Elon Musk attends a Cabinet meeting at the White House on February 26, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
“No matter how many billions he gets in tax cuts and government contracts, it will never be enough for him,” said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. “Now he’s going after the elderly, the disabled, and orphaned children.”
Progressive lawmakers and advocates hit back on Sunday after Elon Musk parroted the long-debunked right-wing claim that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, the billionaire’s latest false attack on the nation’s most effective anti-poverty program.
Musk made the comments during an appearance on the “Joe Rogan Experience” podcast over the weekend, and the episode has already racked up nearly 8 million views as of this writing.
“Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time,” Musk said. “If you look at the future obligations of Social Security, it far exceeds the tax revenue.”
The advocacy group Social Security Works noted in response that Social Security—which is 90% funded for the next quarter-century—”hasn’t missed a payment in 89 years” and accused Musk of “defaming” the program as part of an effort to “cut benefits and otherwise destroy Social Security.”
BREAKING: Elon Musk called Social Security "the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time" in an interview with Joe Rogan. pic.twitter.com/gCrDPLM15u
Musk’s comments came as the Trump administration, with the assistance of the billionaire Tesla CEO’s lieutenants, is working to gut the already-understaffed Social Security Administration, an effort that could result in benefit delays and disruptions.
“This guy is a leech on the public,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) wrote on social media after a clip of Musk’s remarks on Rogan’s podcast circulated. “No matter how many billions he gets in tax cuts and government contracts, it will never be enough for him.”
“Now he’s going after the elderly, the disabled, and orphaned children so he can pocket it in tax cuts for himself,” Ocasio-Cortez added. “It’s disgusting.”
Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, wrote that “a guy who makes $8 million a day off the government thinks seniors getting $65 a day they worked their whole lives to earn is a ‘Ponzi scheme.’”
“Protect Social Security,” Casar wrote. “Fire Elon Musk.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also weighed in on Musk’s comments during an appearance on NBC‘s “Meet the Press” Sunday morning, calling the billionaire’s attack on Social Security “totally outrageous.”
“That’s a hell of a Ponzi scheme when for the last 80 years, Social Security has paid out every nickel owed to every eligible American. Quite a Ponzi scheme,” said Sanders, who called on lawmakers to support his proposal to expand Social Security benefits by lifting the cap on income subject to payroll taxes.
“You lift that cap, we can extend the solvency of Social Security for 75 years,” the Vermont senator said. “And you can raise benefits.”
Last week, as Common Dreams reported, Sanders attempted to pass his Social Security expansion bill through the Senate via unanimous consent, but Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) objected, blocking the legislation.
A previous version of this story improperly identified “Meet the Press” as an MSNBC show.
Elon Musk urges you to be a Fascist like him, says that you can ignore facts and reality then.Neo-Fascist Climate Science Denier Donald Trump says Burn, Baby, Burn.
Elon Musk applauds alongside the wife of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) during a House Republican Conference meeting on November 13, 2024. (Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
“Elon Musk’s commission is a plot to destroy our Social Security by giving it to Wall Street executives—so that you get nothing and they get everything,” warned one advocate.
A lengthy series of X posts attacking Social Security as a “nightmare” caught the attention of the platform’s mega-billionaire owner, Elon Musk, who could soon take aim at the beloved New Deal program as co-chair of an advisory commission tasked with identifying federal spending to slash.
“Interesting thread,” Musk, the world’s richest man, wrote late Monday in response to the posts by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who once said he hopes to pull Social Security “up by the roots and get rid of it,” along with Medicare and Medicaid.
In his new thread, Lee characterized Social Security—which lifts more Americans above the poverty line than any other federal program—as a “tax plan” insidiously disguised as a retirement plan and condemned the Social Security Act of 1935 as one of many “deceptive sales techniques the U.S. government has used on the American people.”
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), replied Tuesday that Lee’s posts amount to “a misrepresentation of Social Security’s history and how the program works.”
“There is nothing deceptive about Social Security. The social insurance program has been working just fine for nearly 90 years and has never missed a payment,” said Richtman. “The kind of propaganda Sen. Lee posted undermines public support for Social Security, making it easier to cut or privatize the program. It is perhaps no coincidence that Sen. Lee’s second-biggest campaign contributor by industry is the securities and investment sector.”
“The money is ours, Mike Lee, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump. You’re not going to get a penny of it.”
