# 42 million Americans can not afford food.....



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/pove...ood-stamps/ss-BBKRUn8?ocid=spartanntp#image=1


*42 million Americans struggle to afford food*
Food is a basic need that an estimated 42 million Americans struggle to afford.

SNAP began as a temporary relief program during the Great Depression and became a permanent fixture in 1964 under President Lyndon Johnson. In its first year, the Food Stamp Program, as it was then known, had a budget of $75 million. As of fiscal 2017, the federal government spent about $70 billion on SNAP, in addition to modest administrative costs shouldered by the states.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

As Judas Iscariot was informed about 2000 years ago by a well known personage, the poor will always be with you. My first thought is that constitutionally it is not within the authority of the federal government to engage in redistribution of wealth, and that charity falls under the venue of private charity, including and especially the organizations which exist ostensibly in honor of the aforementioned personage. If those organizations followed through with their part of this I doubt that there would have been a temporary turned permanent federal program which grew and grew. At the end of the day, constitutional or not, it is difficult to justify allowing people not to eat regularly.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

I do not think anyone wants another to starve, but surely we need to fix some of the problems here before taking on new problems.

40 million people needing money to eat seems like it should not be such a high number in what is considered a first world country...….seems like a lot to me.

Seems like a much more important issue than over sized soft drinks or straws......or a 3 toed frog.....


----------



## oldasrocks (Oct 27, 2006)

Some of the poor are their own worst enemies. I don't mind helping people actually in need but there are so many leachers it makes me sick. We wee them in WalMart with a load of expensive stuff like Porterhouse steaks. I also see how they are dressed to the 9's, fancy hairdos, manicured nails and high priced shoes. Then they get into nicer cars than I have.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Pure vanity...….a lot of peoples moral compass is soo skewed the ship is already on the rocks.

American society teaches that if people have a nice car and look a certain way they are A Ok and have it made, its the happy life and what many now consider the American dream.

When in reality, most of them are just a few checks from homeless and repo`s, very frustrated and about as far from happy as possible...to them, its the American nightmare, many bicker over petty things because their stress and frustration levels are soo high......their happiness rides a couple checks one way or the other from made in the shade, to suicide.


If you have a decent 10 year old car paid off, a modest house paid off and wear normal used looking clothes you are a lesser person and do not have it made...…..


Bigger better faster more keeps the engine/machine alive, so all perceptual inputs teach those values....movies, advertisements etc push the idea of a societal norm upon them, so they think they can be OK and blend in by dressing a certain way or presenting a image of success...…….unfortunately the poor are most susceptible to this as they already feel lesser and have low self esteem from watching what they perceive to be having it made.


In a society where image is promoted over morals...……..


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

The food stamp program was created as a subsidy for the "FARMERS" in America. Which is why it is under the Dept. of Agriculture, and "NOT" Department of Health and Human Services.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

shawnlee said:


> Pure vanity...….a lot of peoples moral compass is soo skewed the ship is already on the rocks.
> 
> American society teaches that if people have a nice car and look a certain way they are A Ok and have it made, its the happy life and what many now consider the American dream.
> 
> ...


All true. Worse yet is that the problem here pushes and pulls. On one side, Madison Avenue, so-called fashion authorities, and the neighbors and kids at school all emphasize that you are somehow deficient if you don't spend every penny you can earn and borrow on appearances. This mindset is also reinforced by government, employers, and bankers who don't want any of us in a position to tell them to go bugger themselves and refuse to be a cog in their machine.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Sourdough said:


> The food stamp program was created as a subsidy for the "FARMERS" in America. Which is why it is under the Dept. of Agriculture, and "NOT" Department of Health and Human Services.


True, but I doubt that Red Frank's merry men failed to notice that it served to put the farmers and consumers affected both on the plantation regardless of how they set it up officially.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

IndyDave said:


> All true. Worse yet …. This mindset is also reinforced by government, employers, and bankers who don't want any of us in a position to tell them to go bugger themselves and refuse to be a cog in their machine.


 Sorry I can`t help myself....


----------



## Oregon1986 (Apr 25, 2017)

I don't judge anyone for being on food stamps because I have been in their shoes and I don't feel bad about it. When I was pregnant with my son I also had a 6 year old daughter,was a single mom and I was busting my butt working 40 hrs a week and often over time. I made $11.50 an hour and still needed help with food stamps. There are those out there who truly are working hard but still need a little help


----------



## dodgesmammaw (Jun 19, 2013)

We volunteer at the local mission weekly . We are always thrilled when all they need is a hand up.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

The problem is we are not willing to allow farmers to go broke. With the evolution of combustion engine and rapidly improved farm machinery, and methods, the farms produced massive excess food. The Federal Government started purchasing the food as a method of building a floor on the wholesale market price of farm products. What you would call the purchaser of last resort. Much of that farm product was shipped to poor countries with starving populations. And still is.

