In 1960, some 455,000 workers were receiving disability payments. In
2011, the number was 8,600,000. In 1960, the percentage of the
economically active population aged 18 to 64 years old receiving
disability benefits was 0.65 percent. In 2010, it was 5.6 percent.
Things have changed. Americans have grown healthier, and
significantly lower numbers die before 65 than was the case a
half-century ago. Nevertheless, the disability rolls have ballooned.
One reason is that the government seems to have gotten more
openhanded with those claiming vague ailments.
In 1960, only one-fifth of disability benefits went to those with “mood
disorders” and “musculoskeletal” problems. In 2011, nearly half of
those on disability voiced such complaints.
“It is exceptionally difficult — for all practical purposes,
impossible,” writes Eberstadt, “for a medical professional to disprove a
patient’s claim that he or she is suffering from sad feelings or back
pain.”
Many people are gaming or defrauding the system. This
includes not only disability recipients but health-care professionals,
lawyers, and others who run ads promising to get you disability
benefits.
Between 1996 and 2011, the private sector generated 8.8 million new jobs, and 4.1 million people entered the disability rolls. The ratio of disability cases to new jobs has been worse during
the sluggish recovery from the 2007–09 recession. Between January 2010
and December 2011, there were 1,730,000 new jobs and 790,000 new people
collecting disability.
This is not just a matter of laid-off workers in their 50s or early
60s qualifying for disability in the years before they become eligible
for Social Security old-age benefits.
In 2011, 15 percent of disability recipients were in their 30s or early 40s. The government transfers $130 billion obtained from taxpayers or
borrowed from purchasers of Treasury bonds to disability beneficiaries
every year.
The human cost: Consider the plight of someone who at some level knows he can work but decides to collect disability payments instead. That person is not likely to ever seek work again, especially if the sluggish recovery turns out to be the new normal. He may be gleeful that he was able to game the system or just grimly
determined to get what he can in a tough situation. But he will not be
able to get the satisfaction of earned success from honest work that
contributes something to society and the economy.
Is the government helping Americans that have questionable disabilities or is this one way to lower the unemployment rate.
Michael Barone
Good thing Mr. Barone posted a solid plan for how to deal with this, oh wait, he didn't do that all.
ReplyDeleteMax,
DeleteIs that a tacit agreement that such behavior exists?
That it may be getting more and more widespread?
Just asking.
Jean
It's not about a plan but another dysfunctional government program being taken advantage of by people that are out of options. Yet another symptom of whats wrong with this country.
DeleteI'm not ignorant Jean, and I'm not shocked that government programs get abused. What I've grown tired of are the political pontiff's who know everything that is wrong and nothing that is right. And of course, it's simple, all government programs contain some waste or fraud, therefore ALL government programs must be stupid and wasteful. Yawn. Like Lou said, it's not about a plan, it's about sticking to the message of how bad things are.
DeleteHow many times do we have to wail about how little Obama has done to fix 30 plus years of deindustrialization? The Michael Barone's of the world are like the crabby old muppet guys in the balcony talking shit.
Max, is it ok to have government waste and just acknowledge it's ok because it's government waste and we expect it?
DeleteWhen we see waste know about waste shouldn't government address and eliminate it so the resources can be used productively?
We are portraying each other at extremes that neither one of us live at. It's not okay to acknowledge it and just accept it, but niether is it helpful to do nothing but post link after link of abuse. The abuse is NOT the norm. The growth of these programs and food stamps is because we want the cheap goods that ruthless capitalism brings through no holds barred shitty trade deals. But, when that crushes workers and leaves them only jobs that they can't support themselves on, we try to buy their silence with some new program. And Republicans are just as guilty.
DeleteYou and I both know what has killed this economy and it's not communism. It's bad trade deals, it's cheap labor overseas, and in your personal case it's the EPA who forces you to play by a set of rules that companies triple your size don't even think about. Growth of programs is an attempt by both parties to keep the proles from openly revolting against a scam that has benefitted a fraction of the country at their expense. So, in that light, is our taunt fest about acknowledging it or not acknowledging it useful? Prolly not. What we should do is acknowledge it and talk about solutions that are realistic. Just my .02
The abuse is part of the problem in Washington. Yes our politicians have sold us out and provided cheap junk for all of us to enjoy. To bad they didn't see the unintended consequences of the imports on the people. And yes they are buying our silence with the freebies. At least until the bank runs dry.
DeleteThe problem with the crappy programs is that they are implemented and controlled by Washington. To minimize fraud, it needs to be implemented and controlled at the state and local level. One size programs for the country seldom fit as every state is different. Cost of living, housing, etc. What 100.00 will take care of in Iowa doesn't cut it in San Francisco. In any case, big brother needs to step back and let the states take care of business.
It's also too bad that individuals couldn't see their shortsightedness with their purchases of cheap shit. But, living large is an American institution. The bigger and more ostentatious, the better. You know me, I keep going back to Reagan V. Carter. Bad as Carter was, his message was spot on and we did nothing but paper over that message and spent our intrinsic wealth that predictably has wound up in just a few hands. That's how capitalism works.
DeleteAs for states running it, many states can't afford to keep themselves sufficient. I agree that money goes farther in some places then others, but who is willing to accept that article when you tell a state like Iowa it will get less then California because of cost of living. In principle, I agree with you, I just don't know how you pull it off.
but who is willing to accept that article when you tell a state like Iowa it will get less then California because of cost of living. In principle, I agree with you, I just don't know how you pull it off.
DeleteThat's why it should be a state responsibility. The Fed Gov't sends money to the states on a population basis and they distribute as they see fit. If in the case of Calif. gives it out liberally and runs out, it's Calif's problem. The states can be responsible for who qualifies a responsible for eliminating fraud.