The startling rise of disability in America (2013)

https://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

by pseudolus • 1 year ago

82 126 1 year ago

apps.npr.org

VA disability is one of these big scams. People have gotten pretty good at transforming brands into money these days. So socially respected groups like firefighters or military use the chance to extract massive wealth from productive society.

vkou• 1 year ago

Have you made any VA claims, or have you worked for the VA?

I know people who have done both, and profligacy is not something either would accuse the organization of.

lokar3• 1 year ago

AIUI, pretty much everyone can get a partial disability rating for tinnitus

the__alchemist• 1 year ago

I know a lot of 100%-disabled vets who had desk jobs while in, who are healthy, rock-climb etc. It's absolutely an abused system. Basically, you claim various categories, and get 10% disability for each category you claim.

edit: They usually have full-time jobs too.

vjvjvjvjghv3• 1 year ago

When I lived in DC I knew several vets who received disability payments, worked well paid full time jobs at defense contractors and otherwise lived normal active lives. It definitely looked a little questionable

nullstyle3• 1 year ago

I recommend you search youtube for “va disability 100 percent” and witness the staggering number of channels clearly teaching people to game the system, complete with shush face thumbnails. There seems to be some profligacy from that angle.

missedthecue2• 1 year ago

There are entire online communities around gaming the system. On how to report pre-service injuries as service related. On how to deliberately build a huge medical file while you're in to support your disability claim later. On where to go and when, in order to get your highest possible rating. Things to say and not to say. There is an entire industry of paid consultants that help you get the biggest claim possible.

It's a big issue. Over 30% of vets today have disability compared to 15% in 2008. 3% of federal revenue goes to paying veteran disability alone and it's climbing. No politician can talk about it because campaigning on taking money from disabled veterans is the best way to nuke yourself in the polls.

9x39• 1 year ago

I agree with you about the VA, although everything I know is secondhand.

I make two generalizations from veterans I know: one type accumulates injuries throughout service (neck, knees, hips, shoulders, back, toxic exposure) but being the walk-it-off types, never documented much because they were often deployed and didn't bother with paperwork. Bitterly complains about the VA and their limited or temporary disability ratings despite grinding pain and difficulty in later life.

Second type is similar to the first type, but played the 'game' optimally, documented, documented, and documented. While you can absolutely get some of the same injuries, I was surprised to find things like mild sleep apnea and male pattern baldness helped get someone a permanent 100% disability rating. No doubt life isn't easy, but to think this individual is 100% disabled is a bit of a stretch when they also work full-time for .gov doing project work.

My point is that like a video game, people are very good at finding the optimal or 'meta' path to maximizing outcomes in a set of rules, and outcomes from a system can be different than what casual observers might think is the intended purpose of the system.

trogdor• 1 year ago

male pattern baldness helped get someone a permanent 100% disability rating

I find that very hard to believe. Do you have evidence that this is true?

Nasrudith• 1 year ago

I've mostly heard about the disability rating of the VA being a way the system screws people over using technicalities by judging them as 'partially able' despite there being few to no jobs that can actually utilize them. Hence the desperation to find some way to boost their percentage to something livable.

lokar3• 1 year ago

It’s not obvious, but I’m pretty sure this is from 2013 (I remember hearing it when it aired).

Uvix• 1 year ago

Confirmed - if you follow the "Listen to this story" link, it's from 22 March 2013.

pyrophane• 1 year ago

Glad you posted this as I remember hearing about this situation some years ago but couldn't remember where.

dang• 1 year ago

Good catch! https://web.archive.org/web/20130326035330/https://apps.npr....

We've added the year to the title above.

WalterBright2• 1 year ago

It's not startling at all. When people are paid to be disabled, what else would one expect?

skulk• 1 year ago

I agree. Allow me to present a modest proposal...

Whoppertime• 1 year ago

It's like California paying more for homelessness each year and getting more homelessness each year

paleotrope• 1 year ago

Bread and circuses

datavirtue3• 1 year ago

Chronic back issues...omg. You can literally exersize your way out of them. It's the only treatment and it is VERY effective. Living proof.

People run into back issues (very common and will probably happen to everyone) and doctors send them home with print outs showing them them how to repair their back. They throw the paper away and go back when "they need surgery." That makes it worse.

WalterBright2• 1 year ago

I have chronic back pain, recently diagnosed as osteoarthritis. I can attest that doing all the exercises the doctor's printout shows keeps the pain at bay.

analog31• 1 year ago

This is as good a place to mention it as anywhere: My physical therapist told me that people who work at a computer all day have a high risk of osteoarthritis.

datavirtue3• 1 year ago

Get the Back Mechanic book. Author is a genius.

cachecrab• 1 year ago

Some people need pain reprocessing therapy. Have you read the book The Way Out by Alan Gordon?

https://www.painreprocessingtherapy.com/ https://www.amazon.com/Way-Out-Revolutionary-Scientifically-...

