Rand Paul Knows 50% of People on Disability are Faking it.

[arcadia]

Had a conversation with a Republican a couple of days ago. Within the space of 5 minutes, he complained about all the fakers who were getting SSDIB and then about his sister who is "clearly" disabled but has been denied, not just once, but three times. It is hard to get. When I represented some claimants if they were under age 45 I would point outside my office window to a small parking lot where there was an attendant whose only job was to hand our tickets. I told them if they could do that job, then according to the guidelines they were not disabled.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Because I'm able to read a dictionary.

Holy crap...me too!


I guess that makes me an authority on what makes someone libertarian!


Based on your reasoning, Rand Paul is libertarian because I said so.


You can't really argue that.

Ok then ... because I actually have read one.

 

[Ford]

Holy crap...me too!


I guess that makes me an authority on what makes someone libertarian!


Based on your reasoning, Rand Paul is libertarian because I said so.


You can't really argue that.

Ok then ... because I actually have read one.

I know! Great read, the dictionary! Not only is it a gripping story, it gives you the authority to make blanket statements!


Of course, there's a problem...when you claim "Rand Paul is not a libertarian because I've read the dictionary" someone else can come along and - by virtue of having cracked open a dictionary - refute your argument.


Well there's really another problem, but I'm sure you don't want to talk about the fact that there's no real definitive...for lack of a better term...definition of what it means to be libertarian.


Libertarians (or libs, if you prefer) are notoriously averse to being defined...individualism and what not. So while you may be able to declare yourself to be a libertarian, you are not (by virtue of the nature of the thing) at liberty to say whether or not another person is libertarian.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Libertarians are not adverse to being defined, we're adverse to being mis-defined. There actually is a definition, but since it doesn't fit into the neat either-or of Pepsi or Coke / Crips or Bloods / Republicans or Democrats / Blue or Red, it's not a definition most people care to use.

But then what can I say to someone who supported Bush Jr?

(Do you like being mis-defined?)

 

[Ford]

Libertarians are not adverse to being defined, we're adverse to being mis-defined.

Well there you go again, speaking for all libertarians.

But then what can I say to someone who supported Bush Jr?

Whatever it is, perhaps you could say it to someone who supported W?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

But then what can I say to someone who supported Bush Jr?

Whatever it is, perhaps you could say it to someone who supported W?

That has to be the most ... random ... objection of all time.

It's like saying "Obama? Please, dude, I'm a Barack fan, thank you very much"

 

[laughing dog]

Libertarians are not adverse to being defined, we're adverse to being mis-defined.

When where you elected or appointed the spokesperson for liberterians?

There actually is a definition, but since it doesn't fit into the neat either-or of Pepsi or Coke / Crips or Bloods / Republicans or Democrats / Blue or Red, it's not a definition most people care to use.

Since you didn't share it, apparently you don't either.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

But then what can I say to someone who supported Bush Jr?

Whatever it is, perhaps you could say it to someone who supported W?

Exactly my point, and I'm not surprised you didn't get it. But Bush supporters like yourself never get the point, right?

And I know you didn't support Bush, but you might want to see what it is like being accused of believing something you don't believe.

So a pro-life drug warrior who wants to nuke the middle east - like you - would never get the point of being mis-defined.

 

[Ford]

Whatever it is, perhaps you could say it to someone who supported W?

That has to be the most ... random ... objection of all time.

It's like saying "Obama? Please, dude, I'm a Barack fan, thank you very much"

We live in confusing times.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

When you deliberately refuse to get the point, your only recourse is to pretend you don't understand.

Be careful about pretending that you are less intelligent than you really are, you might convince people that it is the truth.

 

[Ford]

And I know you didn't support Bush, but you might want to see what it is like being accused of believing something you don't believe.

I guess at this point it would be a waste of time to tell you that I voted straight libertarian from the end of Bush I to the beginning of Bush II?


Plot twist.

 

[laughing dog]

When you deliberately refuse to get the point, your only recourse is to pretend you don't understand.

