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

[Togo]

So, what should I make of something like this:

These golfers are considered disabled. At an age when most people still work, they get a pension and tens of thousands of dollars in annual disability payments — a sum roughly equal to the base salary of their old jobs. Even the golf is free, courtesy of New York State taxpayers.

With incentives like these, occupational disabilities at the L.I.R.R. have become a full-blown epidemic.

Virtually every career employee — as many as 97 percent in one recent year — applies for and gets disability payments soon after retirement, a computer analysis of federal records by The New York Times has found.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/nyregion/21lirr.html?_r=0

Are railroads simply too dangerous to their employees to exist?

It is not clear to me from a quick read of the article that the disability program the LIRR employees are (apparently) scamming is the same one Rand Paul was referring to.

Inasumch as the railroads have a separate version of Social Security (RRTA rather than OASDI), I suspect it isn't.

So, I'm not sure what you are arguing. There is some special tendency for LIRR workers to fake disabilities that does not affect the general population?

I imagine that's true since 97% of the general population does not become disabled. (Unless you subscribe to the belief that railroad work is so dangerous to employees we should shut it down, but since people here seem to love even the silliest choo-choo projects I'm sure that's not it.)

Maybe people are just frustrated it's not a big enough sample (odd given the argument "I know 3 people who are on disability and they're not faking" argument didn't meet with this criticism.)]

But anyway, let's look at some big picture data. Suppose I did some analysis on the general population's disability rate over time. Let's say I went back in time 50 years and saw what the disability rate was for people ages 25-64. Presumably with improved healthcare, better workplace conditions, etc we would have lowered that disability rate by some amount.

How much would you expect the disability rate to have gone down over time?

I'd expect it to go up, since people with disabilties would have a higher survival rate. Better healthcare improves the life of the disabled, and allows them to live longer. It also allows those who previously would have died to survive as chronically disabled. What it wouldn't do much for is the number of people who suffered severe injuries and recovered completely enough to be able to resume a job involving hard physical labour, like working on a railway.

 

[KeepTalking]

So, what should I make of something like this:

These golfers are considered disabled. At an age when most people still work, they get a pension and tens of thousands of dollars in annual disability payments — a sum roughly equal to the base salary of their old jobs. Even the golf is free, courtesy of New York State taxpayers.

With incentives like these, occupational disabilities at the L.I.R.R. have become a full-blown epidemic.

Virtually every career employee — as many as 97 percent in one recent year — applies for and gets disability payments soon after retirement, a computer analysis of federal records by The New York Times has found.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/nyregion/21lirr.html?_r=0

Are railroads simply too dangerous to their employees to exist?

It is not clear to me from a quick read of the article that the disability program the LIRR employees are (apparently) scamming is the same one Rand Paul was referring to.

Inasumch as the railroads have a separate version of Social Security (RRTA rather than OASDI), I suspect it isn't.

So, I'm not sure what you are arguing. There is some special tendency for LIRR workers to fake disabilities that does not affect the general population?

I am pretty sure that is it, given that this is exactly what your linked article says:

The answer, according to government records and dozens of interviews, stems from a combination of factors, including highly unusual L.I.R.R. contracts that allow longtime workers to retire with a pension as early as age 50, federal rules that let railroad retirees claim disability for jobs they no longer hold, and an obscure federal agency called the Railroad Retirement Board that almost never says no to a disability claim.

Your point is almost everyone (~97%) would fake a disability if there were not some crack federal agency that kept a lid on things?

No, my point is that the article you linked pretty much already addressed the question you asked of the previous poster.

 

[SimpleDon]

What percent of people on disability do you think are faking it?

You would have to ask the Social Security Administration, or the Department of Justice.

You certainly can't just pull a random number out of your ass, which is what Rand Paul did.

To be fair, I don't think that Paul said that 50% of the people on disability are frauds, he said that half of the recipients are on disability because they are 'either anxious or their back hurts -- join the club ..."

 

[Nice Squirrel]

You would have to ask the Social Security Administration, or the Department of Justice.

You certainly can't just pull a random number out of your ass, which is what Rand Paul did.

To be fair, I don't think that Paul said that 50% of the people on disability are frauds, he said that half of the recipients are on disability because they are 'either anxious or their back hurts -- join the club ..."

That is true.

 

[SimpleDon]

What percent of people on disability do you think are faking it?

I'd say from my experience that it is much less than 10%, say 3 to 5%.

There is a trade off between preventing fraud by making qualification harder and denying coverage to people who are really disabled.

What percentage of the 60% of applicants that are denied coverage after all of their appeals do think really are disabled?

 

[Rhea]

"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to bilby again."

took care of that for you.

 

[SimpleDon]

Let them all get reevaluated by the VA. They'll not only tell you, there's nothing wrong with you. They'll tell you there's nothing wrong with you and smirk.

