what is ssi and ssdi (Australia just has one DSP no matter what disability or work capabilities?

Answer 1

Well--this takes a bit of explaining--and if it seems illogical, that's because it is! :) There are two programs for what are essentially historical reasons (the bureaucrats have rationalizations foisted on them by politicians--I'm talking about what's "really going on").

SSDI (Social Security Disability Insurance) is for people who have worked and paid into the social security system. It started with a limited program for the blind in the 1930s (Title X ofthe original 1935 act). As the system evolved, this turned into the current system. The rationale is that people who have paid into the system are entitled to receive the benefits if they become disabled. In addiiton, they are considered "deserving" because they have been productive citizens. They are allowed to work and earn money (within limits) as a "transition" back to work--or on a more or less permanant basis, on the theory that, being productive citizens in the first place, they are/will make a real effort to be productive again.

SSI (Supplemental Security Income) is viewed as short-term emergencey relief or for those who have not worked and paid into the system. Thus--beecause it hasn't been "earned" it is essentially considered welfare--charity, in other words. And, the rationale went, if a person getting welfare gets a job, even a prt-time one, then obviously they can work and shouldn't be getting pubic welfare.

This thinking (still prevalent among the extreme right in America) became embedded in the system. It comes from ideas from the American Progressive Era reformists who drew a distinction between the "deserving" and the "undeserving"poor--and not surprisingly were a lot more willing to help those in the former category. In their defense, though--the way the system is set up now would NOT meet with their approval--I'm talking about where the rationales trace back to.

In practice, this is what actually happens. For those on SSDI, you have to be careful. Although you can work--and earn a fair amount, the cut-off is an all or nothing setup. Even one dollar over the limit--and you lose ALL benefits. So a lot of people are careful to keep their earned income jsut under the line (and thus only working part time)--becaus unless and untill they can jump straight to a much higher income level by working full-tie, they will lose a substantial part of the money they have to live on. And its not a lot, no matter how you cut it--few have the personal resources to afford that. So there' sa built in disincentive for many to return to full-time work--they have to have the skills to get a pretty decent entry-level job right from the start.

The SSI ends up applying mostly to young people with disabilities--who, like any young person, starts out never having worked. But--because the've thus never paid into the system, they aren't "entitled." They aren't prohibited from working--but if they earn more than a tiny amount ($85 US) in a month, they start losing benefits--which are much less than SSDI anyway. So--unless they are one of the minority who get a good education, they're stuck. There is a program to allow them to work long enough to be eligible for SSDI--but it cuts off at age 25 and requires 5 years work history--which of curse means they may have to choose between college and work. And many have to take longer in school because of the disability, which just makes it harder.

Andyes, this means that, under the system in the United States, a child born with or axcquiring a disability is considered "undeserving" while an adult who has been fortunate to live and grow up without a disability and so had the opportunity to work is "deserving." of better treatment and opportunities.

Told you this wasn't logical!

Answer 2

Wow, I need to move to Australia...

Social Security Insurance and Social Security Disability Insurance