SSI

[jr88]

Not to start anything, because I don't like the idea of someone taking disability if they are able to work, but I vaguely remember a company disability plan that I was going to sign up for. I no longer work there, but to my knowledge, it did say that part of qualifying was that you had to go through SSI first. Obviously there are varying degrees of disability, and I would want someone to be able to be as productive as possible if say, they had a bad accident, etc.
That being said, I would never come on this board and ask that question. Kinda makes you wonder...

I have a close friend who was forced to retire on disability after being diagnosed with stage 3 Cancer.He had worked the same job for 35 years. He has had 1 lung removed along with a several Brain tumors. He is hanging in there, and recently mentioned he would like to find some part time work to get out of the house.
You never know what is someone else is going through until you walk in their shoes. I recently asked an attorney what the definition of "Disabled" was and he informed me there was none. He added that if a Concert Pianist had carpel tunnel syndrome, he would be disabled. He also said a Ditch Digger would have to be in a "Stephen Hawking" state to be considered disabled and that most fall in between. Go Figure

 

[Z_Man]

This isn't directed at you but whose fault is that? If it your neighbors fault that you didn't pay for disability insurance? Is it my kids kids fault that someone didn't think they could be hurt and not be able to work.

I get 300 a month is rather expensive for something you might never use but it's certainly no ones responsibility but yours to worry about.

I think our nations spending habits are what will cause our complete destruction. At best we'll have 5-6 generations paying for these social programs 1-2 generations AFTER they are stopped.

I don't expect everyone to follow my views on the issue or be so against the programs as I am. That's fine but I truly wish folks would look at how much damage it is doing to our country. Not to undermine 9-11 but our countries economy poses a MUCH greater threat to Americans than a planes being crashed into buildings.

I'm not on a pedestal because we would be in a tough spot if either my wife or I couldn't work but I certainly wouldn't be on here asking how much can I make before .gov takes my pay checks from me.

If Americans took care of what they actually needed to most folks wouldn't be in 300-450k dollars houses and have 2-4 kids with one or two 35-40k dollar cars.

300 a month is what disability insurance costs? yeah that is outrageous...

just put that into a Roth IRA and if you are disabled later in life you have some loot, which you can always pull the principal out, and if not you have a retirement home.... and if you already max your roth then put it in an investment account...


honestly if people lived within their means, unless they were involved in a bad accident (which is what SSI is for...) would never need insurance to pay their living expenses.

 

[teratos]

I'll never get approved

Never say never. Have they done the psych eval yet?

 

[Blaster229]

Never say never. Have they done the psych eval yet?

I never took one to get the job :-)

For me, ssi would only be very small. They make you apply regardless.

 

[rseymorejr]

Social Security Disability is the biggest scam going. It's one of the reasons that Social Security is going broke. I know a few people on it and their only true disability is being a lazy POS. We have way too many people in this country that will take a situation and milk it for all it's worth.

 

[teratos]

Social Security Disability is the biggest scam going. It's one of the reasons that Social Security is going broke. I know a few people on it and their only true disability is being a lazy POS. We have way too many people in this country that will take a situation and milk it for all it's worth.

You should see it from my end. SO many people are on to the game. I have had a few people recently who want to apply for disability "just in case". That isn't how it works.

 

[Name Taken]

300 a month is what disability insurance costs? yeah that is outrageous...

Well it's insurance so of course it will vary.

It depends on your health, age, and how much income you need to insure.

Obviously if you are 27, do not smoke, good health, and only need to know you have 40k a year if something happens it is going to be less.

If you need 60k a year and had a heart attack 5 years ago you are going to pay more.

 

[photoracer]

When my late wife was alive she spent about 7-8 years on SSI disability as she was too young to get her SSA (congenital heart issues). At that time she could only make $600/month so she applied to go back to limited work and got a job working for Big Brothers Big Sisters. She also had to go to arbitration to get her back owned disability payments.

 

[fabsroman]

So, if I have to medically retire this year, a condition of my federal disability retirement requires me to apply for social security disability first. In conjunction with my federal retirement. So, what you are saying here is that I should just tell them no for whatever amount they approve me for?
Just take my disability amount from the agency?

Seems nobody actually knows what they are talking about here.
You people pay into social security, so you should refuse what you can get, right?

That is not exactly what is being said here. There is a guy the OP knows that is currently on SSI. Mind you, that means you are disabled. I have no issue helping somebody out that is truly disabled and unable to any form of work whatsoever. However, the OP wants to know how much somebody on SSI DISABILITY can make before they start to lose benefits. To me, that means 1) the person can work but 2) the person ONLY wants to work up to the point he does not lose any benefits even though he could possibly work more than that.