This is all a form of what is called "Social Engineering". Our entire Federal Tax Code is social engineering. It is interesting that we talk about the possibility of a massive economic collapses, and devastating depression. The quickest way to trigger that would be to substantially reduce the food stamp program.

What people don't understand is that all of the systems are illusions. They exist simply because without them there would be instant catastrophic hell on earth, and at some point they will fail like cascading dominos, or a house of cards. The system that we have sucks, but it is better then the alternative.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

I'm sure a few people need assistance through some rough times in this country. But as others have pointed out there is simply no reason for 20 % of our population to not afford to feed themselves in one of the worlds wealthiest nations. It's a matter of priorities. Food is literally dirt cheap in this country. Maybe spend a little less on smart phones, fancy rims, tats, and Nike footwear, buy real food instead.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Sourdough said:


> The problem is we are not willing to allow farmers to go broke. With the evolution of combustion engine and rapidly improved farm machinery, and methods, the farms produced massive excess food. The Federal Government started purchasing the food as a method of building a floor on the wholesale market price of farm products. What you would call the purchaser of last resort. Much of that farm product was shipped to poor countries with starving populations. And still is.


 
The problems are much deeper than that......the farmers are hardly getting rich, about the time they think they are making money, a crazy expensive piece of machinery breaks...…


Food is cheap, the farmer sells it very cheap, if that is what food costs, everyone would be full.


What has happened is giant corps have taken over food production and they are regulated into crazy town which jacks the price up, places like here are 4 bucks + a gallon for diesel, so it adds a huge charge to the transportation of food, top that off with business burdened by crazy regulations to mandatory crazy health care burdens, rising minimum wages and you end up with a massive price taxed on to the food.


As the price of all ancillary costs rise that just gets tacked on to the end product......raise the wage to 15 bucks a hour, top it off with some crazy health care scam, add in some mandatory 401k and whatever else you want....the business just marks up goods and a worker really ends up with out any more money in the end as whatever wage increase was given ends up in the product retail costs.....


Follow the dollar thru its cycle and you will understand what is happening, I could type out 40 paragraphs and break it down, but no one really cares, if you do, feel free to look it up......short version, pushing 65% of our income goes to the government...….if we push that out and break down how much of the same dollar as you spend it that gets spent by businesses you patronize for government licensing,city licenses etc etc etc...…..it becomes clear why 40 million people cant afford food.....many that can, can not afford to buy a house or a new car......or pay for health care.


Do not even get me started on the creation of the dollar as it starts out in hole to begin with...…


Money is like blood that flows thru arteries , created, spent, received,payed out, taxed and then flows out again to start the process over....there are some clogged arteries and some side eddies and whirlpools the money is getting caught in, its just a few and then those dollars are spent strategically to funnel the flow in certain directions and fuel agendas from mild to wild.


Make some money flow charts for the basic businesses and your personal money...….follow it from begging to end in a few basic circles for a business, employee, farmer, grocery store, commodities of various natures and in government taxes......the picture will become clear.

You can use that to piece a local economy together and understand how the money just flows in a circle...…...but when you get a clogged artery or the blood goes to one part of the body and does not complete the circle we get big trouble.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Just some food for thought-

http://www.healthdata.org/news-rele...ght-or-obese-and-weight-growing-problem-among
An estimated 160 million Americans are either obese or overweight. Nearly three-quarters of American men and more than 60% of women are obese or overweight. 
In the US the greatest prevalence of obesity and overweight was found among men aged 50 to 54 (80%) and women aged 60 to 64 (73%). Among Americans under age 20, the greatest prevalence in being overweight or obese was found among children ages 10 to 14, with boys at 38% and girls at 37%.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

GTX63 said:


> Just some food for thought-
> 
> http://www.healthdata.org/news-rele...ght-or-obese-and-weight-growing-problem-among
> An estimated 160 million Americans are either obese or overweight. Nearly three-quarters of American men and more than 60% of women are obese or overweight.
> In the US the greatest prevalence of obesity and overweight was found among men aged 50 to 54 (80%) and women aged 60 to 64 (73%). Among Americans under age 20, the greatest prevalence in being overweight or obese was found among children ages 10 to 14, with boys at 38% and girls at 37%.


