Poverty Line: $11,770 a year. Max SSI Disability: $8,000 a year. How is this livable?

[Audacious]

[source for poverty line]
[source for maximum SSI disability payments]

Why should people on disability -- people who can't work, and who don't have a choice but to live on disability -- live in abject poverty, almost $4,000 a year below the poverty line?

The poverty line is so stingy to begin with that barely anyone can live on it. Where I live, the cost of living is $18,700 a year. But if I get SSI disability, I will be making $10,000 a year less than that... for what reason, exactly? How is it justifiable that US citizens who do not in any way deserve to live in poverty get to live in complete and utter squalor?

I'm not saying we should pay disabled people super high wages, but it should at least meet the US median cost of living.

Also: People who expect private charity to cover all of it are living in a fantasy land. Nobody ever says 'let charity pay for national defense'. Why? Because we think it's necessary. Why isn't providing for citizens who can't take care of themselves also a necessity?

Edit: The maximum SSI disability payment is actually about $8700 a year. My point remains.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Well...the answer is, the people who are on disability for legitimate reasons are suffering as a result of the large number of people who are on it who shouldn't be.

Disability insurance has one of the highest abuse rates of any social safety net program.

An 18-month investigation by a Senate subcommittee reports that in more than 25 percent of cases reviewed, evidence confirming disabilities was “insufficient, contradictory, or incomplete.” The staff reviewed 300 decisions in which individuals were awarded disability benefits by administrative law judges. An internal Social Security Administration report echoed the findings, showing a national error rate of 22 percent.

According to Social Security Administration data, currently including spouses and children, SSDI rolls have swollen to 10.9 million. A record one in fourteen workers is now on the SSDI. Of the people who leave the SSDI program each year, 36% exit the program due to death, while 52% reach retirement age and seamlessly switch to other benefits. Only 6% return to work and 3.6% exit the program due to medical improvement.

If the senate & SSA reports are accurate, that would mean that out of the 10.9 million people collecting, ~2.6 million in that group should not be collecting.

So, if the current payout is $8,000/year, and 10.9 million people are collecting, that would be a total of ~$87 Billion in payouts.

If we divide that by 8.3 million instead of 10.9 million, that $8,000 turns into $10,500.

Granted, you're still not "living it up" on $10,500, but it beats $8,000...that's for sure.

I'm not sure what else can be done other than the fraud cleanup to be honest. We can't raise the taxes for it, it's already the 2nd highest funded US program (a very close 2nd behind Medicare/Medicaid). As it currently stands, employees pay 6.2% and employers pay 6.2% (12.4% total) on all income up to $118,500.

In terms of creative cuts, the only reasonable cut I can think of off the top of my head is to set a maximum net worth limitation in order to be eligible to collect when people are older. I'm not sure what that magic number should be, however, the one stat we do have to operate off of is this: ~47,000 millionaires collect social security retirement benefits.

Maybe something along the lines of "If you have a net worth of $500,000+ (not including home value of primary residence), you aren't eligible to collect"?...and then reallocate those funds toward the disability aspect of social security?

 

[Audacious]

Well...the answer is, the people who are on disability for legitimate reasons are suffering as a result of the large number of people who are on it who shouldn't be.

Disability insurance has one of the highest abuse rates of any social safety net program.

An 18-month investigation by a Senate subcommittee reports that in more than 25 percent of cases reviewed, evidence confirming disabilities was “insufficient, contradictory, or incomplete.” The staff reviewed 300 decisions in which individuals were awarded disability benefits by administrative law judges. An internal Social Security Administration report echoed the findings, showing a national error rate of 22 percent.

According to Social Security Administration data, currently including spouses and children, SSDI rolls have swollen to 10.9 million. A record one in fourteen workers is now on the SSDI. Of the people who leave the SSDI program each year, 36% exit the program due to death, while 52% reach retirement age and seamlessly switch to other benefits. Only 6% return to work and 3.6% exit the program due to medical improvement.

If the senate & SSA reports are accurate, that would mean that out of the 10.9 million people collecting, ~2.6 million in that group should not be collecting.

So, if the current payout is $8,000/year, and 10.9 million people are collecting, that would be a total of ~$87 Billion in payouts.

If we divide that by 8.3 million instead of 10.9 million, that $8,000 turns into $10,500.

Granted, you're still not "living it up" on $10,500, but it beats $8,000...that's for sure.

I'm not sure what else can be done other than the fraud cleanup to be honest. We can't raise the taxes for it, it's already the 2nd highest funded US program (a very close 2nd behind Medicare/Medicaid). As it currently stands, employees pay 6.2% and employers pay 6.2% (12.4% total) on all income up to $118,500.