I ran into this scenario about 3 years ago. A client of mine, that happens to be severely bi-polar, was determined to be disabled. He was put on government provided health insurance, probably Medicaid, and the agency he was working with was going to try to find him some paying work. His comment to me was, "but I told them that I don't want to work too much and lose my benefits." Then, I find out that he is working in construction whenever his buddy needs help and his buddy is paying him cash under the table to 1) avoid having to pay FICA/FUTA and do all the withholding and 2) so this guy does not have to report the wages against the benefits. So, not only are neither of them paying into SSI for the wages being earned, but one of them is actually pulling money out of SSI even though he is probably able to work.

Thing is, the guy is my age and I cannot imagine where he will be in 20 years when the two of us are 64 years old. He has absolutely nothing saved for retirement. He owns almost nothing. He rents a room from another client of mine.

Don't get me wrong, if I could find a government benefit plan that maintained my standard of living, I'd choose that over going out in the cold and snow tomorrow for 3 client meetings I have in the Silver Spring area. I'd much prefer staying home in a heated house, hanging out with the kids and my wife, eating bon bons, etc. It would be nice to receive a utility subsidy instead of going out and chopping firewood in the spring and summer to heat the house so I can save some money.

At some point, the earners/givers are going to have too much of the takers and then the crap is going to hit the fan.

 

[rico903]

The last I read it was around $14K a year before they started taking money back. While I know SSI is rife with scams and BS, like alcoholics and drug addicts qualifying, I do know some people who really and truly have needed it. The hoops totally qualified people had to jump thru to receive it makes me wonder how so many able bodied people are able to qualify. I believe it's closet industry of Drs and lawyers that live off of getting people qualified whether they are or not.

 

[Blaster229]

I guess the OP isn't interested in this topic any longer.

 

[LoneRanger]

I have news for you, Insurance companies are a big part of the problem. I worked for a government agency, and after 20 years was injured to the point I was not allowed to return to my job. I carried supplemental disability through Hartford Ins., offered by my employer. In addition, the employer is also required to carry workers comp insurance. Hartford didn't pay one dime, they made me jump through hoops for months and then said the liability was on the Workers Comp Insurance company. The Workers Comp Insurance Co., Corvel decided after a hip and a knee I wasn't going to get any better, so they started denying medical care, now I pay 300 a Month for BCBS but they won't pay for anything related to my workplace Injury. For the last 3 years they have been pushing me to apply for SSI as well, they do this to push off their liability. That is what they are doing in Blaster's case. If I get SSI I would only receive a few hundred dollars a month (it is offset by pension)
but medicare kicks in and presto, Corvel Insurance is off the hook for future Meds. So you go on believing people are irresponsible and that Insurance will cover you, but you better hope you never get hurt seriously or you will learn there is no such thing as "Insurance"

I would expect private insurance companies to push folks to SSI disability...why have their policy holders pay for your disability when you can get the taxpayers to fund it.....

This happens with every place the government decides to stick their noses where they do not belong. We see it with things like house prices when the government decided to guarantee mortgages and rises in college tuition when the government guarantees student loans....

The government needs to get out of that business.........

 

[Pinecone]

I have news for you, Insurance companies are a big part of the problem. I worked for a government agency, and after 20 years was injured to the point I was not allowed to return to my job. I carried supplemental disability through Hartford Ins., offered by my employer. In addition, the employer is also required to carry workers comp insurance. Hartford didn't pay one dime, they made me jump through hoops for months and then said the liability was on the Workers Comp Insurance company. The Workers Comp Insurance Co., Corvel decided after a hip and a knee I wasn't going to get any better, so they started denying medical care, now I pay 300 a Month for BCBS but they won't pay for anything related to my workplace Injury. For the last 3 years they have been pushing me to apply for SSI as well, they do this to push off their liability. That is what they are doing in Blaster's case. If I get SSI I would only receive a few hundred dollars a month (it is offset by pension)
but medicare kicks in and presto, Corvel Insurance is off the hook for future Meds. So you go on believing people are irresponsible and that Insurance will cover you, but you better hope you never get hurt seriously or you will learn there is no such thing as "Insurance"

What government agency has worker's comp insurance??????

Most government agencies (ALL of the Feds) are self insured for worker's comp.

 

[jr88]

What government agency has worker's comp insurance??????

Most government agencies (ALL of the Feds) are self insured for worker's comp.

The state of Maryland, Virginia, Delaware Etc...
Mandated by Federal Law.

 

[Blaster229]

What government agency has worker's comp insurance??????

Most government agencies (ALL of the Feds) are self insured for worker's comp.

lol I went round and round with a dumbshit from quest diagnostics for the bill of a covered blood test for my inury surgery. Apparently a few weeks after I get the bill, the claim number wasn't good enough, so I called.
It was a federal workman's comp claim. She wanted to know who the insurance carrier was. I told her Dept. of Labor, workman's comp. She says " No. who is the insurance carrier?" I said that WC DOL is the insurance carrier.
" Sir, I have been doing this a very long time and there is an insurance carrier".
I said " Oh, you mean like Aetna, BCBS, Met life, etc...?" She says " Exactly".
I said " Oh. It's Dept of labor, WC". and then hung up on her.

