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.
BS. My wife is on SSDI because she is very ill and is not and never ever will be employable. No one will employ her even if she wanted to be employed. And I've said this a hundred times on this board "IT IS DIFFICULT, EVEN WHEN VERY ILL, TO QUALIFY FOR SSDI, AND FOR MOST IT TAKES YEARS". Everyone who runs at the jaws about SSDI as though they are experts never had to collect it, never had to deal with it, never had to help anyone who is severally sick acquire it, because if they did they would know better.
Whoops. You've totally missed my point. I'm not saying everyone on SSDI does not need it or deserve it, certainly the majority are truly disabled. But I'm not denying that some people are on SSDI as a last resort when they could normally do other jobs if said jobs were available. It is an act of desperation for some to have some half way decent income coming in when the jobs just are not there. I don't blame the people doing this. I blame politicians who pass the tax code and "free" trade bills and society who allow private international banksters to use the world's economy as their own personal fiefdom.
None of this is a recent event. When I worked in healthcare in the late 80s, anyone applying for State Medicaid was required to file an appication for SSDI/SSI disability. One issue is that we have an uneducated and unskilled population for the highly technical jobs that our economy requires. Many people are awarded disability due to an impairment(s) that prevent them from engaging in exertional type work but, if they had the education and skills to perform most sedentary jobs, they would never have been found disabled to begin with. One solution would be a requirement that all people on disability undergo a medical and vocational evaluation to determine what they are capable to doing despite their impairment and, providing training that results in them coming off the rolls within a prescribed period at the completion of their training or, if they refuse, cutting them off. Most people struggle to survive on disability and are hardly living the good life. If they had training that provided opportunities to earn a living in spite of their impairments, most would be much better off.
bolillo_loco had it right. Taking people off the disability roles to compete with the millions already unemployed for the same jobs does not sound like a solution to me.
You wrote: "One issue is that we have an uneducated and unskilled population for the highly technical jobs that our economy requires."
And whose fault is that? The law requires each person to attend school for 12 years,TWELVE YEARS, under pain of truancy and being removed from your parents home all at cost to the state or in other words your fellow citizens. If you can't teach millions and millions of people to be self sufficient in a twelve year window than the problem does not lie with individuals but with the system. Germany has a system where you're ready to work after H.S. if you're not on the "college track".
I have uncles in my own family with H.S. degrees, no college, who are solidly middle class and none are in union trades but some are in government jobs. I know numerous others that this is true for. What happened? H.S. used to be plenty to sustain a middle class lifestyle for the majority of people. Even now only about 30-35% of people have a 4 year Bachelors degree.
WHY has the "educational" system not adopted with time and technology as Germany's has? Whose fault is that"? There is zero reason for a person to be held hostage for twelve years at taxpayer's expense only to be told they need to go tens of thousands of dollars in debt in trade school or college to learn something "useful". The whole process/concept borders on the perverse.
Look at the numbers. People are signing up for these disablities when there is real work that they can do. The idea that these people should be "written off" is stupid. For a wide swath of disabilities there is work within the US that could be done, at least partially, by these people.
30% of people who sign up on the first run, do get denied. But then we "pay off" lawyers to sue the US govt, and then the laweyers get a share. You get ALL the money you were initally denied.
Just look at these numbers. It seems that it is pretty easy to get a doctor who says you can't work, then a lawyer to represent you against an undefended goverment. The proof is in the pudding. . .back-paid and mental ilness has not skyrocketed in the US
they are just things that are sooo subjective, that ANYONE can claim it
Ok, lets break it down: Anyone can sign up for SSDI (not referring to SSI). The process is a long one and one must convince many professionals and bring together strong evidence to substantiate one's claim. Most are denied to weed out those who may be fraudulent. At least 80% are denied their first yearly round. Most of those that are quickly approved are most likely terminal, blind.
I agree with you, if you are employable then you should not qualify. SSDI stipulates you can not be employable and no employer wants you. Why? because they are in truly bad shape and not reliable because of their condition. That is it, not that complicated.
The lawyers who represent SSDI claims are not suing the government. They are representing clients, many who need help in organizing doctors and piles of records and paperwork to present to an administrative law judge. This most often takes 3 years. Keep in mind in what the client is asking. They are asking to collect on insurance they and there employer paid for over a span of several years. Just like any insurance you will collect, and should collect all moneys owed to you from the date you filed for disability. It wouldn't be tolerated if it was a private insurance company so why would it be ok for the Fed to rip you off? The lawyers are paid a fix amount by federal law.
As far as crooked doctors are concerned, I can't say. Most people don't think of their doctors as crooks. And I do not believe its easy to fool doctors.
My point is its a load of BS that it is easy to acquire SSDI, fool doctors, judges, lawyers and the federal government. Get easy approval, make lots of easy money and never pay tax on it.
Are there people scamming, sure but they are by far the minority. As far as claims climbing, just ask yourself how old is our population getting, how much larger is our population today than lets say 1980. I'm sure the stats for SSDI are coming from older folks. Not a scam but mortality.
As far as subjective conditions, I will agree, but that also cuts both ways. Those that may take advantage and our doctor's ignorance. There is a lot they do not know. A matter of fact they know less than what they know. My wife has a rare neurological disease that is so weird many narrow minded doctors can not get their mind around it, so it must not be so. But it is.