This would be the least of processed foods which are rich in fat and sugar and poor in nutrition. As I understand it, this is one of the primary motivators in homesteading--controlling the quality of our own food.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

3 problems as I see it. 
First, just way too many people.
Second, no common sense education. No mandatory classes on how to live within your means. Between my own, and my children's school curriculum, I do not remember a single class on avoiding debt, living within your means. There was home economics, which was a girls only thing when I was in school, but it was known mostly for baking cookies. I wonder if there was any actual economics involved? The ability to live within your means should be taught all the way through school. Saving 20 cents of every dollar of your allowance, and so on. 

Third, Federal reserve and fiat currency has made America, and the rest of the "civilized" world into a fiefdom. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Money is, in reality, worthless, since fiat currency is based on the foolish belief that the federal reserve can just up and print money, the government says "Believe in me" and we all bow and scrape, and say "Yes, Massah"


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

School administration seems to believe ie birth control education the priority rather than budget control. Yet people keep habbin dem babies.
Priority one is reeducation rather than teaching skills, creating tools and preparing for existence.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

GTX63 said:


> School administration seems to believe ie birth control education the priority rather than budget control. Yet people keep habbin dem babies.
> Priority one is reeducation rather than teaching skills, creating tools and preparing for existence.


Sounds racist.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Yes, I suppose to some most every word could.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/cult.../27545-cdc-one-in-three-nyc-babies-is-aborted
One could parse the statistics in the posted link and conclude the same thing.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

LOL!!!!
_The New American (TNA)_ is a print magazine published twice a month by American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John Birch Society.

You may as well be giving The Onion as a source.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

SRSLADE said:


> Sounds racist.


Yes, it does. There are several posts on this thread with racial undertones.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Clem said:


> LOL!!!!
> _The New American (TNA)_ is a print magazine published twice a month by American Opinion Publishing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the John Birch Society.
> 
> You may as well be giving The Onion as a source.


Many people don't care if it's opinion or complete fiction, as long as it supports their agenda.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

The end of my post #17 said "the government says "Believe in me" and we all bow and scrape, and say "Yes, Massah"" which I was well aware could be construed as racist, but more importantly, will always and eternally be associated with the groveling subservience brought on by fear and loathing, rather than adoration.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Clem said:


> The end of my post #17 said "the government says "Believe in me" and we all bow and scrape, and say "Yes, Massah"" which I was well aware could be construed as racist, but more importantly, will always and eternally be associated with the groveling subservience brought on by fear and loathing, rather than adoration.


After reading your posts for years, I understood it that way too. I never thought your post implied racism.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Oregon1986 said:


> I don't judge anyone for being on food stamps because I have been in their shoes and I don't feel bad about it. When I was pregnant with my son I also had a 6 year old daughter,was a single mom and I was busting my butt working 40 hrs a week and often over time. I made $11.50 an hour and still needed help with food stamps. There are those out there who truly are working hard but still need a little help


Yup, many families that receive SNAP benefits have at least one person working.

"Increasingly, SNAP is serving a larger share of households where one or more members are employed. Between fiscal 1989 and 2015, the share of SNAP households with earnings rose from 19.6 percent to 31.8 percent. In contrast, the percent of those receiving cash welfare (AFDC/TANF) declined from 41.9 percent to 5.8 percent over the same period. In fiscal 2015, 54.9 percent of households with children had some earned income, while 7.4 percent of households with elderly individuals and 10.7 percent of households with non-elderly individuals with disabilities had earnings."

From: https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=82672


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> This would be the least of processed foods which are rich in fat and sugar and poor in nutrition. As I understand it, this is one of the primary motivators in homesteading--controlling the quality of our own food.


Yup. Good food is expensive, and not everyone can garden. 

Chastising someone for being poor and over weight is just wrong.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> Yup, many families that receive SNAP benefits have at least one person working.
> 
> "Increasingly, SNAP is serving a larger share of households where one or more members are employed. Between fiscal 1989 and 2015, the share of SNAP households with earnings rose from 19.6 percent to 31.8 percent. In contrast, the percent of those receiving cash welfare (AFDC/TANF) declined from 41.9 percent to 5.8 percent over the same period. In fiscal 2015, 54.9 percent of households with children had some earned income, while 7.4 percent of households with elderly individuals and 10.7 percent of households with non-elderly individuals with disabilities had earnings."
> 
> From: https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartId=82672


I find it difficult to be surprised when wages have been relatively stagnant for decades and the cost of living continuously increases.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

I have a feeling that the majority of HT'ers are not particularly rich, and many if not most have at some time taken some government assistance.

i think all the boasting about how much money some claim is BS, too. 

If they had it, why would they be at a "homesteading" forum, bragging about it?


