1 in 6 Draw Welfare in Predominantly Red States

[Wyatt earp]

It's true....lets not tiptoe and beat around the bush...let's cut to the chase...many red states are full of lowlife white trash but make no mistake about it....it's the huge population of blacks in these states you speak of that bring the dependency averages way up.
These blacks are Liberal DemonCrats of course and thankfully most are way too busy doing nothing to make it to the polls come election time.

Here's some facts from a credible source: 21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
o The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific
Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.

And why are those participation rates so high, dear poster. And have you compared Hispanic and Black economic progress forward from 1930 on a decade basis to 2010?
Race baiters and haters: if you can't give context, your posts mean nothing.

"And why are those participation rates so high, dear poster."

The Left has taught the poor to remain complacent and to simply allow centuries to pass (while being funded by Republicans) as man made evolution will eventually prevail...i.e.- affirmative action, heightened birth rates among blacks and hispanics, reverse discrimination...etc etc
Come on man...get with it and save me the typing...this shit is so elementary.

iow, you admit you have no idea.

Idea of what?
Nobody but archaeologists really gives two shits about your 80 year period. Most of us productive types are focused on today and looking ahead.
What else can I teach you?

You are unable to learn that you can't teach. You have no context, you have no productivity beyond flipping hamburgers. Non-white economic increases have moved forward dramatically in the last eighty years. Now ask yourself why a minority portions of the minorities still have not increased economically.

Obama.. That's easy answer..
.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You are unable to learn that you can't teach. You have no context, you have no productivity beyond flipping hamburgers. Non-white economic increases have moved forward dramatically in the last eighty years. Now ask yourself why a minority portions of the minorities still have not increased economically.

Most likely education. I'll share a true story here.

During the housing bubble it was difficult for landlords to find good tenants. Many of the poorer people took advantage of government guidelines that allowed banks to give home loans to people with no money and no credit check. Many of them took advantage of 0% down.

I have used Craigslist for years to find my tenants. During that time, I would get emails I thought were a prank or something.

Terrible grammar, worse punctuation, spelling errors galore. It was like I was getting responses from seven year olds. Some of them I couldn't even figure out WTF they were asking or trying to tell me.

I trashed many of them, but in desperation, I had to select some of them to fill an apartment.

So they came by and during some chitchat, I found out most of these black people were high school graduates. But like I said, I didn't respond to many of those emails. If I won't even accept an apartment application from those people, HTF do they find jobs filling out job applications like that??????

 

[whitehall]

That's why they voted for Trump.

 

[Preacher]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

That's just a fucking disturbing story. 1. WHY would a parent allow their mentally retarded child to have kids!? WTF?
2. What the hell is with parents NOT pushing education as the way OUT of poverty!? My kids HATE MY GUTS because I force them to take education seriously. I threatened and was serious about holding back my oldest if her math grade in the final report card was NOT what I wanted it to be.....she hit the EXACT number I wanted. I don't hide how poor we are from them because then that makes think we are well off etc but that's only because we thrift store shop,pinch pennies,yard sales etc. I want them to graduate high school and ALL go to college. Oldest wants to be a Veterinarian,son will probably end up being a Cop or Fire Fighter. IMO its child abuse to just allow your kids to NOT do the best in education...don't fucking have them if you can't or don't care about them doing their best.

 

[candycorn]

How about we just say the TRUTH about the subject huh?
MORE white get disability BECAUSE more whites WORK.
MORE Negros get welfare BECAUSE more Negros DO NOT.
Okay? That IS the truth and labor stats and welfare stats back it.

If you read the reports it seems that the ability to hire an attorney is the key factor in getting SSD.

 

[DarkFury]

How about we just say the TRUTH about the subject huh?
MORE white get disability BECAUSE more whites WORK.
MORE Negros get welfare BECAUSE more Negros DO NOT.
Okay? That IS the truth and labor stats and welfare stats back it.

If you read the reports it seems that the ability to hire an attorney is the key factor in getting SSD.

I never used one.

 

[candycorn]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

And it's common knowledge red states take from the federal government for welfare and programs like SSA disability while blue states pay in more than they take. In other words the blue states are funding the people in red states to be lazy. And now this comes out that shows people in the red states get on disability and their families never get off it.

The exact opposite of what conservatives claim every day. THEY are the lazy ones that need to get jobs and stop taking a handout from the 'gubment'.

Except the flaw in your argument (and this topic) is states don't get welfare--people get welfare. To think that everybody in a red state is conservative is as ridiculous to think everybody in a blue state is a liberal:

View attachment 130581

You have excuses, no surprise.

