The date when Social Security’s trust fund is expected to run out of money just got bumped up. The fund is now projected to empty in 2032, according to a new report released by Social Security’s trustees.
The new depletion date isn’t an earth-shaking change — it’s only a quarter earlier than the estimate in last year’s report. But it illustrates how President Donald Trump’s policies are degrading a program he promised to never jeopardize — and accelerating an approaching crisis in how our government will assist the elderly and disabled.
The report names three factors that contributed to the earlier insolvency date. One is a declining fertility rate, but the other two drivers can be traced back to Trump: a drop in immigration into the country, and the “substantial effect” of the tax policies in the One Big Beautiful Bill he signed last summer.
Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities.
Reduced immigration during Trump’s second term — especially when coupled with a declining fertility rate — strains Social Security because the program is funded through payroll taxes. Those come out of people’s paychecks, and fewer workers supporting an aging population means the program receives less revenue. Indeed, Social Security already has been tapping its trust fund for the better part of the past two decades because the program’s costs have exceeded its cash income. And as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out last year, last year’s tax cuts were a boon to the rich but a bust for the solvency of the Social Security trust fund.
To be clear, if the fund is depleted, Social Security won’t go belly up. Benefits will continue to be paid out, but there will be a large drop in the amount. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates that the “average monthly cut would total $500, which is more than what the average retired household spends on groceries each month.”
That would be a huge blow to the budgets of many older Americans. Social Security is a major source of income for most retirees, and roughly 40% of beneficiaries over the age of 65 rely on it for most of their income. And it would mark the destabilization of the sole source of retirement security for most Americans that is supposed to be insulated from ups and downs — unlike 401K plans. As the CBPP has pointed out, Social Security is “most workers’ only source of guaranteed retirement income that is not subject to investment risk or financial market fluctuations.”
Trump’s acceleration of the program’s insolvency comes atop his assaults on the program’s administrative capacities. His cuts to the Social Security Administration have left offices understaffed, increased wait times, and reduced quality of customer service.
Ultimately, Trump is exacerbating a colossal social safety net problem that predates him, and the trust fund will hit dire straits after he has left office. Democrats need to have clear plans for shoring up the program and making it robust for the future — which will require not being sheepish about taxes as a tool for renewing the social contract. And when Republicans try to claim that they, too, are champions of Social Security, all Democrats need to do is point to the truth.
“I’m Hunter Biden. You’ve never actually heard from me,” posted the son of former President Joe Biden to X and Substack on May 19.
It was an unexpected proclamation from a long-controversial figure in Democratic politics, whose personal scandals, nepo baby tendencies and criminal conduct have long been the stuff of political culture wars and tabloid coverage — and even a factor in electoral outcomes. But Hunter Biden’s note marked the opening salvo of a deliberate bid to reinvent himself using the miraculous powers of the social Internet.
And at the moment, it’s strangely kind of working.
Biden has been posting and replying to other people’s posts frequently, and getting a ton of engagement, thousands of reposts and vaguely positive media coverage for his commentary. He’s published posts on a variety of topics — sobriety (Biden has battled drug and alcohol addiction), his family, gratitude, his paintings, fundraisers for homeless people. Mostly it’s in writing, but sometimes he puts up videos with snippets of life philosophy in the style of Instagram influencers.
My suspicion is that Biden knows tapping into the attention economy could be parlayed into future opportunities.
Part of the reason Biden is breaking through is he’s making blunt, self-deprecating humor a significant part of his online persona. For example, he once complained that a photoshopped image of him smoking a pipe featured what looked more like a meth pipe than a crack pipe, asking to be mocked more accurately. (Biden has openly discussed an addiction to crack cocaine.) He ended that post with the phrase, “Thank you for your attention to this matter” — a nod to Trump’s signature sign-off on many of his own social media posts. The joke seemed to be well-received by people across the political spectrum.
