Friday, October 24, 2014

U.S. Spends 40% less on Disability Benefits/GDP than All Other Nations

Less than 1% of people who are disabled are able to come off of disability and return to work. That number should not statistically be possible. Less than 1% who are disabled become un-disabled? That was told to me by a Social Security Administration official. And looking at the picture further, it's even less rosy.

According to a recent analysis by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, or OECD, the United States has the least generous disability-benefit system of all OECD member countries except Korea. The OECD describes the U.S. disability-benefit system, along with those of Korea, Japan, and Canada, as having “the most stringent eligibility criteria for a full disability benefit, including the most rigid reference to all jobs available in the labor market and the shortest sickness benefit payment duration.” In addition, the United States spends less as a share of its economy on incapacity-related benefits than other nations. In 2009 public expenditures on incapacity-related benefits comprised just 1.5% of U.S. gross domestic product, or GDP, compared to an average of 2.4% for all OECD nations.
The Facts on Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income for Workers with Disabilities— Center for American Progress (emphasis mine)

And no one is getting rich on disability. Before the Great Recession, the overall employment rate— which the Social Security Administration defines as: annual earnings over just $1,000"— was only 12% in 2007. That means 88% of people on disability earned less than $2.70 a day. When I was employed, my morning tea cost more than that! And yet there are still alarmist articles like this one from Forbes which claims:

Benefits that would replace a significant portion of their previously earned wages, while also qualifying them for Medicare, our generous health-insurance program for the elderly. Today, the United States spends around $200 billion a year, literally paying Americans not to work.

I don't know what you consider significant, but my income is only a little over one fifth of my previous income. Also, I am limited to making $1,000, or I loose my benefits. This, while also not underpaying me for my skills (per Social Security rules). That means I can only work 6.9 hours per week. A old girlfriend of mine who was in sales can only work 3 hours per week! You find either of us a job like that, and we'll take it!

So the difference between most and the poverty line is only $4,000, and I can guarantee you most disabled folks medical expenses are more than $4,000 in a year. My medications alone average more than half that, and I've turned down my doctors offer of a few medications because they were too expensive. and let's not forget how much dental care costs should anything go wrong with your teeth, because Medicare doesn't cover dental at all, never mind that loads of medications and conditions ruin teeth and can make wearing dentures impossible.

And Social Security rules are made to keep recipients at poverty levels, after first subjecting them to the most rigorous screening process in the world! Not only do they want to keep our group as small as possible, but they want to ensure our dependence on a system that keeps us in poverty! Less than 1% of small group to start ever make it. It's worse if you were disabled after 30 without having had paid enough FICA tax. That is, if you receive SSI along with SSDI benefits, you are limited to only $2,000 in assets whether earned or in gifts, a number increased only once, in 1989, and never adjusted for inflation.

What I see is a system that punishes its most needy, trapping them in a world where their suffering is only compounded by the constraints it places on them, saying essentially, "If you are truly sick (which we highly doubt in the first place), you don't deserve a route to success. The "Pursuit of Happiness" is only for people created equally, and since you are less than, you shall receive less than." As of March 2013, the average monthly benefit for a disabled worker was about $1,129, with male workers receiving $1,255 per month and female workers receiving $993 per month on average.

Yes, Social Security has programs for becoming "financially independent," but to take advantage of these programs, you are required to plan to quit using your benefits as a result of receiving this "hand up" on a timed progress line (usually 3-5 years), regardless of whether or not your condition has improved. Basically what they're saying is, we know that your disability should not be an impediment to you being a fully functioning member of society. We know that if we help you learn some new skills, get assistance setting up your business, or invest in some small ticket items for your future (never to exceed the amount of your monthly benefits), then regardless of the condition that disabled you, you will magically be able to make enough money to support yourself and no longer need disability benefits or Medicare. (Nevermind that it would have been impossible to get health insurance after being disabled until four years ago.)

If you made any sort of success for yourself prior to becoming disabled, you're penalized and kept from a career that was successful up until the time that your health went south. Social Security requires that you never ever charge less than fair market value for your work, even if you're providing a discount because you may not be able to meet deadline like someone who is health. That's not what matters. What matters to the Social Security Administration,kk is you're doing the same work, and therefore must charge the same as a healthy person would.

In this way, many people who would like to make themselves financially stable are scared into avoiding assistance services, because we are required to plan to leave the safety net of disability benefits, regardless of whether or not our condition has improved. Income, rather than illness, really determines if you are disabled in the U.S.

Meanwhile, the stigma that disable people are somehow cheating everyone else out of "hard earned" money (as if disability is "easy" money) by inflammatory articles like this one from Forbes, "How Americans Game the $200 Billion a Year Disability Industrial Complex" This title makes you think that people on disability make $200 Billion a year, but that's just not true. It's the Disability Industrial Complex that's worth $200 Billion. That number is not an entitlement. It's an asset value! And what's with the word "Game"? What an explosive word to use, nevermind that it ignores all the facts!!

There is some hope on the horizon. The ABLE Act would allow those on SSI to create health savings accounts and not be limited to $2,000 in assets. This is especially important to children on disability as they grow older. If you're disabled as a child, you've never paid into Social Security because you've never worked. Therefore you're on SSI and limited to never owning more than $2,000 in assets. Mind you, the estimated cost of raising a disabled child is around $1,000,000. Basically the government has said to disabled children: Don't ever try. You were born at the bottom and you will stay at the bottom. A disability should not create a class system in this society, but that's exactly what we've done.

Let's change this!

1 comment:

  1. Hi there, I'm Lindsey! I have a question and would love to speak with you, please email me when you have a moment- thanks so much!