Massachusetts was the leader in welfare reform and the model for the Federal welfare reform. It was hoped, that among other things, that by limiting the total amount of time that someone was eligible for welfare to 5 years that He or She would work towards financial independence. The contrary is true!

A study was done to find out what happened to all the former welfare people not on the rolls. Some had gotten jobs. Some had left the state for states that hadn't as yet set time limits on the receipt of benefits. Some couldn't be found to find out what happened to them.

Now here's the kicker, ONE HALF OF THE FORMER WELFARE RECIPIENTS WERE NOW ON SOCIAL SECURITY! THAT'S RIGHT, HALF!

This is not rumor but fact. A large percentage of what use to be people who were supported under the broad federal budget were now receiving their income from Social Security. I'm sure that there were a few that deserved to be granted S.S disability status, but I believe, in fact I know that many S.S. recipients have found the Doctor/Lawyer combination the would work with them so that they would be collecting S.S. payments for the rest of their lives.

Social Security need not be in as bad a shape as it is now. I believe that if the S.S. system was cleaned up of all the money being passed out for fake disability that it would be a good first step in helping the S.S. system be more available to senior citizens.

I am a counselor in a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Center (Criminal Division). We are classified MI / CD ...mental illness / chemical dependency.

It is the goal of a fair percentage of our women to get placed on SS because it is a guaranteed income for life. Social Security is also a higher monthly income than Welfare.

We are in a state that has generous benefits and easy restrictions. People come here from all over the United States to take advantage of our benefits. If you know how to play the game, you can get free medical including tummy tucks, gastro by-pass, new glasses, complete set of dentures, several times, (cause they loose them when they leave treatment, go back to getting high, then go to jail and back to treatment, where they get their second set of teeth. I could site many examples of the abuse to our Social Security, Welfare, Medicare systems.

The sad part, the really sad part is that the recipients have been and are teaching their children and grandchildren, of which there are many*, how to use/abuse the system in the same way.

*To have given birth to 9 children all of whom have been taken from them for the safety of the children is common. The prevailing wisdom is that these children should now be raised by the same family members that helped to screw up the addict...cause family is always best you know...

Social Security is in the tank. What it was supposed to be for, has grown beyond recognition, it now takes care of the old, a little, the disabled & infirm quite a bit, as a replacement for Welfare...a lot.

Originally Posted by Just Susan

I am a counselor in a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Center (Criminal Division). We are classified MI / CD ...mental illness / chemical dependency.

It is the goal of a fair percentage of our women to get placed on SS because it is a guaranteed income for life. Social Security is also a higher monthly income than Welfare.

We are in a state that has generous benefits and easy restrictions. People come here from all over the United States to take advantage of our benefits. If you know how to play the game, you can get free medical including tummy tucks, gastro by-pass, new glasses, complete set of dentures, several times, (cause they loose them when they leave treatment, go back to getting high, then go to jail and back to treatment, where they get their second set of teeth. I could site many examples of the abuse to our Social Security, Welfare, Medicare systems.

The sad part, the really sad part is that the recipients have been and are teaching their children and grandchildren, of which there are many*, how to use/abuse the system in the same way.

*To have given birth to 9 children all of whom have been taken from them for the safety of the children is common. The prevailing wisdom is that these children should now be raised by the same family members that helped to screw up the addict...cause family is always best you know...

Social Security is in the tank. What it was supposed to be for, has grown beyond recognition, it now takes care of the old, a little, the disabled & infirm quite a bit, as a replacement for Welfare...a lot.

Thank you Just Susan!
I was expecting the first response to defend the "abusers" of the S.S. system. I was expecting some of the usual phrases used by some on these posts, "MYOB' or discriminating against these "Poor People" leave them alone.
It was refreshing to hear from someone that works close to the "system" that is willing to tell it like it is.

The majority of the welfare recipients that are disabled and receiving federal benefits receive it through the Supplemental Security Income Program(SSI) which is NOT funded by Social Security. It is essentially a federal welfare program for the disabled who do not have the required coverage from having paid into the Social Security(SSA) System. It is administered through SSA but has a different funding source. None of the SSA insurance funds are used for the SSI program. Contrary to popular belief, being an addict or an alcoholic does not qualify you for the program. You must have other physical or mental problems in order to be eligible.
I know that this information is going to cause a hullabaloo, but I just wanted the information disseminated that the SSI and SSA programs are two distinctly different programs.
When you receive SSA disability, you become eligible for Medicare after 24 months. With the SSI program, you qualify for Medicaid, NOT Medicare, again from a different funding source.

