The Stunning Rise Of Disability, Food Stamp And Welfare Benefits

[Libertarian666]

I guess the end game is that no one works and everyone lives on public assistance.
Luckily nothing can go wrong with a great plan like that!

[clacy]

The Democrats have shown their cards recently by touting the benefits of the recent CBO study by saying its actually a positive that Obamacare is disincentivizing work with subsidies paid for by people that do choose to work.

For some reason Dems hate it when people have to work.

[Pointedstick]

The Democrats have shown their cards recently by touting the benefits of the recent CBO study by saying its actually a positive that Obamacare is disincentivizing work with subsidies paid for by people that do choose to work.

For some reason Dems hate it when people have to work.

The problem is that work generally sucks.

The bigger problem is that it has to get done if we're to have a civilization.

[WildAboutHarry]

[quote=MangoMan]The article ponders: How much is fraudulent and how much is deserved?[/quote]

38% fraudulent.  I just made that up.

What would be nice to see is what it takes to qualify now, versus what it took in the 1970s.  My impression is that these programs have become more expansive, and more heavily advertised by the feds.

[Reub]

I always cringe when I hear advertising from the federal govt enticing people to join up for food stamps, free cell phones plans, or Obamacare. This seems to be inherently wrong.

[moda0306]

Maybe the problem is that we're in a severe demand shortage in the midst of a weak recovery from a severe recession caused by a massive financial crisis.

If people can't find work, they're going to be more likely to apply for welfare and food stamps.  Disability filings are going to look that much more appealing as well.

This isn't rocket science.  In the midst of a severe recession, massive unemployment is a huge problem.  Look at the Great Depression... Butchers and bakers and candlestick-makers all with skills to put to use, unable to find customers because everybody is hunkering down and hoarding cash, which, individually, makes sense, because if customers/work is sparse, you have to save what you can in case of disaster.

The Democrats have shown their cards recently by touting the benefits of the recent CBO study by saying its actually a positive that Obamacare is disincentivizing work with subsidies paid for by people that do choose to work.

For some reason Dems hate it when people have to work.

I run into older a lot who COULD retire, but for the fact that they're not 65, insurance would be unaffordable/unavailable, and they can't handle the uncertainty of whether they'll be hit with a $100,000 medical bill.  They're not just lazy shlubs.  They're 63 year-olds that saved well, but don't know if their heart problems are going to leave them dead at 66 after a $100,000 medical bill and leaving behind a wife on one less SS check, or if they'll live until 95.

Insurance removes a ton of that uncertainty... subsidy or no subsidy (assuming we're not considering the "community rating" a subsidy, which in reality it surely is).  So if subsidized insurance is the difference between someone working and not working, it's very likely they're on the more responsible end of the curve of people who benefit from health reform, not the less-responsible. 

I'm not trying to look for sympathy or anything here (and I'm not trying to use my family situation to change opinions here or try to make people "feel bad," or whatever else liberals tend to do), but my dad actually worked longer than he would/should have had to MOSTLY because of the uncertainty/expense of health costs.  So he worked until 65 (for medicare), and had a stroke at 66... he's getting better but still isn't what he used to be.  So he could have had at least 3 more years of retirement (or partial retirement at-least, working part-time) before ending up losing his health. 

As much as we have an under-employment problem, they're are a lot of other people working a job they hate in bad health for no other reason than to have access to community insurance rating.  Between SS, their retirement savings, and maybe even a pension, everything would work... unless they have a need for healthcare before 65 that's sizable enough.

[moda0306]

I always cringe when I hear advertising from the federal govt enticing people to join up for food stamps, free cell phones plans, or Obamacare. This seems to be inherently wrong.

I don't think I've ever heard such an advertisement from the feds... other stuff, maybe, but not welfare-statey stuff.  Do you hear this often?

[Kshartle]

I always cringe when I hear advertising from the federal govt enticing people to join up for food stamps, free cell phones plans, or Obamacare. This seems to be inherently wrong.

I don't think I've ever heard such an advertisement from the feds... other stuff, maybe, but not welfare-statey stuff.  Do you hear this often?

I've heard and seen the ads but I think that budget has now gone to promoting Obamacare.

[Dieter]

+1 to what moda0306 said.

And yes, there is some abuse of the system.

And improvements that could be made.

[Mountaineer]

I'm not trying to look for sympathy or anything here (and I'm not trying to use my family situation to change opinions here or try to make people "feel bad," or whatever else liberals tend to do), but my dad actually worked longer than he would/should have had to MOSTLY because of the uncertainty/expense of health costs.  So he worked until 65 (for medicare), and had a stroke at 66... he's getting better but still isn't what he used to be.  So he could have had at least 3 more years of retirement (or partial retirement at-least, working part-time) before ending up losing his health. 

Moda, I'm really sorry about your dad.  That must be really tough on all concerned.  I hope and pray that your dad fully recovers and has many more years of a fruitful life ahead of him.

