8 ms·

Social Security started paying out in 1940: https://www.proquest.com/docview/146227490?sourcetype=Historical%20Newspapers https://www.proquest.com/docview/14622

Social Security started paying out in 1940: https://www.proquest.com/docview/146227490?sourcetype=Historical%20Newspapers https://www.proquest.com/docview/146227490?sourcetype=Histor... With anyone 65 years or older eligible to start receiving checks. The 1875 date almost certainly comes from that. I wouldn't be surprised if someone set it as a default for anyone they didn't have a birth date for because you could safely assume someone was older than that if they were receiving social security when it first started _or_ because there are some of those initial payments that truly were never discontinued.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
EdwardDiego 2y ago
That makes a lot of sense.
Aloisius 2y ago
They didn't use computers in 1940 for it though. All this was stored on paper where using days since 1875 wouldn't have made much sense. That would lead to most of the beneficiaries having a negative number. They didn't get their first computer until 1956 and by that point, the 1875 date would have made little sense. It simply makes more sense there was data entry errors. Indeed, we know there are since the SSA makes records available for dead people. They show people supposedly born as early as 1800: https://aad.archives.gov/aad/fielded-search.jsp?dt=3059&tf=F&cat=all https://aad.archives.gov/aad/fielded-search.jsp?dt=3059&tf=F...
- masswerk 2y ago
  > All this was stored on paper Rather, as also mentioned in the answers, on Hollerith cards, 5-digit encoded (2 for the year, 3 for the day of year). Punch-card appliances were very much a thing. (WWII logistics were run by punch-cards.)
  - Aloisius 2y ago
    They used IBM cards, not Hollerith cards (they used IBM 077 collators and 405 accounting machines). They were coded with 6 digits: 2 for month, 2 day and 2 year according to the SSA. https://www.ssa.gov/history/ssa/yourss55.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/ssa/yourss55.html
    - masswerk 2y ago
      Notably, this is from December 1955, already on computers. There's no mention of how data was handled before this. (Also, pre-WWII, people used do talk of "Hollerith cards" in a general way – and the system started in the 1930s.)
      - Aloisius 2y ago
        It's mentioned on IBM's site: https://www.ibm.com/history/social-security-act https://www.ibm.com/history/social-security-act https://www.ibm.com/history/punched-card#The+Social+Security+Administration https://www.ibm.com/history/punched-card#The+Social+Security... And the SSA site mentions using IBM machines for it in 1936. IBM machines only used IBM cards: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v69n2/v69n2p55.html https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v69n2/v69n2p55.html The checks used to pay people were also IBM punchcards.
        masswerk 2y ago
        Hollerith founded the Tabulating Machine Company, which became the Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company (CTR), which became International Business Machines Corporation (IBM). These are the same thing, admittedly adding other businesses along the way. (Hence, IBM includes the invention of the tabulating punch-card in its company history.) So, after 1924, it's IBM, but this didn't stop people from talking about Hollerith cards, even in the 1950s. Here, it was used to designate the pre-computer era use with punch-card appliances.
        Aloisius 2y ago
kuhewa 2y ago
The very first recipient, Ida May Fuller, would be 150 years old currently.
erik998 2y ago
In 1875, the American Express Company established the first private pension plan in the United States. I can also see a situation where the SSA recipient in 1940 was born in 1875. The recipient age 65 could have married someone very young for 10 years. That younger person could be on survivors benefits and continue receiving payments. Here is an example: https://www.ssa.gov/history/idapayroll.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/idapayroll.html On January 31, 1940, the first monthly retirement check was issued to Ida May Fuller of Ludlow, Vermont, in the amount of $22.54. Miss Fuller, a Legal Secretary, retired in November 1939. She started collecting benefits in January 1940 at age 65 and lived to be 100 years old, dying in 1975. https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10084.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10084.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/survivor/eligibility https://www.ssa.gov/survivor/eligibility So if in 1965 this retired person married someone age 18... Then that person at 18 never remarried. Could they end up in a situation where they receive survivors benefits from the original applicant? The recent spouse would be born in 1947 and marry in 1965 for 10 years until their spouse's death... not have remarried or worked, then at age 60 in 2007, derive survivors benefits from original applicant?
- hylaride 2y ago
  > So if in 1965 this retired person married someone age 18... Then that person at 18 never remarried. Could they end up in a situation where they receive survivors benefits from the original applicant? "In order to receive this (spousal) benefit, you must have been married for at least 10 years, and both you and your ex must be at least 62 years of age". Basically, you could but you wouldn't get much to make it worthwhile. I do know that veterans benefits did (at one time?) payout to spouses in the way you ask, though. IIRC benefits from the American Civil War were paid out into the 21st century due to a handful of cases where old veterans married young women. The last known "civil war widow" died in 2008 having married an 86 year old at 19. A daughter received her father's benefits until 2020. There was also another spouse who died in 2020, but she never collected the pension. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_survived_into_the_21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_...
  - Projectiboga 2y ago
qingcharles 2y ago
Also factor in there were civil war widows legitimately eligible for pensions from their dead soldier husbands until the last one died just a couple of years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_survived_into_the_21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_... Also can be via your father, this lady was collecting a civil war pension until 2020: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irene_Triplett https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irene_Triplett
- zten 2y ago
  Can’t wait for Musk’s team to finally peel back these layers, realize that the code actually implemented the laws, and have to admit they are the idiots and apologize for wasting the government’s money on a poorly-run audit.
  - thecopy 2y ago
    They wont admit anything
    - flir 2y ago
      At least we'll get a good example for the Chesterton's Fence wiki page.
      - krger 2y ago
        Until the Heritage Foundation succeeds in dismantling Wikipedia.
        flir 2y ago
        That makes me wonder what the Wikimedia Foundation's disaster recovery plan looks like. The crucial bit of infrastructure (and the most vulnerable point right now) might be the domain name.
        2y ago
erik998 2y ago
There is so much more info on their site. https://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/operations.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/operations.html Early Operations Social Security Bulletin Volume 1 - June 1938 - Number 6 ACCOUNTING OPERATIONS OF THE BUREAU OF OLD-AGE INSURANCE Joseph L. Fay and MaxJ. Wasserman Bureau of Old-Age Insurance. Mr. Fay is Chief of the Baltimore Accounting Operations Section and Mr. Wasserman is Chief of the Statistics Section. They were assisted by Edward O. Manning of the Statistics Section. https://www.ssa.gov/history/fay638.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/fay638.html
gonzobonzo 2y ago
> The 1875 date almost certainly comes from that. Here's 1875 the claim that's been all over Twitter these days[1]: "Social security runs on COBOL, which does not use a date or time type. So the > date is stored as a number using the ISO 8601 standard. The epoch for this is 150 years ago (1875) - aka the metre standard." "So if you don’t know the date of something, it will be a 0 value, which in COBOL will default to 1875 - 150 years ago." Weirdly this post itself didn't get a lot of attention (only 2.2k likes), but a ton of people took a screenshot of it and passed it around as fact, which got a lot more attention. For instance, post like this[2] with 56 thousand likes (there are a bunch of them on Twitter right now, all with a screenshot of this original post). It's a good example of how misinformation spreads like wildfire, and how extremely few people bother to check to see where or not its accurate. I'm not sure it's useful trying to figure out reasons for a 1875 date when we don't actually have any indication that this was actually occurring, and the discussion started because some made an erroneous claim. [1] https://x.com/toshiHQ/status/1889928670887739902 https://x.com/toshiHQ/status/1889928670887739902 [2] https://x.com/enkday/status/1890808249663869204 https://x.com/enkday/status/1890808249663869204
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
chrisco255 2y ago
The 1875 date is a made up thing. There's millions of records more than 100+ years old, some as old as 229 years old by birth date. And, it's still very much a problem if the first people to receive SS are still receiving it, or if the system is still cutting checks because their death wasn't ever recorded.
- skissane 2y ago
  > or if the system is still cutting checks because their death wasn't ever recorded. My speculation: there are a small handful of long dead people, for whom the SSA has never received proof of death, and they fall through some bureaucratic loophole in the "assume people over 115 are dead" rules, so the SSA is still printing them checks. But these checks haven't been deposited in a bank account in many decades, and the SSA doesn't even have a current address to send them, so it just sticks them in a filing cabinet in their basement. No fraud, the government isn't really losing any money since the checks aren't being deposited or cashed, just a little bit of bureaucratic stupidity that no doubt adds up to a rounding error in the federal budget. But you can see how Musk/Trump/et al could spin this to sound a lot worse than it really is.
  - kolanos 2y ago
    > But these checks haven't been deposited in a bank account in many decades, and the SSA doesn't even have a current address to send them, ... While this is likely true for a majority of cases. I am confident that there are both bank accounts and addresses that have remained valid since the 1940s. For example, ABA routing/account numbers on checks go back to 1910. Presuming checks are being printed, it would not surprise me if they are being sent through the U.S. postal system. What happens to them after that, though, is anyone's guess. Banks generally stay on top of deceased customers. But even then, a bank account can be transferred to beneficiaries and retain the same account number. i would expect that banks would flag a check being deposited in the name of a known deceased former account holder. But there have already been cases mentioned in this thread where someone can receive SSA benefits on behalf of a deceased spouse/parent. As such, it is conceivable that those checks could be deposited.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

EdwardDiego 2y ago

That makes a lot of sense.