Thank you Mac9! You saved me from replying to such misinformation. You are 100% correct.

Originally Posted by mac9

The majority of the welfare recipients that are disabled and receiving federal benefits receive it through the Supplemental Security Income Program(SSI) which is NOT funded by Social Security. It is essentially a federal welfare program for the disabled who do not have the required coverage from having paid into the Social Security(SSA) System. It is administered through SSA but has a different funding source. None of the SSA insurance funds are used for the SSI program. Contrary to popular belief, being an addict or an alcoholic does not qualify you for the program. You must have other physical or mental problems in order to be eligible.
I know that this information is going to cause a hullabaloo, but I just wanted the information disseminated that the SSI and SSA programs are two distinctly different programs.
When you receive SSA disability, you become eligible for Medicare after 24 months. With the SSI program, you qualify for Medicaid, NOT Medicare, again from a different funding source.

For the sake of the argument I'm assuming that you are right. If I can figure out how to change the title of the post to "SSI the new Welfare" I will. But, I will keep my stance on saying that S.S.A. reform is necessary. The money from a "different funding source" (our tax money. which already floats the SSI system) could be redirected toward making our SSA system more equitable for our elderly. This is still SSA reform because it increases the funding source.

Simply Susan stated that all the drug/alcohol people she knows want to get onto the SSI/SSA (whichever fits) and very often do, buy what I say is that, "The former welfare people have gone to see a Doctor/Lawyer combination that tells them how to fake the system into believing that they are disabled". All but one person that I know personally, and am speaking about, used the mental incapacity route to a lifetime check from the government.

Oh did I mention that ALL these people are related through marriage? Do you think that some information might have been shared amongst them?

I am torn about this...My sister was hit by an uninsured driver here in Colorado. Several months later she started acting kinda weird. The short story is she had a closed head injury from the accident. By this Time she had lost her job and health insurance so we purchased health insurance for her from the same agent that had her car insurance. In the end we had no choice but to put her in a mental treatment facility for evaluation and finally got the diagnoses. That is when the fun really began. The car insurance said she wasn't injured in the car wreck because it had been so long and she had signed that she was ok. But the health insurance said it was a pre-existing condition caused by the car wreck. You guessed it no one would pay for anything. It took several years and some lawyers to get this worked out but in the interim she was on SS disability.

So what can I say when used correctly the system will function. But there will always be a few to try and spoil it for the many....

Originally Posted by cologal

I am torn about this...My sister was hit by an uninsured driver here in Colorado. Several months later she started acting kinda weird. The short story is she had a closed head injury from the accident. By this Time she had lost her job and health insurance so we purchased health insurance for her from the same agent that had her car insurance. In the end we had no choice but to put her in a mental treatment facility for evaluation and finally got the diagnoses. That is when the fun really began. The car insurance said she wasn't injured in the car wreck because it had been so long and she had signed that she was ok. But the health insurance said it was a pre-existing condition caused by the car wreck. You guessed it no one would pay for anything. It took several years and some lawyers to get this worked out but in the interim she was on SS disability.

So what can I say when used correctly the system will function. But there will always be a few to try and spoil it for the many....

Sorry to hear about your sister, I hope she is doing well lately. As you said "when used correctly", but sadly there are more than a few abusing the system. So many so, that legitimate people like you sister, struggle through a system unable to sort out the abusers from the needy.

Originally Posted by gnu

Thank you Just Susan!
I was expecting the first response to defend the "abusers" of the S.S. system. I was expecting some of the usual phrases used by some on these posts, "MYOB' or discriminating against these "Poor People" leave them alone.
It was refreshing to hear from someone that works close to the "system" that is willing to tell it like it is.

Susan and Gnu. You are so informative and helpful.

Let's open a real can of worms here. The SSA system is slowly going broke because of all of the "borrowing" that was done in order to make the deficit seem lower than it is. The SSA fund is loaded with IOU's from presidents starting with Reagan and ending with Bush.

Originally Posted by mac9

Let's open a real can of worms here. The SSA system is slowly going broke because of all of the "borrowing" that was done in order to make the deficit seem lower than it is. The SSA fund is loaded with IOU's from presidents starting with Reagan and ending with Bush.

The SSA fund is not loaded with IOU's from the Presidents, and certainly wouldn't have skipped over Democratic Presidents, if that power was theirs. The liberal bias really shows with that statement.

The Presidents in this country haven't had the power borrow or lend monies from any budget in government. ONLY Congress has that power.

