• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What does disability mean to you and who qualifies?

What does disability mean and who should get it?

  • who cares, it is unmanagable

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .
big sudden turns that will flip it over
that will be the result of going past 21 trillion in debt by the time the socialist in chief leaves office? So tell me, at what point will enough be too much 21 trillion 41 a hundred and one? Can the debt just continue to grow forever?

Unless you STOP entitlements dead in their tracks there's no stopping this boat from capsizing we on the right firmly believe that bankrupting the country is the goal of you commies, go on tell me I'm wrong
 
that will be the result of going past 21 trillion in debt by the time the socialist in chief leaves office? So tell me, at what point will enough be too much 21 trillion 41 a hundred and one? Can the debt just continue to grow forever?

Unless you STOP entitlements dead in their tracks there's no stopping this boat from capsizing we on the right firmly believe that bankrupting the country is the goal of you commies, go on tell me I'm wrong

Why would any side want us to fail? Both parties want success they merely have differing opinions on how to achieve the same goal. One is a little more people centric, while the other is a little more business based but both are not as different as they attempt to project. The single worse detractor of the whole system of political debate are self aggrandizing and delusional ego's.

I'm not a commie but I also don't believe in a plutocracy.
 
Both parties want success
at the expense of the American taxpayer? No welfare and socialism is not 'caring about the people'. In this case failure is an option. There has been a trend in one direction for over 50 years, more and more government interference in every facet of your daily life (now they will have your e-mails and your medical records?) you will serve the state well in your golden years or will you be seen as a non-productive member of society when you come before the death panel? semi-retired is that obamanation code for unemployed? I still have yet to see all the folks that have signed up at the state exchanges and love it, time will tell?
 
at the expense of the American taxpayer? No welfare and socialism is not 'caring about the people'. In this case failure is an option. There has been a trend in one direction for over 50 years, more and more government interference in every facet of your daily life (now they will have your e-mails and your medical records?) you will serve the state well in your golden years or will you be seen as a non-productive member of society when you come before the death panel? semi-retired is that obamanation code for unemployed? I still have yet to see all the folks that have signed up at the state exchanges and love it, time will tell?

There's only one problem with your theory the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer under the current trend of unbridled capitalism. People can't work if there's no jobs, so how are they supposed to live without income? And if there's so much socialism why did the gov bail out corporations and banks during the financial collapse of 2008 instead of the average citizen? That was $4 trillion right there in one shot added to the deficit and why is the FED buying up $85 billion of bad bank loans every month for years on end if it's all going to the poor? And eventually even the wealthy will suffer if people can't make enough money to stimulate the economy thru spending.

See the real problem is that average people aren't getting enough of the pie and that's what's causing the lack of growth, not gov spending which is literally just a bunch of numbers on some books. But if they keep buying up bad debt from greedy banks and their investors they are going to devalue the dollar and capital investments in the US, so bad that interest rates and inflation eventually shoot thru the roof.
 
I figured you don't care for others and you've confirmed that.

Actually, all he confirmed is that he is against government imposed charity.

The nation is made better by caring for all its citizens. There is abuse in the system, but as it has been stated in this thread, it's about 1% (if I'm not mistaken). We don't have great numbers of people unable to earn a living, languishing in the streets. That is the trait of a 3rd world banana republic, not the beacon of freedom Americans like to claim the U.S. is.

"Try to imagine a regulation of labor imposed by force that is not a violation of liberty; a transfer of wealth imposed by force that is not a violation of property. If you cannot reconcile these contradictions, then you must conclude that the law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice." - Frédéric Bastiat

I have quoted that at least twice now and yet no one wants to challenge the idea that when the government imposes a transfer of wealth by force that it's a violation of property. Perhaps because they know it is and they can't actually reconcile how they can claim they care for people when they support violating their rights.