Aloisius 2y ago

They didn't use computers in 1940 for it though. All this was stored on paper where using days since 1875 wouldn't have made much sense. That would lead to most of the beneficiaries having a negative number. They didn't get their first computer until 1956 and by that point, the 1875 date would have made little sense. It simply makes more sense there was data entry errors. Indeed, we know there are since the SSA makes records available for dead people. They show people supposedly born as early as 1800: https://aad.archives.gov/aad/fielded-search.jsp?dt=3059&tf=F&cat=all https://aad.archives.gov/aad/fielded-search.jsp?dt=3059&tf=F...

masswerk 2y ago
> All this was stored on paper Rather, as also mentioned in the answers, on Hollerith cards, 5-digit encoded (2 for the year, 3 for the day of year). Punch-card appliances were very much a thing. (WWII logistics were run by punch-cards.)
- Aloisius 2y ago
  They used IBM cards, not Hollerith cards (they used IBM 077 collators and 405 accounting machines). They were coded with 6 digits: 2 for month, 2 day and 2 year according to the SSA. https://www.ssa.gov/history/ssa/yourss55.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/ssa/yourss55.html
  - masswerk 2y ago
    Notably, this is from December 1955, already on computers. There's no mention of how data was handled before this. (Also, pre-WWII, people used do talk of "Hollerith cards" in a general way – and the system started in the 1930s.)
    - Aloisius 2y ago
      It's mentioned on IBM's site: https://www.ibm.com/history/social-security-act https://www.ibm.com/history/social-security-act https://www.ibm.com/history/punched-card#The+Social+Security+Administration https://www.ibm.com/history/punched-card#The+Social+Security... And the SSA site mentions using IBM machines for it in 1936. IBM machines only used IBM cards: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v69n2/v69n2p55.html https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v69n2/v69n2p55.html The checks used to pay people were also IBM punchcards.
      - masswerk 2y ago
        Hollerith founded the Tabulating Machine Company, which became the Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company (CTR), which became International Business Machines Corporation (IBM). These are the same thing, admittedly adding other businesses along the way. (Hence, IBM includes the invention of the tabulating punch-card in its company history.) So, after 1924, it's IBM, but this didn't stop people from talking about Hollerith cards, even in the 1950s. Here, it was used to designate the pre-computer era use with punch-card appliances.
        Aloisius 2y ago

kuhewa 2y ago

The very first recipient, Ida May Fuller, would be 150 years old currently.

erik998 2y ago

In 1875, the American Express Company established the first private pension plan in the United States. I can also see a situation where the SSA recipient in 1940 was born in 1875. The recipient age 65 could have married someone very young for 10 years. That younger person could be on survivors benefits and continue receiving payments. Here is an example: https://www.ssa.gov/history/idapayroll.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/idapayroll.html On January 31, 1940, the first monthly retirement check was issued to Ida May Fuller of Ludlow, Vermont, in the amount of $22.54. Miss Fuller, a Legal Secretary, retired in November 1939. She started collecting benefits in January 1940 at age 65 and lived to be 100 years old, dying in 1975. https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10084.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10084.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/survivor/eligibility https://www.ssa.gov/survivor/eligibility So if in 1965 this retired person married someone age 18... Then that person at 18 never remarried. Could they end up in a situation where they receive survivors benefits from the original applicant? The recent spouse would be born in 1947 and marry in 1965 for 10 years until their spouse's death... not have remarried or worked, then at age 60 in 2007, derive survivors benefits from original applicant?

hylaride 2y ago
> So if in 1965 this retired person married someone age 18... Then that person at 18 never remarried. Could they end up in a situation where they receive survivors benefits from the original applicant? "In order to receive this (spousal) benefit, you must have been married for at least 10 years, and both you and your ex must be at least 62 years of age". Basically, you could but you wouldn't get much to make it worthwhile. I do know that veterans benefits did (at one time?) payout to spouses in the way you ask, though. IIRC benefits from the American Civil War were paid out into the 21st century due to a handful of cases where old veterans married young women. The last known "civil war widow" died in 2008 having married an 86 year old at 19. A daughter received her father's benefits until 2020. There was also another spouse who died in 2020, but she never collected the pension. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_survived_into_the_21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_...
- Projectiboga 2y ago

