Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The number of people accepted for disability has been dropping since 2010. Last year saw the lowest number of people accepted for disability since Obama was elected. Not a good tactic if you are "trying to make as many as possible dependent on the Gov".
Not only that, but the percentage of people accepted for disability is lower for EVERY year under Obama than it was for ANY year under GW. The HIGHEST percentage of applicants accepted for disability under Obama was 35.85% (in 2010). The LOWEST percentage of applicants accepted for disability under Bush was 37.58% (in 2007) - and it went as high as 46.13% (in 2001). So much for "Dear Leader" being the "Marxist". Bush did a MUCH better job of accepting people onto disability.
Ken
Last edited by LordBalfor; 05-30-2013 at 08:55 PM..
The reason for the increase is the Obama regime is ALLOWING people who are laid off and too young to qualify for SS to jump on this bandwagon to keep the unemployment rate artificially low. These deadbeats should go on welfare or move to a state that has work.
If you are 55 and get laid off, it is hard to find another job that will pay you what you need to cover your expenses.
I have shared this story before. Heck, it might even be in this thread.
Family friend has been diagnosed with Dystonia. He cannot swallow or speak. He is disfigured. He no longer drives because of the spontaneous ticks. He cannot eat, let alone work. His savings are exhausted.
He is on his third disability application. If this is denied we will all chip in and hire a competent disability attorney for him.
Getting approved for disability is not the cake walk that some perceive.
How has Obama made Disability Benefits easier to get? If shark attacks go up under Obama, does that mean he's responsible for the increase? Or are there other factors worth consideirng?
Heck, we have people who believe government is controlling the weather.
States have a long history of using regressive policies to encourage poor residents to vote with their feet and move elsewhere. Local governments do the same, for example most places don't allow you to plop a trailer on a piece of land you own.
As the Mother of a disabled child, I strongly resent these right wing attacks on the disabled community - many of whom are living in poverty. Try having a brain injury through no fault of your own and then get back to us about how great it is to live with a disability and how little help you actually get from government sources.
I do not have a sense that most Republicans have issues with the disabled community. Internet forums seem to attract concrete thinkers who think everyone on welfare is a drug addict eating lobster.
The reason for the increase is the Obama regime is ALLOWING peoplewho are laid off and too young to qualify for SS to jump on this bandwagon to keep the unemployment rate artificially low. These deadbeats should go on welfare or move to a state that has work.
If you are 55 and get laid off, it is hard to find another job that will pay you what you need to cover your expenses.
Prove this.
While the number of applications has been increasing for the last 15 years the percentage of application approved has been declining.
What's very odd -- the cases of disability are skyrocketing in numbers -- in spite of workplace disability laws that make it so the workplace must accomodate disabled employees. In the past you had to actually be disabled to collect these checks. You had to be missing legs or something quite major.
Monthly Statistical Snapshot, April 2013
Number of people receiving Social Security, SSI, or both
April 2013:
All beneficiaries: 62.465 million total, 54.1 million SocSec only.
Aged 65 or older: 40.8 million, total, 38.8 million SocSec only.
Based on 115.9 million working full time, each recipient is supported by 1.8 workers.
Mr. malamute wrote: You don't need a severe impairment to get on disability. You can have two perfectly good arms and two perfectly good legs, and IQ over 65 and still collecct your free money.
The problem with our government and our social workers is that they take the approach that working for a livng is bad and cruel. Work is actually therapuetic, it's good for someone.
Disability numbers are not skyrocketing because more people have actually become severely disabled. In fact with modern medicine, there should be far less cases but it's the reverse.
Thus speaks the voice for the ignorant. You can have a traumatic brain injury and still have a sound body and even an IQ of 100+ but still be disabled. Try functioning day to day at home - never mind on the job - with a severely impaired short term memory, non existant executive function, and completely "blind" to time to mention only a few.
It's people like you who cruelly add insult to injury when you sit in judgement of those with "invisible" disabilities. Some people think they know everything when the reality is that they know nothing.
While the ADA requires employers to make "reasonable accomodation" for those with disabilities, the truth is that many - especially small businesses do not. It's too expensive and too much trouble, so the disabled applicant is told someone with better qualifications got the job. Pretty hard to disprove and not worth the time to file a complaint which no one will read.
You really shouldn't post about issues that you have no understanding of and view only through the lenses of prejudice and your preconceived notions. It does not reflect well on you and causes people to view your other posts with skepticism.
Yours,
- Rambler
That's what I've always suspected and have said and it's the absolute truth. I'm sure there are some employers who are pro-hiring disabled, but most aren't. Either because of liabilities or ignorance. Discrimination laws look good on paper but in reality they are rarely enforced and/or taken seriously. Sometimes you'll see a company getting sued but most of the time they just get around it by making an excuse, like saying someone else got the job or the person wasn't qualified. It's hard to make a legal case out of it even if you really were discriminated against unlawfully.
The thing about having an "invisible" disability or mental illness, is that it is your choice of wether or not to disclose it to an employer or potential employer. In my case, mild aspergers syndrome, I will never disclose it to an employer unless I know it would burden me on the job. Disclosing any mental illness will hurt your chances. For physical disabilities it's a whole different story, your disability can be seen from a mile away. But with mental disabilities people think there is nothing wrong with you just because you appear normal on the outside. Once again it's ignorance. But is it really any different then racism? These types of discrimination will never die. The unemployment rates for people with disabilities is always severely high. Supposedly even in good economies.
It's a very glaring issue that is rarely talked about or discussed within the mainstream.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