Lets not try to turn the debate on SSI/SSA abuse into a forum for or against either party. I don't think you want to "open a real can of worms" you mught not like what you find inside.

Originally Posted by gnu

Sorry to hear about your sister, I hope she is doing well lately. As you said "when used correctly", but sadly there are more than a few abusing the system. So many so, that legitimate people like you sister, struggle through a system unable to sort out the abusers from the needy.

Thanks for the post...yes my sister is much better.

I suggest that everyone read the Social Security Law. Surprising what you'll learn. I was an administrator with the Social Security Administration for 32 years and have, at least, some knowledge of the law and the funding of the program.

Supplemental Security Income is a program funded out of General Tax Revenues and is a financial needs based program. In layman's terms, it's welfare. The income and resource limits are very low. To be considered "Disabled" you have to meet the same requirements as those for Social Security Disability. The program is administered by the Social Security Administration and ALL payments and administrative costs come from General Tax Revenues, NOT from Social Security Program income.

The Social Security Program is financed through FICA and Self-employment Taxes. It is a "pay-as-you-go" program. That is, when you were working your FICA or Self-employment tax paid for the benefits of the then retirees. Todays workers are paying for your monthly Social Security benefits. Any program income not immediately needed to pay monthly benefits and administrative costs (which are less than 3% of income) are invested in U.S. Government Securities at current interest rates, the same as you or I invest in Government securities. Is it an IOU? You could say that. But isn't your CD at the bank an IOU from the bank, or your checking or savings accounts, etc., etc? What does the bank do with your money on deposit there? It doesn't sit in a container with your name on it, but is invested by the bank in home mortgages, property, etc., so you can be paid interest on your CD, etc. Which would you rather have, an IOU for billions of $ from a bank, that could default, or the same IOU from the U.S. Government? The Social Security Law states that if the Social Security Program has insufficient funds to pay current benefits, those benefits WILL be paid from the General Treasury of the U.S.

Will the Social Security Program go broke? NO!! Despite what many politicians want you to believe, Congress will take whatever action is necessary to keep the Social Security Program solvent by increasing income to the Program. This can be done in any number of ways, too numerous to go into. Every politician and all political party's know that with over 25% of the population receiving Social Security Payments each month (retirement, survivors and disability benefits), and millions of voters knowing their parents, grand and great-grand parents are counting on the Social Security Payments each month, it would be the political kiss of death to have the program fail.

Originally Posted by mrhetzel

I suggest that everyone read the Social Security Law. Surprising what you'll learn. I was an administrator with the Social Security Administration for 32 years and have, at least, some knowledge of the law and the funding of the program.

Supplemental Security Income is a program funded out of General Tax Revenues and is a financial needs based program. In layman's terms, it's welfare. The income and resource limits are very low. To be considered "Disabled" you have to meet the same requirements as those for Social Security Disability. The program is administered by the Social Security Administration and ALL payments and administrative costs come from General Tax Revenues, NOT from Social Security Program income.

The Social Security Program is financed through FICA and Self-employment Taxes. It is a "pay-as-you-go" program. That is, when you were working your FICA or Self-employment tax paid for the benefits of the then retirees. Todays workers are paying for your monthly Social Security benefits. Any program income not immediately needed to pay monthly benefits and administrative costs (which are less than 3% of income) are invested in U.S. Government Securities at current interest rates, the same as you or I invest in Government securities. Is it an IOU? You could say that. But isn't your CD at the bank an IOU from the bank, or your checking or savings accounts, etc., etc? What does the bank do with your money on deposit there? It doesn't sit in a container with your name on it, but is invested by the bank in home mortgages, property, etc., so you can be paid interest on your CD, etc. Which would you rather have, an IOU for billions of $ from a bank, that could default, or the same IOU from the U.S. Government? The Social Security Law states that if the Social Security Program has insufficient funds to pay current benefits, those benefits WILL be paid from the General Treasury of the U.S.

Will the Social Security Program go broke? NO!! Despite what many politicians want you to believe, Congress will take whatever action is necessary to keep the Social Security Program solvent by increasing income to the Program. This can be done in any number of ways, too numerous to go into. Every politician and all political party's know that with over 25% of the population receiving Social Security Payments each month (retirement, survivors and disability benefits), and millions of voters knowing their parents, grand and great-grand parents are counting on the Social Security Payments each month, it would be the political kiss of death to have the program fail.

Thank You for your informative post. You obviously know the system after working 32 years with SSA.

