We have very similar problems in the UK. The number of people claiming Incapacity Benefit grew from 0.75m to 2.75m in less than thirty years. Two-thirds are claiming for reasons of mental health or back pain. In the most impoverished parts of the country, nearly 20% of the population is officially "too sick to work".
The issue is currently the most contentious of many welfare benefit reforms, I suspect in large part because discussing the issues raised in this article are almost totally taboo. Everyone knows perfectly well why disability rates are 10x higher in the poorest parts of the country, but there's a political taboo that prevents anyone from saying "Incapacity Benefit was used for decades by governments of both parties as an accounting trick to keep down the official unemployment figures".
I don't think it's a taboo to discuss it, it's not being discussed because it shows very clearly what a big problem we have (just like America) with waning job numbers and really awful support for the poorest. We're not in as deep is as America is (from my basic understanding of our benefits vs. American welfare) but if the government were to talk about the problems with Incapacity Benefit they would also have to address the problem of another 2 million unemployed people with no recent job history and no jobs for them even if they could work.
Things are just about ticking over now, imagine the shit storm that would occur if every unemployed person was told they're now competing with another 2 million people, keeping this a "secret" is as much in the governments interest as it is every person that votes. No good would come of this issue being out in the open now, it needs to come out when there are jobs available or proper support for the unemployed, neither of which is true at the moment. I could be missing an important factor (due to aforementioned shallow understanding of benefits) so please correct me if I'm wrong and there is an advantage or proper way this can be addressed.
I cant help think that business would rather keep the, er, difficult to employ out of the employment market.
Do employers really want to employ people with various disabilities and ailments? Do they really want the added grief, work, red tape, costs, etc?
Then we have the long term unemployed, the , er, useless manky scum who cant wash, dress or string a sentence together. Drunk, illiterate and on drugs? Do employers really want these people over and above nice educated suited "normal" people? Who wants Frank Gallagher on reception, as a sales rep, or stinking out out nice Google offices?
If the answer is yes, then hit the streets and employ a few. Go down where the "scum" are and offer them jobs and hope. Cheap, easy to find and plentiful.
If the answer is no, then lets stop begrudging the meagre social security they get. Lets happily pay our taxes to keep such people alive, comfortable and out of "our" way, so that we can get on with our businesses and work, and improve our lives.
The issue is currently the most contentious of many welfare benefit reforms, I suspect in large part because discussing the issues raised in this article are almost totally taboo. Everyone knows perfectly well why disability rates are 10x higher in the poorest parts of the country, but there's a political taboo that prevents anyone from saying "Incapacity Benefit was used for decades by governments of both parties as an accounting trick to keep down the official unemployment figures".