• 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!

Helping the Needy and the Poor

Where do you draw the line? Who would you help? You can choose more than one


  • Total voters
    53
Bi-polar depression/anxiety attacks/ADHD/back problems. The latest scams to collect SS Disability. When the medical community finally decides that alcoholism is a disease, we're screwed. ;)

I don't mind a hand up -- in fact, I think we should probably do even more for people who are genuinely disabled. But a hand out? God, I wish we didn't do that as often as I think we do.

Wrong Maggie. The psychological issues that you describe are CERTAINLY disabling and can prevent people from working. I've signed off on half a dozen SSI forms, requesting disability for patients that had one of those psychological illnesses. THEY COULD NOT WORK because of them. It would be unethical for me to sign off on them if I felt they COULD work. Further, my brother is one who receives SSI because of severe anxiety/depression. There is no question that he could not survive without it.
 
I have a new difinition of "disability".

If you send out resumes to all companies in 40 miles (or within bus system) and if they refuse to hire you in 90 days. Then you are disabled untill they do hire you.......

PS

I have spent 5 years suing for disability I paid 27 years into............so I know about the disability system.........

you get nothing......
Most of the homeless are SSI people, they dont get enough to afford a place to stay.
it takes min of 2 YEARS to collect disabiltiy......

That's not entirely accurate. Once you apply for SSI, you will receive an answer within 6 months. If accepted, not only will you start receiving benefits immediately, but you will receive back benefits from the day that your SSI was approved. If it was NOT accepted, there are 3 levels of appeal you can go through. THAT'S where your "2 year" comment may have come from, since each appeal takes about 6 months apiece.
 
GmH said:
This are the ones that drive Republicans crazy.

For every story like that, I could giev you 100 of people who worked their ass off, and got the shaft through no fault of their own and got exploited.

Either Ecclesiastes 9:11 (time and unforseen occurance), or 8:9 (man dominating man).
 
A friend of mine has an older son 40 something to be exact. He is on SSI. He is too drepressed to deal with a job or to deal with life in general. He is not too depressed to buy a car. He is not too depressed to buy a boat. He is not too depressed too move from Idaho to South Carolina....all by his little 0l' self. He is not too depressed to go fishing all day and water sking all summer. His 73 old mother works to help support him.... This are the ones that drive Republicans crazy.

I will gladly, gladly, gladly give you a helping hand when you are truely needy, help you get on your feet, make sure you are clothed and do not go hungry. I draw the line at helping you when you sit on your butt all day and fish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WE DO NOT want the needy thrown off welfare, we want the bums like the one above thrown off welfare

Good point. I've had several instances where a perfectly able bodied person somehow manages to 'milk' the system.

Having worked in the non-profit sector for awhile and dealing with people that have DD/ID; I know there are people that NEED that assistance and are truly.. disabled. The person you've described above is one of the poster children for what's wrong with the system.

But how do we fix it? This is the bigger concern to me.
 
A friend of mine has an older son 40 something to be exact. He is on SSI. He is too drepressed to deal with a job or to deal with life in general. He is not too depressed to buy a car. He is not too depressed to buy a boat. He is not too depressed too move from Idaho to South Carolina....all by his little 0l' self. He is not too depressed to go fishing all day and water sking all summer. His 73 old mother works to help support him.... This are the ones that drive Republicans crazy.

I will gladly, gladly, gladly give you a helping hand when you are truely needy, help you get on your feet, make sure you are clothed and do not go hungry. I draw the line at helping you when you sit on your butt all day and fish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WE DO NOT want the needy thrown off welfare, we want the bums like the one above thrown off welfare

SSI is insurance. He EARNED it.
 
My big gripe is that SSI "tells" people to go to work, but punishes them for doing so by disproportionately reducing benefits for hours worked..inducing many of the disabled to forego the desired job (and increased independence) and independent housing so they can actually afford to pay for services they need (thus leaving them unemployed and more dependent upon family/guardians).

I think this is a legitimate complaint. It would encourage people who actually are trying to work and contribute to their own care to gradually reduce payments until they truly get back on their feet. Immediately taking away benefits makes their life harder not easier. If you have kids you have to start paying for care, you have to pay more for gas, insurance, etc., Give just a little more incentive for those going back to work and weed out more of the freeloaders to pay for it.
 
I wasn't aware of that, but I remember hearing that in one of the states (can't remember which one), it is estimated that about 25% of the disability recipients are abusing the system, and I know that it's growing by leaps and bounds for the past few years.

Can you tell me how you know this? Is there a link?
 
