You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Economy
Is Disability the New Welfare?
2013-04-04
The government in Britain recently did something interesting.

It asked everyone receiving an "incapacity benefit" — a disability program slowly being phased out under new reforms — to submit to a medical test to confirm they were too disabled to work. A third of recipients (878,000 people) didn't even bother and dropped out of the program rather than be examined. Of those tested, more than half (55%) were found fit for work and a quarter were found fit for some work.

In 1960, when vastly more Americans were involved in physical labor of some kind, 0.65% of workforce participants between the ages of 18 and 64 were receiving Social Security disability insurance payments. Fifty years later, in a much healthier America that number has grown to 5.6%.

In 1960, 134 Americans were working for every officially recognized disabled worker. Five decades later that ratio fell to roughly 16 to 1.

In an illuminating and predictably controversial exposé for "This American Life," NPR's "Planet Money" team tried to figure out why, since 2009, nearly 250,000 people have been applying for disabilities every month (while we've averaged only 150,000 new jobs every month).

One factor has to do with what correspondent Chana Joffe-Walt calls the "Vast Disability Industrial Complex." These are the sometimes shady, sometimes well-intentioned lawyers who fight to fatten the rolls of disability recipients. These lawyers get a cut of every winning claimant's "back pay." The more clients, the bigger the take. That's why they run ads on TV shouting, "Disabled? Get the money you deserve!"

That points to the even bigger parts of the story. As the nature of the economy changes, disability programs are sometimes taking the place of welfare for those who feel locked out of the workforce — and state governments are loving it. States pay for welfare, the feds pay for disabilities.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#5  I know (2) people who went this route. One even calls her monthly deposit her "paycheck" that she uses, in part, to go bowling....

Both of them are now former friends...they cannot understand what I have an issue with....
Posted by: Uncle Phester   2013-04-04 19:52  

#4  Warning: long rant.
In 2002, it took us eleven months to get funding for in-home autism therapy. Just after the therapy started, the new (Dem) Gov's office said, "Gee, why are we giving kids 30 hours of therapy a week? Why can't they do this for a few hours in a doctor's office?"

One of the providers for Early Childhood autism therapy managed to convince legislators that the therapy really only worked for kids under seven. So his program gets all the funds now, and those kids diagnosed at age 7 are out of luck. It was quite interesting to discover that the appeals judge, who eventually granted one of our kids a modest extension of services, did not know that the age 7 cutoff was completely arbitrary.

The eleven months of therapy our kids did receive, before the state yanked the funds out from under older kids, has made our kids employable, functioning, and on their way to independence. My kids are paying their taxes.

It is unconscionable to set up road blocks for those who need disability assistance, and to turn around and give it away to people who just sit on their fannies.
Posted by: mom   2013-04-04 12:59  

#3  Nothing new about it.

I was hired in 1974, along with a whole bunch, into the SSA when SSI was instituted. Supplemental Security Income was targeted Federal welfare as an adjunct to Social Security. The targets were clearly cut as the blind, aged and disabled.

Ooops there's that disabled term again. What does that mean? Originally in the terms of this program it meant physically unable to hold a job. What it has come to mean is just another excuse to redistribute money to favored "disadvantaged groups". It literally took less than a month for the welfare worms to attack this new barrel of apples.

The progressive welfare pushers immediately started pumping out pamphlets telling potential recipients how to game the system. They actually set up an information table in the lobby of our office building two or 3 blocks up from the WTC explaing the 4 A's of disability: Angina, Allergies, Arthritis and Arthereosclerosis.

Obviously old age and blindness is pretty cut and dried but disability???? Hoo boy.

The worst of it was that the damn state and city offices were the worst offenders. All NYC and state welfare offices forced ALL their recipients to come and apply for the federal benefit or they were cut off.

The black humor in the situation was pretty funny. There were a raft of girls from the limosine liberal strongholds of Vassar, Swarthmore, etc. that now had to deal with low-life scum where one woman had 7 children with 5 different men living in an apartment with her sister and her 3 kids from 3 other different men AND their boyfriends AND their father and his girlfriend. These "poor naive" misses turned in to raving racist Nazis in the proverbial blink of an eye.

Me? I thought that I was a cynical conservative when I started. When I quit a year later I was more cynical about the gov't then ever AND actually felt sorry for some of the "clients" because of the bureaucratic crap they had to endure.

Disability as the new welfare? It's enough to make a cat laugh.
Posted by: AlanC   2013-04-04 12:39  

#2  Is disability the new welfare?

Yes. The democrats, during the Reagan push to "reform" welfare, deliberately loosened the requirements to continue funneling bribes and payoff money to their constituents (vote buying on credit, where the money is delivered AFTER the election, not before.)

But want to expand on the comment at the end regarding lawyers: I submit that Congress knows precisely what is good for business and knows what it takes to have a thriving business sector, mainly because of the way they regulate the business that they DO know about, which is lawyering.

And how do they regulate lawyering?

That's the point: THEY DON'T.

The lawyer-business is totally self regulated. There are NO regulations imposed on lawyers by the federal government, and there are NO limitations placed on lawyers as riders on totally irrelevant bills.

I submit that the "stupid" laws being passed by lawyers on all other businesses and business fields are not done from ignorance, but from greed or malice: take 0bamacare, replace Doctor with Lawyer, and it would NEVER pass.

I'm ready for the Revolution (aka the Great Reset), for I KNOW who f*cked up the Great American Experiment.
Posted by: Ptah   2013-04-04 12:34  

#1  and the tax treatments of disability pay or retirement
Posted by: Frank G   2013-04-04 12:20  

00:00