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I'm sure a few people need assistance through some rough times in this country. But as others have pointed out there is simply no reason for 20 % of our population to not afford to feed themselves in one of the worlds wealthiest nations. It's a matter of priorities. Food is literally dirt cheap in this country. Maybe spend a little less on smart phones, fancy rims, tats, and Nike footwear, buy real food instead.


Low quality food is dirt cheap. Good unprocessed produce and grass fed meat, and it doesnt have to be organic, is $$$. Low quality food will keep you alive for a while, but you wont thrive on it and eventually pay a high price for trying to live on it. Devil is in the details. All food wasnt created equal, a calorie isnt just a calorie.

Making assumptions about poor people makes you sound silly. No doubt there are fools, both rich and poor that waste their money on shiny consumer bobbles of the minute, but assuming all people are poor because they cant resist shiny bobbles is well... stupid.

And if you truly believe shiny consumer bobbles are bad for people, you should vote somebody in office that bans constant ads for such wastes of money! But oh thats right, the whole dang economy is based on people being stupid with their money and demanding their ice cream cone NOW..... To have everybody be suddenly fiscally responsible, would make the Great Depression look like boom times in comparison to what would happen.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

The headline is bull....and most are falling for it. And with headlines like that, it just makes it easier for people to whine and say "I'm one of them".
But then, it feels good to "feed the poor" and be benevolent rather than allowing people to live the consequences of their actions.

It's easier for others to feed your kid, before school, lunches and summertime. Yup - let Mom spend money on false fingernails, hairstylists and 150 dollar sneakers.

Do you know how much of that food in food boxes is wasted? "Oh, I don't like rice" or I don't know how to cook that....from one who used to go into low income homes, and see food box food piled on counters while pizza boxes are strewn around the counters and floors. It's appalling.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

shawnlee said:


> *42 million Americans struggle to afford food*
> .


The Headline should read; *"42 million Americans prefer to use their money for other things since the taxpayers will provide their food"*


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

HermitJohn said:


> Low quality food is dirt cheap. Good unprocessed produce and grass fed meat, and it doesnt have to be organic, is $$$. Low quality food will keep you alive for a while, but you wont thrive on it and eventually pay a high price for trying to live on it. Devil is in the details. All food wasnt created equal, a calorie isnt just a calorie.
> 
> Making assumptions about poor people makes you sound silly. No doubt there are fools, both rich and poor that waste their money on shiny consumer bobbles of the minute, but assuming all people are poor because they cant resist shiny bobbles is well... stupid.
> 
> And if you truly believe shiny consumer bobbles are bad for people, you should vote somebody in office that bans constant ads for such wastes of money! But oh thats right, the whole dang economy is based on people being stupid with their money and demanding their ice cream cone NOW..... To have everybody be suddenly fiscally responsible, would make the Great Depression look like boom times in comparison to what would happen.


I don't condemn anyone for being poor. Been that way myself for most of my life. (Financially speaking) what I have an issue with is folks blowing their money on the shiney baubles then expecting others to feed them. As if that isn't bad enough, we also have those in our midst who would force us to do so!


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Yup. Good food is expensive, and not everyone can garden.
> 
> Chastising someone for being poor and over weight is just wrong.



Its one thing to poke fun, its another to inform...….if no one tells you that you have a giant piece of food in yer teeth, then how do you know.

We have let far too many things become normal and OK.....that are clearly not ok, due to PC garbage.


"Some" good food is expensive, actually the good food is the cheapest in the store.....but it requires cooking and preparation......most are too lazy to cook it or do not even know how, a large part of why they are also impoverished and overweight.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

I grew up on beans n cornbread, taters n gravy, and other "cheap" food. My poor diet stunted my growth something awful. I didn't hit the 6' mark until halfway through the eight grade! Even then I grew very slowly through high school, took me all four years to pick up the last four inches.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Many people don't care if it's opinion or complete fiction, as long as it supports their agenda.


This is so very true!


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

I was wondering if the not feeding the poor people crowd feels we should not pay the farmer to grow food no one needs. They should know better than to grow extra.


----------



## hiddensprings (Aug 6, 2009)

mnn2501 said:


> The Headline should read; *"42 million Americans prefer to use their money for other things since the taxpayers will provide their food"*


. While I know that some folks use their SNAP stuff wisely and only short term until they get back on their feet, I do agree with your new headline. I've stood in line at the grocery store behind folks using the SNAP card for food then whipping out a $100 bill to pay for their beer and cigarettes. Where are their priorities? Certainly not to the two little kids they had with them.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

SRSLADE said:


> I was wondering if the not feeding the poor people crowd feels we should not pay the farmer to grow food no one needs. They should know better than to grow extra.