This line of yours "The nation is made better by caring for all its citizens" is basically talking about a unity and a fraternity that you desire to be there, but no matter what you do it will forever be artificial and imposed on the people. No one has organized on their own free will, no one is associating with others because they desire to do so, no one is helping anyone or doing anything they desire to do. It's all just forced upon them by the government for whatever agendas they desire to impose on the people. There is really no justice, no empathy, no ability to even consider people here at all.
 
government imposed charity
wow that is mind boggling to me.
On my planet charity imposed at the point of a gun goes by a different name.
The real issue is that the run of the mill wage slave hasn't a clue.
 
the current trend of unbridled capitalism
could you point me to where that is happening (in this country)?
its ok, you folks seem to be all for our mixed economy to become pure, I can see that while you are getting your wish I fear you have no idea what the result will be, folks that lived under communism and fled here can tell ya it ain't all its cracked up to be ;)
 
There's only one problem with your theory the rich are getting richer.
and somehow you've been lead to believe that isn't a good thing?

2el5xuf.jpg
 
wow that is mind boggling to me.
On my planet charity imposed at the point of a gun goes by a different name.
The real issue is that the run of the mill wage slave hasn't a clue.

I have found that calling it charity makes them feel better. If I call it by it's proper name they bitch and moan like children screaming It's not true. It's not true! It's not true! WAAAH!
 
We used to have sanitariums and state mental hospitals filled with people. Those "resources" no longer exist.

You think churches, friends and family have resources that last a life time of a person with disabilities? That's the thing about charity and a family's ability to earn enough to provide the necessities, it's not always there and it ebbs and flows with the economy.

Yes, we did it before welfare. Annie Sullivan grew up in an alms house which certainly wasn't ideal, but grew up to teach Helen Keller how to communicate. Before that, people like Keller were viewed by some as borderline animals with no hope of ever communicating. Imo, Sullivan gained a great deal of insight and empathy from her rough childhood that assisted her in helping Keller.
 
It expands the number of insured, and mandates certain things such as parents being able to cover their children longer and insurance companies not being able to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions. That is not socialized medicine. Do you even know what socialized medicine is? Do you even know what the word socialism means?

That would depend on what era and what strain of socialism you're talking about. What people like yourself practice comes from the 19th century. I would say that controlling the business decisions of insurance companies is socialist in nature as it removes ownership control of the business and puts in the hands of the government.
 
Last edited:
Just because they do things, or you see them doing things, doesn't mean they aren't disabled. Maybe they have severe arthritis that is mostly controlled with medications, but it can flair up and make it so that every few days they can't get out of bed. Very few jobs are going to be okay with an employee who is calling in at least once a week because they simply can't move.

Sure there are some people who cheat the system, but just because you see someone who is doing something you don't think they should be doing because they qualify for disability doesn't mean they aren't disabled.

Yes that's all true, but like I stated earlier, I've actually known several people when I was younger who were screwing over the system. There was a neighbor who worked under the table while collecting disability.

Widespread fraud reported in Social Security Administration's Disability Program | Fox News

Senate panel uncovers millions in disability fraud
 
The ACA will probably go down in history as the pivotal point that saves the American economy with the net present value of the unfunded liability of Medicare being $43 trillion. That is the single biggest, financial time bomb that this country faces in the near future without something being done about it.

I truly hope you are correct.
The USA has needed to get healthcare costs under control for decades.
 
Yes, we did it before welfare. Annie Sullivan grew up in an alms house which certainly wasn't ideal, but grew up to teach Helen Keller how to communicate. Before that, people like Keller were viewed by some as borderline animals with no hope of ever communicating. Imo, Sullivan gained a great deal of insight and empathy from her rough childhood that assisted her in helping Keller.

There are no longer alms houses.
 
Yes, we did it before welfare. Annie Sullivan grew up in an alms house which certainly wasn't ideal, but grew up to teach Helen Keller how to communicate. Before that, people like Keller were viewed by some as borderline animals with no hope of ever communicating. Imo, Sullivan gained a great deal of insight and empathy from her rough childhood that assisted her in helping Keller.

Finding anecdotal accounts in the past does not in any way negate the historical social reality of private aid for the disabled being lackluster in addressing the entire population.
 
Actually, all he confirmed is that he is against government imposed charity.



"Try to imagine a regulation of labor imposed by force that is not a violation of liberty; a transfer of wealth imposed by force that is not a violation of property. If you cannot reconcile these contradictions, then you must conclude that the law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice." - Frédéric Bastiat

I have quoted that at least twice now and yet no one wants to challenge the idea that when the government imposes a transfer of wealth by force that it's a violation of property. Perhaps because they know it is and they can't actually reconcile how they can claim they care for people when they support violating their rights.