My big gripe is that SSI "tells" people to go to work, but punishes them for doing so by disproportionately reducing benefits for hours worked..inducing many of the disabled to forego the desired job (and increased independence) and independent housing so they can actually afford to pay for services they need (thus leaving them unemployed and more dependent upon family/guardians).

SSI is a truly ****ed thing.
Some of these people want to try to work, but are penalized by loosing their necessary medical benefits.

Health care reform should of started with things like this, first.
 
Can you tell me how you know this? Is there a link?

Certain things can cause someone to become disabled — a chronic illness, for example, or an accident. One thing that should not cause people to be categorized as disabled is a recession.

But that appears to be happening with Social Security Disability Insurance, the 1950s-era expansion of the program best known for paying retirement benefits. In 2007, 8.9 million people were on disability. Now that number is 10.7 million, a 20% jump in just five years.

While non-economic factors account for part of the increase — including a previous backlog of applicants and an aging population — the linkage between the rising disability rolls and the Great Recession is impossible to ignore.

Recession enriching disability rolls

Unemployment claims have been trickling down over the past few months, which most agree is good news.

But in tandem with that decrease, another public benefit has been increasing. Since 2007, some 3.4 million Americans have been added to the list of those receiving Social Security Disability Insurance. SSDI, as it's know, pays out some $1,000 a month and also gives people access to Medicare and Medicaid.

About 10.6 million Americans now receive SSDI benefits which has raised new fears that the Social Security Trust Fund may go broke as early as 2017. According to two new studies, many of those new claimants ran out of unemployment benefits before they applied for SSDI
.
As unemployment benefits claims decline, disability claims rise | PRI.ORG
 
This isn't exactly true, Fiddy. It's WORSE than that. My brother is on SSI. He can keep his benefits if he works a certain amount. If he works ONE DOLLAR over that amount, he receives NOTHING. The SSI plus his part time job allow him to live independently, pay rent, buy food, etc... Without the SSI, he would be unable to do any of those things, would need to go into government subsidized housing and go on welfare. A pro-rated system would be far better for him. It would encourage him to work more, become more independent, etc... But the way the system is set up, this cannot happen.

The system needs an overhaul. All or nothing doesn't work. It doesn't encourage anyone to get off assistance.

I wasn't directly involved with my brother's financial situation, and won't be for hopefully some time, so I could entirely be mistaken as to the severity of the situation. I was more or less astonished that here was this young guy who wanted to work (I mean, wanted to work), but had to be that guy walking a tightrope between two skyscrapers. Heaven forbid he makes just a tiny bit more money, because then they would pull out the rug from underneath him and what was already a straight loss of expenses (my family continues to fund a large part of his life) would become completely untenable. He would likely never in his lifetime be a fully-independent person due to: being under guardianship, never be able to fund his own services (let alone medical expenses) at the same time as fund his living expenses. So really the best he could financially do is be a loss financially, but a loss that would be able to feel some sense of independence like any American citizen wants to have/usually gets. It's something I take to heart, and something I could never stress enough: the value of independence and getting as close as one can to being just like a regular citizen of this country. It's not a significant demand, but it is a justified one.

He would have to choose between being able to fund what limited time he has with staff on one hand, and on the other, being able to live independently from my parents and hold a job doing God's honest work. Again, hopeless pauperism or a shimmer of independence and pride in his own life. That's a pretty stark choice.
 
Last edited:
Bi-polar depression/anxiety attacks/ADHD/back problems. The latest scams to collect SS Disability. When the medical community finally decides that alcoholism is a disease, we're screwed. ;)

I don't mind a hand up -- in fact, I think we should probably do even more for people who are genuinely disabled. But a hand out? God, I wish we didn't do that as often as I think we do.

And who makes that decision you? If you knew what you were talking about you would not say such things. One of the few things GW Bush did was to tighten the qualifications for getting SSI. The problem is that under his sons tuteldge the system has gone completely anal. My son has Aspergers and gets SSI because we had documents from the state and several therapists who said because of his condition he could not work. It still took almost a year to get approved. I know many families whose child(including adult children) is much more significantly disabled than mine and have similar paperwork but had to go to court and spend thousands of dollars to get something that if the clerk had bothered to read the documents would not have wasted tax payers nor parents dollars.

Havin actual experience with the system those people who complain about the cost should be complaining about the system that Bush II devised to adminster it. thats were the waste, the inefficiency the hardship is.

