Like thieves in the night, the Republicans have been hiding their intentions in the shadows lest anyone find out what they are actually up to. And just like those thieves, they won’t break into your house through the front. Instead, they’ll go around to the back door. It’s not so obvious that way.
This week, a prominent member of the administration, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, proudly revealed their subtle plot. On Wednesday, he stated that the so-called “Trump accounts” Republicans created for children in their tax and spending bill are “a back door for privatizing Social Security.”(1) Like the thieves, the Republicans can’t be up front about their plans, they have to sneak through a “back door.”
The Republicans ultimate goal, the destruction of Social Security (along with Medicare and Medicaid), has always been somewhat out in the open. We’ve all known it, but until Bessent’s statement, it was something that most Republicans would vigorously deny.
In fact, Republicans have stated over and over again that they were not planning to touch Social Security. Unfortunately, they said the same things about Medicare and Medicaid, and we have all seen what happened to those programs when they took power.
The GOP would object and say, “We’re not planning to destroy Social Security; we just want to ‘privatize’ it.” But what would that mean? It means that your money will be taken from the safe and secure government accounts and distributed to private investment firms and banks — you know those kinds of businesses in which the C-suite executives are paid tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars. Where do you think that money comes from?
And, while they’re at it, the Republicans also plan to eliminate all fiscal regulations on these firms such as fiduciary requirements. That will allow all manner of investor fraud to occur, not to mention abuse and waste.
The argument they make is that private firms can earn higher returns on investment than the government. This may be true in some cases, but it is also true that investment firms and banks have, at times, lost money through overly risky opportunities and sheer incompetence. Some of these firms have even gone bankrupt losing all of their clients’ capital (after paying out inordinate sums to their executives in salary and bonus packages). Remember the financial crisis of 2008? It included the collapses of Lehmann Brothers and Bear Stearns as well as the government bailouts (using taxpayer dollars) of JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley because they were “too big to fail.” Again, your money became their money without them having to go through the trouble of breaking the law.
Of course, once your funds are in the hands of these greedy people, you can expect to be charged all manner of “fees” in order to help pay for the exorbitant salaries and bonuses. There will be “maintenance fees,” “investment fees,” “administrative fees,” and so on. I anticipate that, under this scenario, the “fees” will steadily grow no matter what your return on investment is. Rather than receiving an annual letter from the Social Security Administration telling you about next year’s increase in your payments, you’re likely to get a bill from your investment banker for next year’s inflated fees.
But Social Security is going broke the Republicans argue. Yet they won’t take common-sense steps to save it like removing the arbitrary cap on Social Security taxes. It’s only there to keep the wealthy from having to pay more. Rather than save the program, the GOP would prefer to let it self-destruct even if it means that millions of Americans, some of whom are Republicans, will lose their only source of income.
Why are Republicans so adamant about privatizing Social Security? Because they see this HUGE pot of money in the government’s coffers that they and their billionaire backers can’t get their hands on. They lust after that money to the point of obsession. They aren’t really concerned about whose money it is, as long as they can get it somehow: like thieves in the night.
(1) https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/30/business/bessent-trump-social-security.html