Taeper• 1 year ago

This works for a lot of back issues but not all of em! For example syringomyelia, depending on where it forms, can be exacerbated by working out. So ideally make sure you have a good idea of why your back hurts before you start, but it can be hard to diagnose.

https://asap.org/disorders/articles/exercise-concepts/

datavirtue3• 1 year ago

Yeah, there are definitely edge cases but most back pain is self inflicted. The common knowledge around back issues is REALLY bad and doctors, oddly enough, do not help and are often ignorant themselves.

olalonde7• 1 year ago

Fewer than 1 percent of those who were on the federal program for disabled workers at the beginning of 2011 have returned to the workforce since then, one economist told me.

Do they lose their "disabled" status if they go back to work? If so, that seems like a textbook poverty trap. Why risk losing lifetime free money for a minimum wage job that might not last?

lazyasciiart5• 1 year ago

Yes

genewitch3• 1 year ago

I have a friend 'trapped' by government aid. They receive some benefits from being diagnosed with something as a minor and their father received a government aid that conferred to them. Its SSDI IIRC; the rules say they can't get married, can't own property, can't earn more than $X/unit of time.

The 27 years I've known them have been punctuated by my saying "what if you do this to solve your current issue" and the reply is "I'll lose my benefits"

I'm unfit to say if they need it; as in I am unsure if their life would be worse or better without.

Don't read too much into the setup, above; my memory is fuzzy unless I am directly talking to them about it, and even so they correct me like, "its not ssi it's ssdi," or whatever it is. This is to +1 with an anecdote.

roarcher4• 1 year ago

I dated a disabled woman for a bit, and this is exactly how it was. Every possible solution to her situation had better be 100% guaranteed to work, because it was guaranteed to get her ejected from SSDI, never able to reapply unless she developed a new and unrelated disability.

She wasn't even allowed to save money for an emergency fund or a large purchase because there was a limit to how much liquid cash she could have at any time, and it was something like $2000. If she demonstrated an ability to save more than that, the bureaucrats would take that as irrefutable evidence that she was well enough off to not need help, and boot her from the program.

Every single thing about the way that program is administered actively prevents its users from bettering their situation.

Civitello• 1 year ago

can't get married<br> This is the next frontier in marriage equality.

mensetmanusman• 1 year ago

Sugar and inactivity are a hell of a drug.

nurettin• 1 year ago

So is inbreeding.

AndrewKemendo2• 1 year ago

I am a 100% P&T disabled veteran - I have handicapped parking and all of that.

I could sit here and list out all the medical and legally accepted reasons that the Veterans Administration, and as a result all other regulatory bodies, give me this status (epilepsy, constantly dislocating shoulders, hip arthritis, tinnitus, PTSD etc...)

However I have friends, colleagues and neighbors who are measurably less physically and mentally capable but are not considered disabled.

When I look at the job market, MOST people are not capable of doing their individual life without significant training, help, direction or supervision. People call this bad-state "adulting" and find it onerous.

Said another way, the vast majority of people do not have the cognitive ability, education (self taught or formal), or experience to set goals, take actions and self improve without significant direction from someone else. I personally consider that disabled.

So if these people are considering themselves disabled, then they are probably right - they are incapable of being independent or living within a community that takes care of them. So the only remaining community left is the abstracted transactional monetary system implemented by governments to allocate resources toward them provided they check the right boxes.

Ideally 100% of humanity would be on disability - because we can build systems measurably more capable than human labor - someone just needs to rebrand it as "UBI."

DiggyJohnson• 1 year ago

Interesting perspective. A lot of the nuance and disagreement comes from what we mean when we say “incapable”.

dingnuts2• 1 year ago

No, the view that "everyone should be on disability" is just socialism..

constantcrying3• 1 year ago

I would absolutely hate to have to think myself "disabled" and I would hate the idea of the state seeing itself as my "caretaker".

What you are describing is also the opposite from what liberal democracy was envisioned as. It was supposed to be a state, which created complete and mature citizens, which make well formed decision and can be trusted with governing the country.

To be honest I do not think that you are wrong in your description, the state is certainly transforming into an institution where the citizen are envisioned as disabled wrecks, which are in desperate need of government support. I just hate that this is the case, it is fundamentally incompatible with the ideals of a liberal democracy.

