For many years I have maintained that there is little or no proof that there is a significant link between rates of unemployment and the rates of disability claims. Common wisdom is to the contrary. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has released a report dealing with disability benefits around the world. Take a look at this chart (click on it to view it full size).
Could someone show me on this chart some evidence of a relationship between disability claims and unemployment?
Could someone show me on this chart some evidence of a relationship between disability claims and unemployment?
7 comments:
This chart/report doesn't include people who file and get denied or people whose claims are still pending. Used by itself, it's not useful for showing a link (or showing no link) between unemployment and people filing claims.
You need to use one that shows the actual number of claims filed (including allowances and denials) versus the rates of unemployment.
Agree with Anon#1. I'm sure that SSA somewhere has stats on disability filings which could be compared to the unemployment rates of the same periods. Anecdotally, I've always noticed a rise in initial claim filings when the economy is down. For example, you have a 50-something guy who gets laid off and has been troubled by back pain for years (but not enough so that he had to quit). Many states would require that he file for DIB which, if approved, would mean that his unemployment benefits would terminate.
It would be interesting to see the numbers.
A quick search of socialsecurity.gov for "disability and unemployment" in the Research, Statistics, & Policy Analysis section found some studies that included relevant info with charts - e.g. in a study titled "Changes in Incentives Influencing Program Size" the narrative notes "Disabled-worker application rates and incidence rates have tended to rise in periods of increasing unemployment and fall in periods of decreasing unemployment with the exception of the early 1980s, when the program was tightened and the benefits were reduced" and "Economic changes influence applications to the DI and SSI programs. Historically, when unemployment rises, applications and awards for the DI program have increased as well. Disabled-worker application rates have tended to rise in periods of increasing unemployment and fall in periods of decreasing unemployment, with the notable exception of the early 1980s, when unemployment approached 10 percent and the rate of applications declined dramatically (Chart 59). However, at the same time, a tightening of the program and reductions in benefits were taking place and may have had a greater influence that resulted in declining application rates. The incidence rate for DI workers (awards per 1,000 in the disability-insured population) also tends to follow the unemployment rate (and application rate), with the same caveat about the period of the early 1980s (Chart 60)."
Sorry I can't post the charts here, but go and take a look for yourself. The above mentioned study covers 1970-2003.
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/policy/docs/chartbooks/disability_trends/sect05.html
Echoing anonymous #3, there is research on this topic on SSA's site. David Autor has also written about this. Of course, there are many other variables that can affect both unemployment and disability filing rates (and allowance rates).
Pres obama announcing federal pay freeze.
I been stating it....I been stating it
$100,000+ aljs and other ssa $100,000 employees are over paid.
"Pres obama announcing federal pay freeze.
I been stating it....I been stating it
$100,000+ aljs and other ssa $100,000 employees are over paid."
and they'll continue to be paid $100k+. what is your point?
Really? Overpaid?
Why?
Because the unemployment rate hasn't been hitting government workers?
People earning $100K would be earning double that in the private sector. Associate Commissioners 4-5 times that, and Commissioners 10 times that.
And you're mad because you see it as them getting YOUR money? When they would be getting it anyway through any other means?
Honestly, people whine about the millions of dollars in bonuses CEO's get, but it never occurs to them that their analogs in government earn a pittance by comparison?
Why don't we mandate a maximum wage for ALL workers? hmmn? would that make you happy? No one can earn over $100K by law? would that fix the world’s problems?
Do people actually stop and think that only reasons people at that level stay there are loyalty to the government? Even in the present economy, being former division head at a government agency makes you a prime candidate for any managerial position outside government with WAY higher pay.
So why don't we just sour the pot as much as we can for federal workers? by all means! Let's solve unemployment by firing people in the government!
Post a Comment