Most of the time they will tell you that your problem isn't service related. They are stretched pretty thin right now after so many wars. The Vietnam War veterans are reaching prime disability age.

Our Senators and Congressmen are ever anxious to help veterans by expanding the list of the service related disabilities but are much less likely to provide the money that the VA needs to cover their expanded roles.

 

[dismal]

You would have to ask the Social Security Administration, or the Department of Justice.

You certainly can't just pull a random number out of your ass, which is what Rand Paul did.

To be fair, I don't think that Paul said that 50% of the people on disability are frauds, he said that half of the recipients are on disability because they are 'either anxious or their back hurts -- join the club ..."

Why, that sounds like a statistically verifiable/falsifiable claim.

I did find this, which does in fact seem to back it up while highlighting the relatively high increase in mental and back disabilities in recent years:

http://ldihealtheconomist.com/he000072.shtml

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

IMHO if you're a service member and they force you out on a medical discharge they owe you disability for life, and medical care. By forcing you out they've sealed the deal. If you wish to return to employment in another capacity that's a personal choice. If you choose not to work they should have to pay.

 

[SimpleDon]

After having helped my brother get on disability due to severe epilepsy, I can tell you it is not any easy thing to get. The hoops you .must jump through are many

We are trying to get SSDI for my brother in law who has stage 4 cancer. It stated as a skin cancer and has now spread. He is under almost constant chemo now. He had his own business as a plumber, a well puller and an all around handyman in a rural area. He paid his payroll taxes and he has medical insurance thanks to the ACA. But he is in a red state that didn't expand Medicaid, so that he will lose his subsidy for the health care insurance unless he earns at least 12 thousand dollars a year.

Bizarre, thank you SCOTUS.

We kept him above the 12 thousand dollar a year last year by going together and buying some of the bad debts that were owed to him through the years. Some of the people who owed him money paid him when they heard about his situation.

He had bought a place out in the country that he was renovating in his spare time to be his retirement home. It was about 60% finished. Six of the people who he had hired to help him down through the years got together and finished the work on the house in their spare time. They handed the keys to him on New Years Day so that we can report their gift of the free labor as this year's income, if he doesn't qualify for Medicare under SSDI.

He is an uniquely stubborn and proud man. It has taken nearly a year to talk him into applying for SSDI. He only got the health care insurance because his bother was an ACA advocate, helping people to sign up for the ACA. They discovered the cancer in the screening physical, probably the first time in twenty years that he had been in a doctor's office. He was in surgery less than 48 hours after the physical. Without the ACA he would be dead by now.

We hired a lawyer for him. We are now waiting to hear on the first application.

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.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

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.

You've got to remember, Don, that if they pay out to people like your brother these fat cats won't have any of your and my money left to retire on themselves after 20 or 30 years. They need all those bennies and high retirements they get on our dime so they can get another government job and collect more money while they're retired. They got a nice game going.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

After having helped my brother get on disability due to severe epilepsy, I can tell you it is not any easy thing to get. The hoops you .must jump through are many

We are trying to get SSDI for my brother in law who has stage 4 cancer. It stated as a skin cancer and has now spread. He is under almost constant chemo now. He had his own business as a plumber, a well puller and an all around handyman in a rural area. He paid his payroll taxes and he has medical insurance thanks to the ACA. But he is in a red state that didn't expand Medicaid, so that he will lose his subsidy for the health care insurance unless he earns at least 12 thousand dollars a year.

Bizarre, thank you SCOTUS.

We kept him above the 12 thousand dollar a year last year by going together and buying some of the bad debts that were owed to him through the years. Some of the people who owed him money paid him when they heard about his situation.

He had bought a place out in the country that he was renovating in his spare time to be his retirement home. It was about 60% finished. Six of the people who he had hired to help him down through the years got together and finished the work on the house in their spare time. They handed the keys to him on New Years Day so that we can report their gift of the free labor as this year's income, if he doesn't qualify for Medicare under SSDI.

He is an uniquely stubborn and proud man. It has taken nearly a year to talk him into applying for SSDI. He only got the health care insurance because his bother was an ACA advocate, helping people to sign up for the ACA. They discovered the cancer in the screening physical, probably the first time in twenty years that he had been in a doctor's office. He was in surgery less than 48 hours after the physical. Without the ACA he would be dead by now.

We hired a lawyer for him. We are now waiting to hear on the first application.

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.

And that is something else. Where you apply for disability can make a world of difference in your outcomes.

Most people in my family went North back in the day because the laws were better, the jobs were better, the pay was better and while the winters were worse, they was something you could live with. When the bad luck happened and if you needed to retire on disability, in those northern, more pro labor states, getting your disability benefit was a great deal easier than it was in the South. Down here, the plantation mentality still holds sway and people regardless of color are suppose to work, usually long hours for short pay, until they die, or more accurately until the job kills them. disability claims are viewed as suspect unless you show up at the SS office either in a straight jacket or an iron lung.