01HNNWZ0MV43FF3• 1 year ago

The fundamentally incompatible part is that the citizens are not complete and mature?

lazyasciiart5• 1 year ago

It was supposed to only count landowning males over 25, which was expected to consist of mature able citizens with assets.

akomtu• 1 year ago

Countries are created by adults and destroyed by children, and that's the normal stage of progress. The metaphorical adults, or the great souls, are experienced, self-directed and inspired by a vision of the great future. They know where they want to get and how to get there. The metaphorical children, or the young souls, live in the dark, clueless about what they are here for, so they chase minute distractions and learn by mistakes. However those mistakes is the only way to grow up.

itishappy• 1 year ago

I just applied to a job and part of it was a disability disclaimer. Here's the list:

* Alcohol or other substance use disorder (not currently using drugs illegally)

* Autoimmune disorder, for example, lupus, fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, HIV/AIDS

* Blind or low vision

* Cancer (past or present)

* Cardiovascular or heart disease

* Celiac disease

* Cerebral palsy

* Deaf or serious difficulty hearing

* Diabetes

* Disfigurement, for example, disfigurement caused by burns, wounds, accidents, or congenital disorders

* Epilepsy or other seizure disorder

* Gastrointestinal disorders, for example, Crohn's Disease, irritable bowel syndrome

* Intellectual or developmental disability

* Mental health conditions, for example, depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, schizophrenia, PTSD

* Missing limbs or partially missing limbs

* Mobility impairment, benefiting from the use of a wheelchair, scooter, walker, leg brace(s) and/or other supports

* Nervous system condition, for example, migraine headaches, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis (MS)

* Neurodivergence, for example, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder, dyslexia, dyspraxia, other learning disabilities

* Partial or complete paralysis (any cause)

* Pulmonary or respiratory conditions, for example, tuberculosis, asthma, emphysema

* Short stature (dwarfism)

* Traumatic brain injury

The form asks if you currently have or have ever had one of these in the past. Well, I don't know if anyone I've met hasn't. I said "no." I have no idea what the right approach here is.

howard941• 1 year ago

If you want the job the right answer's going to be no. Unfortunately only a small fraction of those maladies gets you on disability, almost none of them before age 50.

hungryhobbit• 1 year ago

How can you say anything except no? Who, when applying for a job, wants to make themself look like a less attractive candidate?

s1mplicissimus• 1 year ago

I'd definitely not tick "low vision" and then straighten my glasses in a disapproving manner

specialist2• 1 year ago

the vast majority of people do not have the cognitive ability

Fascinating. I'd love to know more.

Assuming your statement is true: If most people lack executive function, then people presenting ADHD symptoms are the norm, not the exception.

Accepting that hard truth would change society, right?

Not to get too into the weeds about UBI...

Ideally 100% of humanity would be on disability

Do you mean 100% eligibility, regardless?

someone just needs to rebrand it as "UBI."

Or maybe you mean the original "negative income tax" proposal? (What the kids today call "UBI".) So that everyone's guaranteed a bare minimum income.

In either case: I agree.

We'd be able to greatly simplify our patchwork safety network. No need for special consideration for pregnancy, family leave, eldercare, recovering from surgeries, etc.

AndrewKemendo2• 1 year ago

My point is we have the mechanisms to implement UBI today if we want, we just choose not to.

And yes from my experience with people diagnosed with ADHD - IMO it’s an “adjustment disorder” for people who can’t fit into a rote directed life

On the opposite end people with high anxiety but can play the role of doing what they are told go far, but are mimics, and have nary a new thought or alternative view available to them.

cebert• 1 year ago

It’s unfortunate that we can’t seriously consider universal basic income in the United States. If we provided every adult citizen with $13K annually during their working years, it could offer support to those unable to find meaningful employment without forcing them to declare themselves disabled just to survive. That label can take a real toll on a person’s psyche and limit their belief in their ability to grow or find better opportunities. We also have to be realistic and realize AI is positioned to replace a significant number of jobs in the next decade. A safety net like UBI will only become more essential moving forward.

vjvjvjvjghv3• 1 year ago

That would require a total rethinking of our economic system. I doubt this will happen without any catalyst like war or revolution.

olalonde7• 1 year ago

Not necessarily. The US government already spends >2000$ per adult per month. It would require a total rethinking of the role of government.

okanat• 1 year ago

I agree. Some libertarian economists noticed that endless growth demands slavery-like conditions and the economic collapse one way or another. They are trying to back away without using the s-word and invent half-baked solutions like UBI.