If you are the guardian of a person with SSI you are generally audited once a year by the Social Security Office. If they even smell something funny, you are subjected to a full audit which is not alot of fun. In either case you have to account for every dollar and prove that it has gone to the person on SSI. If not you are SOL without a paddle. So far this year where I live 6 parents have been sent to PRISON for not being able to prove where the money went or having used it themselves which is a federal offense.

Are there scumbags out there sure, but most people just like to pick on something and someone they know little about and bitch.

In another site people were actually calling people like my son leaches on society and "worthy of death". thats why I am here.

Please get your (everyone) facts straight before you attack the kids. Its the system thats screwed not the kids. If we stuck to the Dole/Bush I proposition there would be alot less waste.
 
I voted for everything except "all the poor no matter what the circumstance."

If options #2 and #6 had left out the parts about "too tired to work" and "too depressed" I probably wouldn't have voted for them. I think depression and insomnia are serious problems. People who have these problems should be given help, provided they make efforts to combat/resolve their conditions.
 
And who makes that decision you? If you knew what you were talking about you would not say such things. One of the few things GW Bush did was to tighten the qualifications for getting SSI. The problem is that under his sons tuteldge the system has gone completely anal. My son has Aspergers and gets SSI because we had documents from the state and several therapists who said because of his condition he could not work. It still took almost a year to get approved. I know many families whose child(including adult children) is much more significantly disabled than mine and have similar paperwork but had to go to court and spend thousands of dollars to get something that if the clerk had bothered to read the documents would not have wasted tax payers nor parents dollars.

Havin actual experience with the system those people who complain about the cost should be complaining about the system that Bush II devised to adminster it. thats were the waste, the inefficiency the hardship is.

If you are the guardian of a person with SSI you are generally audited once a year by the Social Security Office. If they even smell something funny, you are subjected to a full audit which is not alot of fun. In either case you have to account for every dollar and prove that it has gone to the person on SSI. If not you are SOL without a paddle. So far this year where I live 6 parents have been sent to PRISON for not being able to prove where the money went or having used it themselves which is a federal offense.

Are there scumbags out there sure, but most people just like to pick on something and someone they know little about and bitch.

In another site people were actually calling people like my son leaches on society and "worthy of death". thats why I am here.

Please get your (everyone) facts straight before you attack the kids. Its the system thats screwed not the kids. If we stuck to the Dole/Bush I proposition there would be alot less waste.

Thoughtful post...I agree with most of what you've said. If you re-read my post, you'll see I was referring to Social Security Disability -- and had strictly adults in mind when I wrote it. Tom's a taxi driver. The stories he tells about his "disabled" clients would curl your hair.
 
A friend of mine has an older son 40 something to be exact. He is on SSI. He is too drepressed to deal with a job or to deal with life in general. He is not too depressed to buy a car. He is not too depressed to buy a boat. He is not too depressed too move from Idaho to South Carolina....all by his little 0l' self. He is not too depressed to go fishing all day and water sking all summer. His 73 old mother works to help support him.... This are the ones that drive Republicans crazy.

I will gladly, gladly, gladly give you a helping hand when you are truely needy, help you get on your feet, make sure you are clothed and do not go hungry. I draw the line at helping you when you sit on your butt all day and fish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WE DO NOT want the needy thrown off welfare, we want the bums like the one above thrown off welfare
Is he comitting fraud?
 
Thoughtful post...I agree with most of what you've said. If you re-read my post, you'll see I was referring to Social Security Disability -- and had strictly adults in mind when I wrote it. Tom's a taxi driver. The stories he tells about his "disabled" clients would curl your hair.

Yes I understood that but SSI is as close as I have ever gotten to the disability process. My point is that Bush I in conjunction with then Senator Dole re-wrote the old turnstile method we use to have and replaced it with a more Proove it type system. Bush II took it a step further and made it almost impossible to get passed the paperwork and beaurocrats. This was for the whole Social Security mess. But I am not saying that fraud does not exist it does and it is probably more prevailent in some places than others. I am saying that it is just not as much as most people think (media hype). I used my son and the others on SSI (not the same as SSD) as examples. If I got carried away my apologizes.
 