Surgical!

 

[Preacher]

How about we just say the TRUTH about the subject huh?
MORE white get disability BECAUSE more whites WORK.
MORE Negros get welfare BECAUSE more Negros DO NOT.
Okay? That IS the truth and labor stats and welfare stats back it.

If you read the reports it seems that the ability to hire an attorney is the key factor in getting SSD.

There are numerous and numerous lawyers or law firms that will take a SSD case for free and then take a portion of the back pay when you win. In my case I just appealed mine ( I was told they deny everyone the first time) and 8 months later was approved after grueling physical exams and mental exams I was subject to 5k in back pay....got an apartment and paid for Christmas with it.

 

[candycorn]

1 in 6 Draw Welfare in Predominantly Red States

Of COURSE there will be more White Folk on Welfare than Blacks or Hispanics.

Blacks only constitute twelve (12%) percent of the total US population.

Whites constitute seventy-seven (77%) percent of the total US population.

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045216/00

Raw numbers, without the context of percentage-of-ethnic-population, in the racial context established by the OP, are highly misleading... and downright deceptive.

However, all one need do is to look at the PERCENTAGE of the total Black population on Welfare, vs. the PERCENTAGE of the total White population on Welfare, to understand the situation properly.

That's a perspective that Liberals don't want us looking at too closely, and that they try to mask, with all this Red State $hit... something they try to repeat every so often.

=============================================================

Using HuffPo's OWN racial demographics on food stamp consumption; drawn from USDA data...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/28/food-stamp-demographics_n_6771938.html

And the USDA's total food stamp (SNAP) consumption figures...

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/29SNAPcurrPP.pdf

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD="align: left"]

Total US population, 2016, US Census Bureau estimate​

[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

323,127,513​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total Black population (323,127,512 X .12)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

38,775,301​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total White population (323,127,512 X .77)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

248,808,185​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] _[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total US food stamp (SNAP) participation, Jan 2017[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

42,684,691​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Percent of all US food stamps consumed by Blacks[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

25.7%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total US Blacks receiving food stamps (42,684,691 X .257)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

10.959,965​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Percent of US Blacks receiving food stamps (10,959,965 / 38,775.301)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

28.29%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] _[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total US food stamp (SNAP) participation, Jan 2017[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

42,684,691​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of all US food stamps consumed by Whites[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

40.2%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Total US Whites receiving food stamps (42,684,691 X .402)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

17,159,245​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of US Whites receiving food stamps (17,159,245/248,808,185)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

6.9%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] _[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of US Blacks receiving food stamps (SNAP)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

28.29%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of US Whites receiving food stamps (SNAP)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

6.9%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Difference[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

21.39%​

[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

Consequently, we see that 21.39% more Blacks are on food stamps, than Whites, as a percentage of their demographic within the larger US total population.

So much for the raw-numbers hor$e$hit being fed to us by deceitful Liberals.

Next slide, please.

Who mentioned race?

 

[candycorn]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

That's just a fucking disturbing story. 1. WHY would a parent allow their mentally retarded child to have kids!? WTF?
2. What the hell is with parents NOT pushing education as the way OUT of poverty!? My kids HATE MY GUTS because I force them to take education seriously. I threatened and was serious about holding back my oldest if her math grade in the final report card was NOT what I wanted it to be.....she hit the EXACT number I wanted. I don't hide how poor we are from them because then that makes think we are well off etc but that's only because we thrift store shop,pinch pennies,yard sales etc. I want them to graduate high school and ALL go to college. Oldest wants to be a Veterinarian,son will probably end up being a Cop or Fire Fighter. IMO its child abuse to just allow your kids to NOT do the best in education...don't fucking have them if you can't or don't care about them doing their best.

Did you listen to the story or read it…just curious.

 

[deanrd]

Especially in the red states. Ooooh, that's positively orgasmic. How can they compete morally with the angelic beings dwelling in the heavenly blue states?

They gave us Trump, a man who proudly admits to and enjoys committing sexual assault, to be a role model for their children. Obviously, they can't compete.

 

[deanrd]

Republicans will do nothing for the poor.

It's not 'they will do nothing for the poor', it's what they will do TO the poor.

