![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.azuse.cloud\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/11\/Boots-and-helmets-168x300.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Last month (yes, it is now February), an article was posted on the CBO\u2019s proposal for saving money, mostly by dumping it on the backs of veterans. That in itself is bad enough.<\/p>\n
We all know there is waste and outright fraud perpetrated by people with flim-flam claims of service they never had, and that some of them have managed to slip through the cracks of the VA\u2019s administrative service. The latest news from Foggy Bottom is that those blue-water sailors who were offshore during the Vietnam War will be able to apply for benefits for exposure to Agent Orange. And we are all aware of someone who claimed disability when he had none and faked it whenever he had a chance.<\/p>\n
The CBO\u2019s suggestions on how to save money by dinging veterans seemed appalling, as it should have. While there are fakes and SV clowns who get VADC and\/or SSDI, they are outnumbered by those who are truly disabled and cannot work at full-time jobs, and are receiving both Social Security Disability Income and VA Disability Compensation.<\/p>\n
The CBO\u2019s idea was to take one or the other away from these people, with no regard to the impact that will have on them. Most of us are on budgets, including me. Retirement income is considered to be fixed income. SSRI is taxable at 50%, which means that Uncle Sam wouldn\u2019t get a penny for taxing it out of most of us. VADC is nontaxable. Other income from things like pensions or IRAs or investments are ordinary income and taxable at a specific rate.<\/p>\n
Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which is for people who cannot work and have limited income and resources, is not the same as SSDI, which is taxable.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n SSDI<\/strong>\u00a0benefits: Sometimes\u00a0taxable<\/strong>. Benefits under the\u00a0Social Security Disability\u00a0Insurance<\/strong> program can create\u00a0federal tax<\/strong>\u00a0liability in some cases.\u00a0 Above $34,000, the maximum percentage of benefits you have to include in\u00a0taxable<\/strong>\u00a0income rises to 85%. The corresponding levels for joint filers are $32,000 to $44,000.<\/p>\n SSI benefits: Never taxable: <\/strong>Disability benefits are also available to some people under the Supplemental Security Income or SSI program. Eligibility for this program is based largely on financial need, with strict limitations set on how much you have in other financial resources that are available for you to use to support yourself. In addition, the benefit amount to which you are entitled can be reduced depending on how much income you earn and what the source of that income is.\u00a0\u00a0\u2013 Source: Motley Fool\u00a0 The complete article is here:\u00a0\u00a0 https:\/\/www.fool.com\/retirement\/2016\/06\/05\/is-social-security-disability-taxable.aspx<\/a><\/p>\n VA Disability Compensation, on the other hand, is nontaxable, but is only offered to veterans, and while there are fraudulent claims registered to get it, the number of veterans who are not<\/em> engaged in fraud is higher than the number of fraudsters.<\/p>\n I did read the CBO\u2019s actual proposal. While the writer says at the end that it is \u201conly a suggestion\u201d, the amount of \u201csavings\u201d doesn\u2019t make a dent in the actual $4.1 trillion budget. But what I found more interesting was the review of the CBO\u2019s dismal failure in their overestimation of the acceptance of, and applications for, the ACA program and exchanges.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen the ACA passed in 2010, CBO\u00a0projected<\/a><\/u>\u00a021 million people would be enrolled in the exchanges in 2016. After the Supreme Court ruled that the Medicaid expansion was optional for states and not compulsory, CBO\u00a0increased<\/a><\/u> its projection of 2016 exchange enrollment to 22 million as some people who would otherwise have been enrolled in Medicaid in non-expansion states were then expected to enroll in the exchanges instead. Exchanges plans have proved much less attractive than expected as enrollment will\u00a0average<\/a><\/u>\u00a0only about 10 million people this year. This means that CBO\u2019s last projection of exchange enrollment before the exchanges opened overshot actual 2016 enrollment by 120 percent<\/u>.\u201d \u2013 Source: Forbes: https:\/\/www.forbes.com\/sites\/theapothecary\/2017\/01\/02\/learning-from-cbos-history-of-incorrect-obamacare-projections\/#2181e9e946a7<\/a><\/p>\n The Forbes article is direct and to the point: the Congressional Budget Office\u2019s pencil pushers and accounting forecasters are out of touch with the Real World. Not only did they fail to anticipate that Obamacare\u2019s popularity was far less than expecte<\/em>d; they also failed to take into account the possibility that the recovery from the Great Recession would have a grindingly slow pace, taking far longer than the recovery during the Reagan Administration. It did not just lag. It was stultifyingly dismal<\/em>.<\/p>\n Therefore, their suggestions that any savings should be on the backs of veterans who are receiving both SSDI and VADC should be regarded as grossly inappropriate. If anything, the bloated spending on \u201cfavorite\u201d programs in Congress should be viewed with a jaundiced eye.<\/p>\n Despite WaPo\u2019s assertions that CBO is a necessity, it really isn\u2019t.\u00a0 https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/news\/monkey-cage\/wp\/2017\/06\/13\/the-trump-administration-detests-the-congressional-budget-office-heres-why-its-important\/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5c7e0d8ec105<\/a><\/p>\n It acts only as a shield between Congress and the Oval Office.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"