... Mountaineer

[moda0306]

I'm not trying to look for sympathy or anything here (and I'm not trying to use my family situation to change opinions here or try to make people "feel bad," or whatever else liberals tend to do), but my dad actually worked longer than he would/should have had to MOSTLY because of the uncertainty/expense of health costs.  So he worked until 65 (for medicare), and had a stroke at 66... he's getting better but still isn't what he used to be.  So he could have had at least 3 more years of retirement (or partial retirement at-least, working part-time) before ending up losing his health. 

Moda, I'm really sorry about your dad.  That must be really tough on all concerned.  I hope and pray that your dad fully recovers and has many more years of a fruitful life ahead of him.

... Mountaineer

Thank you very much.  He appears to be on his way to recovery ... I really felt a little weird using that example, as I'm not a fan of using emotional pleas and purely anecdotal examples in arguments about overall policy that has pros/cons.  I just think his situation is pretty common.

[Mountaineer]

I'm not trying to look for sympathy or anything here (and I'm not trying to use my family situation to change opinions here or try to make people "feel bad," or whatever else liberals tend to do), but my dad actually worked longer than he would/should have had to MOSTLY because of the uncertainty/expense of health costs.  So he worked until 65 (for medicare), and had a stroke at 66... he's getting better but still isn't what he used to be.  So he could have had at least 3 more years of retirement (or partial retirement at-least, working part-time) before ending up losing his health. 

Moda, I'm really sorry about your dad.  That must be really tough on all concerned.  I hope and pray that your dad fully recovers and has many more years of a fruitful life ahead of him.

... Mountaineer

Thank you... I really felt a little weird using that example, as I'm not a fan of using emotional pleas and purely anecdotal examples in arguments about overall policy.  I just think his situation is pretty common.

Hey Moda, you are welcome.  That just makes you human and not an robotic automaton (oops, was that redundant?). 

... Mountaineer

[moda0306]

Moda, I'm really sorry about your dad.  That must be really tough on all concerned.  I hope and pray that your dad fully recovers and has many more years of a fruitful life ahead of him.

... Mountaineer

Thank you... I really felt a little weird using that example, as I'm not a fan of using emotional pleas and purely anecdotal examples in arguments about overall policy.  I just think his situation is pretty common.

Hey Moda, you are welcome.  That just makes you human and not an robotic automaton (oops, was that redundant?). 

... Mountaineer

My liquid-overflow ducts on my visual-stimuli sensors are operating full capacity.  I query what is causing said reaction. 

JK.

[Pointedstick]

As much as we have an under-employment problem, they're are a lot of other people working a job they hate in bad health for no other reason than to have access to community insurance rating.  Between SS, their retirement savings, and maybe even a pension, everything would work... unless they have a need for healthcare before 65 that's sizable enough.

Even if that issue disappeared, there would still be a lot of people working at jobs they hate just for the money. I suspect we all know people in this situation or are in it ourselves. The fact of the matter is that work provides benefits, whether it's money, cheaper health insurance, something to do during the day, a source of social interaction, a sense of purpose, you name it. And these benefits have to be weighed against the suckiness of the work. I mean, I'd retire right now if I could. Wouldn't you? Wouldn't everyone?

In general, I feel that a substantive difference between liberal-minded folks and others is the relationship to work. Liberal-minded folks tend, in my experience, to feel like work is awful, that it shouldn't need to exist, that the benefits it provides should be available even in its absence to a certain extent, that it is alienating and dehumanizing.

I understand this attitude, because a lot of work does suck, but I think the overarching problem is that hard work is necessary for civilization to exist. We can't have a complicated society with indoor plumbing and electricity and internet access and tomatoes in the winter and vacations to disneyland without an awful lot of work. That work can't just get done by machines, not even in the near future. It has to be done by people.

The people I know who grouse most about work are people who really would not want to give up their MacBook Pros, their Xboxes, their motor vehicles, their ability to have pizzas and Chinese food delivered straight to their doors at 10 PM. You can't have it both ways, sorry. Either we have work (a lot of it; hard, nasty, ugly, yucky, unpleasant work), or we give up all the comfort we've grown accustomed to.

[moda0306]

As much as we have an under-employment problem, they're are a lot of other people working a job they hate in bad health for no other reason than to have access to community insurance rating.  Between SS, their retirement savings, and maybe even a pension, everything would work... unless they have a need for healthcare before 65 that's sizable enough.

Even if that issue disappeared, there would still be a lot of people working at jobs they hate just for the money. I suspect we all know people in this situation or are in it ourselves. The fact of the matter is that work provides benefits, whether it's money, cheaper health insurance, something to do during the day, a source of social interaction, a sense of purpose, you name it. And these benefits have to be weighed against the suckiness of the work. I mean, I'd retire right now if I could. Wouldn't you? Wouldn't everyone?

In general, I feel that a substantive difference between liberal-minded folks and others is the relationship to work. Liberal-minded folks tend, in my experience, to feel like work is awful, that it shouldn't need to exist, that the benefits it provides should be available even in its absence to a certain extent, that it is alienating and dehumanizing.

I understand this attitude, because a lot of work does suck, but I think the overarching problem is that hard work is necessary for civilization to exist. We can't have a complicated society with indoor plumbing and electricity and internet access and tomatoes in the winter and vacations to disneyland without an awful lot of work. That work can't just get done by machines, not even in the near future. It has to be done by people.

