In response to:

Stressed? Are You Disabled?

DanCobb Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 3:22 PM
This is a conservative site. I have read most of the posts on here, and it's quite illuminating. From these posts I have gleaned that: 1) conservatives can't stand it when a government program makes another person's life more tolerable... 2) not a single post here deals with a person or acquaintance of the poster who actually deserved Social Security disability.... all of the anecdotes are about people they know of or have heard about or who they have heard in conversation who are gaming the system; 3) that conservatives prefer to focus on the bad aspects found in the nature of some humans while completely ignoring the good --except, of course, themselves.
gsw Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 11:24 PM
aah ahem -you do realize that the article and comments are about abuses--oh wait I am truly sorrry - reading disorder right?
faultroy Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 6:12 PM
Here is your problem: while you have valid points, they are ALL overshadowed by the fact that when government tries to help people they actually dis-enpower people. We can see this by the "help (i.e. money) the government gives crack and heroin addicts--statistics indicate their is actually increased deaths when they receive their checks to purchase more drugs. Look at social security--we give older people money without a commensurate exchange of volunteer services causing them to be more uninvolved and less engaged; more sedentary and therefore sicker which increases the bills for everyone. The fact that you cannot see any downside indicates that you are far too partisan.
45caliber Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 4:35 PM

Social Security was never meant to go to disabled. That was what Welfare was for. Social Security was meant for retirment.

But due to the ease of getting on SS disability, too much money is going to that which leaves a lot less to those retiring. The problem was that it was building up as people paid before retiring and the Congress couldn't stand the thought of all that money simply sitting there when they could use it to buy more votes.
togubin Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 3:33 PM
1. What conservatives really can't stand is self-righteous prigs like yourself who pretend to be more "compassionate" while stealing other people's money to spend as they see fit.

2. No one "deserves" disability unless they've paid for their own insurance. People are responsible for their own lives, so stop trying to run things. Mind your own damn business.

3. We're not "focusing" on the bad behavior, simply pointing out what you idiots on the Left won't look at -- ie, we're going bankrupt and the Left thinks it's more "compassionate" to pretend the problem doesn't exist rather than deal with it in a calm, adult manner.
Lance73 Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 5:39 PM
And that, folks, is what you call a home run shot.
DanCobb Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 3:25 PM
4) that Conservatives are happy to tell you about their own disabilities and how much worse off they are than people they have heard about who are collecting disability --and they're happy to tell you how stoic they are in their rejection of any benefits related to their disability.
5) that conservatives see a fraudulent claimant behind every tree and in every inkblot --the usual standard element of conservative paranoia; and
6) that conservatives tend to see things in black and white....: because some people are gaming the system, the system is bad and corrupt, without giving a second thought to all the truly disabled people who would be hopeless without the help of their co-citizens who pay taxes which help them survive.
Arley2 Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 4:01 PM
I'll bet you, Miss DanCobb, couldn't find ten conservatives anywhere in the US in a year long search who object to people who are genuinely disabled getting tax payer support.

The operative word is "genuinely."

What happens with nearly all government programs is that the criteria for awarding assistance become more and more inclusive over time, and THAT'S the fault of government regulators and those who make decisions about who is "genuinely" disabled.
Arley2 Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 4:05 PM
I'm not sure about this, but it may also be a function of the way government agency budget work. Let's say a disability program stuck to the original criteria and DID NOT spend their entire budget. What would happen? The budget would be reduced next year.

Show me one government administrator who would tolerate THAT.
A Capitalist Pig Wrote: Aug 20, 2012 11:59 PM
Redistribute your own money jacka*s. Liberals are always so much more compassionate with OTHER people's money.
Government worker: “Do you have a disability?”

Man: “No.”

Man’s wife: “What does he get if he’s disabled?”

Government worker: “His monthly payments will [double].”

Man’s wife: “Well, then he’s disabled.”

Government worker (to man): “What’s your disability?”

Man: “I’m stressed.”

An attorney friend of mine recently overheard the above conversation in a Florida government building. The man, who had just turned 65, was signing up for retirement benefits while his wife stood over his shoulder. I relay the story to illustrate how our government is expanding...