Taryn Heon is a clinical social worker, social justice/peer advocate, and writer.
GUILFORD-As a graduate student in clinical social work, my training included analysis of social welfare policies, writing policy briefs, thinking about issues on a range of levels from national policy to community organizing to my own clinical training.
But we weren't given diplomas just to do therapy. We were change agents, in a field that is ambiguous, ever-changing, and - as of right now - in peril.
In one of my policy classes, my professor put us into small groups to create budgets that would hypothetically be covered by federal benefits. We were asked to write down what we believed the Social Security Administration (SSA) should consider a reasonable cost of living for someone who qualifies for this federal program?
Of course, we were all planning to include just the basics, the things one would need to survive, and we were as conservative in our estimates and projections as possible. Because that is, of course, how the SSA runs, right? Better yet, isn't that how a "fair" social welfare system works?
We returned to the classroom, where we compared our budgets and total amounts we felt seemed "right." Most of us wrote down the bare bones, the necessities.
Then our professor offered some rhetorical questions: What if this recipient wanted to buy clothing, go to the movies, pay for their child's piano lessons, travel once per year, go out to dinner once in a while, buy loved ones gifts, take classes, pay for car repairs? What about a savings account for emergencies? Non-emergencies?
What if a recipient of social benefits could have the resources to do the things that most abled, fully-employed workers get to do?
This exercise challenged our preconceived ideas about what any given person should be entitled to; it has become embedded in all our psyches that social welfare benefits exist to cover basic survival needs, that any other expenses should be reserved for those who are able to earn those extra costs of living.
It was a bit of a watershed moment for many of us. We realized how inherently unfair and arbitrary the system is, including the amount of surveillance and bureaucratic monitoring SSA recipients must face on top of managing their disabilities.
The wealth gap in our country, and what we consider to be the "poverty" level, is completely disproportionate. The richest among us have unchecked, astronomical wealth - exponentially higher than what the vast majority of us have.
Yet people still complain about how those poor or disabled people are abusing the system, or using it unfairly, and that they are lazy and need to get a job.
* * *
I fear for the future of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits because of the emerging cuts across departments and because (and this makes me pretty sad to witness) the people who could most benefit from progressive economic policy decisions are voting against their own interests.
It's like someone broke into your house, trashed all your things, spray-painted swastikas everywhere, took all your money, gaslit you, and then left, and then you enthusiastically welcomed that very person back into your home.
Financially, this is about accumulating wealth, not regulating waste, fraud, and abuse.
In 2025, the federal government defines the poverty level for one person as $15,650 annually, or $32,150 for a family of four. Social Security benefits for destitute and disabled people are profoundly low.
These social safety net benefits depend on a set of criteria that is arbitrarily defined by people with wealth. Let that sink in.
* * *
It's a strange thing, this class gap.
When I was younger, I would watch Wheel of Fortune or Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? or Jeopardy or The Price Is Right. Such game shows were and still are a staple of lower- to middle-class entertainment culture.
Now, as an adult with eyes on social justice, I find it pretty cringy for those reality television shows to even exist, while its producers and celebrity hosts already possess the money that contestants are competing to attain.
Despite the huge income inequality, capitalism has infiltrated our psyches, and the expectations or beliefs about what is fair are wielded, in a very stingy way, against the people most in need of money.
Is it naïve of me to think that maybe out of the destruction, we can find inroads to better imaginings of our country and its allocation of resources?
Rapid change is not a pipe dream or unattainable; think back to the early days of Covid, when the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance programs were enacted, providing individuals $600 per week for job loss and illness.
This, of course, was before things got politicized. At first, for a few months, it was a nonpartisan issue: For one brief moment, people who were sick or lost their jobs deserved financial support from the government.
* * *
There's so much to write about what is wrong, what is so dehumanizing, on so many levels, in so many sectors and institutions.
I hope that, despite the destruction of our democracy, as MAGA voters see the actual intentions of Donald Trump and his allies, including the architects of Project 2025, we can preserve or expand progressive social policies.
What if falling apart provides an opportunity for MAGA supporters to listen to proposals for economic reform in their favor, with much-higher monthly payments? Perhaps a system where the SSA does not repeatedly try to claw back alleged overpayments from recipients, so-called mistakes that should fall on the shoulders of the government?
Can those who hold values of "personal responsibility" and "good work ethic" imagine a country in which everyone had health care? Can they imagine being entitled to a monthly benefits payment for a better quality of life and more freedom?
This wealth gap needs to be thoroughly challenged and examined, not just written off as the way things are. They don't need to be. The resistance efforts across the country, I think, are impactful, and while things feel very bad, a lot of good neighbors with boots on the ground are doing hard work to protect and support people.
Is it a wild idea to think we can save our democracy, or even have progressive, people-centric policies take precedence? Maybe.
But given the last decade, crazier things have happened, right?
To quote Mary Oliver, "Keep some room in your heart for the unimaginable."
Perhaps our imaginations are the locus of control we need in this critical political moment.
This Voices Viewpoint by Taryn Heon was written for The Commons.
This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at [email protected].