Their gravy train will run out soon, as the funding for social security disability will not be able to meet current needs by 2016. I would bet that the vast majority recieving social security disability will magically be "cured" and be able to work when the payments are markedly reduced.
2014.
Under the High Cost Assumptions, the default date was 2015. Based on my calculations since 2010, it has always been 2014.
Technically speaking, or I guess legally speaking, there is no law that compels Social Security to pull money from OASI to fund OADI.
As of December 2012, the OADI Trust Fund held $122,666,000,000 (and no I ain't joking) or $122.7 Billion.
Since 2009, the OADI Trust Fund has sustained losses of
The effects of the 2% FICA silliness will start manifesting itself in April, and then Sequestration Blues will start around June or so....it'll be another Obummer Summer of Pseudo-Recovery and then things will reach equilibrium and stabilize around September.
The primary issue is still that both OASI and OADI (as well as HI) are dependent upon creating 13.7 Million jobs like, uh, yesterday, but that just ain't happening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking
Jesus, get your facts straight for gods sake. SSDI is taxed. A matter of fact I'm still paying federal taxes from my wife's SSDI settlement. And she will file again this year and she----I will own additional federal taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking
You stated SSDI is not taxable. I'm saying it is taxed. One must pay federal taxes on SSDI. Perhaps not a company's private disability or SSI. SSDI is not the same as SSI. Yes, my wife did receive a lump sum and was taxed, and is taxed every month from her SSDI payment.
You made a claim, and he called you out on it, so stop yer yapping.
If you're paying taxes on Social Security Disability Benefits, then either 1) you have no clue what you're doing --- and honestly, you've never impressed me, so I am not at all surprised; or 2) your income is over the threshold for the taxation of benefits.
There are no set of circumstances under which your wife's SSDI income would ever be taxed, excepting the possibility that she files jointly with you, or unless she derives substantial Income from Wealth, that puts her over taxable threshold for persons on SSDI.
Your claim that SSDI is taxed is nonsense, and it isn't the SSDI that is taxed, rather it is the substantial Income in excess of SSDI benefits that is taxed.
Look at the numbers. People are signing up for these disablities when there is real work that they can do. The idea that these people should be "written off" is stupid. For a wide swath of disabilities there is work within the US that could be done, at least partially, by these people.
30% of people who sign up on the first run, do get denied. But then we "pay off" lawyers to sue the US govt, and then the laweyers get a share. You get ALL the money you were initally denied.
Just look at these numbers. It seems that it is pretty easy to get a doctor who says you can't work, then a lawyer to represent you against an undefended goverment. The proof is in the pudding. . .back-paid and mental ilness has not skyrocketed in the US
they are just things that are sooo subjective, that ANYONE can claim it
Look you can go on about the process, and justification for it. . .but it doesn't add up
Americans with disabilitiy have more rights and protections
Americans are not ANY more disabled than they were 20 years ago
Based on the move from welfare to SSDI, the data suggest that most of the growth from "fuzzy" illness i.e. pain/mental are due to a lack of employment and not any real disability.
My vote - either signficanlty limit how long 95% can stay on the program, or kill the program.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking
Ok, lets break it down: Anyone can sign up for SSDI (not referring to SSI). The process is a long one and one must convince many professionals and bring together strong evidence to substantiate one's claim. Most are denied to weed out those who may be fraudulent. At least 80% are denied their first yearly round. Most of those that are quickly approved are most likely terminal, blind.
I listened to that NPR report, also. I was unaware, until then, how agressively states were pushing people off of state programs and onto federal ones. I was left with the impression that some of what the "consulants' working on behalf of the states are engaged in is fraud.
I got the same impression. And the disabled don't count as "unemployed."
Probably explains where many of those missing 8.5 million workers have gone who have disappeared from the workforce since Obama took office. I fully realize this gaming of this system predates Obama and I'm not blaming him for it, but I've been wondering where those 8.5 million workers went since our population has been growing, not contracting, and the unemployment rate dropped to under 8 % recently.
Look you can go on about the process, and justification for it. . .but it doesn't add up
Americans with disabilitiy have more rights and protections
Americans are not ANY more disabled than they were 20 years ago
Based on the move from welfare to SSDI, the data suggest that most of the growth from "fuzzy" illness i.e. pain/mental are due to a lack of employment and not any real disability.
My vote - either signficanlty limit how long 95% can stay on the program, or kill the program.
Why would you limit how long people can stay on disability? They are disabled for as long as they are disabled. It makes no sense to have an arbitrary limit for how long people can be on disability.
I have a neighbor now who was a licensed health care nurse. She hit a deer on her way home from work one night and it tore off the top of her head. She is now on full disability, and also works as a restaurant dishwasher 25 hours a week for $10/hr, which she gets paid 'under the table', no taxes. Her full disability is under $800/mo. I rail against people who double dip, but I don't begrudge her. She's 58 now and I feel her years working and paying her own way entitles her to a decent living. The accident with the deer diminished her mental capacity; she'll never work as a professional anything again.
In other words, she's earned it. No, she shouldn't be double dipping, but for every rule, there are exceptions. IMO, she would be one of those exceptions. She works hard and appreciates what she has.
Steve Douglas 3 months ago
this guy should be the poster child for obama and his health care.wonder if this bum got his free cell phone
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.
The video is a perfect example of people who want nothing more than a free ride. I know a few myself.
