• FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    “freeloaders” is exceedingly rare, it’s mainly a rightwing talking point to erode support for benefits. A high percentage of people with disability who can’t work aren’t even able to get disability insurance.

    it takes years, you need to hire a lawyer, go through extensive medical testing… All that to get a couple thousand a year, and given that you’re not working, it’s barely survivable.

    The only report I read on it was 15 years ago, a report by the general inspector of SSDI they estimated that 1-3% of people applying for disability were fraudulent and they had on average a 0.3% success rate. I wonder if that report is available online, I had read it at the local library.

    • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.worksM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      11 days ago

      People like this will fight tooth and nail to prevent any theoretical “freeloaders” from getting less than minimum wage to survive on at the expense of something like 98.5% of people who make genuine claims (because your description is accurate, it is absolute torture to go through, and this bullshit lie is pushed to manufacture public support to make it even harder), but they accept tax dodging billionaires exploiting society for their own gain as an inevitable part of life they’re happy to put up with because they’ve been brainwashed in to thinking one day it might be them (when the reality is you’re probably thousands of times more likely to become ill and or disabled than you are to become filthy rich).

      It’s so fucking twisted.

      • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        I feel like thousands of times is deeply underestimating the odds. There are 801 billionaires in the US, while there are over 70 million people living with a disability.

        Edit: I should add that I agree very much with the rest of your comment.

        • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.worksM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          11 days ago

          Yeah, I didn’t have the energy to go look up the numbers lol I figured thousands still covered hundreds of thousands, but millions might be overshooting it, but you’re absolutely right, thanks.

      • atomicorange@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 days ago

        It’s like saying the problem with the criminal justice system is guilty people being found innocent.

        • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.worksM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 days ago

          Unfortunately the justice system does find a lot of guilt people innocent, especially in cases of sexual violence, and or if they have a lot of money and power, so it might not be the best comparison, but I get what you mean!

        • Rhaedas@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 days ago

          Great parallel. If there is to be error, let it be on the positive side and not hurt those who need help.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 days ago

      The exaggeration or outright lying about welfare and social nets for political gain has roots back to the 60s. Reagan used the already created term “welfare queen” to disable even more help. Far easier to taint the whole thing than to improve fraud detection or shudder let the very small percentage of fraud exist while you try to help as many people as possible.

      Republicans hate people. It’s as simple as that.

    • iii
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      11 days ago

      Our respective experiences might differ based on context.

      Where I live, there’s 500k people on disability, on a work age population of around 5 million (1).

      I was offered disability benefits, as I received my diagnosis.

      • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        You were offered sick leave or permanent disability benefits? In most places those are completely different.

        Someone with CPTSD in my country might get long term sick leave if their condition flares up, but that condition isn’t in the list of those considered for long term disability benefits.

        If getting long term disability in belgium is so early that’s probably a good thing. Lot’s of disabled people in other countries literally die on the streets because they don’t have the physical or financial capital it takes to go through the multi year long draining process it takes to get disability benefits.

        • iii
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 days ago

          Permanent, as of the neurological component.

          The CPTSD developed by growing up in an environment not, beneficial for lack of better word, to my situation.

            • iii
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              11 days ago

              Yet, there’s a freeloather problem here.

              By legal definition, there’s not. As anyone that receives disability benefits is legally disabled.

              But in practice.

              • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                11 days ago

                and your sources to back that up are…?

                I’m sure like everywhere a couple people cheat the system. But using that to excuse the marginalisation of disabled people who can’t work is disingenuous at best.

                • iii
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  That’s indeed an issue. By definition an elephant is an elephant, even if it has great manes and hunts antilopes in the savanna.

              • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 days ago

                I just want to chip in that the definition of “disabled” is more complex than just receiving disability benefits. I’m going to use a UK framework to illustrate what I mean, but my overall argument applies equally to other countries.

                There are multiple different kinds of disability benefit in the UK. One of them (PIP) isn’t dependent on household income, and isn’t linked to one’s ability to work. ESA is another disability benefit which does depend on income and is also linked to difficulty working. You can get both PIP and ESA, but it’s fairly common for people to get PIP, but not ESA. Being in receipt of either of these benefits would potentially qualify a person as being “disabled”

                These benefits are also used for gaining access to other resources for disabled people, like a blue parking badge that allows one to park in disabled bays. The easiest way to get one of those is to provide evidence of being in receipt of a benefit such as PIP, but you don’t actually have to be in receipt of any benefit to get a blue badge (and once you do have a blue badge, that is often sufficient ‘proof of disability’)

                And to complicate things further, if we are talking about disability discrimination, then a person doesn’t need to be in receipt of any of these benefits to be covered by the Equality Act. Many people who don’t even think of themselves as disabled are covered by this legislation, which casts a very wide definition of “disabled”.

                The TL;DR: is that even the concept of “legally disabled” is complex and context dependent.

      • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        I think you’re also misunderstanding what is being “on disability” in other countries? It seems like your government covers long-term (but not lifelong) illness. Mine doesn’t. So the comparison is kind of disingenuous.