In terms of creative cuts, the only reasonable cut I can think of off the top of my head is to set a maximum net worth limitation in order to be eligible to collect when people are older. I'm not sure what that magic number should be, however, the one stat we do have to operate off of is this: ~47,000 millionaires collect social security retirement benefits.

Maybe something along the lines of "If you have a net worth of $500,000+ (not including home value of primary residence), you aren't eligible to collect"?...and then reallocate those funds toward the disability aspect of social security?

I'm not sure what else they could do to prevent fraud, though; it's already incredibly difficult to get on disability. You're automatically denied, and must appeal (generally this process involves a lawyer); it takes up to two years and it isn't definite. You can't have more than $2,000-$3,000 in property, not including your car or your house.

SSI, by the way, is supplemental security income, meaning it's for people who have not worked and cannot work. SSDI is for people who have worked but cannot work anymore and has similar restrictions, but pays more money.

I've had to look into all of this to file my disability claim, and it's really shocking how bad the quality of life they expect you to have is.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I'm not sure what else they could do to prevent fraud, though; it's already incredibly difficult to get on disability.

When you mentioned 'SSI disability', I assumed you were referring to SSDI...my mistake on that one.

However...On the topic of people making false or exaggerated medical claims to abuse it, while there's no way of proving that it's happening, there is some loosely related statistical data that could be very telling.

The 1996 Welfare Reform Act implemented several reforms to move people off of welfare and back into jobs. The reforms were largely hailed as successful, as the number of people receiving welfare benefits has declined substantially since 1996.
However, during the same 17-year time period, the number of individuals receiving disability has risen substantially, meaning that many individuals who were previously receiving aid through welfare were switched to disability programs. During a period when US population grew by 19.6 percent, the number of disability recipients increased by 49 percent.

...but that aspect aside.

Is SSI intended to be the only source of income for those who are truly disabled?

I have an aunt who has Muscular Dystrophy and hasn't been able to work (or really get around all that well) for close to 15 years now. I know she does collect social security benefits of some kind (not sure if it's SSDI or SSI), is on Medicare/Medicaid, and receives another federal benefit, in addition to benefits from the state of Ohio. I don't know what her total income is, she's never told me, but I do know that she's able to maintain her own residence and buy food.

Many of the benefits are designed to be a la carte benefits based on the individual and none of them is intended to be a "one stop shop".

Another angle of looking at it...the number of people under 65 on SSI is roughly 5 million as of August. Considering the fact that the SSA reported that only a very small percentage of recipients were classified as experiencing "chronic homelessness", I think it's fair to assume that there is significant overlap between them, and the 109 million people living in households that collect other welfare benefits of some form or another.

If getting on SSI truly does entail being severely disabled, and the only source of income to them was that $8,000 and nothing else, I'd expect most of them would be homeless if that was the case...since they're not, I think that SSI seems more like a supplement to other forms of assistance.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I'm not sure what else they could do to prevent fraud, though; it's already incredibly difficult to get on disability. You're automatically denied, and must appeal (generally this process involves a lawyer); it takes up to two years and it isn't definite. You can't have more than $2,000-$3,000 in property, not including your car or your house.

SSI, by the way, is supplemental security income, meaning it's for people who have not worked and cannot work. SSDI is for people who have worked but cannot work anymore and has similar restrictions, but pays more money.

I've had to look into all of this to file my disability claim, and it's really shocking how bad the quality of life they expect you to have is.

I was on SSI until the death of my father in March ( now on death benefits) You cannot collect both. I hated those restrictions but at the same time support them. The deal behind disability SSI SNAP section 8 is that you NEED help that is why regular social security, death benefits and certain other benefits have fewer ( if any restrictions) because it is not based on need.

 

[Bible Page]

It's not livable. And what's worse, if a SSI recipient gets a job to make ends meet, they have to not only pay income tax on that, but if they work too many hours they lose a portion of their SSI.

It's the parasitism of the able that cut into the disability.

And what's worse is that SS money is yours!

Ah, socialism. People that advocate it aren't actually on the receiving end of it.

Yet.

[source for poverty line]
[source for maximum SSI disability payments]

Why should people on disability -- people who can't work, and who don't have a choice but to live on disability -- live in abject poverty, almost $4,000 a year below the poverty line?

The poverty line is so stingy to begin with that barely anyone can live on it. Where I live, the cost of living is $18,700 a year. But if I get SSI disability, I will be making $10,000 a year less than that... for what reason, exactly? How is it justifiable that US citizens who do not in any way deserve to live in poverty get to live in complete and utter squalor?