A lot of Biden’s posting is unobjectionable and sometimes even wholesome — at least by the standards of online attention-seeking behavior. But there’s an aspect of his new identity that I find more troubling: his attempts at cross-partisan political populism. Regardless of what his intentions are, he’s exhibiting a naivete about noxious right-wing ideas.
A couple days after he began his pivot, Biden appeared on the podcast of the right-wing antisemitic conspiracy theorist extraordinaire Candace Owens. The decision to appear at all was shocking — Owens is at the very heart of some of the most backward and outlandish disinformation emanating out of the far-right online, including false claims that the moon landing was faked; that France’s first lady is a pedophile and lying about her gender; and that the FBI, the French Foreign Legion, the Israeli government and Turning Point USA staff could be among those involved in the death of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk last year. As my MS NOW colleague Anthony Fisher pointed out, during the interview Biden praised Owens “for asking questions” about Kirk’s death in an astonishing endorsement of Owens’ operation.
Last week, seemingly emboldened by attention he’s getting from the right for his new identity online, Biden wrote on X:
Someone called me the MAGA whisperer and I’ll gladly take the title. Left, right, D or R we all want the same things. We’re being divided on purpose by the Epstein Elite Oligarch class because as long as we’re at each other’s throats, they get fat and rich off of our misery.
This appears to be a shallow riff on a common piece of political rhetoric on the left that people have more in common than they’re led to believe and that shared interests can unite the working class across race, gender and other social divisions. But notably, Biden’s spin on the idea seems to be that there’s no substantive difference between the left and the right. That kind of apolitical populism might sound appealing, but it’s not true.
When someone responded to Biden’s post saying he was part of the elite that he was decrying, Biden deflected by implying his substance abuse struggles render him an outsider to the elite class. This, too, is nonsense. Biden’s mental health struggles are real and deserve sympathy, but that doesn’t negate the reality that he traded inappropriately on his father’s name to make insane amounts of money, or pleaded guilty to tax fraud but was saved from the consequences by a presidential pardon.
The next day, Biden wrote a long post on X cataloguing “things most Americans agree on,” listing policies or ideas that he believed transcended political tribe. Some of it was sensible — there’s a lot of data backing broad bipartisan support for things he mentions like “groceries cost too much,” “legal immigration is good” and “endless wars are stupid.” But some of it was also sloppy. One item on his list read: “AI is like my new best friend that also might be trying to take my job, my ability to think for myself, and my humanity in the process. Yo like I love you, but WTF, but I still love you.” In reality, recent polling shows Americans are far less ambivalent — and more critical — about artificial intelligence and its development than Biden seems to believe. And Biden’s claim that “diversity is actually awesome” is a universal principle in America that requires amnesia about the last decade in politics.
Biden’s glib political posts have been getting enough attention that a Fox News reporter asked President Donald Trump last week what he thought about the idea of Biden running for president in 2028. (Trump made a joke that if scandal-plagued Democrat Graham Platner has a chance of succeeding his race for the Senate in Maine, maybe Biden has one too.)
It’s difficult to know what to make of all this, and the timing of Biden’s “internet guy” era is also curious. With his father out of the political picture, Biden’s life and ordeals had become of far less interest to the public. If he wants a return to equanimity after feeling unfairly scrutinized by the public, it would seem this is the time to relish a new privacy. Instead, he’s catapulting himself into the public sphere in a way he never has before.
My suspicion is that Biden knows tapping into the attention economy could be parlayed into future opportunities to make money and form valuable social connections. And he seems to be in need of cash. In court filings filed in 2025, he said he was “several million dollars” in debt. And people mostly stopped buying his amateur art works for exorbitant prices after 2023, according to his court filings. (It shouldn’t be hard to guess why.)
Is Hunter Biden serious about getting into politics, whether as some kind of influencer, pundit or politician? Does he view it as a way to find validation after years of being stigmatized? Is he just using it as a way to exploit the algorithms that rule our lives and turn politics into just one more way to secure eyeballs? I have no idea. I don’t think he does either.
Login
