This reminds me of a small discussion on the ACBNY list that occurred, only
because I asked if any of our local agencies had services for elderly homebound
blind people. Back in 1962 when I began working as a social worker at what
later became Helen Keller Services for the blind, Fred had recently become
supervisor of what was then called the home teaching department, shortly
rechristened the rehab teaching department. If you were old and blind and you
needed help, you saw a social worker who then referred you, usually to the home
teaching department, for whatever services you needed. Usually, it was skills
of daily living. There was one woman in her sixties who, amazingly, wanted to
learn braille, and she did. Then, perhaps within a year or so, the commission
for the blind developed a way to provide federal and state funding for rehab
teaching services for elderly people by creating a new category, "homemaker".
This allowed them to pretend that there was the equivalent of a vocational goal
and reimburse the agency for services. But what that meant was that each client
had to apply to the commission and receive a package of services. If you just
wanted to learn braille or learn how to eat properly, (which is what I'd like
to do now that my useable vision isn't useable), you couldn't apply and the
agency no longer wanted to take you as a client for just one or two services
because there'd be no reimbursement. Since then, they've added and subtracted
and now, instead of services being chosen to meet the client's needs and being
reimbursed for as long as necessary, there's a set of services, reimbursed by
the commission, a little package, for a short period of time. Everything is
bureaucratic and it all depends on funding. It's mechanistic. People in their
forties and fifties can't imagine a world where you go to the hospital for
surgery, and stay there for several days, and you're cared for by nurses or
businesses with owners and employees who actually personally know their
customers and care about providing good service and talk with them. Unions
really did fight for their members and make their lives better. Most people
were home on weekends, not working, not shopping on Sundays or week nights at
11 pm. Yes the system always did favor the wealthy elites, and there were many
inconveniences and lots of pollution. But there was also a lot more
communication. Workers had a better deal, and so did blind clients in the New
York metro area.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 7:33 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren, 1 more thing
In taking a position with the State of Washington, it was part of our agreement
that I would receive a retirement pension as part of my pay.
Also I was to receive annual leave, sick leave, and certain designated
Holidays. It was all spelled out in my contract, and to date the State of
Washington has lived up to its end of the agreement. From time to time the
Establishment decides that they are being too generous with their employees.
They decide that receiving both social security and a state pension might
afford the retiree a decent retirement. And besides, they can use the money
for some other projects. The only defense against such pilferage is a strong
employees union. Although, when I was working for the state, our employees
union had lost the leverage of negotiating wages, it was still strong enough to
prevent the loss of fringe benefits. I retired under a fairly generous plan.
But within a couple of years new hires had a new plan that offered less in
benefits. And I understand that later on there was a third even leaner
retirement package set in place. A definite sign that the employees union was
losing strength.
Also, as with our current employment, the state is doing more and more contract
work. We receive a proposed contract which we can either accept...if we want
to work, or reject...which means the state will offer it to others. Under
contract we have no fringe benefits, unless we pay for them. This would be
fine, if the contract actually covered the Program Services and a decent wage
for the contracting agent. But of course it never does.
Carl Jarvis
On 11/12/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What I read from your link says that a bill was presented which would
allow some state workers, who are unable to receive social security
benefits, to receive state benefits equivalent to what their social
security benefits would be. It doesn't say that they lose benefits.
As for the debate I mentioned, I don't have a link, but it was the one
that took place at Hofstra University.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Frank Ventura
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 1:29 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren, 1 more thing
Hi Miriam, in the days after 9-11, the Bush administration amended the
social security law by inserting what is known as the "windfall
elimination provision", which allows states to take the amount of a
social security benefit out of a retirees pension or deferred
compensation effectively preventing them from collecting social
security. For example if an employee retires and gets $2000 from their
deferred comensation and $1000 from social security their deferred
compensation will be reduced to $1000. See the link below my
signature. To the best of my knowledge only 6 sates do this to their
employees with Massachusetts being one. Sadly, my senator, Ms. Warren refuses
to take a stand against this provision.
As far as Obama, I found many youtube clips of his debates but I found
noting where he said that he will eliminate or reduce social security.
Can you provide a link? If he did say that it certainly will be
everywhere on the internet.