I'm not saying we should pay disabled people super high wages, but it should at least meet the US median cost of living.

Also: People who expect private charity to cover all of it are living in a fantasy land. Nobody ever says 'let charity pay for national defense'. Why? Because we think it's necessary. Why isn't providing for citizens who can't take care of themselves also a necessity?

Edit: The maximum SSI disability payment is actually about $8700 a year. My point remains.

 

[dogs4thewin]

It's not livable. And what's worse, if a SSI recipient gets a job to make ends meet, they have to not only pay income tax on that, but if they work too many hours they lose a portion of their SSI.

It's the parasitism of the able that cut into the disability.

And what's worse is that SS money is yours!

Ah, socialism. People that advocate it aren't actually on the receiving end of it.

Yet.

Actually, I believe it is a dollar off for every two dollars you make. It does not take much to get kicked off the program.

 

[Bible Page]

No, I don't imagine it does. Sadly enough.
I was on vacation last year in Florida. I stopped at a McDonalds and a tiny little woman was cleaning up the place. I stopped and chatted with her as she came to wipe down our table that we'd cleared of our food stuff once we were finished.
She was 91 years old! She said she expected to live a long time but she couldn't live on what she was making in Social Security so she worked there three days a week.
Broke my heart. We tipped her before we left. God love her. That was 5 years ago. I hope she hits a lottery and lives to be 125.

 

[Audacious]

It's not livable. And what's worse, if a SSI recipient gets a job to make ends meet, they have to not only pay income tax on that, but if they work too many hours they lose a portion of their SSI.

It's the parasitism of the able that cut into the disability.

And what's worse is that SS money is yours!

Ah, socialism. People that advocate it aren't actually on the receiving end of it.

Yet.

I'm a socialist and this is exactly the kind of thing I think socialism exists to prevent.

Edit: Also, there is a very easy way to solve this problem: funding it more in a way that guarantees a certain amount of money to anyone with a disability. Perhaps we could make it completely unattached to social security so that there isn't a $2,000 a year plus disparity between those who have been able to work and those who have never been able, for instance.

There are two kinds of disability: social security disability income (SSDI), which comes from your social security fund, and supplemental security income (SSI) which comes from taxes in general. One pays much less than the other, but both are below the poverty line, and the solution is a fairly simple one -- spend more money.

 

[ALoveDivine]

I'm a socialist and this is exactly the kind of thing I think socialism exists to prevent.

I absolutely agree, as long as you are referring to Nordic-style Socialism and not the soviet style. Which I imagine you are.

Yeah much like communism, capitalism is great in theory but in practice it means a large chunk of the population ends up living in squalor. For every one professional basketball player there are going to be hundreds who make the shoes that bear his name.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I'm a socialist and this is exactly the kind of thing I think socialism exists to prevent.

Edit: Also, there is a very easy way to solve this problem: funding it more in a way that guarantees a certain amount of money to anyone with a disability. Perhaps we could make it completely unattached to social security so that there isn't a $2,000 a year plus disparity between those who have been able to work and those who have never been able, for instance.

There are two kinds of disability: social security disability income (SSDI), which comes from your social security fund, and supplemental security income (SSI) which comes from taxes in general. One pays much less than the other, but both are below the poverty line, and the solution is a fairly simple one -- spend more money.

The REASON for that is that SSI as it is for people who either have NEVER paid in or those who have not paid in long enough to earn credits is that those people never EARNED that money. Social security disability on the other hand, is based ( while there IS a max one can receive is based on the amount one paid in or EARNED over his or her working life.

 

[pakicetus]

I absolutely agree, as long as you are referring to Nordic-style Socialism and not the soviet style. Which I imagine you are.

I just read your signature: "Blessed are the meek, blah blah blah..." Who is it quoting? It sounds like the words of some God-hating hippie socialist.

 

[Audacious]

The REASON for that is that SSI as it is for people who either have NEVER paid in or those who have not paid in long enough to earn credits is that those people never EARNED that money. Social security disability on the other hand, is based ( while there IS a max one can receive is based on the amount one paid in or EARNED over his or her working life.

I understand that, but that doesn't mean that people who haven't worked don't need the same economic protections as people that have.

I absolutely agree, as long as you are referring to Nordic-style Socialism and not the soviet style. Which I imagine you are.

Nordic socialism is definitely the way to go, in my opinion.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I understand that, but that doesn't mean that people who haven't worked don't need the same economic protections as people that have.