qingcharles 2y ago

Also factor in there were civil war widows legitimately eligible for pensions from their dead soldier husbands until the last one died just a couple of years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_survived_into_the_21st_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War_widows_who_... Also can be via your father, this lady was collecting a civil war pension until 2020: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irene_Triplett https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irene_Triplett

zten 2y ago
Can’t wait for Musk’s team to finally peel back these layers, realize that the code actually implemented the laws, and have to admit they are the idiots and apologize for wasting the government’s money on a poorly-run audit.
- thecopy 2y ago
  They wont admit anything
  - flir 2y ago
    At least we'll get a good example for the Chesterton's Fence wiki page.
    - krger 2y ago
      Until the Heritage Foundation succeeds in dismantling Wikipedia.
      - flir 2y ago
        That makes me wonder what the Wikimedia Foundation's disaster recovery plan looks like. The crucial bit of infrastructure (and the most vulnerable point right now) might be the domain name.
        2y ago

erik998 2y ago

There is so much more info on their site. https://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/index.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/operations.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/operations.html Early Operations Social Security Bulletin Volume 1 - June 1938 - Number 6 ACCOUNTING OPERATIONS OF THE BUREAU OF OLD-AGE INSURANCE Joseph L. Fay and MaxJ. Wasserman Bureau of Old-Age Insurance. Mr. Fay is Chief of the Baltimore Accounting Operations Section and Mr. Wasserman is Chief of the Statistics Section. They were assisted by Edward O. Manning of the Statistics Section. https://www.ssa.gov/history/fay638.html https://www.ssa.gov/history/fay638.html

gonzobonzo 2y ago

> The 1875 date almost certainly comes from that. Here's 1875 the claim that's been all over Twitter these days[1]: "Social security runs on COBOL, which does not use a date or time type. So the > date is stored as a number using the ISO 8601 standard. The epoch for this is 150 years ago (1875) - aka the metre standard." "So if you don’t know the date of something, it will be a 0 value, which in COBOL will default to 1875 - 150 years ago." Weirdly this post itself didn't get a lot of attention (only 2.2k likes), but a ton of people took a screenshot of it and passed it around as fact, which got a lot more attention. For instance, post like this[2] with 56 thousand likes (there are a bunch of them on Twitter right now, all with a screenshot of this original post). It's a good example of how misinformation spreads like wildfire, and how extremely few people bother to check to see where or not its accurate. I'm not sure it's useful trying to figure out reasons for a 1875 date when we don't actually have any indication that this was actually occurring, and the discussion started because some made an erroneous claim. [1] https://x.com/toshiHQ/status/1889928670887739902 https://x.com/toshiHQ/status/1889928670887739902 [2] https://x.com/enkday/status/1890808249663869204 https://x.com/enkday/status/1890808249663869204

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

chrisco255 2y ago

The 1875 date is a made up thing. There's millions of records more than 100+ years old, some as old as 229 years old by birth date. And, it's still very much a problem if the first people to receive SS are still receiving it, or if the system is still cutting checks because their death wasn't ever recorded.

skissane 2y ago
> or if the system is still cutting checks because their death wasn't ever recorded. My speculation: there are a small handful of long dead people, for whom the SSA has never received proof of death, and they fall through some bureaucratic loophole in the "assume people over 115 are dead" rules, so the SSA is still printing them checks. But these checks haven't been deposited in a bank account in many decades, and the SSA doesn't even have a current address to send them, so it just sticks them in a filing cabinet in their basement. No fraud, the government isn't really losing any money since the checks aren't being deposited or cashed, just a little bit of bureaucratic stupidity that no doubt adds up to a rounding error in the federal budget. But you can see how Musk/Trump/et al could spin this to sound a lot worse than it really is.
- kolanos 2y ago
  > But these checks haven't been deposited in a bank account in many decades, and the SSA doesn't even have a current address to send them, ... While this is likely true for a majority of cases. I am confident that there are both bank accounts and addresses that have remained valid since the 1940s. For example, ABA routing/account numbers on checks go back to 1910. Presuming checks are being printed, it would not surprise me if they are being sent through the U.S. postal system. What happens to them after that, though, is anyone's guess. Banks generally stay on top of deceased customers. But even then, a bank account can be transferred to beneficiaries and retain the same account number. i would expect that banks would flag a check being deposited in the name of a known deceased former account holder. But there have already been cases mentioned in this thread where someone can receive SSA benefits on behalf of a deceased spouse/parent. As such, it is conceivable that those checks could be deposited.