Social Security Works (SSW), a progressive advocacy group, said Tuesday that by amplifying Lee’s thread to his hundreds of millions of followers, Musk “just declared war on Social Security.”
“For 89 years, through war and peace, boom time and bust, health and pandemics, Social Security has never missed a single payment,” said Alex Lawson, SSW’s executive director. “Compared to the risky alternatives on Wall Street, Social Security is a rock of retirement security. If billionaires like Elon Musk paid into Social Security at the same rate as the rest of us on all of their income, we could expand benefits for everyone and pay them in full forever.”
“This is a declaration of war against seniors, people with disabilities, and the American public,” Lawson said. “The Republicans are coming for your Social Security, which they call a ‘nightmare.’ Elon Musk’s commission is a plot to destroy our Social Security by giving it to Wall Street executives—so that you get nothing and they get everything.”
“We’ve seen this play again and again,” he added. “When Republicans destroyed defined-benefit pension plans, they claimed that the market would be able to create amazing returns for everybody. Instead, workers got pennies, while Wall Street managers got billions. That is always the plan. We will defeat this Republican effort to steal our earned benefits. The money is ours, Mike Lee, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump. You’re not going to get a penny of it.”
Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, similarly denounced Lee’s thread and Musk’s promotion of it, saying both “should enrage and concern every single American who has contributed to Social Security.”
“Sen. Mike Lee has dreamed about ‘phasing out Social Security’ and the benefits generations of Americans have earned for more than a decade. His bad ideas have been rightfully ignored but last night he got a big assist from Elon Musk, who amplified Lee’s wrongheaded views about Social Security on X.”
“Social Security is a solemn promise between the American people and the government,” Fiesta continued. “We pay for Social Security’s guaranteed benefits with every paycheck and expect them to be there when we retire, lose a spouse or parent, or become disabled. No one voted to phase out Social Security or let Wall Street gamble with their earned benefits. Older Americans will rightly punish any politician who tries to cut their benefits or gut the system that has worked for generations.”
On the campaign trail, President-elect Donald Trump pledged to defend Social Security while simultaneously pushing proposals that would wreck the program’s finances.
Many Republican lawmakers, who are soon to be in the majority in both chambers of Congress, have called for raising the Social Security retirement age—a change that would cut benefits across the board. On Tuesday, Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) toldFox Business Network that “we’re going to have to have some hard decisions” on Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare—a euphemism for benefit cuts.
Richtman of NCPSSM said that the kind of attack advanced by Lee and other Republicans “conflicts with President Trump’s promise not to tamper with Americans’ earned benefits.”
“It signals where Trump’s MAGA allies in Congress are heading—toward privatization and benefit cuts, something the majority of Americans across party lines say they do not want,” Richtman added.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) speaks to reporters at the U.S. Capitol on July 23, 2024 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images)
“Republicans would rather protect their billionaire friends at the expense of everyone else,” said the chair of the Joint Economic Committee.
Budget proposals released by congressional Republicans in recent months lay bare the party’s desire to slash taxes for wealthy Americans and large corporations at the expense of key government programs and services, including nutrition assistance, environmental protection, and Medicaid.
That’s according to an analysis released Wednesday by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee (JEC), which examined budget plans the GOP has released as Congress works to craft and pass government funding bills for the coming fiscal year.
The JEC specifically cites a Fiscal Year 2025 budget proposal published in March by the Republican Study Committee, a panel comprised of three-quarters of the House GOP caucus.
The plan, the JEC Democrats noted Wednesday, “claims to balance the budget by cutting Medicare spending, raising the retirement age for Social Security, capping funding for Medicaid and CHIP, and cutting the rest of non-defense discretionary spending by 31% across the board.”
“This would drive up health costs for American families by increasing premiums for [Affordable Care Act] healthcare plans and getting rid of protections for people with pre-existing conditions,” the new analysis says. “It would also prohibit Medicare from negotiating down prescription drug costs.”
A separate proposal from Republicans on the House Budget Committee claims it would finance “large tax cuts for the wealthy by both slashing key services and assuming that their tax giveaways lead to unrealistic levels of economic growth,” the Democratic report says.
“Analyzing this budget with more reasonable economic assumptions instead shows that budget would likely require the government to eliminate most federal services within a decade,” the report adds.
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the chair of the JEC, said in a statement Wednesday that “Republicans’ extreme proposals are dangerous for America.”