This line of yours "The nation is made better by caring for all its citizens" is basically talking about a unity and a fraternity that you desire to be there, but no matter what you do it will forever be artificial and imposed on the people. No one has organized on their own free will, no one is associating with others because they desire to do so, no one is helping anyone or doing anything they desire to do. It's all just forced upon them by the government for whatever agendas they desire to impose on the people. There is really no justice, no empathy, no ability to even consider people here at all.

No, he said: You assume that I or anyone else should care?

By that response, he doesn't care.

You are arguing that you didn't get a personal voice in how the government operated before you were born into this country. As a people, this is the government we have chosen. If there were great numbers who believed as you do, it would be different or change would be afoot to make it that way. There isn't. You live here by choice. Consider that.
 
Yes that's all true, but like I stated earlier, I've actually known several people when I was younger who were screwing over the system. There was a neighbor who worked under the table while collecting disability.

Widespread fraud reported in Social Security Administration's Disability Program | Fox News

Senate panel uncovers millions in disability fraud

There are certainly people who commit fraud in these systems, but they aren't nearly close to the majority of those who receive disability. And personally, I don't think that people should be penalized for working what they can to go beyond disability, at least not if it isn't really a big amount they earn (although it shouldn't be under the table). Someone who is disabled but able to work can only get $1000 a month in disability. So I don't have an issue with those people getting that and working some as well to earn a little more to live on. $1000 a month is not a lot of money, at all. And that is max amount. Now, it should work on a scale. And a person who qualifies for disability should not be completely disqualified because they have a job that earns them enough to not qualify for pay because there is always a chance they could lose that job due to their disability and they shouldn't have to redo all the paperwork to get paid again should it happen.
 
There are certainly people who commit fraud in these systems, but they aren't nearly close to the majority of those who receive disability. And personally, I don't think that people should be penalized for working what they can to go beyond disability, at least not if it isn't really a big amount they earn (although it shouldn't be under the table). Someone who is disabled but able to work can only get $1000 a month in disability. So I don't have an issue with those people getting that and working some as well to earn a little more to live on. $1000 a month is not a lot of money, at all. And that is max amount. Now, it should work on a scale. And a person who qualifies for disability should not be completely disqualified because they have a job that earns them enough to not qualify for pay because there is always a chance they could lose that job due to their disability and they shouldn't have to redo all the paperwork to get paid again should it happen.

I don't think you're understanding just how deep the fraud goes. Did you read the links?

And NO, if someone can work, then they do not get disability. We just cannot afford it as a nation. I would advise you to take a look at what the government brings in monthly and what they spend per month. Also, take a look at the national deficit ticker. What you are suggesting is just impossible and will eventually destroy our country.

The Social Security disability assistance program, which provides more than $200 billion in benefits to nearly 14 million Americans annually, is at risk of running out of funding by 2016, according to the trustees who oversee the program.
 
I don't think you're understanding just how deep the fraud goes. Did you read the links?

And NO, if someone can work, then they do not get disability. We just cannot afford it as a nation. I would advise you to take a look at what the government brings in monthly and what they spend per month. Also, take a look at the national deficit ticker. What you are suggesting is just impossible and will eventually destroy our country.

People qualify now for disability even if they are working because many jobs that some get are only parttime or lowpay anyway and they could lose those jobs at any time due to their disability.
 
People qualify now for disability even if they are working because many jobs that some get are only parttime or lowpay anyway and they could lose those jobs at any time due to their disability.

That depends entirely on the money they make and the hours they put in, as I'm sure you are aware. BTW, my personal anecdote about the neighbor who worked while collecting disability, are you doubting me? You think I just jump to conclusions without ever talking with him, knowing him and being aware of his schedule? He was a roofer. LOL! Yeah, real disabled. He was a liar as are many people who go after disability, and a lot of the are seeking it out with fake "injuries" because the economy is still SO bad when it comes to jobs. WAIT until a couple of years after this Obamacare. It's going to be a disaster.
 
I'm not taking it personally. I'm just saying that what you are talking about doing is something you could just have easily done to me; it's something that can and has happened to me in the past. It's why my initial filing and subsequent appeals have been denied, and why I spent a considerable portion of last year homeless.

