For some people with disabilities it’s a social services problem because they will never have the capacity to work for their income with their own type of disability. For others like myself it’s an occupational support issue.

i consider both of these to be some form of social support to be honest.

the rest of the post i pretty much agree with. As you said it's not a competency problem (although technically it is in terms of the hiring procedure) it's a training latency problem. Even beyond that point, there are a lot of people with physical disability who can do various different kinds of work. Physical disability is rather broad as defined, so it could include someone with an amputated limb for example. While that's not going to help, it's most certainly not going to kill their job prospects, unless they're a trained pianist or something. That might pose a problem.

I think the conceptual meaning of ableism is just, weird. For one thing it could very easily be implied that different people are "differently" able, which could be construed to mean that black people aren't smart enough to work office jobs (to pull a historically relevant example) the other implication is better, i can't really think of any exact definition that would pin down this phenomenon in such a way that i would be comfortable referring to a specific thing as "ableist"

I think the closest that you might get is incredibly bad accessibility design, stairs for someone in a wheelchair, for example. I guess to me ableism is more of a passive thing, than an active thing. Not hiring someone based on disability would either be discriminatory or just good ole capitalism in my eyes depending on the situation.

You might be able to use ableist to broadly describe aspects of society, but i feel like that's going to be really uncharted territory and i don't really want to go there.

I guess ultimately i just think discrimination is more than suited in like 95% of cases here lol.