Nordic socialism is definitely the way to go, in my opinion.

Why not?

 

[sahjimira]

I'm on disability. I hate it. I worked my whole life and due to horrible circumstances here I am. I'm going to vocational rehabilitation to try and get some kind of part time work I can do. What I don't know but I want to try. I nearly have enough to live on but praise God I can meet my bills. Nothing else, God forbid any emergency. I saw the word lottery in a post. Indeed wouldn't a million or two b enough for people and the rest used for other things? In my state lottery was supposed to help the schools. Guess what.. they r still begging for money...

 

[Sumwear]

$8000.00 a year? That's a low-end for yearly disability. However, there still are other remedies available:

Food Stamps
Rent Control/Stabilization
If one has social security disability, they should by extension have Medicare, and if they have a low end number with regards to monthly payments, they too should be able to get city/state health insurance

 

[Armoured]

[source for poverty line]
[source for maximum SSI disability payments]

Why should people on disability -- people who can't work, and who don't have a choice but to live on disability -- live in abject poverty, almost $4,000 a year below the poverty line?

The poverty line is so stingy to begin with that barely anyone can live on it. Where I live, the cost of living is $18,700 a year. But if I get SSI disability, I will be making $10,000 a year less than that... for what reason, exactly? How is it justifiable that US citizens who do not in any way deserve to live in poverty get to live in complete and utter squalor?

I'm not saying we should pay disabled people super high wages, but it should at least meet the US median cost of living.

Also: People who expect private charity to cover all of it are living in a fantasy land. Nobody ever says 'let charity pay for national defense'. Why? Because we think it's necessary. Why isn't providing for citizens who can't take care of themselves also a necessity?

Edit: The maximum SSI disability payment is actually about $8700 a year. My point remains.

Well obviously i people on disability just pulled themselves up by their bootstraps...

 

[Sumwear]

Wait. This is not correct. The maximum for disability is not $8,000.00 yearly as I have a relative who gets a little over $1,500.00 a month.

EDIT: Now I see the problem. SSI - I believe - is similar to a welfare program, which is also available to those who are on disability.

Actual payments that take into account ones work history and the health factor that prevents a person from working full-time falls under SSDI:

http://www.ssa.gov/disability/

 

[Audacious]

Why not?

Why don't they need the same economic protections? Disabled people aren't able to work, no matter how you put it, and they still require the same things as everyone else -- food, shelter, clothing, safety.

$8000.00 a year? That's a low-end for yearly disability. However, there still are other remedies available:

Food Stamps
Rent Control/Stabilization
If one has social security disability, they should by extension have Medicare, and if they have a low end number with regards to monthly payments, they too should be able to get city/state health insurance

Yes, but these things don't completely alleviate the problem of poverty for the disabled; they merely make it better than it would be without such programs. If they paid, say, the actual cost of living -- or at least up to the poverty level -- it wouldn't be such a huge problem for people who are disabled.

Ask a person on SSI disability about their quality of life and how it's affected by finances. They're not going to tell you that it's very high.

Wait. This is not correct. The maximum for disability is not $8,000.00 yearly as I have a relative who gets a little over $1,500.00 a month.

EDIT: Now I see the problem. SSI - I believe - is similar to a welfare program, which is also available to those who are on disability.

Actual payments that take into account ones work history and the health factor that prevents a person from working full-time falls under SSDI:

http://www.ssa.gov/disability/

SSI is disability for those who haven't ever worked and are unable to; SSDI takes from the social security fund for people who have put money into it, which many -- principally young disabled people -- have not.

 

[Albion]

[source for poverty line]
[source for maximum SSI disability payments]

Why should people on disability -- people who can't work, and who don't have a choice but to live on disability -- live in abject poverty, almost $4,000 a year below the poverty line?

The poverty line is so stingy to begin with that barely anyone can live on it. Where I live, the cost of living is $18,700 a year. But if I get SSI disability, I will be making $10,000 a year less than that... for what reason, exactly? How is it justifiable that US citizens who do not in any way deserve to live in poverty get to live in complete and utter squalor?

I'm not saying we should pay disabled people super high wages, but it should at least meet the US median cost of living.

Also: People who expect private charity to cover all of it are living in a fantasy land. Nobody ever says 'let charity pay for national defense'. Why? Because we think it's necessary. Why isn't providing for citizens who can't take care of themselves also a necessity?

Edit: The maximum SSI disability payment is actually about $8700 a year. My point remains.

Why do you think it's called "SUPPLEMENTAL" Security Income?