I wasn't directly involved with my brother's financial situation, and won't be for hopefully some time, so I could entirely be mistaken as to the severity of the situation. I was more or less astonished that here was this young guy who wanted to work (I mean, wanted to work), but had to be that guy walking a tightrope between two skyscrapers. Heaven forbid he makes just a tiny bit more money, because then they would pull out the rug from underneath him and what was already a straight loss of expenses (my family continues to fund a large part of his life) would become completely untenable. He would likely never in his lifetime be a fully-independent person due to: being under guardianship, never be able to fund his own services (let alone medical expenses) at the same time as fund his living expenses. So really the best he could financially do is be a loss financially, but a loss that would be able to feel some sense of independence like any American citizen wants to have/usually gets. It's something I take to heart, and something I could never stress enough: the value of independence and getting as close as one can to being just like a regular citizen of this country. It's not a significant demand, but it is a justified one.

He would have to choose between being able to fund what limited time he has with staff on one hand, and on the other, being able to live independently from my parents and hold a job doing God's honest work. Again, hopeless pauperism or a shimmer of independence and pride in his own life. That's a pretty stark choice.

Yup. I still fund a large portion of my brother's living expenses. He want's more independence, but in order to get that, he would be placed in an untenable situation.
 
This isn't exactly true, Fiddy. It's WORSE than that. My brother is on SSI. He can keep his benefits if he works a certain amount. If he works ONE DOLLAR over that amount, he receives NOTHING. The SSI plus his part time job allow him to live independently, pay rent, buy food, etc... Without the SSI, he would be unable to do any of those things, would need to go into government subsidized housing and go on welfare. A pro-rated system would be far better for him. It would encourage him to work more, become more independent, etc... But the way the system is set up, this cannot happen.

The system needs an overhaul. All or nothing doesn't work. It doesn't encourage anyone to get off assistance.

That is precisely correct. The current system punishes people for attempting to do better, making it almost impossible for people to increase their station in life. For those with kids, its' hard to justify harming them in order to maintain ones' pride. We trap people in poverty and then many blame them for remaining there.

which is why I think we need a Negative Income Tax, in order to ensure that you NEVER net lose disposable income by increasing ones' work-related income.
 
The op is probably referring to disability, and there are many people on it who are able-bodied, and just gaming the system.

I hate it when people say "there are many people on it". It tends to present the image that the "majority" of people are scamming the system and thus it should be eliminated. There are always going to be people who try to scam the system, no matter what it is.

Some of the most heinous scammers tend to be those running big business. Often costing people far more money than some guy who is sitting there collecting a disability check.
 
I hate it when people say "there are many people on it". It tends to present the image that the "majority" of people are scamming the system and thus it should be eliminated. There are always going to be people who try to scam the system, no matter what it is.

Some of the most heinous scammers tend to be those running big business. Often costing people far more money than some guy who is sitting there collecting a disability check.

Fed+Spending+%25+GDP
 

I'm not disagreeing that there is a large amount spent on "welfare" programs. In fact that is what you would expect when a country goes into a recession. What I am arguing is this idea that somehow there is a large portion of people collecting things like disability that are scamming the system. There simply isn't, and to say that these programs are bad because of a few bad apples is just ridiculous.
 
I'm not disagreeing that there is a large amount spent on "welfare" programs. In fact that is what you would expect when a country goes into a recession. What I am arguing is this idea that somehow there is a large portion of people collecting things like disability that are scamming the system. There simply isn't, and to say that these programs are bad because of a few bad apples is just ridiculous.

ABC News: Medicare Fraud Alone Costs More Than $60Bn A Year

Majority? I don't know - depends on how you define. Do at least large minorities of people on these programs not need them? Yes. Look above if you need the anecdotal evidence; here you have two people who could be earning more money but who can't because the structure of the program punishes them for doing so.
 
ABC News: Medicare Fraud Alone Costs More Than $60Bn A Year

Majority? I don't know - depends on how you define. Do at least large minorities of people on these programs not need them? Yes. Look above if you need the anecdotal evidence; here you have two people who could be earning more money but who can't because the structure of the program punishes them for doing so.

Based on that article, it just enforces my point. The most costly of the scams are perpetrated by those at the top, rather than the individual.

"Fraudulent pharmacies, clinics and medical supply companies seem to pop up like mushrooms in South Florida, the area widely considered to be ground zero in the fight against a crime that requires little training and involves few risks."
 
...that's not really "the top". The point was more to demonstrate that the systems' ability to curb fraud was negligable, and that the cost of fraud was indeed significant.

The Recession ended in June of 2009; but the numbers of on SNAP are up 46% since Obama took office. You're going to have to color me pretty skeptical that there hasn't been a push to put as many people as possible in the position of receiving government benefit, regardless of whether or not they absolutely needed it.

System wide, many people are indeed trapped against the welfare cliffs that have been described. Why would you work harder or longer if doing so would mean a reduction in income?
 
Back
Top Bottom