1 in 6 Draw Welfare in Predominantly Red States

[candycorn]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

 

[Iceweasel]

Especially in the red states. Ooooh, that's positively orgasmic. How can they compete morally with the angelic beings dwelling in the heavenly blue states?

 

[JoeB131]

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

My sister went legally blind when her retinas started detaching. It still took years for her get SS disability.

Are there people gaming the system? Maybe. But the real problem is that since the labor market is controlled by employer need and not workers needs, a lot of these people could work somewhere, it's just no one wants to hire them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Heard of a guy in East Texas who had 100% disability and was making more than 200K a year running several night clubs.

SSI is a scam for many in East Texas, yes.

 

[midcan5]

It is ironic just how much the red states rely on welfare and this is true even in blue states. If you see a map of voting, red covers lots of blue states too and these are generally conservative areas away from cities. It shows you just how powerful the messaging is when money dominates the idea sphere. People vote against their own because the other is painted as an elite or as a welfare cheat, meanwhile the very people who vote have no healthcare, jobs, or a solid infrastructure. It is bizarre but it works. Check out, "The Trouble with Reality: A Rumination on Moral Panic in Our Time" by Brooke Gladstone, she covers the ways in which speech controls many people's choices.

"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." LBJ

"I wouldn't say Donald Trump is a champion for white America, I think he shares a lot of the issues and values of white America." David Duke

"We live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups. I ask, in my writing, 'What is real?' Because unceasingly we are bombarded with pseudo realities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very sophisticated electronic mechanisms." Philip K. Dick
.

 

[JoeB131]

It is ironic just how much the red states rely on welfare and this is true even in blue states. If you see a map of voting, red covers lots of blue states too and these are generally conservative areas away from cities. It shows you just how powerful the messaging is when money dominates the idea sphere. People vote against their own because the other is painted as an elite or as a welfare cheat, meanwhile the very people who vote have no healthcare, jobs, or a solid infrastructure. It is bizarre but it works. Check out, "The Trouble with Reality: A Rumination on Moral Panic in Our Time" by Brooke Gladstone, she covers the ways in which speech controls many people's choices.

well said.

The thing is that we've created a concept of "entitlements" vs. Welfare.

Social Security, Medicare and Unemployment Insurance are seen as "entitlements", even though most people who collect them end up taking out more than they ever paid in to them.

Meanwhile, SNAP, TANF, WIC, section 8, even if they are utilized by people who can't work (Children, the disabled) or people who work and don't make enough to make ends meet, are looked down upon.

I lovingly refer to the former groups as "White People Welfare", the kind of welfare that white folks are okay with, because people they know receive them.

White people also make up the majority of people who use the latter group, but we've trained people to look down on them.

 

[Muhammed]

Social security is an insurance policy that the workers are forced to buy. It is not "welfare".

 

[DarkFury]

Especially in the red states. Ooooh, that's positively orgasmic. How can they compete morally with the angelic beings dwelling in the heavenly blue states?

You know it's not hard to picture say four generations of coal miners with breathing disabilities. Not all forms of work are good for you.

 

[DarkFury]

Heard of a guy in East Texas who had 100% disability and was making more than 200K a year running several night clubs.

SSI is a scam for many in East Texas, yes.

Under ssi laws you can't work but you can own anything.

 

[Eloy]

Republicans will do nothing for the poor.

 

[JoeB131]

Social security is an insurance policy that the workers are forced to buy. It is not "welfare".

Of course it is. If you take more out of it than you pay in, it's welfare.

Period.

The thing is, if you live past 72, you will get everything you paid into it back. It's why the system is in such trouble now, the average life expectency is 78.

 

[miketx]

It's those state funded abortions.

 

[Iceweasel]

Especially in the red states. Ooooh, that's positively orgasmic. How can they compete morally with the angelic beings dwelling in the heavenly blue states?

You know it's not hard to picture say four generations of coal miners with breathing disabilities. Not all forms of work are good for you.

You went off on a tangent there.

 

[JoeB131]

You know it's not hard to picture say four generations of coal miners with breathing disabilities. Not all forms of work are good for you.

well, it's a good reason why we shouldn't still be mining coal...

 

[Rustic]

You know it's not hard to picture say four generations of coal miners with breathing disabilities. Not all forms of work are good for you.

well, it's a good reason why we shouldn't still be mining coal...

The majority of coal mining is open pit which has zero danger for the health of the workers. Dip shit

 

[IsaacNewton]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

And it's common knowledge red states take from the federal government for welfare and programs like SSA disability while blue states pay in more than they take. In other words the blue states are funding the people in red states to be lazy. And now this comes out that shows people in the red states get on disability and their families never get off it.

The exact opposite of what conservatives claim every day. THEY are the lazy ones that need to get jobs and stop taking a handout from the 'gubment'.

 

[Rustic]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

And it's common knowledge red states take from the federal government for welfare and programs like SSA disability while blue states pay in more than they take. In other words the blue states are funding the people in red states to be lazy. And now this comes out that shows people in the red states get on disability and their families never get off it.

The exact opposite of what conservatives claim every day. THEY are the lazy ones that need to get jobs and stop taking a handout from the 'gubment'.

The fact remains socialism is against the self interests of conservatives…

 

[miketx]

You know it's not hard to picture say four generations of coal miners with breathing disabilities. Not all forms of work are good for you.

well, it's a good reason why we shouldn't still be mining coal...

We? You a coal miner now?

 

[DarkFury]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

And it's common knowledge red states take from the federal government for welfare and programs like SSA disability while blue states pay in more than they take. In other words the blue states are funding the people in red states to be lazy. And now this comes out that shows people in the red states get on disability and their families never get off it.

The exact opposite of what conservatives claim every day. THEY are the lazy ones that need to get jobs and stop taking a handout from the 'gubment'.

Tell that to the coal miners or the steel mill workers or those with the hardest most dangerous jobs like the farmers!

 

[mudwhistle]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

**