I'm not angry. I'm just saying why it's very understandable why someone else might be.

The job I just got (and start on Monday) specializes in helping people who are in similar situations to yours, Kori. We house over 100 formerly-homeless people with mental illness, provide mental health therapy and support, and assist them in getting benefits such as disability as well as career training and job placement assistance.

Is there anything like that for you in your area, or are you basically stuck fending for yourself?
 
I met another "disabled person" this morning that was loading up for a week trip to go horseback riding in Missouri. How disabled could that person really be, horses are alot of trouble and require high amounts of physical labor for care.

It is becoming sickening seeing these types basically on early retirement while the rest of us work.

If a person was on a career track and received an injury that interfered with their ability to carry on in that line of work then they can get disability because it is in society's best interest to "put them to pasture."

The alternative is having them make an expensive transition to a new line of work at a late age and what we really want to do is get them out of the economy so someone younger can get started on their mortgage as fast as possible and the older person can get started on their retirement as fast as possible (which also has a useful economic role). You produce more capital that way.
 
That depends entirely on the money they make and the hours they put in, as I'm sure you are aware. BTW, my personal anecdote about the neighbor who worked while collecting disability, are you doubting me? You think I just jump to conclusions without ever talking with him, knowing him and being aware of his schedule? He was a roofer. LOL! Yeah, real disabled. He was a liar as are many people who go after disability, and a lot of the are seeking it out with fake "injuries" because the economy is still SO bad when it comes to jobs. WAIT until a couple of years after this Obamacare. It's going to be a disaster.

I actually said that this should be part of the consideration for whether someone qualifies for getting paid benefits while still working. It should simply go on a scale based on what the person needs to live decently in their area and what they make (or are likely to make) based on their particularly disability.

And no, I don't doubt your story. I just don't think that it is as widespread as some believe. It happens, but I have no idea what makes your neighbor qualified for disability. Just because someone is a roofer and can technically do the job doesn't mean they necessarily should be doing it or can legally do it. But they may be very good at it.

My brothers have a serious nervous condition that prevents them from legally working many jobs, including things like power line work and such. Heck, my one brother qualified to defuse mines in the Army before he was diagnosed with the disorder. He shakes, a lot, when his hands aren't busy doing something else. He wasn't technically put out of his job in the Army, but he was relegated to truck driver for his unit because of it. He was denied a job to work on power lines because of his disorder. There are a lot of jobs that legally cannot risk people with certain conditions working there, even if technically the people are able to actually do the job and they are good at it.
 
I actually said that this should be part of the consideration for whether someone qualifies for getting paid benefits while still working. It should simply go on a scale based on what the person needs to live decently in their area and what they make (or are likely to make) based on their particularly disability.

And no, I don't doubt your story. I just don't think that it is as widespread as some believe. It happens, but I have no idea what makes your neighbor qualified for disability. Just because someone is a roofer and can technically do the job doesn't mean they necessarily should be doing it or can legally do it. But they may be very good at it.

My brothers have a serious nervous condition that prevents them from legally working many jobs, including things like power line work and such. Heck, my one brother qualified to defuse mines in the Army before he was diagnosed with the disorder. He shakes, a lot, when his hands aren't busy doing something else. He wasn't technically put out of his job in the Army, but he was relegated to truck driver for his unit because of it. He was denied a job to work on power lines because of his disorder. There are a lot of jobs that legally cannot risk people with certain conditions working there, even if technically the people are able to actually do the job and they are good at it.

Look lady, you can't climb up and work on a roof in 90 degree temperatures all day long, every day if you are disabled. Come on! And yes, according to everything I've looked at, disability fraud is through the roof.

If you are going to state that fraud is NOT a widespread problem in the disability program, then I would like you to provide links. I provided TWO that state the opposite of your claims, one is a statement by the head of the social security department.
 
Look lady, you can't climb up and work on a roof in 90 degree temperatures all day long, every day if you are disabled. Come on! And yes, according to everything I've looked at, disability fraud is through the roof.

If you are going to state that fraud is NOT a widespread problem in the disability program, then I would like you to provide links. I provided TWO that state the opposite of your claims, one is a statement by the head of the social security department.

No, the Social Security Administration has repeatedly stated that fraud is an issue affecting 1% or so of payments.
 
Back
Top Bottom