125 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

As a (now retired) attorney with some professional experience with the SSDI system, and some personal experience in applying for SSDI due to a medical condition (and winning a ‘closed period award’ for the length of time the condition prevented me from working) let me add a couple data points.

First, on historical average, only 22% of individuals who file an application ultimately get approved.

Second, on appeal after a claim is denied, about 13% of those who appeal ultimately get approved.

Third, on appeal (after the initial denial, and the 2nd denial) to an Administrative Law Judge about 60% of those who take it to that stage get approved. But, that represents only about 2% of those who made an initial claim. That is because most claims are abandoned before they get to the point where the case is heard by a judge. The process is miserable, demeaning, and the goal of the system is to deny the claim.

Fourth, for the vast majority of those who ultimately get approved, it can take years. From the date I filed my initial claim, until my hearing date, 4 years and 3 months elapsed. 3 more months of waiting for a decision and then after the Judge approved the award, another 5 months elapsed before SSA paid the award. So in total, it took 5 years from the time I filed until I received the award. In addition, I did not file my initial claim until 18 months after the disability occurred. So from the date I became disabled (under the legal definition and based on the court concurrence as to the date disability began), 6.5 years elapsed before I received the award (which was a single lump sum). By that time, my condition had been treated over a period of 3 years and I had been back to work for 2 years.

If you look at the statistics from 2009-17, the % of approvals was trending down. If my recollection is correct, during those years the % approved either stayed flat or declined every year. They rose slightly and/or stayed flat up until 2021 and are now on the rise, as pointed out in the article.

So the point to all of the above is threefold. First, more than 75% of applicants who file a claim are denied. Second, the process is miserable and takes 2 years or more to complete. Third, if indeed those who are attributing the rise to the jab are correct, we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. My own personal experience and my legal experience allows me to say with certainty that a high percentage of valid claims are abandoned along the way…because the process itself, and the way lawyers are compensated is designed to deny claims and ultimately force people to give up.

Given the length of time it can take to go through the process, and the massive backlog that exists in nearly every jurisdiction for a hearing before an ALJ, we should expect to see a continued rise in both initial applications and approvals.

A thorough analysis would need to look at historical data for applications, approvals (at the various stages), and the medical conditions for which approvals were granted. The data is all public, although it would take a massive effort to find it, import it, and ultimately analyze it to determine if what we are seeing on the surface can be proven with the historical data.

Expand full comment

Thank you. I am going to pin you comment. Since there are so many areas to focus on and I wanted to be concise, I did not go into as much detail on this.

Expand full comment

Nice. I hope it helps shed some light. It’s a very complicated issue. What will be interesting to watch in my view is the extent to which initial applications increase over time.

Expand full comment

Yeah, I could easily easily qualify for disability, for a very narrow meaning of "easily". I started the paperwork once and gave it up as not worth the trouble. Thankfully I was old enough to apply for Social Security, supplemented by a part-time job that I can handle, and a willingness to live a very simple lifestyle.

Expand full comment

I am no lawyer, but it seems to me a case could be made for worker's compensation if an employer mandated the jab, expecially if the person tried for an exemption and was denied.

Expand full comment

Oh, yes. This is the kind of advice employers got in 2020, which I think would be what they rely on if there is a case. Scroll down to see the quote. The article shows there would be a lot of ins and outs on such a claim.

"Are Vaccine-Related Injuries Covered by Workers' Compensation Laws?

Employees who experience an adverse reaction to a vaccine administered pursuant to an employer's vaccination policy may be entitled workers' compensation benefits. Some states, like....."

https://www.dwt.com/blogs/employment-labor-and-benefits/2020/12/employer-covid-vaccines-mandates-incentives

Expand full comment

Can you point me in the direction of these data custodians? I'd like to take a stab at analyzing these numbers. I can build it to auto-update if the data sources are publicly available online. This way, we can monitor over time as the numbers are published.

I think the number of applications, approvals, etc., as you outlined will be an interesting fact set to watch develop.

Expand full comment

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2022/19-1-percent-of-people-with-a-disability-were-employed-in-2021.htm

Here one. BLS has data. SSA has data with stats by race, gender, year, state, county and more. The thing is, I don’t know if any of it is in any kind of file format that could be imported.

What would be interesting I think on a macro level is how the 2020, 2021, 2022 # of applicants compare to the prior decade. Because in my mind that is the real key right now. From what I recall, both applications and ultimate approvals were flat or declined from the prior year from 2009-2017. Then they ticked up a bit.

Obviously if the number of approvals is up 10% in 2022 vs 2021 or whatever that is a good data point. But since the % approved has been pretty constant for 2 decades (22-26%) the real tell for me would be looking at the potential increases in people applying.

And also looking at the age brackets of people applying and then the same with approvals. Because if more younger people are applying and/or getting approved that would be a key data point.

The thing is, as I wrote, for the vast majority who get approved it is a 2 plus year process. My best recollection is that at level 1, only 9% get approved, then at the admin appeal level 13% get approved, and then at the ALJ level 60% get approved. But those %s are based on the number of people who take the next step.

Hence, since the jabs rolled out 18 months ago, to already see the increases in approvals in under two years, means we are just at the beginning of what could be a huge uptrend. It also likely means more approvals are being granted at the initial phase and the 2nd phase. Which, with my tinfoil hat on tight, makes me wonder whether SSDI has changed their standards and are granting more ‘early’ approvals in order to try and keep the lid on.

Typically it takes about 6 months for a decision on the initial claim, then 3-6 months for a decision on the administrative appeal. If you get denied twice you have the right to request an in person hearing before an ALJ. Which depending on where you live can take years. It took me 2.5 years of waiting for my hearing. I was offered a video hearing after a year of waiting but I turned it down because I needed to have the Judge actually be able to “see” in person what had happened. That took another 1.5 years.

There is something going on. We all know it’s the jab. The real question is how nefarious is this seeming hurry to approve substantially more claims in a much shorter timeframe than historical data would show.

Don’t know if any of that is helpful or not.

Expand full comment

Oh thank you! This looks like an excellent place to start. Government db's are usually pretty accessible and normal so if I can find what we want, it can likely be automated to pick up new data as it comes.

Expand full comment

You are most welcome. I know most of what I have seen and read has been focused on the seeming 10% increase in claim approvals. Based on at least two decades of historical data that would translate into massive increase in applications. On the order of what, 12 million? (I’m not a math wizard, lol). If that holds true, that would tell us something. But if approvals are now being given at a larger percentage than the historical norm, and are being approved faster, that might tell us something else.

If I can assist in anyway let me know. I have a lot of experience with the ‘system.’

Expand full comment

can you get me any source for that 10% claim?

Thank you

Expand full comment

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/do-vaccine-rollouts-correlate-to?s=r

Edward Dowd has spoken about this issue on multiple interviews and written about it on Gettr. I can try to find additional links if you like.

Expand full comment

There's no source in there for the 10%.

Expand full comment

Everyones getting confused. That dataset does not refer to people receiving disability payments, it refers to people with disabling conditions. I was trying to see if there was a dataset regarding changes in disability payments.

Expand full comment

The dataset I referenced is for the survey that (I think) Ed used.

Expand full comment
Error