 I almost never see anyone take this stance, it is usually parroted by people as a rebuttal when its pointed out there is a flaw in the food programs. 


I do see it mentioned as a sure way to fix it when making hyperbole reply to illogical thinking.

I have said it many times as a match for the extremist replies to logical inquiry.....


One says, hey I noticed the snap person loading up a cart full of steak and lobster, that does not seems right and usually the extremist reply is so you want them to starve and then the reply to that extremist remark is the opposite end of the spectrum, well that would fix it, they would work or die.


I have never seen any legitimate stand as the viewpoint of "I think people should starve"...…...people will sarcastically say it and people will also put it out there as chum, but I can honestly say I have never met a person who wants people to starve...…..taking that as a stance just stagnates logical discussion, it would be the same as me replying to every instance where one wants to help and saying "So you want to take all my money"...….it justs get us no where and frankly, its shows thru as those with no argument or valid ideas as a last resort to "Win" a conversation as if that's even a thing or anyone keeps score or even cares.....


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Just another case of the safety net becoming a hammock.

Provide food for a person and they aren't hungry. They spend their money on other things. Provide rental assistance and they have roof over their heads. They spend their money on other things. Provide free day care ant their children are cared for. They spend their money on other things. Provide free health care and they
On and on it goes. Charity becomes a right. They spend their money on other things.

There are dozens of free food pantries around the metro Detroit area. The Salvation Army passes out 3,000 meals and hot chocolate 365 days a year, while keeping housing and clean beds for 300 each night. Most communities provide meals for senior citizens and churches hold numerous dinners. 

Most of the "hungry" have cable, cell phones, as they are free to spend their money on other things. Some think that if their tax dollars go to feed the poor that the poor must make economic choices in making their food last. But others will argue that how they spend their food money isn't subject to your scrutiny.

My ancestor, George Peabody, spent millions providing housing to the poor of London, to no avail.

Too often we strive to recreate the poor into our image, then complain when they don't value it the way we do.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> I almost never see anyone take this stance, it is usually parroted by people as a rebuttal when its pointed out there is a flaw in the food programs.
> 
> 
> I do see it mentioned as a sure way to fix it when making hyperbole reply to illogical thinking.
> ...


Why is the SNAP program feeding poor people a problem, but ag subsidies that pay farmers not to grow aren't? Can you explain? If one group should "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" why shouldn't the other? 

The fact is that there are food insecure kids in this country, and there shouldn't be. The fact is that many people that receive SNAP are employed and just need help feeding their kids. Just based on the attitude on this forum, the community and religious institutions would not make up for government food programs. That may have happened decades ago, but most people now don't care about anyone beyond their immediate circle. 

No, we don't have starving people now because of government programs.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Why is the SNAP program feeding poor people a problem, but ag *subsidies that pay farmers not to grow* aren't? Can you explain? If one group should "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" why shouldn't the other?


Because keeping food prices low *helps* everyone but buying food for people who could work but won't or for those scamming the system *hurts* everyone who does work.

Farmers don't "get paid not to grow".
They are paid rental fees to offset the losses from keeping land out of production, which increases wildlife habitat and helps with water quality.



Irish Pixie said:


> No, we don't have starving people now because of government programs.


We have plenty who claim they would starve without them, but they lie.



Irish Pixie said:


> The fact is that there are food insecure kids in this country, and there shouldn't be.


How many are *you* feeding each day?



Irish Pixie said:


> Just based on the attitude on this forum, the community and religious institutions would not make up for government food programs.


Again, how many do *you *feed each day?


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Because keeping food prices low *helps* everyone but buying food for people who could work but won't or for those scamming the system *hurts* everyone who does work.
> 
> Farmers don't "get paid not to grow".
> They are paid rental fees to offset the losses from keeping land out of production, which increases wildlife habitat and helps with water quality.
> ...


 I wanted to reply but the way you think just took my will to live away.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> I wanted to reply but the way you think just took my will to live away


I'm sorry you're deterred by reality.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Thank you for your concern. I was at the store one day and the produce guy had an entire cart full of old bananas. I thought "wow" lets make banana bread. So I had to ask, how much for the old bananas? Answer. We can't sell those. We throw them away. 
How and who does this waste help? Are we a just society when we can have such waste and still let people go hungry?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

SRSLADE said:


> Thank you for your concern. I was at the store one day and the produce guy had an entire cart full of old bananas. I thought "wow" lets make banana bread. So I had to ask, how much for the old bananas? Answer. We can't sell those. We throw them away.
> How and who does this waste help? Are we a just society when we can have such waste and still let people go hungry?


