I would have thought that this was a given. A person with an illness so disabling that they can not work at any job in the United States is not a healthy person. Most illnesses are progressive, ergo, ending in death. I guess the liberals will try to make a politically correct statement out of this finding and attempt to channel tax monies to correct the problem when there is no problem to begin with.
Some of you just don’t get it. Until a demographic study is done, one can’t be certain of “facts,” nor of the extent of factors affecting a given statistic. Medical history is full of “obvious” things which were disproven once studies were done. The graphs actually provide numerical proof of the extent of what is “given.”
I don't think it was a study - it's some graphs made by the CBPP using data from SSA. SSA collects data on death rates because this is needed to estimate future costs to SSA (for people on disability and people on old-age benefits). So I would say that it cost nothing, and it does more than show that people on disability die at a higher rate - it shows by how much, by age and gender.
Good point Mike, about the future cost projections. I would have expected to see more of a temporary leveling off of the death rate (or at least a less steep increase compared to normal death rates) around age 50 and 55, due to beneficiaries perhaps not being quite as ill qualifying under the medical vocational rules. It seems not though.
I would have thought that this was a given. A person with an illness so disabling that they can not work at any job in the United States is not a healthy person. Most illnesses are progressive, ergo, ending in death. I guess the liberals will try to make a politically correct statement out of this finding and attempt to channel tax monies to correct the problem when there is no problem to begin with.
ReplyDeleteYou find this surprising and newsworthy? You are getting farther off the map all the time.
ReplyDeleteSome of you just don’t get it. Until a demographic study is done, one can’t be certain of “facts,” nor of the extent of factors affecting a given statistic. Medical history is full of “obvious” things which were disproven once studies were done. The graphs actually provide numerical proof of the extent of what is “given.”
ReplyDeleteAnd how much did it cost to pay for this scientific study proving what we already know???
ReplyDeleteI don't think it was a study - it's some graphs made by the CBPP using data from SSA. SSA collects data on death rates because this is needed to estimate future costs to SSA (for people on disability and people on old-age benefits). So I would say that it cost nothing, and it does more than show that people on disability die at a higher rate - it shows by how much, by age and gender.
ReplyDeleteGood point Mike, about the future cost projections. I would have expected to see more of a temporary leveling off of the death rate (or at least a less steep increase compared to normal death rates) around age 50 and 55, due to beneficiaries perhaps not being quite as ill qualifying under the medical vocational rules. It seems not though.
ReplyDelete