Frank
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/new-bill-would-change-social-security-
rule-on-public-workers-benefits.html
P
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Miriam Vieni
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 9:38 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren, 1 more thing
Well Frank,
It depends on what you mean by far left. I don't understand about your
state, how it could prevent you from receiving social security. I'll
have to google that. But I do remember hearing Obama, in a
presidential debate with Romney, talk about how it would be a good
idea to privatize social security or lower its benefits or some such
thing. And now that I'm reading the book, We've Got People by Ryan
Grinn, which is a detailed history of the Democratic Party since Jesse
Jackson's run, my memory of Obama being willing to reduce our social
security has been verified. So if you think that the Democratic
leadership is left wing, you've been fooled like a lot of us were. The
Clinton wing of the Democratic party is corporatist and cares only to
stay in power. There's an industry of consultants who stay in business
because the party insists that moninees raise a certain amount of money in
order to be supported in elections by the party.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Frank Ventura
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 2:29 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren, 1 more thing
Miriam, yours is just one of the many experiences that make me think
we have already lost the battle. I used to have a stack of my late
mother's medical bills on my desk at home. I have since put them in a
file box and hid them under my desk as I can't stand to see them.
About half of my take home pay goes to those bills and will most
likely do so until I die. Thankfully I don't have children so the
cycle of inherited debt will stop. Carl spoke about how he fears that his
pension and social security will be protected.
That is a generational thing as my generation is already living in a
world where those things don't exist. Even here in my allegedly
progressive state, my union has lost access to the state pension
system. Instead we have it replaced by (nudge, wink) "deferred
compensation" which is nothing more than a zero interest savings
account where I am forced to contribute 15 percent of my paycheck to
every pay period and then when I retire I get to cash it in minus the
almost 30 percent of cumulative back end charges and fees. Now about
that social security? As a state employee I am not allowed to collect
social security when I retire. Sure we pay into it but remember that
piece of paper we signed when we took the job? Yes sir that "windfall
elimination plan" law really sticks it to me as it does in the other 5
states in the country that require state employees to sign away their
social security. I feel defeated and don't have any positive view of
the future despite how many far left podcasts I listen to as they too are
part of the corporate demigods that got us where we are.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Miriam Vieni
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 9:25 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren, 1 more thing
Amy was trying to ask, what she thought was a provocative and
meaningful question, and Warren was trying to dodge it. But really, I
don't see the point of the question. I've noticed that she often does
something similar, asks public figures to comment on outrageous things
that other people have said. Trying to get someone to say something in
an unguarded moment is not, as far as I'm concerned, doing useful journalism.
As for your personal concern, I surely do understand that. As I've
explained, my income slowly decreases as municipal bonds are called
and replaced with bonds that pay a lower rate of interest. My expenses
rise, supplemental medical insurance, Medicare Prescription insurance,
and other expenses. As my physical capacities decline, and I'm not
sure how long I'll be able to walk, I'm going to have to have a
different level of care. And that's another issue. I can be empathetic
toward people on the margins of society, but it's quite a different
situation when you find yourself dependent on people who don't
understand your needs, have little education and poor training, don't speak
English well, and may steal your belongings.
Now that Yaneek is leaving to join our military, I may very soon be
back in that situation again. What is most ironic is if I had the
$400,000 annually to pay for what is considered a quality nursing home
here and if I wanted to be in such a place, I'd be cared for by
employees at the same level of education, and they wouldn't be working
for me, but for an impersonal bureaucracy. When my mother was dying of
cancer, she was in a well known Catholic hospital that serves dying
cancer patients. It had a modern clean physical plant. They had her on
medication which kept her free from pain.
But all her personal belongings were stolen. I also remember visiting
one Friday night. The rooms were all laid out in a circle, opening
onto a corridor, and in the center of the circle, there was a glass
enclosed nursing station. As we walked along the corridor, I could
hear a woman crying out, asking for help or something. She must have
been feeling frightened and alone. No one went to her. Those nurses
acted like she didn't exist. That was back in the late 80's. Oh, and
by the way, because she didn't die within a year of being admitted,
they threw her out. She died in the best nursing home I could get her
into, with a much poorer level of care, a few months later.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 7:17 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren, 1 more thing
I heard it, both during the "debate" and on Democracy Now. I have no
idea why Amy played that up. It sounded to me as if it were simply
another side step in order to avoid saying anything provocative.
Frankly, I run hot and cold. We have a bunch of brain damaged
candidates eager to be the last president of the American Empire.
The billionaires are so greed driven that they no longer understand
that they need to working class in order to continue enriching themselves.
My current concern is wondering how long our pensions and social
security will continue. That is the source of the majority of our monthly
income.
If we continue headed down the road the way we are, it won't be long
before Cathy and I will be attempting to live on half of what we need
to stay afloat.
Carl Jarvis
On 11/11/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Democracy Now thought that Warren's response to Amy's last question
was so significant, that they have it as a separate thing on the
website and it downloaded as a separate episode. Amy asked her to
comment on the first 2 primaries being in majority white states where
candidates would have to spend a lot of time wooing voters and then
the third in a state with a large black population. Warren said, "Are
you going to ask me to comment on that?"
and then she said, "I'm just a player in the game." I suppose that
Amy thinks this is significant, Warren refusing to comment on race?
Miriam