[nfb-talk] Alright, from another passionate liberal.RE: nfb-talk Digest, Vol 55, Issue 62

Thu Dec 27 19:42:59 UTC 2012

Well, you're right. SSI usually means "Supplimental Security Income". But it 
is also used to mean "Social Security Income".  I was indeed using the less 
common meaning which is confusing.

You're also right about the source for Supplimental Security Income, 
"Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program 
funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes."

http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/

According to  the AARP web site, Supplimental Security Income payments are 
not effected by the fiscal cliff:

http://blog.aarp.org/2012/12/21/over-the-fiscal-cliff-what-you-need-to-know-right-now/

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Tardif" <markspark at roadrunner.com>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 1:23 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Alright,from another passionate liberal.RE: nfb-talk 
Digest, Vol 55,Issue 62

> Please, let me just give you a friendly correction here.  You keep talking 
> about an SSI crisis.  I think you mean regular Social Security benefits, 
> or even SSDI, (Social Security Disability Insurance), very different 
> animals from SSI, (Supplemental Security Income.  SSI is a program 
> designed to help those who are disabled or blind, but it is income-based, 
> not based on you putting anything into the system through years of 
> employment.  In other words, you don't have to have worked in order to 
> receive SSI.  It is, however, much more directly tied to any other income 
> you may be receiving. And whild the Social Security Administration 
> administers SSI, my understanding is that the money actually comes out of 
> the general treasury, not out of the Social Security trust fund.  People 
> get those programs confused, but I think if we are going to discuss them, 
> it is important that we know which programs we are talking about.  Just a 
> friendly suggestion.
>
> Mark Tardif
> Nuclear arms will not hold you.
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Todor Fassl
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 1:51 PM
> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Alright,from another passionate liberal.RE: 
> nfb-talk Digest, Vol 55,Issue 62
>
> In my opinion, when someone says something that is totally untrue, even in
> passing, it is important to set the record straight. I don't really want 
> to
> argue about Fox News but I don't think we should just let it slide that 
> some
> people think Fox News is the equivalent of CNN. It's just not.
>
> Anyway, lets talk about SSI and the national debt.
>
> Did you know that the federal government actually comes out ahead on the
> money it borrows right now? The interest rate the government pays is less
> than the rate of inflation. You could argue that it encourages the
> government to just keep on borrowing but what it proves is that there is 
> no
> debt crisis. If bankers were worried about the national debt, they 
> wouldn't
> be so anxious to loan money to the government. The only serious issue 
> right
> now is that in 20 to 30 years, there will be less money collected from
> workers than what is needed to pay for SSI benefits for the retirees and 
> the
> disabled.
>
> But that is not a crisis. First of all, that's a long way off. Secondly, 
> its
> a temporary problem caused by the "baby boom" right after WWII. Fifty to
> sixty years from now, the ratio of recipients to payers goes back to a
> manageable level.  And lastly, even the temporary problem can be managed 
> by
> doing things like raising the retirement age and putting a cap on the 
> income
> you can receive and still get benefits. It's silly for Warren Buffet to be
> receiving SSI checks.
>
> One thing we should not do is raise payroll taxes to buff up the Social
> Security Trust Fund.  There really is no such thing. The reason is that if
> we collect money today, where are we going to put it? You want to put that
> money in the safest possible place, right? Wyou know what that is? 
> T-Bills.
> In other words, buy some of the national debt. So then we end up taxing
> people to borrow money from ourselves -- which is stupid. As much as I
> admire Daniel Patrick Moynahan, that was a dumb idea he came up with years
> ago. If hhe were here today, he'd probably argue that he didn't expect the
> government just to spend the money but what else can they do?  Maybe we
> should have bought Canada with the money. I'll bet we could get a good 
> price
> for it today.
>
> Anyway, there really is no SSI crisis.  The impending problem is really
> fairly minor. And eventually, Social Security will reach an equlibrium
> between payments and benefits. As our population continues to age, there
> will always be a problem with the ratio of payers to recipients. But we'll
> just have to keep raising the retirement age. And after all, that only 
> makes
> sense because the problem is caused by people living longer and longer.
> Essentially, all we have to do is keep the average number of years that
> people receive benefits constant.
>
> From: "Ray Foret Jr" <rforetjr at att.net>
> To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:07 PM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Alright,from another passionate liberal.RE: 
> nfb-talk
> Digest, Vol 55,Issue 62
>
>
>> Totally agree here.  Many thanks Mike.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> The Constantly Barefooted Ray
>> Still a very proud and happy Mac and Iphone user!
>>
>> On Dec 27, 2012, at 12:01 PM, Mike Freeman <k7uij at panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You're not getting it: there are those who consider CBS News and the NY 
>>> Times as propaganda organs also and all the more shameful for not 
>>> admitting it. Since we discuss our common connection, blindness, here 
>>> and are loath to pay for a debating society here, especially when such 
>>> debates do little more than generate controversy and division, it's 
>>> better to keep to blindness.
>>>
>>> Mike Freeman
>>> sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Dec 27, 2012, at 9:41, "Todor Fassl" <fassl.tod at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well, I mainly just want to nake the distinction between Fox News and 
>>>> other news sources clear.  It's up to the reader to decide the 
>>>> significance. It's not a matter of opinion that Fox News is trying to 
>>>> persuade people to vote conservative. They say so themselves 
>>>> practically every day. By definition, that makes them a propoganda 
>>>> outlet, not a news source.
>>>>
>>>> There may be value in reading "The Daily Worker" from the Communist 
>>>> Party. You may learn things you wouldn't have learned otherwise. Never 
>>>> the less, it's propoganda. So is Fox News.
>>>>
>>>> You may learn something from listening to Fox News. And I can't tell 
>>>> people not to listen to them. That's really none of my business.  But 
>>>> the fact is that Fox News is absolutely, positively, definately not the 
>>>> conservative equivalent of CNN or NPR or CBS or the New York Times.
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Jacobson" 
>>>> <steve.jacobson at visi.com>
>>>> To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 11:18 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Alright,from another passionate liberal.RE: 
>>>> nfb-talk Digest, Vol 55,Issue 62
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> This is exactly why we have to be careful what we discuss here.  Your 
>>>>> comments here are not going to be seen as fact by everyone, and 
>>>>> inevitably
>>>>> someone is going to challenge them and sooner or later things get 
>>>>> heated. That's not how it should be, but it is how it is on lists.  It 
>>>>> is as firm a rule as the
>>>>> law of gravity.  .  While I don't trust any news source that feels 
>>>>> they have to tell me that they are fair and balanced, I think that one 
>>>>> has to realize that there
>>>>> are cases when any news source is not going to be objective.  I could 
>>>>> say more about Fox and MSNBC, but it won't help us address the issues 
>>>>> that face
>>>>> us as blind people.  Each of us has to make decisions about what we 
>>>>> support in general, but it is important that we can learn here how 
>>>>> various options
>>>>> affect us as blind people so we can act accordingly, and that means we 
>>>>> have to get along well enough to be able to share information.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>>> nfb-talk:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/rforetjr%40att.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nfb-talk:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/fassl.tod%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/markspark%40roadrunner.com
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/5989 - Release Date: 12/26/12
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfb-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/fassl.tod%40gmail.com 