Be careful about pretending that you are less intelligent than you really are, you might convince people that it is the truth.

Is this the voice of personal experience?

 

[dismal]

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying we've become significantly worse at treating musculoskeletal and mental disorders since 1981?

You really can't think of anything? Like the aging of a boom of babies? Like the increased survival rates (but not full cure rates) from severe injuries? In creased survival times from musculoskeletal diseases? Like the accumulation of toxins from pre-safe-workplace days? Like the decrease in institutionalizing people?

You can't think of a THING that would increase the cases of musculoskeletal and mental disorders?

The academic research I have read suggests that demographics play a very small part in the disability boom.

Disabilities are up dramatically across all age subgroups. (for example, 30-35 is way up, 36-40 is way up, etc, etc.)

Do you have some research that suggests otherwise?

http://economics.mit.edu/files/7388

http://www.nber.org/chapters/c11119.pdf

 

[Rhea]

Wait, hang on... doesn't Rand Paul call himself a Libertarian? Wouldn't he know?

 

[dismal]

Wait, hang on... doesn't Rand Paul call himself a Libertarian? Wouldn't he know?

I didn't see any links to research supporting your point in there.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Wait, hang on... doesn't Rand Paul call himself a Libertarian? Wouldn't he know?

Actually, no. He has gone to great lengths to deny that he is a libertarian, and has in fact accused the press of "hanging the albatross of libertarianism around his neck". Yes, he used the word "albatross".

If you are willing to put the label on anyone who claims it, no matter how absurd the claim, you still can't put the label on Rand Paul.

 

[laughing dog]

Wait, hang on... doesn't Rand Paul call himself a Libertarian? Wouldn't he know?

Actually, no. He has gone to great lengths to deny that he is a libertarian, and has in fact accused the press of "hanging the albatross of libertarianism around his neck". Yes, he used the word "albatross".

If you are willing to put the label on anyone who claims it, no matter how absurd the claim, you still can't put the label on Rand Paul.

You put that label on Ayn Rand and she consistently denounced libertarians in public.

 

[KeepTalking]

Since when does "mental disorder" only mean "anxiety", and "musculoskeletal" only mean "back pain"?

They don't <snip>

Then Rand Paul could not possibly be right, and the rest of your post is simply a distraction.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Look,

if you set up a system to help people, and then you don't trust the people or you think the people are prone to cheating said system, you will run the system not as a helping thing, but like a diamond that must be kept from a thieving populace.

And the only people who will be hurt are the honest people trying to get help. Cheaters, you see, will always find a way. Honest people will just give up and get no help.

 

[SimpleDon]

I was approved for SSDI and Medicare in less than two days and was sent a check for nearly a year of back benefits. I couldn't believe it after all of the horror stories that I had heard. My elder care attorney told us that we wouldn't need him to apply, that with my condition all I needed was a specialist's diagnosis. That was six years ago. He recommended that we hire an attorney in the state that my brother in law lives in because the Social Security Administration had gotten much tougher in that short time.

Yeah. With your diagnosis there's no wiggle room. The only possible fraud would be the doctor lying and that's not likely. Where the problem comes is with the diagnoses that could be disabling but aren't always. Then they drag their feet looking for any out.

Personally, I would think chemo itself should qualify for short term disability.

Unfortunately, short term disability doesn't qualify you for Medicare. Long term total disability only qualifies one for Medicare after two years unless you have a condition that leads to an early death, like mine or stage 4 cancer.

My brother in law will be all right even if he doesn't qualify for SSDI. His "significant other" is a land owning millionaire who is willing to support him. Our efforts to keep him minimally employed are just a slightly better payback now than us just paying the entire insurance premium without the government subsidy.

His and therefore our main problem is that he is extremely stubborn. He doesn't want help from his friends and family and he played by the rules and paid his FICA taxes all of these years when most of the people in his position in his largely cash only business didn't and he feels like he now should now receive some benefit from SS when he needs the benefits. I agree with him.