Excellent post. There shouldn't be hungry people in the US, but there are.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SRSLADE said:


> Thank you for your concern. I was at the store one day and the produce guy had an entire cart full of old bananas. I thought "wow" lets make banana bread. So I had to ask, how much for the old bananas? Answer. We can't sell those. We throw them away.
> How and who does this waste help? Are we a just society when we can have such waste and still let people go hungry?


Two totally unrelated issues at play here. We have more than enough food in this country. As evidenced by entire carts of bananas being on display long enough to go bad. We also have too many people unwilling to accept their responsibility in life.... To the extent they cannot even feed themselves in the middle of a very wealthy nation.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> How and who does this waste help?


It prevents illnesses from spoiled foods.
You could have bought the bananas before they spoiled, and fed them to the poor, but you didn't.



Irish Pixie said:


> There shouldn't be hungry people in the US, *but there are.*


How many do you feed each day?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Excellent post. There shouldn't be hungry people in the US, but there are.


That may be true but its not due to food shortage, it's due to ambition shortage.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It prevents illnesses from spoiled foods.
> You could have bought the bananas before they spoiled, and fed them to the poor, but you didn't.
> 
> 
> How many do you feed each day?


When the store threw those bananas out that was a nice write off for the store. That day we all helped feed the store owner and his family.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SRSLADE said:


> When the store threw those bananas out that was a nice write off for the store. That day we all helped feed the store owner and his family.


Which we do everyday. That's how our system should work. Those who provide goods and services to others should be rewarded for their labors.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> When the store threw those bananas out that was a nice write off for the store. That day *we all helped* feed the store owner and his family.


I'd say he was feeding himself since he did all the work and he owned the bananas.
You've done nothing but complain about how others should do things to suit you.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Which we do everyday. That's how our system should work. Those who provide goods and services to others should be rewarded for their labors.


Do you mean like single mothers that clean toilets and can't pay their bills?


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I'd say he was feeding himself since he did all the work and he owned the bananas.
> You've done nothing but complain about how others should do things to suit you.


There's the rub. You want me to suit you. The great divide.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I'd say he was feeding himself since he did all the work and he owned the bananas.
> You've done nothing but complain about how others should do things to suit you.


He only owned the bananas to the point of when he wrote them off.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> He only owned the bananas to the point of when he wrote them off.


They were never yours.



SRSLADE said:


> There's the rub. *You want me to suit you.* The great divide.


You're confused.
I don't care what you do.

I'm not the one telling others what should be done with their resources and property.
That's you.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> Do you mean like single mothers that clean toilets and can't pay their bills?


Whose fault is that?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

SRSLADE said:


> Do you mean like single mothers that clean toilets and can't pay their bills?


This! They are employed, but still can't provide enough for their family. They don't have the luxury of intentionally limiting their income because they have a spouse that will take care of them.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

SRSLADE said:


> Do you mean like single mothers that clean toilets and can't pay their bills?


Exactly! I would never ask a single mother to scrub my toilet without paying them for their work. Marrying them is a whole nuther thing. They are no longer single.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> This! That are employed, but *still can't provide enough for their family*. They don't have the luxury of intentionally limiting their income because they have a spouse that will take care of them.


You could always get a job and provide for them.
Be the change you want.
Lead by example

How many could you support with the amount you spend on your phone and internet? 
(Or do you "deserve" that for yourself, while they starve?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> This! That are employed, but still can't provide enough for their family. They don't have the luxury of intentionally limiting their income because they have a spouse that will take care of them.


Anyone who is employed full time and cannot afford to feed their family needs to figure out what they are doing wrong.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

A write off for one that cannot be a hand up for another sounds rigged.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

SRSLADE said:


> A write off for one that cannot be a hand up for another sounds rigged.



Now you are on the trail.....to realization, if you could only take the next steps to why and who,.....but that's where most faulter.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)




----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> A write off for one that cannot be a hand up for another sounds rigged.


How many bananas did you buy to give away?
How many will you buy tomorrow?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

shawnlee said:


>


Couldn't have said it any better myself!


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Why is the SNAP program feeding poor people a problem, but ag subsidies that pay farmers not to grow aren't? Can you explain?


 NOPE.....

Like most, no one cares enough to invest the time to see for themselves to see where the root of these problem come from or how others have lifted themselves out of poverty or what steps could be taken. Like I stated, I could explain with sources you trust and it still would not change your point of view...…..



People care just enough to pick up the torch de jour of the day and run with it, then like forest gump, they set it down and go home.