The people I know who grouse most about work are people who really would not want to give up their MacBook Pros, their Xboxes, their motor vehicles, their ability to have pizzas and Chinese food delivered straight to their doors at 10 PM. You can't have it both ways, sorry. Either we have work (a lot of it; hard, nasty, ugly, yucky, unpleasant work), or we give up all the comfort we've grown accustomed to.

I think you're totally right.

However, there is something uniquely unfortunate about someone working until 65 with heart problems, who has worked and saved his butt off over the years, to get insurance paid for just in case he has an expensive medical condition occur, especially because a lot of times these same people know they probably won't live very long. 

There's also something uniquely unfortunate about someone who just wants to work a bit less, or become an entrepreneur, but has a condition that an insurance company will charge him (individually) out the butt for.  A private insurance market with no community rating is going to have that result (even if the argument can be made that in general private healthcare will result in lower prices and better care, an unhealthy person is still going to be expensive).

But yes, liberals do tend to have a certain entitlement attitude.  I just don't think it's anywhere near what some posters are saying from the standpoint of those who will quit working or reduce hours due to healthcare reform giving them a community rating and potential subsidies.

[Libertarian666]

As much as we have an under-employment problem, they're are a lot of other people working a job they hate in bad health for no other reason than to have access to community insurance rating.  Between SS, their retirement savings, and maybe even a pension, everything would work... unless they have a need for healthcare before 65 that's sizable enough.

Even if that issue disappeared, there would still be a lot of people working at jobs they hate just for the money. I suspect we all know people in this situation or are in it ourselves. The fact of the matter is that work provides benefits, whether it's money, cheaper health insurance, something to do during the day, a source of social interaction, a sense of purpose, you name it. And these benefits have to be weighed against the suckiness of the work. I mean, I'd retire right now if I could. Wouldn't you? Wouldn't everyone?
...

Not everyone would. For example, I could but I don't, and there are plenty of other examples on the boglehead forum.

[Pointedstick]

I think you're totally right.

However, there is something uniquely unfortunate about someone working until 65 with heart problems, who has worked and saved his butt off over the years, to get insurance paid for just in case he has an expensive medical condition occur, especially because a lot of times these same people know they probably won't live very long. 

There's also something uniquely unfortunate about someone who just wants to work a bit less, or become an entrepreneur, but has a condition that an insurance company will charge him (individually) out the butt for.  A private insurance market with no community rating is going to have that result (even if the argument can be made that in general private healthcare will result in lower prices and better care, an unhealthy person is still going to be expensive).

But yes, liberals do tend to have a certain entitlement attitude.  I just don't think it's anywhere near what some posters are saying from the standpoint of those who will quit working or reduce hours due to healthcare reform giving them a community rating and potential subsidies.

Thanks moda.

I agree with you about the ridiculousness of the current state of affairs. But I think it's important to understand how and why it came about. The whole idiotic employer-sponsored health insurance meme was created during World War II in response to government wage caps. And the modern necessity for insurance to cover everything only emerged as Medicare and Medicaid underpaid doctors, forcing them to shift costs onto people paying with cash and insurance, and even further with the advent of ever more mandates that insurance cover everything under the sun. As fewer people paid in cash and knew what they were paying for or what the price was, costs could rise practically infinitely.

The same damn thing happened to college tuition. As soon as Uncle Sam started handing out loans like they were candy, suddenly the colleges could charge basically whatever they wanted because people could always get more government-guaranteed loans. Now you have four-year college tuitions that cost the same as a luxury house when scarcely 40 years ago, the very same schools were charging waaaaay less, adjusted for inflation. You could pay the costs yourself with a waitressing job, like my mother in law did. Could someone do that at the same school today? Not in your life.

So yes, I think we agree that the current system is an almighty mess. But again, I believe it is crucial to understand why it got so messed up. It didn't just happen because mean rich people laughed haughtily as they rubbed gold coins together and looked down their monocles at poor people.

[Mountaineer]

Here are perfect examples of what happens when the government endorses welfare (e.g. encourages the entititlement mindset).  Obviously, we don't learn from this ... our leadership seems to want to create more and more dependency on big government and grow itself.  I have a friend in real estate who frequently visits the reservations in the north central US to do his job.  He says the typical reservation indian mindset is "Why should I work when the check comes in every month and I can sit in front of my flatscreen TV and drink beer all day?"  Sad.

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.c ... ent-151078

... Mountaineer

[Pointedstick]

Here are perfect examples of what happens when the government endorses welfare (e.g. encourages the entititlement mindset).  Obviously, we don't learn from this ... our leadership seems to want to create more and more dependency on big government and grow itself.  I have a friend in real estate who frequently visits the reservations in the north central US to do his job.  He says the typical reservation indian mindset is "Why should I work when the check comes in every month and I can sit in front of my flatscreen TV and drink beer all day?"  Sad.

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.c ... ent-151078

... Mountaineer

It's the same in New Mexico. And there's a vicious cycle that deepens this crisis as the ones with ambition leave to go pursue careers and adventure, leaving the reservations even poorer for their absence.