“While Democrats are fighting to invest in families, Republicans would rather protect their billionaire friends at the expense of everyone else,” said Heinrich. “Kicking 42 million kids off of health insurance, gutting federal investments in public safety, denying veterans hospital care, and getting rid of [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] benefits that help people afford groceries is unconscionable. Americans deserve better.”
Trump has called for an extension of the tax cuts he signed into law in 2017—changes that overwhelmingly benefited wealthy Americans. An extension of the tax cuts would add $4.6 trillion to the deficit of the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The former president’s advisers have also reportedly discussed reducing the corporate tax rate from 21% to 15%, a change that would give the largest 100 U.S. companies a tax cut of $48 billion per year.
But earlier this week, UNITE HERE—a union that represents hospitality workers—endorsed Democratic nominee Kamala Harris over the Republican candidate, warning that “another Trump presidency would mean four chaotic years of defending against his attacks on unions, working people, immigrants, women, and others.”
As for Trump’s proposal to eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits, an analysis by the Tax Policy Center’s Howard Gleckman found that the move would reduce “Social Security and Medicare hospital insurance (HI) revenues by $1.5 trillion over the next decade,” harming the programs’ finances while providing “little or no benefit” to lower-income households in 2025.
“Less than 1% of the lowest-income households (those making about $33,000 or less, would get any tax cut at all,” Gleckman observed. “But about 28% of middle-income households would get a tax cut. Among the top 0.1 percent, about 20 percent of households would get a tax cut.”
Gleckman found that “in dollar terms, the biggest winners would be those in the top 0.1% of income, who make nearly $5 million or more.”
The Existing, not Living report, commissioned by Scotland’s largest social landlord, the Wheatley Group, spoke to tenants around the country to look at the impact of the social security system on their lives.
The research showed that 65 per cent of claimants believed that UC payment failed to give them enough money to cover the basics of life.
One tenant said of her situation: “Trying to live on £243 per month, that’s horrible.
“I’m expected to pay my council tax, gas and electricity, pay debt and rent arrears.
“It’s physically impossible to pay for all that and, of course, also your internet or some kind of mobile phone with internet, which you need to have if on UC.”
THREE major unions will be launching a joint campaign to halt social care privatisation in West Lothian, they announced over the weekend.
Following the integration of health and social care in Scotland in 2014, local integration joint boards (IJBs) have run social care, with council social work departments relegated to the status of “contractor.”
The boards are made up of health board members and local councillors.
West Lothian IJB, which operates in a locale with the fastest-growing elderly population in Scotland, is considering forcing the privatisation of four care homes for the elderly, according to the Unite, GMB and Unison unions.
The government has quietly published plans to effectively legalise “hazardous” accommodation for thousands of asylum seekers in England.
In a move labelled “shameful” and an “assault on human rights” by housing and refugee charities, a new draft law proposes removing landlords’ obligation to get a HMO (house in multiple occupation) licence if they are providing accommodation to vulnerable asylum seekers.
Campaigners say HMO licences are the primary way authorities currently ensure homes filled with large numbers of people they were not initially designed to fit do not become a major fire risk. They are normally required for all private rented properties that house five or more people from multiple households and are granted by councils if inspectors are satisfied that the building meets government guidelines, including that it isn’t dangerously overcrowded, in disrepair, damp or mouldy.
OIL and gas giants were accused of “grotesque profiteering” today after BP reported that it had raked in an eye-watering £4 billion in just three months.
The mammoth profit total for the first quarter of 2023 was down from the near £5bn the energy firm pocketed in the same period last year following Russia’s attack on Ukraine.
But the combined profits of both BP and Shell have now hit a whopping £55bn over the last year as gas and electricity bills have more than doubled for Britons already struggling with 40-year high inflation and plummeting take-home pay.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “BP’s grotesque profiteering is continuing at pace.
“Profiteering is a blight on the economy which is driving prices higher, leaving workers poorer while businesses struggle to keep the lights on.”
UNISON is challenging the Tory government’s latest attack on the right to strike in a two-day High Court hearing starting on Wednesday.
The public-sector union’s case was prompted by then prime minister Boris Johnson’s decision to scrap decades-old regulations preventing bosses from employing agency workers to break industrial action.
Last July’s widely condemned action was “unlawful and violates fundamental trade union rights,” Unison argued.
General secretary Christina McAnea said: “Breaking strikes with unqualified and ill-experienced agency workers doesn’t address the root causes of why people are striking and it only puts the public in danger.”
