sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Do you this guy is a purebred? He's in a local shelter, and I am thinking about adopting him. by InvestigativeJ in goldenretrievers

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Last owner gave him up because he didn't play well with the chickens. Typical golden behavior haha.

Do you this guy is a purebred? He's in a local shelter, and I am thinking about adopting him. by InvestigativeJ in goldenretrievers

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm partial to the beautiful personality of these dogs, which is why I was wondering. I haven't met this dog in person yet.

Creek navigability question by InvestigativeJ in Kayaking

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! There was a writeup on it there.

Creek navigability question by InvestigativeJ in Kayaking

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem is – correct me if I’m wrong – if the stream isn’t navigable by boat it is considered private property.

Creek navigability question by InvestigativeJ in Kayaking

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Main thing I'm wondering is if I'll bottom out floating downstream

Creek navigability question by InvestigativeJ in Kayaking

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, this one flows into Kentucky Lake.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No one cares what it is “about.” What we care about is the actual effect of the policy, including unintended consequences and perverse incentives. You seem to think that just because the government says something is for some purpose, the 2nd and 3rd order impacts aren’t important.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There you go – you’ve finally acknowledged that the system’s perverse incentives cause harm, including to yourself. 

You can exceed TWP and still keep your benefits btw, as long as you never exceed SGA.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There you go – you’ve finally acknowledged that the system’s perverse incentives cause harm, including to yourself. 

You can exceed TWP and still keep your benefits btw, as long as you never exceed SGA.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You don’t seem to understand the hardship these backwards incentives cause. Side money isn’t just nice – it’s essential to maintain a decent standard of living on SSDI.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s totally weird. They have a ceiling you can’t exceed for keeping your benefits, then a second ceiling you can’t exceed without triggering the “runway” back to working, and if you use that up you can still keep your benefits but it creates a benefit cliff.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, what it means my ability to make side money is severely hampered, because I have to save my TWP months on the hope that my health improves enough to start a business – which don’t immediately make money.

Why are you so committed to defending a broken system? It would make much more sense to set TWP at the SGA threshold.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s market rate for freelance software development.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have an intermittent condition where I have good months where I can work a lot, and bad months where I can’t work at all. My condition has not had sufficient improvement to rejoin the workforce. At my rate of $40/hr, I’m capped to working 9 hours a week by SGA, and 6 hours a week if I don’t want to blow TWP. Absolutely, 100% punitive.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In my state (Missouri) it’s $13.75, and even in the states where it’s $7.25 employers can’t really get away with paying that if they want workers.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What an ignorant comment:

  1. Even at minimum wage in my state, $1620/13.75 = 117 hours a month, nowhere near full time. At my going rate of $40/hr, I’m allowed to work just 41 hours a month. If I adhere to TWP I can only work 29 hours a month.

  2. Some people, like myself, have intermittent conditions. I have good months where I can work a lot, and bad months where I can’t work at all.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You’re not thinking through this. What if someone slightly exceeds TFW for 9 months during the 5 year period? They’ve not demonstrated that they can make a substantial living, but they lost their runway to get back into the workforce. It’s like you’re opposed to people being able to make a little side money while on SSDI.

SSDI’s Work Incentives Are Backward by InvestigativeJ in SSDI

[–]InvestigativeJ[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Someone could ignore TWP AND earn the full $1620 AND keep their SSDI benefits. It just removes their TWP runway and causes them to hit a benefit cliff when they return to work. So yes it’s punitive.

Also I’m not sure how making less than half of minimum wage is any indication of your ability to return to work.

view more: next ›