Well, that is a long way from saying most people on "assistance" were fake disability cases. Disability claims have to be heard and approved by judges, you know. I know two people on disability and it was not easy for them to get it. One was a clear case of a woman in a good job who was badly injured in a car wreck lost the use of one hand and has chronic severe back damage. The other was a woman who had worked all her life coping with bipolar disorder that had gotten progressively worse until she was no longer capable of dealing with workplace situations. Both of them had to prove that they were not faking because back pain and mental illness are two of the most-faked ailments. The injured friend had to produce medical evidence including X-rays and doctors testimony. They are under oath, these doctors. The other was able too show that she had been diagnosed at 14 and had over 30 years or medical records showing treatment and that she had been taking her medications that were no longer helper her much. She had a long work record until they couldn't find a med that worked for her. So she clearly was not inventing a mental illness just to qualify. I'm sure there is a lot of abuse in the system. But unless all the judges are corrupt, the system is pretty good at weeding out the fakers. I also suspect that the aging of the boomers is naturally making them the biggest group of new disability claims. Boomers have been the biggest component of any grouping of Americans that you care to make since 1955.
A woman in clarksdale is on disability. She's so fat and lazy that she gets boils?that have to be lanced. Dr told her its because she never exerts herself enough to sweat. All she does is eat and sit on her couch. She's gotten so big now she's been labeled disabled. This came from her sister.
Any good fraud investigator would begin a review of Social Security disability and tell you the analytics don't make any sense. Major red flags. In a time when jobs are less physically depanding, and fewer Americans have physical requirements to their jobs workplace disability is through the roof. 14.9 million people are disabled and cannot work. This is a larger percentage of the workforce than at any other time since the program began. Even more troubling is the fact that the leading drivers of the growth of the enrollment are back injuries and mental disabilities. These have traditionally been home to the vast majority of fraud cases. That is why your red's two aquaintences received so much scrutiny. I know how I would plan my review if I were searching out fraud, and I'm very certain with the right amount of scrutiny and money put into investigation we could cut the total spend by 20% or more. The interesting dichotomy is that fraud investigations are very expensive, so we would probably see little cost beneifit.
I think Homer Simpson decreed that 250+ was disabled. Social Services scorned both me and my application when I applied. Damn, the bad luck.
If you want to split hairs about my statement regarding assistance go ahead, but there is no question that the gyst of what I said is accurate. Disability claims do indeed have to be heard by a judge but the system has been so flooded with claims that there is no way in the world a judge can read through every single claim. Those claims are signed off by a doctor and the judges trust the doctors opinions. Besides, what power does the judge have to question the doctors assertion? Unless the person is a complete dumb ass they are not going to do anything in the courtroom to make the judge believe that the doctor might be wrong. Is the judge supposed to order an investigation into the legitimacy of the claim? With diminished federal resources for law enforcement, I would say the likelihood of that is slim to none. I can appreciate the fact that you believe that because these doctors are under oath that they have seconds thoughts about signing off on claims. But as you alluded to there is so much subjectivity the doctor has a legal "out" regardless; he has nothing to lose. I feel certain that there are pockets in the country where getting on disability is much easier than others. In fact, the 20/20 special specifically pointed out West Virginia and Florida as the largest offenders. I don't think anyone on this forum will doubt my sincerity when I say I am an ardent supporter of social programs such as this; I've had family members who couldn't have lived or survived without it because of Chron's disease (sp?). I am sure your friends are the same. I want those programs to continue for those like our friends and family who genuinely need it and in order to assure that we have to weed out the ones who are using it as a form of welfare/gap relief before social security. I agree with your statement about Boomers. By the sheer numbers of you and given the age range of boomers during this span of history it just is what it is. If it were a smaller generation, the numbers would be relatively less. My original point in this conversation to McTiger was to point out that the persons receiving "welfare" or "assistance", since the crash in 2008, are not minority women who are procreating at an alarming rate. This is the undertone of the Republicans complaint about the spike in government assistance: that's its going to lazy minorities who just want a free ride and it simply isn't true in this instance.
I don't like lazy myself. Doesn't matter if they're a minority or majority. I want people to do all they can to support themselves before applying for assistance. Not get all they can from it.
I don't like lazy either and I could care less what form it comes in. I think most decent American's feel the same way about it. I know I never mind helping out someone in need when I can; especially if it helps them to get back on their feet. But I detest it when I feel like anyone is taking advantage of my goodness and I feel pretty certain the lion's share of people in this country feel the same way about it, Republican or Democrat.
I don't think you really understand how the process works. What power does a judge have? Are you kidding? All the power of the courts. They question the doctors decisions all of the time. It's what they do. The judges investigate the legitimacy of claims themselves. These claimants have been paying into the Social Security System for their entire careers and have every right to make such a claim. Initial claims have a denial rate of approximately 65%. Reconsiderations (the first step of appeals) are denied at an even higher rate (up to 85%). About 1.6 million claims are denied each year by Social Security administrators. Administrative Law Judges hearings of 3rd level appeals then hear all of the evidence and make rulings based upon evidence. About 34% more are denied at this level. The 4th level is the Appeals Council which only reviews the appeals court rulings, they deny about 97%. Finally the last appeal is to a Federal Court Review which denies over 99%. He has a great deal to lose. He can lose his license to practice medicine, he can lose his credibility before the courts, and he can be brought up on perjury charges. Judges don't like being lied to by witnesses or lawyers and they have means to deal with it. As in all things, there are certain courts and certain jurisdictions that have different standards than others, I'm sure this is true. Equally true in all matters, there are a few corrupt judges, but the vast majority do their jobs properly. There are too many check and balances to get away with all the the things you suggest. Fair enough. But the majority of those on "assistance" are not SS disability fraud cases. There are about 11 million people on disability (most of them legitimately) and over 23 million on welfare or food stamps. 63,000 people on disability medically improve and return to work each year. Those that receive it average $1,100 a month.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...9/13/AR2010091306493.html?sid=ST2010091401818 http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/11/news/economy/disability-payments/ http://economics.mit.edu/files/7388 Here are three separate articles that support the assertions that I have made about the rise in disability costs in the country and, further, the rise in disability roles by individuals who have no work experience. Say what you want about judges and this "foolproof" system of ours that never let's through a single mistake, but it's happening my friend, and it's happening at an alarming rate that threatens the contributions that you and I and every one else have made to Social Security over our working careers. You state, "These claimants have been paying into the Social Security System for their entire careers and have every right to make such a claim." But I don't give a damn how long you've worked, if your not disabled then you don't qualify for disabiiltiy. I don't care how much you've paid into the system, if you are not disabled, you do not qualify for disability insurance. Plain and Simple. If we can't take an honest look at stuff like this and call a spade a spade then we need to all go home. This isn't about politics and it's not a democrat or republican issue. When the SSI-Disability fund runs dry is it going to be the democrats or republicans who suffer from it? All of us are going to suffer from it.