 

[Z_Man]

Don't get me wrong, if I could find a government benefit plan that maintained my standard of living, I'd choose that...

At some point, the earners/givers are going to have too much of the takers and then the crap is going to hit the fan.

very honest statement.

If everyone were given the option to get paid what they currently make without working, everyone would take it. now about half of the people would find a job to make more money, and about half would be happy and sit on their ass... this is the solution to the unemployment problems....lol.. only need half as many jobs if only half the population wants to work...


the issue is a lot of people are happy living on 2000 bucks a month (disability, food stamps, etc)... and in most of the USA, 2000 bucks a month, is a living salary, 500 bucks a month for a decent 2 bedroom, 400 bucks a month for a car and 250 bucks a month for utilities/cable/internet. if you don't have a job you aren't commuting, so your insurance price for your car is less (and maryland is one of the highest car insurance states, if not the highest) and you aren't pumping a lot of gas in your car(this is typical america pricing, not here obviously).

to give you an idea of how much the fed governemtn spends, if you took all of the money spent on social security, healthcare and welfare, in 2014, was a total of 2.206 Trillion dollars. there are about 200 million american's over the age of 21 (lets face it, most 18-21 year olds are children). if you gave every adult an equal payment instead of funding the "welfare state" you would be able to pay each individual over the age of 21 $11,000. that is almost 1000 a month to EVERYONE.


as a comparison, we spent 229 Billion on interest on the debt last year alone. DOD spending was roughly 800 Billion, making it the third highest expense after #1 medicare and #2 social security. welfare was 379 Billion (#4)

 

[Pinecone]

The state of Maryland, Virginia, Delaware Etc...
Mandated by Federal Law.

Hmm, I was under the impression that most states also self insured for WC.

 

[jr88]

very honest statement.

If everyone were given the option to get paid what they currently make without working, everyone would take it. now about half of the people would find a job to make more money, and about half would be happy and sit on their ass... this is the solution to the unemployment problems....lol.. only need half as many jobs if only half the population wants to work...


the issue is a lot of people are happy living on 2000 bucks a month (disability, food stamps, etc)... and in most of the USA, 2000 bucks a month, is a living salary, 500 bucks a month for a decent 2 bedroom, 400 bucks a month for a car and 250 bucks a month for utilities/cable/internet. if you don't have a job you aren't commuting, so your insurance price for your car is less (and maryland is one of the highest car insurance states, if not the highest) and you aren't pumping a lot of gas in your car(this is typical america pricing, not here obviously).

to give you an idea of how much the fed governemtn spends, if you took all of the money spent on social security, healthcare and welfare, in 2014, was a total of 2.206 Trillion dollars. there are about 200 million american's over the age of 21 (lets face it, most 18-21 year olds are children). if you gave every adult an equal payment instead of funding the "welfare state" you would be able to pay each individual over the age of 21 $11,000. that is almost 1000 a month to EVERYONE.


as a comparison, we spent 229 Billion on interest on the debt last year alone. DOD spending was roughly 800 Billion, making it the third highest expense after #1 medicare and #2 social security. welfare was 379 Billion (#4)

I don't know of anyone making the same on disability as they did while working. Also a lot of the 2+ Trillion you mentioned is for "Children". The problem with this analysis is understanding what Social Security really is. In today's world Social Security is made up of 3 major components; SS Retirement benefits (its original designed purpose) SSDI, SS Disability Income which is available (maybe) to someone who paid into the system and then becomes disabled and can no longer work, and finally SSI which is WELFARE for Adults and their Children that qualify based on low-no income.
Now any sane person would agree the SSI system is a joke and widely abused. The SSDI is abused often, no argument. But in the case of my buddy with Cancer, or perhaps the OP (I don't know their situation), you pay into the Social Security System for over 30 years, no choice in the matter, then you become disabled and in many cases will not live to the required retirement age. Do you really believe a person like this should not be allowed to recoup "some" of the money they were forced to put into the system?? Then we get to the straight "retirement" benefit part of SS, most people never get their investment back, yet too many "Conservatives" go around calling this an "Entitlement". How is a system where you are forced to participate in, and rarely receive the appropriate return a F***ing Entitlement? I started paying into Social Security in 1974, and paid full quarters for 35 consecutive years. My investment based on Stock Market returns will be over $500,000 when I reach retirement age for SSR, I probably won't live to see the first check let alone get my money back. While I don't like seeing healthy young people have babies just to get more SSI, I have no problem with someone who worked for years then became disabled collect some of my excess funds to keep a roof over his head.

