Welcome to Gaia! ::

Legally, anyone, even retarded or down syndrome-affected people over 18 are legally allowed to vote. It's just that some residential providers are lazy, greedy a** holes and simply don't allow it but not offering the client the staff or transportation to go vote. If it's important to the person, soon after the problem gets fixed, even if it means switching residential providers or calling the state on their a**.


Actually more and more employers are opening up to disabled people. Walmart is a big one. There are also factories and workshops that employ them, some facilities cater to their needs, offering staff of their own and work with the person's team.
Actually, I know a guy that only does cash jobs, so it looks like he's not working, but he still does. He chooses to work without the state lowering it's funds, pretty slick trick, and a choice he made.

Blind? Oh, my bad. I was referring mostly to retardation, autism and down syndrome in my post. In this post too. I do know what I'm talking about, at least to an extent. There are some pieces I don't quite get, and words and terms I should know but don't.

Um... In the USA the federal and state governments pay for everything, but encourage them to work if they can so that the state can decrease funding to the person. Working barely increases their spending allowance, which is one of the few things that sucks. Hence, the state pays the bills, the salaries of the staff, the behavial consultants, the case managers, the guardians(if state appointed), the residential providers get paid, and in turn pay the bills for the indivisuals, and many other people.

I'm not refering to disability checks, I'm talking about medicare (or medicaid, forget which is disabilities and which is old people). It pays the residential provider, who supplies the staff, who care for, transport and do whatever.

Legally, anyone, even retarded or down syndrome-affected people over 18 are legally allowed to vote. It's just that some residential providers are lazy, greedy a** holes and simply don't allow it but not offering the client the staff or transportation to go vote. If it's important to the person, soon after the problem gets fixed, even if it means switching residential providers or calling the state on their a**.


Actually more and more employers are opening up to disabled people. Walmart is a big one. There are also factories and workshops that employ them, some facilities cater to their needs, offering staff of their own and work with the person's team.
Actually, I know a guy that only does cash jobs, so it looks like he's not working, but he still does. He chooses to work without the state lowering it's funds, pretty slick trick, and a choice he made.

Blind? Oh, my bad. I was referring mostly to retardation, autism and down syndrome in my post. In this post too. I do know what I'm talking about, at least to an extent. There are some pieces I don't quite get, and words and terms I should know but don't.

Um... In the USA the federal and state governments pay for everything, but encourage them to work if they can so that the state can decrease funding to the person. Working barely increases their spending allowance, which is one of the few things that sucks. Hence, the state pays the bills, the salaries of the staff, the behavial consultants, the case managers, the guardians(if state appointed), the residential providers get paid, and in turn pay the bills for the indivisuals, and many other people.

I'm not refering to disability checks, I'm talking about medicare (or medicaid, forget which is disabilities and which is old people). It pays the residential provider, who supplies the staff, who care for, transport and do whatever.

Two things:

1) I'm not picking a fight here, but I am horrified that people in your area say "That's so jewish", churrlo. gonk I hope you tell people to not say that.

2) I, too am disgusted by Metallic's statement about people with disabilities. Primarily because I am a person with a disability. You may argue that my hearing loss is nothing compared to somebody with Down's Syndrome or Autism, and I know that. I choose to argue that it is a disability because I have rights given to me by the state and the Disability Act of the United States has a clause that applies to me. As a result of being labeled legally in this way, I feel that I am able to really empathize with people who are in worse situations than I am. I want to help kids with worse hearing losses than me learn to take care of themselves in school so they can do well. I want to learn sign language. But that's just my domain. I support people of all disabilities and believe we all should have rights. Someday I'll reach out and start something for somebody else, and when that day comes, I hope I make somebody happy.

Two things:

1) I'm not picking a fight here, but I am horrified that people in your area say "That's so jewish", churrlo. gonk I hope you tell people to not say that.

So, according to that logic, i am a really huge lesbian?

So, according to that logic, i am a really huge lesbian?