Never digging below the surface to find the ugly truths and the bare realities of a issue....it takes time deication and a open mind…...I have had to throw away garbage I thought were truths many times, its not easy and sometimes it takes a while to reset your core beliefs. But do anyone really want to go around believing a thing, when it is not true......however hard or mind bending it can be, a person is better off for it.


I have a exercise for you that will help though...…..it is a start, fact check all your beliefs for just one day....every time you think something, check to see if it is true...….let me give a example.



Irish Pixie said:


> They don't have the luxury of intentionally limiting their income because they have a spouse that will take care of them.



Do people intentionally limit their income when single/poor/on aid..…..???


A good diligent search and investigation in to that should take about a week or 2, assuming one spends 4 or 5 hours a day on it.....….if one cares about knowing, if not you will have to face the truth that you simply do not care if that statement is true or false, which is the norm.....most people have their beliefs and they stick to them right or wrong.


I forgot what the study was or when it was done, but over 60% of what a person believes to be true is false, another 30% is skewed with partial truths and partial untruths....10% is or was true at one time, but might not be current information.



In tests and studies done it is really true when they say....you can`t handle the truth.....the mind will fight to believe untruths, it simply in human nature to fixate on a belief true or false so we can check that box off of knowing or curiosity and move on to the next box, until we have enough filled in to satisfy the brain, so we can then move on confident we have it figured out...…..humans hate uncertainty and our minds try to fill it in with any thing it can,no matter if it is true or not.


Studies have also shown that's really ok as many people do this and survive fairly well, no matter what they fill the boxes in with or believe, as long as it is filled in with something...…..this is what causes people to never even bother getting to a truth as for all intensive purposes, it simply does not matter. Plus you have to fight human nature, because when you investigate you have to toss out everything and that causes uncertainty....a condition most humans hate...…


Which will eventually bring you full circle to ugly truth, most people simply do not care....they say they care, the brain needs them to believe they care in order to function correctly, but the simple truth is, it really does not matter if you really care,...as long as you believe you care.

Which if one opens their eyes, they can see living examples around them every where, each day on a level from poor to rich, from a-z...……..variants from that example are rare and ones who actually do something with that wisdom are even rarer...…...people simply can`t handle the truth, we are not accustomed to it and the brain does not care or want it....


If people could see understand and grasp the truth, without a mental break down, most would find it hard to ever get out of bed..…..so we insert the little untruths to keep us going and we believe them and our mind accepts them...….since as long as it gets you out of bed,.....the truth of the matter is, the truth does not matter much.


Until one picks up the torch de jour and proceeds to inform others of the truth,....then the facts and truth do matter....


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Why is the SNAP program feeding poor people a problem, but ag subsidies that pay farmers not to grow aren't? Can you explain? If one group should "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" why shouldn't the other?


Apples and elephants. Snap, along with all the other gimmes are designed to entrap people into a lifetime of government dependency. Ag subsidies are there to maintain a balance of production, thus ensuring our nation doesn't run short of food. Of course neither passes muster when brought face to face with our constitution and both should be done away with, but I thought you were confused as to how the two functioned and their purpose.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Apples and elephants. Snap, along with all the other gimmes are designed to entrap people into a lifetime of government dependency. Ag subsidies are there to maintain a balance of production, thus ensuring our nation doesn't run short of food. Of course neither passes muster when brought face to face with our constitution and both should be done away with, but I thought you were confused as to how the two functioned and their purpose.



There`s one of them hard truths that`s too hard for most to accept...…… it splits their noggin and core beliefs too deep to accept that is designed and functioning exactly how designed. We are the only ones who think its broke, to those who implement/design and run it, its working just fine...… All desired goals and outcomes are on track and function correctly...….


It all seems sad and heart breaking, until you realize …" Mikey likes it"....he thinks they are "Greeeeeeat!"...….once one understands that, the cold harsh reality sets in....so we avoid that at all costs.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> NOPE.....
> 
> Like most, no one cares enough to invest the time to see for themselves to see where the root of these problem come from or how others have lifted themselves out of poverty or what steps could be taken. Like I stated, I could explain with sources you trust and it still would not change your point of view...…..
> 
> ...


