It’s the workplace safety, stupid!

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Matt Yglesias is doing yeoman’s work on the 2005 Social Security report over at TAPPED today. Go read everything, though I want to highlight real quick this post, where he finds the Trustees’ projecting that men will work less in the future. The report explains this assumption by arguing, in part, that fewer men will get married—and hey, maybe unmarried men are lazier after all—but also because of “higher assumed disability prevalence rates.”

Well crikey. This is yet another trend that, if true, can very easily be ameliorated by better policies. It’s no secret that the Bush administration has gutted workplace safety protections over the past four years. Yet the Bureau of Labor Statistics has estimated that in 2003 there were 4,365,200 non fatal injuries and illnesses in the United States. Disability insurance covers the severest of these injuries, and that money comes out of the Social Security Trust Fund (that’s what the “DI” stands for in OASDI, after all). And a good number of those injuries and illnesses could have been prevented by better workplace protections. Hopefully it’s obvious where I’m going with this…


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend