Corporate and 1%-er GDP Ownership Class Greed Forces 99%-ers to Fight Amongst Themselves for decreasing GDP share left - Some of which funds Social Safety Net

  Walter Olson's and Rand Paul's examples of corporate cost-shifting of disability inclusion, from civil society by democratic fiscal policy to individuals, is as bad as, if not worse than, parents of children whose medical diagnoses were formerly known as (FKA) Higher Functioning Autism or Asperger's Syndrome and may have been socially regarded by others as "shiny aspies."  The corporate and richest 1% cost-shifting harms all autistics trying to live in communities of their own choosing regardless of individual profiles of strengths and weaknesses and how they support themselves with either paid job income or do unpaid work with the financial support of relatives, SSI/SSDI and other 'safety net' programs paid for by taxes (the public).

 Parents who were accused of "neurelitism"  (self-advocate distortion of parental high expectations for their children with a disability without cognizance of other autistic parents' and childrens' differing needs) by self-advocates for other autistics who were 'labelled' 'lower functioning autistic' or 'Kanner-type severe autism,'  are less responsible for the division in the autistic segment of the disabled and disability communities by a severity contest/oppression olympics/respectability politics.


 The 2015-16 personal reputation 'teardown' of Hans Asperger, after the erasure of the former AS medical diagnosis by the DSM 5, as allegedly a nazi sympathizer because of the death of one patient Herta Schreiber in Spiegelgrund 'hospital,' actually a eugenic killing center, in Austria


Contrary to Mr. Silberman I do not defend or condone these murderous actions. Mr. Silberman’s callousness is articulated in his book Neurotribes where he glorifies autism by exalting its gifts but failing to emphasize its handicaps, drawbacks or comorbidities. This fact is agreed upon by Mr. Silberman himself who in a Forbes magazine interview stated that he had left out the diaper wearers and head bangers because, “If we live long enough, we all become ‘diaper wearers’ eventually…Disability is a part of the human experience.” Again, this is NOT the case. Head banging or wearing diapers is not part of our human experience, no matter the age of the person. Mr. Silberman should stop callously minimizing some of the symptoms observed in autism spectrum disorders. As is now too common to Mr. Silberman his statements are insulting to those who are most seriously disabled and to the families who are taking care of them.

continued the erasure of the economic intersection by ignoring 'who pays the costs' of inclusion of all autistics, regardless of the degree of 'intense needs' individual autistics demonstrate, at an individual level to live in communities of their own choosing.

  Steve Silberman's Forbes interview reference

“If we live long enough, we all become ‘diaper wearers’ eventually…Disability is a part of the human experience.”


 is conflating many individual independent living problems related to disability with independent living problems related to aging to enlarge the 'community' of people to make it more representative (closer to a majority) of the population as a whole in a political subdivision (level of government local, state or nation).  Local governments make the same conflation of disability and aging in how they organize and fund public services while still balancing their public budgets.
  
  Examples are the Commonwealth (officially not a State) of Virginia Department of Aging and Rehabilitative Services, mission shift thanks to leadership of the late Theresa Preda.




On July 14, 2016, Theresa Preda passed away following a brief illness.
Theresa was born in Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, on July 30, 1950. Theresa, a 1968 graduate of Monaca High School, has been Director of Independent Living for the Virginia Department of Rehabilitative Services, now the Virginia Department for Aging and Rehabilitative Services, for 29 years. She was a founding member of ADAPT and the National Council of Independent Living. Theresa was involved with the National Educational Leadership Policy Fellowship, Metropolitan Leadership Richmond, and Leadership Denver and was appointed to the Council on Women by Governor Kaine.

  Virginia did the same 'mission merge' of combining rehabilitation, including job-search assistance, for senior citizens and PwDs (people with disabilities) that Montgomery County, Md has already done with the combined mission of Aging and Disability Resources Unit in the county DHHS that supervises the Commission on People with Disabilities.  Aging individuals (seniors) likely don't want to continue working their issues are more likely to be physical barriers that intersect with people with physical or sensory disabilities.  Intellectual disabilities intersect with seniors living with dementia.  People living with/recovering from mental illness or DD without ID are left unserved in the 'mission merge.' A separate Mental Health Advisory Committee advises the Montgomery County Executive about mental health disabilities allowing the Commission on People with Disabilities to ignore even intersectional issues like job development and affordable housing.  




  Fairfax
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/csb/wellness/drop-in-centers.htm

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/csb/publications/intellectual-disability-services-description.htm

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/csb/

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/csb/publications/autism-resources.htm

and Arlington Counties in VA


https://commissions.arlingtonva.us/community-services-board/csb-committee-meetings/

https://commissions.arlingtonva.us/community-services-board/

https://commissions.arlingtonva.us/disability-advisory-commission-dac/

https://commissions.arlingtonva.us/disability-advisory-commission-dac/regional-grants-to-disability-groups/
 
and Montgomery County in MD



http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/HHS-Program/Program.aspx?id=ADS/ADSResourceCoord-p234.html

also have Aging and Disability Services Departments with combined missions that leave some people with disabilities excluded in the benefit payments, for services delivered, provided. 


  People whose issues are not 'intense' 'enough' to be found eligible for services in the process of administratively 'grading people,' are repeatedly left out in the 'grading people' administrative decisions on who is helped with paying the costs of inclusion, as the 2008 ANI Autreat presentation described.  The term 'grading people,' recalls a 2010 Autreat presentation, by Amanda Baggs, Drew Goldsmith and Morton Ann Gernsbacher mentioned here is 
about the concept of socially, but not administratively, 'grading people' to minimize the publicly-paid monetary costs to helping only autistics with the most 'intense needs' formerly known as 'low functioning.'  That presentation ignored equitable ways of providing help paying the costs of inclusion in a community of one's own choosing when a person with a disability, that is also a medical diagnosis, can't pay the costs themselves in money, or time building relationships, with similarly situated people with disabilities.




 The author of the corticalchauvinism blog post misses the economic intersectionality of who pays the costs to a lesser extent than Silberman, who also ignores the economic intersectionality of who pays the costs an individual can't, in favor of trying to claim a 'moral high ground' to guide the advocacy and public policy of how to treat people placed in vulnerable life journeys by the disabilities they were born with. 
As is now too common to Mr. Silberman his statements are insulting to those who are most seriously disabled and to the families who are taking care of them.

  Self-advocates, who also advocate for others who cannot advocate for themselves, continue to ignore the public costs of autistic inclusion by minimizing them to helping the autistics with the most 'intense needs' after diverting as many autistics with less 'intense needs' to 'building autistic community together' to individually privatize the costs, in money and time, of the 'social safety net' to get 'bipartisan' legislative votes in the "gloomy" (as Tyler Cowen described) 'political' and 'governing' process, for what little is left of the 'social safety net.' 


  Disputes about 'individual representation is a legislative fiction,' written about in earlier posts




Try telling that to Autism Speaks or Grasp then, who act with much less
honourable motives than ASAN.
Individual representation is always a legislative fiction, no one person in 
any large community can accurately represent the beliefs and aspirations of 
every single constituent, not in the least because those are likely to be 
paradoxical an contradictory. One therfore advocates a community rather than 
individuals.
 

were about trying to claim a role of majority 'influencer' of movement decisions for autistics leading advocacy by process complaints if they could not be the majority 'influencer' of decisions on issue complaints of what to demand in collective advocacy.  

  In simpler words, 'win an argument' by controlling the group decision making process (including public discourse about disability without equal participation of people with disabilities e.g. the slogan 'nothing about us without us') while 'agreeing to disagree' on issue positions to advocate for.  People who disagree may drop out of one organization in a bigger movement and address the same issues differently, often leading to further conflict if the two organizations attempt to work in coalitions.  The sustainable growth of both organizations, as well as the movement as a whole, may be hampered as well.  


  The choice to 'self-advocate' as 'one autistic community' to expand the social safety net to help more autistics more quickly, with administrative and public policymaking cognizance of individual variation, was a choice that too few autistic self-advocates, in leadership positions and seeking to retain them, in organizations like GRASP, ASAN nationally and in local chapters, AASCEND, Autism National Committee, ANI Autism Network International and AAC (Association for Autistic Community successor to ANI at least in Autreat management), as well as organizations not led by autistics, made to the detriment of the autistic community as a whole.