 

[Preacher]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

That's just a fucking disturbing story. 1. WHY would a parent allow their mentally retarded child to have kids!? WTF?
2. What the hell is with parents NOT pushing education as the way OUT of poverty!? My kids HATE MY GUTS because I force them to take education seriously. I threatened and was serious about holding back my oldest if her math grade in the final report card was NOT what I wanted it to be.....she hit the EXACT number I wanted. I don't hide how poor we are from them because then that makes think we are well off etc but that's only because we thrift store shop,pinch pennies,yard sales etc. I want them to graduate high school and ALL go to college. Oldest wants to be a Veterinarian,son will probably end up being a Cop or Fire Fighter. IMO its child abuse to just allow your kids to NOT do the best in education...don't fucking have them if you can't or don't care about them doing their best.

Did you listen to the story or read it…just curious.

Read it. I was curious why 4 generations were on disability....its disgusting some people think its a lifestyle. I HATE being on disability and if a company hired me I would jump at the opportunity. The biggest reason I am on SSDI right now is because I got a 2 year old at home I watch and wife gets off after kids get off bus and no one here to watch them. Neither I nor my wife want this life where she works and I don't but it is what it is.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

My sister went legally blind when her retinas started detaching. It still took years for her get SS disability.

That must have been some time ago. My one tenant just got it last year, and it took her about three months before her first check. She didn't even hire a lawyer, she did it all herself.

Took me about a year and that was about 15 years ago.

What the hell? It took my wife four years.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Article this morning describes the aforementioned swelling of Social Security Disability claims made in Red States across the fruited plain.

The article states:

How to visualize the growth in disability in the United States? One way is to think of a map. Rural communities, where on average 9.1 percent of working-age people are on disability — nearly twice the urban rate and 40 percent higher than the national average — are in a brighter shade than cities. An even brighter hue then spreads from Appalachia into the Deep South and out into Missouri, where rates are higher yet, places economists have called “disability belts.” The brightest color of all can be found in 102 counties, mostly within these belts, where a Washington Post analysis of federal statistics estimates that, at minimum, about 1 in 6 working-age residents draw disability checks.

One family. Four generations of disability benefits. Will it continue?

Question: Should the President do something about this?

One way is very easy and clear by the way.... The whole story is at thisamericanlife.org but I'll give you the highlight; I'm doing this from memory so if I get a detail wrong, forgive me. When you apply for SSD, about 2 thirds are refused out of hand. So that means if Larry, Moe and Curly all apply, Larry and Moe are going to get rejected.

Now, what you do after that is paramount because it is important. About 1/2 appeal their ruling. Of those who appeal, 80% who hire an attorney to represent them get their benefits. The way it works is that there is a hearing about the rejection. At the hearing is the attorney for the person who filed (Binder and Binder are the #1 firm nationwide) and the judge. The federal government sends nobody.

Here is the transcript of the passage:

The way Binder tells it, he is a guy helping desperate people get the support they deserve. He's a cowboy-hatted Lone Ranger fighting the good fight for the everyman. He apparently keeps a picture of the Lone Ranger on his desk.

So you've got 30,000 people denied disability who are appealing to a judge, taking their case to the courts. And on the one side, the judge has this passionate persuasive lawyer making the case that his client is physically or emotionally incapable of working. And on the other side, who's on the other side? Nobody. Nobody, really. I couldn't believe this when I first heard it. David Autor, the economist, told me with disability cases, there is no person in the room making the government's case.

David Autor
You might imagine a courtroom where, on the one side, there's the claimant and their lawyer saying, my client needs these benefits. On the other side, there's the government attorney saying, ah no, well, we need to protect the public interest, and your client is not sufficiently deserving, and here's why I think that, and so on. But it actually doesn't work like that. Because the government is not represented. There is no government lawyer on the other side of the room.

Again, I don't think anyone wants to deny a legitimately disabled person some benefits but when the government doesn't saddle up for any of the claims, it looks as though people are taking advantage. Especially in the red states.

It takes decades to recover from.democrat rule in the South..


Don't worry we are getting there

Social security is an insurance policy that the workers are forced to buy. It is not "welfare".

Of course it is. If you take more out of it than you pay in, it's welfare.

Period.

The thing is, if you live past 72, you will get everything you paid into it back. It's why the system is in such trouble now, the average life expectency is 78.

Yup FDR fucked up..
Five of my friends died plus my wife in there 40s...guess where that money went?

A huge Ponzi scheme..


I got around $200 bucks from the government when she died..

That's it after the thousands of dollars she put in the system working everyday.


.

That's why I hate SS. If you saved the money and died before retiring it would still be your family's money. As it is the government gets it.

 

[Preacher]

My sister went legally blind when her retinas started detaching. It still took years for her get SS disability.

That must have been some time ago. My one tenant just got it last year, and it took her about three months before her first check. She didn't even hire a lawyer, she did it all herself.

Took me about a year and that was about 15 years ago.

What the hell? It took my wife four years.

Took my mother 2 years. I applied once and was denied....just left it at that...2 years later applied was denied,appealed and was approved several months later. As it is literally my entire check goes to pay the rent.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

My sister went legally blind when her retinas started detaching. It still took years for her get SS disability.

That must have been some time ago. My one tenant just got it last year, and it took her about three months before her first check. She didn't even hire a lawyer, she did it all herself.

Took me about a year and that was about 15 years ago.

What the hell? It took my wife four years.

Took my mother 2 years. I applied once and was denied....just left it at that...2 years later applied was denied,appealed and was approved several months later. As it is literally my entire check goes to pay the rent.

It's not a great deal that's for sure. She went from earning 6K+ a month to a pittance.

 

[DarkFury]

My sister went legally blind when her retinas started detaching. It still took years for her get SS disability.

That must have been some time ago. My one tenant just got it last year, and it took her about three months before her first check. She didn't even hire a lawyer, she did it all herself.

Took me about a year and that was about 15 years ago.

What the hell? It took my wife four years.

I had four listed disabilities.
Post throat cancer
Post Lymph cancer
Post heart attack
Post stroke

I went back to work AFTER the two cancers. Then along came the other and it was over. I would LOVE to be back to work. I made a LOT more money working then sitting.

 

[Kondor3]

1 in 6 Draw Welfare in Predominantly Red States

Of COURSE there will be more White Folk on Welfare than Blacks or Hispanics.

Blacks only constitute twelve (12%) percent of the total US population.

Whites constitute seventy-seven (77%) percent of the total US population.

http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045216/00

Raw numbers, without the context of percentage-of-ethnic-population, in the racial context established by the OP, are highly misleading... and downright deceptive.

However, all one need do is to look at the PERCENTAGE of the total Black population on Welfare, vs. the PERCENTAGE of the total White population on Welfare, to understand the situation properly.

That's a perspective that Liberals don't want us looking at too closely, and that they try to mask, with all this Red State $hit... something they try to repeat every so often.

=============================================================

Using HuffPo's OWN racial demographics on food stamp consumption; drawn from USDA data...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/28/food-stamp-demographics_n_6771938.html

And the USDA's total food stamp (SNAP) consumption figures...

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/29SNAPcurrPP.pdf

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD="align: left"]

Total US population, 2016, US Census Bureau estimate​

[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

323,127,513​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total Black population (323,127,512 X .12)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

38,775,301​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total White population (323,127,512 X .77)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

248,808,185​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] _[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total US food stamp (SNAP) participation, Jan 2017[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

42,684,691​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Percent of all US food stamps consumed by Blacks[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

25.7%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total US Blacks receiving food stamps (42,684,691 X .257)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

10.959,965​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Percent of US Blacks receiving food stamps (10,959,965 / 38,775.301)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

28.29%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] _[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Total US food stamp (SNAP) participation, Jan 2017[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

42,684,691​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of all US food stamps consumed by Whites[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

40.2%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Total US Whites receiving food stamps (42,684,691 X .402)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

17,159,245​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of US Whites receiving food stamps (17,159,245/248,808,185)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

6.9%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] _[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of US Blacks receiving food stamps (SNAP)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

28.29%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Percent of US Whites receiving food stamps (SNAP)[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

6.9%​

[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Difference[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]

21.39%​

[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

Consequently, we see that 21.39% more Blacks are on food stamps, than Whites, as a percentage of their demographic within the larger US total population.

So much for the raw-numbers hor$e$hit being fed to us by deceitful Liberals.

Next slide, please.

Who mentioned race?

The OP.

By implication.

Red States vs. Blue States.

And if you tell me that one cannot reliably infer "race" from such an opening, you are going to be laughed at.

Revealing percentages though, aren't they?

Enjoy.

Next contestant, please.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

My sister went legally blind when her retinas started detaching. It still took years for her get SS disability.

That must have been some time ago. My one tenant just got it last year, and it took her about three months before her first check. She didn't even hire a lawyer, she did it all herself.

Took me about a year and that was about 15 years ago.

What the hell? It took my wife four years.

I had four listed disabilities.
Post throat cancer
Post Lymph cancer
Post heart attack
Post stroke

I went back to work AFTER the two cancers. Then along came the other and it was over. I would LOVE to be back to work. I made a LOT more money working then sitting.

It would be nice but she like you just can't do it. What really irritates me is we've been responsible people. She has a 401k with let's just call it a few hundred thousand in it. But we can't touch it until she turns 62 or 65, something like that. It seems ridiculous to me.