Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (130130)	2/4/2010 5:14:27 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542009

I wasn't suggesting that. I had in mind subsidizing the medical costs The extraordinary/catastrophic costs would be covered, as for the ordinary costs, I don't see a big difference between subsidizing them and just giving the person a more direct handout, except that the later gives the recipient more flexibility, and more incentive to try to control the ordinary costs. Social Security disability includes Medicare If you get Social Security Disability, you are eligible for Medicare, but it doesn't actually include it, two different programs. I'm talking about the disability payments alone. Those payments aren't health insurance. Presumably you could make the health insurance part more generous and pare down the direct disability payments, but why? If anything I'd want to go in the other direction.

To: Lane3 who wrote (130130)	2/4/2010 8:41:07 PM
From: Katelew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542009

I have a cousin who became disabled from her job as a cake icer due to carpal tunnel. That gets her Medicare. Surely her condition doesn't warrant more taxpayer help than AIDS or cancer. That doesn't sound likely. Did she actually get onto the system and into Medicare? I wan't sure because you said "that gets her Medicare" like maybe you were just assuming she might qualify. I'm somewhat familiar with the Social Security Disability system and what it takes to get into it, or at least I was 15 or so years ago. It's very hard to get approved for it, and almost impossible without the help of an attorney who specializes in the field. Lots of people try to get SSD but don't qualify. Attorneys in the field probably turn away 90% of the folks who are seeking it because they know from experience what kinds of medical conditions will meet the thresholds. Basically speaking, a medical condition that is correctible will disqualify you. Carpal tunnel is surgically correctible so I would assume your cousin would be expected to have had the surgery. Even folks who have medical conditions that are untreatible can't automatically get approved for SSD. If they can work at a different profession, that's what they have to do, and it's the Social Security judge who provides a list of suggested occupations. Having sat through a couple of actual SSD hearings, most of the time there was spent reviewing what other types of employment, employment with comparable salaries, could be reasonably expected for the applicant to pursue. So a person who could no longer ice cakes because of a carpal tunnel condition where the surgery failed to completely resolve the problem would be expected to try some other low wage job(s) first. I don't think even having AIDs would mean an automatic enrollment in SSD. People with AIDS tend to keep working until secondary illnesses set in. The level of the wages is a most important component. A neurosurgeon who had untreatable carpal tunnel issues would likely be eligible for SSD because he has no viable alternatives to neurosurgery. This is quite different as you go down the wage scale. Maybe some would see this as unfair, but it's the way the system works. In addition to all this, one has to have paid into the system a certain amount to be able to get on it. It takes a certain number of "credits".....15 comes to mind....to even be elegible. These credits are based on how many years a person worked and how much they were paid. A minimum wage worker might have to have worked 8-10 years, whereas a highly paid professional might have to have only worked 2 or 3. Would a cake icer even have paid in enough to qualify?