UBI by itself will not solve the problems. It will only drive exorbitant inflation. Implementing UBI requires socializing many institutions and nationalizing big companies. People who control the biggest portions of the economy will not give their power up without a war.

trod12342• 1 year ago

Not just a total rethinking, but rather a total redevelopment to find an economic system that is just as stable as capitalism in a free market (without fiat).

Socialism fails 100% of the time given sufficient time, UBI is tied to socialism.

If your food production yield is dependent on maintaining your supply chain which fails under socialism, you basically run into a hysteresis trap under socialism where this fails, and everyone starves to death.

Its like the ending of Daybreakers, where blood becomes increasingly scarce, and the dynamics of it all force some unwilling sacrifices which start a chain reaction.

Just an FYI, Money-printing/non-reserve debt issuance is a catalyst for war/ revolution.

mouse_• 1 year ago

More safety equates to less people willing to work slave jobs for slave wages. They're just gonna make disability bucks harder to access.

whatever12• 1 year ago

Even with 100k / month basic income, the landlords would simply raise their rents to 200k / month. Because why would they give up their generational wealth?

qgin• 1 year ago

In this model, does the current existence of people in poverty basically serve as a ballast that gives everyone else's "above poverty" money a higher, stable value?

Would it ever be possible to not have poverty without making everyone's money worthless?

userbinator2• 1 year ago

those unable to find meaningful employment

I don't want to pay to feed freeloaders. If you want to, that's what charities are for.

Yeul2• 1 year ago

If you hate the handicapped at least have the decency to kill them not let them starve on the streets.

And afterwards introduce genetic screening so that only Ubermensch are born.

vjvjvjvjghv3• 1 year ago

I thought disability is often the only way for people to get support when there is no other option for welfare.

therealdrag0• 1 year ago

I remember some article mentioned that the rise in disability correlated with the fall of welfare availability. (I didn’t read article so donno if covered)

desireco42• 1 year ago

A lot of people are people on Obesity... Which is what Kennedy is trying to fix and address. It is better to enable people to help themselves.

Big corporations have interest to have us weak and confused, from being perpetually single to other ways to make us dependendent on "services"

01HNNWZ0MV43FF3• 1 year ago

You think that an administration with good intentions of helping people would start off by kicking people off of the existing aid systems and tearing down institutions? Even institutions like the National weather service?

Hilift• 1 year ago

This grossly understates the current 2025 financial impact of the problem, and is directly linked to the ~$36 trillion debt.

There is a target to reduce Medicaid recipients by 4.8 million by 2033, by requiring them to attend school or volunteer 80 hours per month. That's a lot.

https://www.nola.com/news/politics/impact-on-louisiana-of-me...

In the next four years, nearly every state that has huge Medicaid obligations will be forced to restrict and reduce access simply due to budget constraints.

For example, California has 6.6 million enrolled in Medicaid and requires a staggering $85 billion federal assistance annual infusion for Medicaid. "People with disabilities composed 8% of Medi-Cal enrollees and accounted for 31% of spending".

California has 49% of the population on employer-provided health insurance. Only 5% purchase private insurance (Affordable Care Act). However, 22% of Californians are covered by Medicaid. That number is unsustainable, and Governor Newsom is already enacting measures to reduce enrollment and eligibility.

https://calmatters.org/health/2025/05/medicaid-work-requirem...

https://www.chcf.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/MediCalFacts...

https://calmatters.org/health/2025/05/medi-cal-assets-newsom...

gusgus012• 1 year ago

California is not a great example, since they pay out to the Fed so much more than they receive, so that infusion isn't really an infusion when you consider the overall budgets.

hollerith• 1 year ago

Nit: "the Fed" means the Federal Reserve Bank, which does not collect taxes. "The US treasury", "the Federal government" or "Fedgov" would work in your sentence.

amanaplanacanal• 1 year ago

(2013)

mike-the-mikado• 1 year ago

I find it really surprising that a current affairs report of this sort is not clearly dated. I wonder if NPR do better with more recent articles?

dhosek• 1 year ago

Last Week Tonight did a great piece on the negatives of how SSDI disability works in practice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq2s7RMRsgs

dehrmann• 1 year ago

It's probably obesity, lack of opportunity, and cultural normalization.

01HNNWZ0MV43FF3• 1 year ago

Can those be fixed?

cavisne• 1 year ago

Nothing compared to the NDIS rort in Australia. There is literal gang warfare over providing "services" to people with high payouts.

Animats• 1 year ago

"Somewhere around 30 years ago, the economy started changing in some fundamental ways. There are now millions of Americans who do not have the skills or education to make it in this country." Not wrong, and sad.