Let me tell you how someone not even on SSA or SSI (myself) feels about "The System". First off you said that "SSI = welfare" and that means is a payroll tax by any other criteria. I don't know about you, but when the government taxes money out of my pocket it is a tax no matter if it is, FICA, Income, Capitol Gains. IT ALL COMES OUT OF THE SAME WORKING MAN'S POCKET.

How many taxpayers know that welfare hasn't been reformed in this country, only shifted to a program that is still payed for under the "General Tax Revenue", with a name "Social Security Insurance" that makes it appear that their tax dollars are not funding it? I and many others would feel that FICA, through payroll taxes, funds SSI. There is no question that both partys
will keep the system afloat, for the vote. That's not what concerns me.

SSA administers the SSI using the same criteria as SSI Disability. Those requirements are that one would have only worked the minimum number of quarters to earn the right to apply for SSD or SSI. Here lies the problem. A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ARE FAKING THEIR WAY INTO THE SSA SYSTEM. It cost us TAX DOLLARS. FICA Pay As You Go, General Fund or wherever, the American public are getting ripped off!

Let me give you an example of a family related to each other by marriage. You will probably need a flow chart to keep it all straight. I'm not sure I can keep it straight and I know all the players.

Start with the marriage of 1 + 2. 1's involvement ends here.
2 has 14 brothers and sisters and use to be married to 3, who has a brother.
3 faked a back injury and got on SSI. Easy to do if you determined to.

2's brother 4 married outsider 5. 5 has been on SSI since 15-16 years old because she is shy and can't get along with people. Guess what? 4, 5 and their two children 6 + 7 are now al on SSI. How nice!

Now 3's brother 8 married 2's sister 9 and they have two children, and guess what, they're all on SSI. 3's brother 8 is fond of saying and has said it in from of yours truly, "your the dumb one for working, I let the government support me and my family. ONLY IN AMERICA, I LOVE IT!"

One of 2's other brothers is on SSI and HE is the only one NOT faking it! And I feel I'm leaving someone out. Nine people related receiving SSI or SSD.

Now do you understand, that if I know of this one extended family ripping off SSI, how many others in my city are doing it. How many, extrapolated into my County, State, Country, are ripping off the system. I may have misunderstood who pays what out of what. All I know is that between all the SS systems my pockets are being picked to support deadbeats. I'd like to see SS reform, now.

You certainly have presented a disturbing case. It's truly a shame, but given the large number of people in the Country, I guess there are bound to be those that manipulate the System. Many times the issues are investigated but yet certain "facts", not known publicly, can actually make the Entitlements legit. However, if you have the particulars of Abuse, I strongly suggest that you contact any SS office and they can begin the process of investigating. So-called "Fraud rings" have been persecuted successfully, and if not successful, at least you know that someone tried the enforcement route. And depending on certain/limited circumstances, a Reward may be payable vis a pporcess called QUI TAM

As to the Funding sources, Yes, it comes from your one Checkbook, one way or another, but it is very important to keep track of the "pots" from a number of perspectives. Remember that FICA tax is based on a different system that the Federal tax. Also, Medicaid (as opposed to Medicare--totally Federal and from FICA) is a Federally supported porgram that often has state funded enhancements. Medicaid is administered by the State, using a system of reimbursement from the Federal General Fund coffers. So it's important that abuse be tracked accordingly as the impact could be both Federal (for everyone) and State related (specific state residents).

For those of you that can re-call the early 1980s, the then Administration pushed through a series of Social Security Reform, one such was the rasiing of the Full Retiremeng age beyond 65 which most people recall from that Adminstration. Another was reform of the Soc Sec Disabilty Insurance Program. Enforcement resulted in outcries, and then slowly, quietly less vigorous appraoches were discussed. After a dip in DI paymnets, it rose again. Welfare Reform under the two term 1990's Administration, also made inroads to try to limit "generations of Receipents" as the terminolgy, if memory serves me, was TANF (TEMPORARY Assistance to Needy Families); States were to work at getting people into jobs and off the rolls within 5 years or face a reduction of Federal support. So both parties have tried to tackle this recently, but given the overall reduction of Federal staffing since the 80s/early 90s, it is really important for inidviduals who uncover Fraud/suspected Fraud to notify some responsible Agency. ( For those who wonder what is the federal administrative costs: they're low, especially compared to Private Insuarnce Companies: Medicare is about 2%; and an earlier Poster indicated Soc Sec is about 3%----anything under 10% in the Private Sector would be considered very efficient)

A knotty problem indeed.