 

[Z_Man]

I don't know of anyone making the same on disability as they did while working. Also a lot of the 2+ Trillion you mentioned is for "Children". The problem with this analysis is understanding what Social Security really is. In today's world Social Security is made up of 3 major components; SS Retirement benefits (its original designed purpose) SSDI, SS Disability Income which is available (maybe) to someone who paid into the system and then becomes disabled and can no longer work, and finally SSI which is WELFARE for Adults and their Children that qualify based on low-no income.
Now any sane person would agree the SSI system is a joke and widely abused. The SSDI is abused often, no argument. But in the case of my buddy with Cancer, or perhaps the OP (I don't know their situation), you pay into the Social Security System for over 30 years, no choice in the matter, then you become disabled and in many cases will not live to the required retirement age. Do you really believe a person like this should not be allowed to recoup "some" of the money they were forced to put into the system?? Then we get to the straight "retirement" benefit part of SS, most people never get their investment back, yet too many "Conservatives" go around calling this an "Entitlement". How is a system where you are forced to participate in, and rarely receive the appropriate return a F***ing Entitlement? I started paying into Social Security in 1974, and paid full quarters for 35 consecutive years. My investment based on Stock Market returns will be over $500,000 when I reach retirement age for SSR, I probably won't live to see the first check let alone get my money back. While I don't like seeing healthy young people have babies just to get more SSI, I have no problem with someone who worked for years then became disabled collect some of my excess funds to keep a roof over his head.

my point is that we are spending an absurd amount of money on entitlements, most of which is mandatory spending. I think there is a way to take care of the people who need it, for less money, and make it harder if not impossible for people who do not actually need help to take money from the government.

paying into social security and medicare is a tax. it isn't an investment, it isn't a retirement account, it isn't a pension, it is a tax. it is a tax you pay to help those who are in need of help and cannot provide for themselves. the problem is the people getting the money aren't necessarily in need. a lot of them are, a good portion are not. There is not good data to have a firm number of how much waste there is.

For some people, the wheels fall of the wagon once they get past 50, for some they keep going just fine for another few decades. it isn't a once you hit x age you stop working. If you plan for a retirement, you retire when you can afford to. The idea that you work until you are 65, and you have a right to stop working, no longer is applicable. the life expectancy is going up, however the cost of those last years of life is higher.


for people who are unable to work can't be left on the streets. It is not an easy problem to fix. before we can fix the $$$ end of SS and medicare, we need to, collectively, decide who we actually need to care for and how they should be cared for.

 

[jr88]

my point is that we are spending an absurd amount of money on entitlements, most of which is mandatory spending. I think there is a way to take care of the people who need it, for less money, and make it harder if not impossible for people who do not actually need help to take money from the government.

paying into social security and medicare is a tax. it isn't an investment, it isn't a retirement account, it isn't a pension, it is a tax. it is a tax you pay to help those who are in need of help and cannot provide for themselves. the problem is the people getting the money aren't necessarily in need. a lot of them are, a good portion are not. There is not good data to have a firm number of how much waste there is.

For some people, the wheels fall of the wagon once they get past 50, for some they keep going just fine for another few decades. it isn't a once you hit x age you stop working. If you plan for a retirement, you retire when you can afford to. The idea that you work until you are 65, and you have a right to stop working, no longer is applicable. the life expectancy is going up, however the cost of those last years of life is higher.


for people who are unable to work can't be left on the streets. It is not an easy problem to fix. before we can fix the $$$ end of SS and medicare, we need to, collectively, decide who we actually need to care for and how they should be cared for.

The ACA is labeled a tax as well, just because they can. If SS is a tax and not a retirement system? Then why is it the Federal employees (OLD) where not required to pay SS but instead forced to contribute the SAME amount to a system called the Civil Service RETIREMENT System, and then later when that was eliminated put back into Social Security System in lieu of the other RETIREMENT system. And now the FERS system is a hybrid of both. So are you saying all the people who do not work for the Federal Government are charged this TAX, but not the feds? Hmmm.
I don't think people should rely on the government to take care of them. But when the average citizen receives the statement every year showing what the "Retirement Benefits" will be, they should not feel guilty taking those benefits when they are eligible. I have friends who make well into six figures, have 401K plans and pensions. I have other friends that can't retire on their pensions/Investments until they reach SS retirement age. But either way people consider those benefits (SS) as something they have paid into and damn well want to be paid, whether they NEED it or not....Not a Tax, Not an Entitlement. The fact that our government dips into SS to promote social programs is not the fault of the average worker who plays by the rules.
If you believe SS Benefits are the result of a tax, when you get to the point where you are eligible to receive them, either don't apply (OH, wait you will be forced to take them so you receive Medicare and offset you Health Care Insurance Co. Costs)...or donate your benefits to Wounded Warrier or some other group in need then you can get a TAX credit.