This article shows what Universal Basic Income looks like on the ground.

sgnelson• 1 year ago

One thing I've noticed over the past 20 years. At least in the United States, we need less "ditch diggers." This means that those who are less intellectually capable find it harder to get employment in a suitable position. I think this is an issue that needs to be addressed. But you know, I live here and now, so that ain't happening.

Yeul2• 1 year ago

Companies would rather hire an illegal immigrant than deal with someone who is not 100% mentally or physically fit.

specialist2• 1 year ago

* At least in the United States, we need less "ditch diggers."*

There is no end to the amount of work that needs doing. Most of it "unskilled" labor.

Childcare, eldercare, planting trees, habitat restoration, ESL tutors, etc.

mindslight• 1 year ago

Sure, there is work that "needs doing". This doesn't mean there is anyone willing to pay to get that work done, especially at a livable wage that someone can base their life on (including some surplus such that they have slack to recover from making mistakes due to being less intellectual).

Even for something with an economically-demanded niche like planting trees, several guys with a shovel are beaten by two guys with a skid steer - putting us right back to the capital wins dynamic where the person who can afford to invest in the skid steer now bids down the now-surplus manual laborers who can't.

Eldercare could definitely use 2-3x the labor, but the whole goal of nursing homes is to turn the screws the other way. Then once you have staffing running extremely thin and unsupervised, the gatekeeping credentials become highly important.

drewcoo• 1 year ago

we need less "ditch diggers."

Fewer.

aspenmayer• 1 year ago

Make that a few, less one, with apologies to GP?

wyldfire• 1 year ago

Eric Conn [1] is a fraudster who abused this with a scheme to bribe judges, doctors.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_C._Conn

pragmatic• 1 year ago

This needs a 2013 flag.

nlh• 1 year ago

I'll never forget the run-in I had with this corner of the labor market:

Back about 15 years ago I was running a small business in the auto industry. A guy who did deliveries for us (entire job: driving cars to people) who was in his early 20s found himself in a very minor fender-bender -- he rear-ended someone else. He claimed his twisted his ankle from the jolt (based on where he was resting his foot). Fine, no big deal.

He went to see a doctor shortly afterwards and immediately filed for a Worker's Comp claim. He then kept seeing that doctor and within a few weeks was given...permanent disability. Literally got a doctor to say he'd never be able to work again. Full sign-off. He of course was seen walking around just fine a few months later.

Absolute insanity.

rowls66• 1 year ago

This article is nearly 15 years old (2013). According to center on budget and policy priorities, the number of SSDI beneficiaries has fallen from is peak in 2014. So this article was written about a trend that peaked a year after its publication and had reversed over the past 15 years. Odd that it would be reposted today.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/social-securit...

trod12342• 1 year ago

I think someone may have wanted to bring more attention to this because contrary to surface level opinion and the peak on the surface; there is actually a growing number of people who meet the requirements to be eligible for disability but who do not receive those benefits.

There's a longstanding fear, and one that seems well founded, where those that meet the requirements won't actually file for it because doing so will have an adverse effect on any potential future employment.

Disability discrimination during hiring is almost impossible to prove with AI these days.

I've heard horror stories from some people at the shelter where I volunteer. One guy apparently had a county representative check the wrong boxes on benefit documents by mistake during welfare processing, saying a person was disabled because of a health condition (sleep apnea iirc) when they weren't disabled or receiving disability, and those people couldn't even find retail work afterwards.

AI has opened the floodgates to all sorts of discrimination as a result of the weights and decision-making being a black box with no accountability.

AngryData• 1 year ago

The problem with disability in the US is it is very easy to get kicked off of it, so nobody risks earning or saving too much money (I think you must maintain under $2000 at all times?) or pursuing a potentially viable career unless it is a 100% guarantee, because you can't go back on disability later for something you had when you were kicked off it, even if it is a progressive disease. You need to show new symptoms that by themselves are disabling or another qualifying ailment.

And also getting on disability in the first place is such a huge pile of bureaucratic nonsense and bullshit to start with that you have to learn how to "game" the system just to get approval. It isn't setup to try and help people who need it, it is setup to disincentivize everybody as much as possible, even if you have serious brain damage, are nearly blind, and only have 3 fingers.

thebigspacefuck• 1 year ago

Someone at my work posted that because they have ADHD they were able to get a free lifetime pass to National Parks because being in nature calms them. I can’t believe some people. If you have the money to support national parks, pay for the pass. Don’t you realize if everyone does this we won’t have any more National Parks? They are at a Director level, they can travel, and somehow ADHD is a disability? You wouldn’t know it if they didn’t tell you every time they introduced themselves. They’re like, “Ugh ADHD made me so driven I got to the Director level it’s so stressful…”.

The startling rise of disability in America (2013)

Related Stories