It is maddening.

 

[fromderinside]

We are trying to get SSDI for my brother in law who has stage 4 cancer. It stated as a skin cancer and has now spread. He is under almost constant chemo now. He had his own business as a plumber, a well puller and an all around handyman in a rural area. He paid his payroll taxes and he has medical insurance thanks to the ACA. But he is in a red state that didn't expand Medicaid, so that he will lose his subsidy for the health care insurance unless he earns at least 12 thousand dollars a year.

Bizarre, thank you SCOTUS.

We kept him above the 12 thousand dollar a year last year by going together and buying some of the bad debts that were owed to him through the years. Some of the people who owed him money paid him when they heard about his situation.

He had bought a place out in the country that he was renovating in his spare time to be his retirement home. It was about 60% finished. Six of the people who he had hired to help him down through the years got together and finished the work on the house in their spare time. They handed the keys to him on New Years Day so that we can report their gift of the free labor as this year's income, if he doesn't qualify for Medicare under SSDI.

He is an uniquely stubborn and proud man. It has taken nearly a year to talk him into applying for SSDI. He only got the health care insurance because his bother was an ACA advocate, helping people to sign up for the ACA. They discovered the cancer in the screening physical, probably the first time in twenty years that he had been in a doctor's office. He was in surgery less than 48 hours after the physical. Without the ACA he would be dead by now.

We hired a lawyer for him. We are now waiting to hear on the first application.

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.

And that is something else. Where you apply for disability can make a world of difference in your outcomes.

Most people in my family went North back in the day because the laws were better, the jobs were better, the pay was better and while the winters were worse, they was something you could live with. When the bad luck happened and if you needed to retire on disability, in those northern, more pro labor states, getting your disability benefit was a great deal easier than it was in the South. Down here, the plantation mentality still holds sway and people regardless of color are suppose to work, usually long hours for short pay, until they die, or more accurately until the job kills them. disability claims are viewed as suspect unless you show up at the SS office either in a straight jacket or an iron lung.

It is maddening.

How does a government standardize processes when processes in states are different by choice (votes count yano)?

Some of it is actually greener pasture thinking and some of it is just that people in some states tend to be cruel on civil matters.

The cure. Emphasize de jure over de pocketbook, knowledge over belief, and humanity over don't.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

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.

 

[James Brown]

To be fair, I don't think that Paul said that 50% of the people on disability are frauds, he said that half of the recipients are on disability because they are 'either anxious or their back hurts -- join the club ..."

Why, that sounds like a statistically verifiable/falsifiable claim.

I did find this, which does in fact seem to back it up while highlighting the relatively high increase in mental and back disabilities in recent years:

http://ldihealtheconomist.com/he000072.shtml

Let's compare apples to apples. From your article:

About nine million adults currently receive SSDI disability payments equal to about half their former salaries.

So Rand Paul is saying that "over half" of those people applied for back pain or 'being anxious.' That would mean the actual figure is more than four-and-a-half million people. What are the actual figures?

Duggan's data indicated that from the late 1980s until 2012, the SSDI benefit award rate for strokes, heart attacks and cancer changed very little but the award rate for musculoskeletal system ailments like "severe back pain" increased 500%.

I agree the increase of 500% is suspicious, but the article doesn't identify the base. Is that 500% increase from an original 900,000, which would equal Rand Paul's 4,500,000? Or 500% increase of a lower starting figure, say, 90,000? The article doesn't say.

But I wonder about those who argue that when there's an increase in fraud, we must punish those who are not committing the fraud.

 

[dismal]

So Rand Paul is saying that "over half" of those people applied for back pain or 'being anxious.' That would mean the actual figure is more than four-and-a-half million people. What are the actual figures?

If you look at the second chart in the link you can see that the diagnosis of "mental and musculoskeletal" is more than "cancer and circulatory" and "all other" combined. This means it's more than 50% of the cases.

 

[ksen]

Rand and dismal are right: severe, chronic back pain is hardly ever debilitating.

 

[dismal]

Rand and dismal are right: severe, chronic back pain is hardly ever debilitating.

If you would like to address an argument someone is actually making, please address how it became 5X as debilitating as it was in 1981.

 

[ksen]

Probably because regular people are carrying around 5X more debt just to stay afloat and that shit gets heavy after awhile.

 

[James Brown]

So Rand Paul is saying that "over half" of those people applied for back pain or 'being anxious.' That would mean the actual figure is more than four-and-a-half million people. What are the actual figures?

If you look at the second chart in the link you can see that the diagnosis of "mental and musculoskeletal" is more than "cancer and circulatory" and "all other" combined. This means it's more than 50% of the cases.

Isn't "mental and musculoskeletal" a broader category than "anxiety and back pain"?