[nfb-talk] my ideas for ending SSI & SSDI

[ckrugman at sbcglobal.net]

Your last point is probably the most important not only for blind students 
but for students with all serious disabilities. I have seen too many 
instances where students were totally unprepared once they left the academic 
settings as they were not able to problem solve on their own. While having 
services around are convenient I am a product of the generation where blind 
students had to develop ingenuity and be able to solve accessibility 
problems on their own more often than not. Having had to hire and deal with 
readers time sheets procure books and arrange for them to be recorded was a 
good skill learned in college which helped deal with supervising and 
managing personnel that was transferable to the employment work to use one 
example.
Chuck
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Jacobson" <steve.jacobson at visi.com>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] my ideas for ending SSI & SSDI


> John,
>
> Whether it is right or wrong, I have found it to be a very human feeling 
> not to consider a job that pays little to be as serious as one paying the 
> true wage.  Sure,
> persons seeking employment should have the long view in mind, but that's 
> easier said than done.  While the tax credit idea is interesting, for many 
> companies, the
> credit would have to be substantial before it would be worth their time to 
> do the paperwork.  In the case of a larger corporation, it likely wouldn't 
> provide any
> appreciable insentive.
>
> I think that one thing that should be done is that some of the costs of 
> specialized equipment should be returned to the government.  In some 
> cases, we are more
> expensive to hire, and while an employer benefits from the work we do as 
> long as we are capable, the employer does not gain any particular benefit 
> because we are
> blind.  Society does gain, though, by the fact that we move off SSI and we 
> start paying taxes.  I think it was Germany that used to have a tax on all 
> employers that
> was used to maintain a fund for buying adaptive equipment.  That made some 
> sense to me, although I don't know what has happened to that in more 
> recent years.
>
> We also have to continue efforts to increase the accessibility of software 
> in the workplace.  If one works in the private sector, this can be a 
> tricky business.  This
> takes education and possibly additional laws, but it is a hard sell.
>
> Another area that needs to be addressed indirectly is transportation. 
> When I started working, somewhere back when you started, it was reasonable 
> to locate near
> one's work, and of course, this needs to remain a consideration.  However, 
> this is becoming more difficult all the time as more households have two 
> people working,
> rarely at the same place, and one changes jobs or even careers more often 
> now.  I don't have a good answer to this.  I know that paratransit works 
> for some people,
> but it has been a real pain for others.  I am fortunate to work for a 
> company that is very dedicated to encouraging carpooling and vanpooling, 
> but participation has
> dropped greatly because of families having both parents working requiring 
> more flexibility in arrival and departure time as parents share the job of 
> picking up kids from
> school or daycare.
>
> These are the kinds of things that I see keeping people on SSI and to some 
> degree SSDI, and need addressing.  We are trying to address some of these 
> within the
> NFB, but I think getting the government back into providing equipment 
> across the board is going to be a tough sell for now.  I also see 
> accessibility of software for
> employment to be complicated.  In some jobs, the software can't just be 
> accessible in the normal sense, it has to be efficient for the blind 
> person.  This isn't always
> easy to tackle.  Software can change so rapidly now that to add the kind 
> of time to figure how to make it efficient for us probably would fall into 
> the "undue burden"
> language of some laws.  Still, we have to keep pushing in that direction.
>
> Finally, and this is where I agree with the caution expressed about 
> entitlement, I have talked with blind students who come into the job 
> market assuming there will be
> a disabled employees office just like a disabled student's office to make 
> sure that everything they need in terms of accessible documents and such 
> are handed to
> them.  They don't know how to get through a course by working with a 
> reader or a co-worker to understand something that may not be accessible 
> and then work
> with the accessibility issues later.  To work successfully, we have to 
> have tools of our own, and sometimes it even means working some extra.  We 
> have to realize
> that if we spend half a day scanning a document that we need but that 
> nobody else has to scan, it means that our employer didn't get what they 
> were paying for
> durint that time.  Of course, nobody works every second, so one has to 
> learn what they can squeeze in and what has to be handled some other way. 
> Sometimes
> employers are good about such things in order to encourage diversity among 
> their staff.  This can be a tough transition for many now, moreso than it 
> was for those of
> us who had to develop some of these skills in college.  I'm not saying 
> that there shouldn't be any help for students, but college is also a time 
> to develop some of the
> skills one might need later on the job.
>
> To me, these are the kinds of things that will reduce the dependence on 
> SSDI and SSI, far more than trying to change the funds themselves.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve Jacobson
>
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:07:34 -0500, John G. Heim wrote:
>
>>Well, technically, these are not ideas for ending SSI and SSDI.
>
>>1. Companies should get tax credits for hiring someone on SSI or SSDI 
>>equal
>>to the amount the person would have received if they'd stayed on SSI or
>>SSDI. The tax credit could last for one year, two years, three -- whatever
>>it takes. Note that this idea is revenue neutral. Of course, someone would
>>have to be on SSI or SSDI in order to go off SSI or SSDI this way. So my
>>idea doesn't do away with SSI and SSDI. But we don't really want to do 
>>that
>>anyway because some people simply cannot work and can never come off SSI 
>>or
>>SSDI.
>
>>2. Waive minimum wage laws for people on SSI or SSDI for 2 or 3 years 
>>after
>>they are hired.  The disabled person would continue to get SSI or SSDI 
>>while
>>they're working because they'd only be making $1 an hour (or whatever).
>
>
>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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