THE TUC is calling today for solidarity in defence of democracy and against racism and extremism to mark the day 90 years ago that trade unions were banned in Nazi Germany.
Union offices were raided and officials and activists rounded up on May 2 1933; some were tortured and some died in concentration camps in the years that followed.
Independent trade unions were replaced with the Nazi-controlled German Labour Front, a propaganda tool for the regime and its hate-filled anti-semitic ideology.
“Trade unions are a bastion of democracy and freedom against authoritarian and violent regimes,” said the TUC, which is providing training and resources for union activists to counter racism, including anti-semitism, and attempts by the far right to recruit in workplaces.
Persecution of trade unionists continues around the world, the union body said.
The Electoral Commission has admitted it will ‘not be possible to accurately quantify’ the impact of the new rules by counting who does or doesn’t have ID at the ballot box
The number of people turned away at polling stations because they do not have Voter ID will never be known, the elections watchdog has admitted.
People will be required to show photographic ID for the first time at polling stations on Thursday.
But the Electoral Commission has admitted it will “not be possible to accurately quantify” the impact of the new rules by counting who does or doesn’t have ID at the ballot box.
Data reveals the world’s leading oil and gas majors continue risk-laden, global expansion, despite net-zero pledges.
…
Analysis of exclusive fields data from GlobalData, Energy Monitor’s parent company, shows that the world’s five largest Western oil majors by revenue – BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell and TotalEnergies – are planning for a future misaligned with a net-zero pathway, as outlined by the IEA.
The findings come despite the fact that all five companies have pledged on paper to reach net zero by 2050, and they are all based in countries that hold similar pledges on a national level. The findings also come on top of an earlier Energy Monitor investigation, which found that the oil and gas extraction plans of just 25 oil majors will produce carbon emissions that use up 90% of the world’s remaining 1.5°C carbon budget.
In the case of the five Western oil majors, the first key net-zero misalignment is the sheer size of the companies’ expansion plans. Rather than entering the period of managed decline that the IEA recommends should occur to be aligned with net zero by 2050, data shows that the five companies are in the process of developing 157 new fields, on top of the 1,350 they already operate. These upcoming fields would add a massive 122 billion barrels of oil equivalent (bboe) to the 299 bboe remaining in the five companies’ already-operating fields.
A motorist drove through Just Stop Oil protesters blocking a road in north London on Tuesday morning (2 May), colliding with a person.
“It went over my foot,” a member of the group can be heard saying.
The demonstration was part of Just Stop Oil’s vow to march every weekday and on Saturdays from 24 April to call on the government to stop licensing any new fossil fuel projects in the UK.
The car wasn’t hanging around for Just Stop Oil’s protest. Credit: Twitter/Just Stop Oil
…
A spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police told LADbible: “Police are appealing for witnesses and dash cam footage after a person was involved in a collision with a vehicle on Holloway Road, Islington, whilst engaged in a protest, at around 10:00hrs, today Tuesday 2 May.
“The incident was brought to police attention after being circulated on social media and shows the person being involved in collision with a grey Renault Megane.
“If you were the person or have any information about the incident please report by calling 101, tweeting @MetCC or online at www.met.police.uk/.”
After the footage went viral, Just Stop Oil shared the video and commented how they believe that ‘inflammatory language’ from politicians and commentators has caused this end result.
The group tweeted: “After weeks of inflammatory language from politicians and right-wing media personalities, a car has finally rammed into a peaceful protest.
“Are you about to comment ‘Good!’ or ‘Stay out of the road?’
“Are you sure that the side you want to pick is the side of violence, of the repression of protest?
Since mid-March, the world’s oceans have been hotter than at anytime since at least 1982, raising concerns among some climate experts about accelerated warming.
Why it matters: Hotter oceans are hugely consequential for land areas, since they can contribute to more frequent and severe extreme weather and climate events, from deluges to heat waves.
In addition, the temperature spike could be a sign that warming is speeding up in ways that climate models failed to anticipate.
The situation has also driven conflict, with more than four million people now in need of humanitarian aid.
A cohort of 19 researchers from seven countries studied if climate change was to blame, ruling that the longer rainy season has become drier, while the short rainy season has become wetter all due to changes in global temperatures.
They branded the drought “one of a kind”, adding that climtae change had made agricultural drought one hundred times more likely.
.webp)