[nfb-talk] blind and wanting to improve things, not get labeled

Mon Apr 26 10:12:30 UTC 2010

Actually, this is an accurate description of the events that have taken 
place.
Chuck
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "T. Joseph Carter" <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com>
To: "qubit" <lauraeaves at yahoo.com>; "NFB Talk Mailing List" 
<nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 1:10 AM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] blind and wanting to improve things, not get labeled


> One story about the pay-go adoption, and Congress's willingness to ignore 
> it, is here:
>
> http://www.ombwatch.org/node/10259
>
> It has a conservative slant, but most of the stuff about the current 
> incarnation of the rule obviously would, since the liberals don't want to 
> encourage people to look too closely at the details unless it's the GOP 
> who is ignoring pay-go.  I chose it because it's at least intellectually 
> honest enough to admit that the problem is with Congress, not with any 
> particular party.
>
> There are actually liberal sites that decry the GOP ignoring the pay-go 
> rule when they were in power, but most of those have been scrubbed now 
> that the shoe's on the other foot.  I swear, Congress acts like a bunch of 
> five year olds.  Someone who can actually be an adult needs to tell them 
> that we don't care who started it.  *grin*
>
> As for the realization that they haven't followed the rule even once, that 
> took a little more digging to see what bills have actually passed the 
> House since rule went back into effect.  Not actually that many, as it 
> turns out.  I think the legwork on that one was done by Heritage in order 
> to embarrass the Democrats.  But since the GOP did much the same, I'm not 
> inclined to jump up and down pointing at the majority and ignoring the 
> scumbags in the minority as well.
>
> (I have a high opinion of Congress, if you can't tell.)
>
> Joseph
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 10:36:41PM -0500, qubit wrote:
>>Where is the source of this little gem?
>>--le
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "T. Joseph Carter" <carter.tjoseph at gmail.com>
>>To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 7:50 PM
>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] blind and wanting to improve things, not get 
>>labeled
>>
>>
>>The current crop of bozos have passed a pay-go rule that requires
>>them to fund all legislation.
>>
>>Every bill since the enactment of the rule has first gone through a
>>vote to suspend the rule so they did not actually have to pay for it,
>>even though they claim credit for passing the rule and cite it as an
>>example of their commitment to bringing down deficit spending.
>>That's right.  Every. Single. Bill.
>>
>>In fact, they demonized the one guy who objected to the suspension of
>>the rule, one time.  And neither Republican nor Democrat stood with
>>him and insisted that the rule be followed.
>>
>>This is why Social Security WILL fail, and why a bunch of blind
>>people are going to suddenly have a really hard time paying the rent.
>>They ought to know what's happening, and they ought to be demanding
>>an accounting from their elected leaders.  Failure to do so will only
>>hurt those of us who depend on these services.
>>
>>Joseph
>>
>>On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 10:59:03PM -0700, ckrugman at sbcglobal.net wrote:
>>>And we must not forget that
>>>Social Security would not be in the unfunded position that it is in
>>>had the trust fund not been raided to cover other government
>>>expenditures as it has been raided many times over the past years.
>>>Chuck
>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter"
>>><carter.tjoseph at gmail.com>
>>>To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 12:50 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] blind and wanting to improve things, not get
>>>labeled
>>>
>>>
>>>>According to the US Debt Clock (privately run and woefully
>>>>inaccessible), the current total US liability per person is in the
>>>>neighborhood of $350,634.  If you spread the wealth evenly, the
>>>>total US national assets (public and private), per person, are only
>>>>$234,237.  That means if you follow the current doctrine of soak
>>>>the rich and make sure nobody has any more than everyone else gets,
>>>>every single man, woman, and child in these United States would
>>>>still owe a total of $116,377.
>>>>
>>>>I've got no idea how much of that is owed to other countries like
>>>>China and how much of that is owed to Grandma (the largest unfunded
>>>>liability of the government is Social Security), but there you have
>>>>it.  If everything we own, all of our land and possessions are
>>>>taken as payment of the national debt, we all still owe something
>>>>in the neighborhood of the value of my family's house, pre-housing
>>>>debacle.
>>>>
>>>>The government has no money to pay squat.  One of these days,
>>>>Social Security is going to not get paid because our debtors are
>>>>going to start demanding a return on their investment.  That's
>>>>basic Economics 101.  WHEN that happens, not if, people looking for
>>>>the government to pay their bills are going to be screwed.
>>>>
>>>>Ask the teachers in California how well they can spend IOUs.  In
>>>>time, that'll be readers' SSI and SSDI checks.  The alternatives
>>>>are a complete and immediate collapse of the dollar or
>>>>Zimbabwe-style inflation.  Scary stuff.
>>>>
>>>>You cannot spend money indefinitely without the ability or desire
>>>>to pay. If you and I do that, we will at least destroy our credit
>>>>rating or at worse go to jail for fraud.  The Weasel Caucus (which
>>>>seems to be the only thing bi-partisan in DC anymore) is doing the
>>>>same and has been apparently since before I was born.  They
>>>>probably won't face any real consequences for it.
>>>>
>>>>We will, sooner or later.  And it's gonna hit certain populations
>>>>(like blind people collecting SSI and SSDI for example) a whole lot
>>>>harder than it's going to hit political fat cats who quibble over
>>>>which model of Gulf Stream Jet they are forced to fly in.
>>>>
>>>>If the media wants to see real anger in the streets, wait till
>>>>people figure out just how screwed we really are, courtesy of a
>>>>whole bunch of fat elephants and complete donkeys, who will have
>>>>moved their not inconsiderable assets to safety long before it
>>>>happens.
>>>>
>>>>Ready to vote them all out,
>>>>
>>>>Joseph
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:43:03PM -0500, David Andrews wrote:
>>>>>Well, the government probably has more money, and can provide
>>>>>things in a more even-handed regular way.  Yes, there are
>>>>>problems with administering government programs -- but private
>>>>>ones too.  Who hasn't had billing problems with an insurance
>>>>>company, a phone company, a a bank or a credit card company.  Any
>>>>>large system that tries to make everybody, and everything the
>>>>>same is going to have these kinds of problems.  If you think the
>>>>>government has a monopoly on the bad stuff, or that the private
>>>>>sector could administer a large program without mistakes, fraud
>>>>>and the rest of it is just thinking selectively to make a point.
>>>>>
>>>>>Dave
>>>>>
>>>>>At 11:43 PM 4/22/2010, you wrote:
>>>>>>Chuck, I don't know you of course, but based on your comments,
>>>>>>I'm tempted to think that you don't receive social security or
>>>>>>Medicare benefits. I and many of my friends can relate horror
>>>>>>story after horror story involving the bureaucracy and
>>>>>>ineptness of various government programs. I've asked many
>>>>>>liberals in amicable debates why they believe that the
>>>>>>government is better able to provide assistance than the
>>>>>>private sector. I ask on a historical, efficiency and
>>>>>>motivational basis. At the end of the arguments, though many
>>>>>>platitudes come across, I've never received a solid answer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>RyanO
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org