Good job, progressive movement —but don’t think for a minute that we don’t know what you’re up to.
Today, “mental disorder” is the leading diagnostic group for individuals regarded as disabled, receiving federal disability benefits. According to the latest Annual Statistical Report on the Social Security Disability Insurance Program (yes, another taxpayer funded give-a-way), there are more than ten million Americans receiving disability payments, and of these, half have been enrolled in the program since 1995. Of the ten million, 35.5% have mental disorders, but this number shifts according to geographical location. For example, 43.2% of the disabled in Washington DC are mentally disabled, more than half of those in Massachusetts are mentally impaired (but we knew that, didn’t we?), and highest among the common diagnoses in Massachusetts was “mood disorders,” which is again no real surprise. The nation’s capital is the highest area for psychotic and schizophrenic disorders, but only if you include members of Congress.
So then, what is the progressive party’s solution? It is actually similar to the solution enacted by the San Diego, California city counsel some years back, who authorized the purchase of bus tickets to Phoenix, rounded up all homeless men and women, and sent them on their way. In other words, “go crawl under someone else's bridge.” It is nothing if not Sanger-esque.
Note: I used the term "give-a-way" because it makes no sense to give a mentally disabled person some sum of money, and expect him or her to spend it on something other than drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes. Like most leftist programs, this one throws money at an issue fully expecting the problem to go away. All it does, really, is give leftists the mistaken idea that they are compassionate. They aren't. Leftist programs ARE the problem.
~ Mustang Sends
Z would like to add that the I've heard so many times over the years that the mentally ill do immeasurably better when they're on their meds and, the minute they're off, they resort to the terrible behavior they're on the streets for; violent, withdrawn, etc...I'm wondering if it wouldn't be useful to make payments to these people contingent on their taking drugs, or SOME way they could be forced to take them, to the point that they could get off the payments because they've done so well and can be educated or trained for jobs, etc.