Denys Beecher

@dbeecher.bsky.social

16 years in US Social Security law, primarily disability claim representation

You’ll all be shocked to learn that the most comprehensive contemporary history of the 2nd Seminole War, written by a US Army veteran in 1848, tells a very similar story. An initial treaty was signed in 1832 by senior tribal leaders, with conditional requirements. 1/

Kathryn Tewson@kathryntewson.bsky.social · 3d ago

After they were amended, they took the redlined versions back and found some people who could probably claim tribal affiliation who were then induced to sign the amended treaties and attest that they were doing so on behalf of this tribe or that band This is my understanding but yyyyeahhhhh

This is why I have occasionally had to counsel prospective clients that it's better to work until they die from terminal cancer, because they'd be dead before they got access to Medicare, and at least they're able to maintain their employer health insurance for the cancer care.

Stacie Dusetzina@dusetzinas.bsky.social · 2w ago

Good reminder of how hard it is to access health insurance for people who are disabled by their conditions but in the waiting period for coverage for SSDI/Medicare. The mortality during the wait period for people with cancer (neoplasms) is nearly 40%. www.healthaffairs.org/doi/epdf/10....

Graphic shows the 24-month mortality rate for different conditions for people who are in the 2 year waiting period for obtaining social security disability insurance. Shows nearly 40% mortality for cancer, followed by about 15% digestive diseases, blood diseases, and HIV/AIDS. Lack of health insurance coverage during this period likely contributes to these higher rates of death.

"Cloistered," "low-nuance," and "thoughtlessly reductive" are apparently now vicious insults as an opening salvo, while starting off calling people "idiot masses" who make "moronic choices" is a temperate choice. I can see why Will spends so much time ultimately arguing about word definitions

Will Stancil
 @whstancil.bsky.social
· 1d
One of the dumbest things to come out of the internet is progressives doubling down on “people are actually really great rational maximizers” - the literal classical economics position - because online, it feels populist to side with the idiot masses
Will Stancil
Yes but we must side with The People through all their moronic choices! That’s where the retweets are!
Will Stancil@whstancil.bsky.social · 2w ago

Kathryn the very first interaction we have ever had, to my knowledge, was this absolutely vicious insult you threw at me for the anodyne observation, not targeting anyone in particular, that 50,000 does not represent any kind of world-shaking wealth for most people

I, for one, love the idea of the new Smithsonian signage. Can’t imagine a better way to get people to engage with the material than putting up “dangerous content inside” warnings.

My hypo for Will. You have $80,000. You can gamble for another $80,000. 50% chance that you get the extra cash. 49.7% chance nothing changes. 0.3% chance that you lose the original $80,000 AND your medical coverage, without which there’s a plausible chance you die. What’s rational, gamble or stay?

Kathryn Tewson@kathryntewson.bsky.social · 2w ago

Fun thought experiment! Let's say you are given a choice between the following two options: 1. You receive $50,000 right now, cash on the barrelhead. 2. I flip a coin. If it's heads, you get $2,000,000. If it's tails, you give me $1,000,000. Which choice do you take? Which choice is rational?

Dude that shit was so incredibly out of touch I fucking choked Some people go too far with the Stancil hate, but holy shit my dude, if you don’t want to be called Bloodless Quant maybe don’t leave us all wondering how it’s possibly for you to keep doing analysis whilst clearly exsanguinated

Will is wrong about large numbers here. A million dollars isn't particularly inconceivable to an average person. We can walk by suburban houses that cost a million. It's very easy to visualize what $1 million would buy.

Will Stancil
 @whstancil.bsky.social
· 1h
The numbers are the numbers. For most households, a $50k windfall would either move them moderately up the socioeconomic ladder for a year, or give them some nice extra spending money for a few years. It's comparable to a hefty raise - good, not totally transformative.
I know this seems intuitively false to people because our brains mash together numbers like "$50,000" and "$1,000,000" into a "really big numbers" category, but if you think about it in comparison to what most people actually earn, it's not that big of a windfall.

A lot of people out there for whom $66,500 would pay down debt and create an emergency fund, relieving them of a lot of the stress of living in a country with a poor social safety net. Stress that is quite literally shortening their lives. I guess certain people can't see that as "life changing."