‘It’s not a government handout’: MAGAs don’t understand Social Security, continue to rally against it
The disconnect between MAGA supporters’ desires and Donald Trump’s actual Social Security plans has sparked fierce criticism, with social media users lambasting what they see as self-defeating political behavior.
The tangible frustration stems from an awful irony rested in a chosen reality: While 77% of Trump supporters explicitly oppose Social Security reductions, according to Pew Research, Trump’s proposed policies would accelerate the program’s path to insolvency by three years, triggering larger benefit cuts than currently projected.
In response, X user Art Candee wrote, “We pay into Social Security. It’s not a government handout. It’s our fcukin’ money.”
The Committee for Responsible Federal Budget’s analysis reveals Trump’s agenda would increase Social Security’s cash shortfall by $2.3 trillion through 2035. This includes $950 billion from ending income taxation of Social Security benefits, $900 billion from eliminating payroll taxes on tips and overtime, and roughly $400 billion from immigration and tariff policies.
The result? Social Security would become insolvent in 2031 instead of 2034, forcing a devastating 33% across-the-board benefit cut—significantly worse than the 23% reduction projected under current law.
Trump’s mass deportation plans would significantly wound Social Security’s finances. In 2010, for instance, undocumented immigrants, which Trump and his voters are in such a great hurry to push out the door, were estimated to have contributed approximately $12 billion annually to Social Security through payroll taxes despite being ineligible to receive benefits. Removing these contributors while simultaneously reducing the program’s revenue streams creates a perfect storm for fiscal disaster.
The irony lies in how Trump’s base appears oblivious to these implications. Despite campaigning on protecting Social Security, Trump’s actual proposals would accelerate its demise. His plan to eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits primarily helps higher earners—those making $5 million or more would receive $2,500 in tax savings, while Americans earning between $32,000 and $60,000 would save just $90.
Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, emphasized the gravity of the situation: “If we do nothing, in nine years, there will be across-the-board benefit cuts of almost a quarter for every retiree who is collecting benefits, and that’s unconscionable.”
As usual, Trump’s campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt dismissed these analyses, claiming, “The so-called experts at CRFB have been consistently wrong throughout the years.” The problem, of course, is that the math of Social Security’s funding mechanisms remains straightforward—reducing revenue while maintaining or increasing benefits inevitably hastens insolvency.
The disconnect highlights an ongoing pattern of Trump supporters voting against their economic interests, often because they aren’t reading, do not care about any information not provided to them by Trump himself, or even listening fully to what he does say. Despite positioning himself as a Social Security hero, Trump’s policies would effectively dismantle the program’s long-term viability while providing minimal short-term benefits to his working-class base. In other words, they’ve voted to have the legs of the small safety net they have remaining cut out from under it.
The contradiction between MAGA rhetoric and reality becomes increasingly stark. While Trump supporters rail against perceived threats to their benefits, they, like clockwork, continue supporting policies that would accelerate the program’s collapse, proving ArtCandee’s point about fundamental misunderstandings of how things like Social Security actually work.
Have a tip we should know? tips@themarysue.com