I'm not arguing your opinion, you're entitled to it. However, there is a member on this forum that has repeatedly bragged about limiting their income so as to not pay income taxes, pay limited amounts into SS and Medicare. They also took SS disability and Medicare early. They also have a working spouse.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> I'm not arguing your opinion, you're entitled to it. However, there is a member on this forum that has repeatedly bragged about limiting their income so as to not pay income taxes, pay limited amounts into SS and Medicare. They also took SS disability and Medicare early. *They also have a working spouse.*


Gee, this sounds almost like myself. If it wasn't for the part of limiting their income so as to not pay income taxes or taking disability and Medicare "early".
I've always strived to increase my income! as do most people. Didn't always succeed though, like many others. Not sure how one "takes ss disability early"? Is there an age limit on that nobody told me about? Wonder reckon why the ss administration didn't point that out?
Ah yes, there's the part that fits me.... I do have a spouse, and she works! (Yep, Another one of us trying to increase our income.) I knew something sounded familiar.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)




----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

haypoint said:


> View attachment 71614


Can you link the source of your graph please?


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Irish Pixie said:


> Can you link the source of your graph please?


I can. It's from a *blog* called Learn Liberty which terms itself "a project of IHS(Institute for Humane Studies)


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Clem said:


> I can. It's from a *blog* called Learn Liberty which terms itself "a project of IHS(Institute for Humane Studies)


Thank you. I knew there was a reason why it wasn't referenced with the graph.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Can you link the source of your graph please?


Sorry, that link has expired. However there are other similar reports around Here's one:
https://nypost.com/2013/08/19/when-welfare-pays-better-than-work/


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> However, *there is a member on this forum* that has repeatedly bragged about limiting their income so as to not pay income taxes, pay limited amounts into SS and Medicare. They also took SS disability and Medicare early. They also have a working spouse.


There's a member of this forum who doesn't have a job but constantly says others should be supporting everyone who has less. 

SS disability can't be "taken early".
You can only get it when you qualify, not when one chooses.



Irish Pixie said:


> I knew there was a reason why it wasn't referenced with the graph.


Can you link *your data* that refutes the graph?


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

haypoint said:


> Sorry, that link has expired. However there are other similar reports around Here's one:
> https://nypost.com/2013/08/19/when-welfare-pays-better-than-work/



Don`t even bother......I don`t anymore...…


It`s the age old tactic ….if you can`t discredit the information, discredit the source.....


There was a fella once that made a statement about...."out of the mouth of babes",.....truer words were never spoken.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> Don`t even bother......I don`t anymore...…
> 
> 
> It`s the age old tactic ….if you can`t discredit the information, discredit the source.....
> ...


Nope. I do like to consider the source and context of any information. You and your ilk can only consider Fox what Fox, alt right blogs and vlogs tell you, I like to read all the information I can find and decide for myself. YMMV.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Nope. I do like to consider the source and context of any information. You and your ilk can only consider Fox what Fox, alt right blogs and vlogs tell you, I like to read all the information I can find and decide for myself. YMMV.



Funny,....I don't consider people with different views...."You and your ilk"...….


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Ben never struck me as an angry person. He seems very comfortable in himself.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

GTX63 said:


> Ben never struck me as an angry person. He seems very comfortable in himself.


He strikes me as being a nice guy, works for what he gets and doesn't whine much. He'd be welcome at our house any time.


----------



## montysky (Aug 21, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> Thank you for your concern. I was at the store one day and the produce guy had an entire cart full of old bananas. I thought "wow" lets make banana bread. So I had to ask, how much for the old bananas? Answer. We can't sell those. We throw them away.
> How and who does this waste help? Are we a just society when we can have such waste and still let people go hungry?


My DW buys older bananas to make banana nut bread to a reasonable stage, awful that your state stops this what a waste


----------



## montysky (Aug 21, 2006)

shawnlee said:


>



Same of them have rifles at the end if their arms, defending our country I assume E1 thru E3 or so with families , thank God for them and we need to more for them.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Nope. I do like to *consider the source* and context of any information.


So do others.
The patterns never change.



Irish Pixie said:


> I like to read all the information I can find and decide for myself.


Have you found any that refutes what has been posted here?
I seem to have missed your links.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

montysky said:


> Same of them have rifles at the end if their arms, defending our country I assume E1 thru E3 or so with families , thank God for them and we need to more for them.


Some of our military personnel receive SNAP benefits. That is appalling. Even more appalling, is that the administration has called for cuts to the SNAP budget. 

From: https://www.npr.org/2018/02/17/586759930/military-families-and-snap-benefits


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> That is appalling.


Military pay grades aren't based on family size and expenditures. 



> BUSHATZ: So when you come into the military, that compensation system has not kept up with how the force has changed and how military families have changed. You're no longer looking at, say, a 17 or 18 year old kid right out of high school with no family who's receiving that base-level pay, right? You're looking at, say, somebody in their late 20s who might have a couple of kids. Well, that income compared to his *family size* or her family size puts them at a place where they qualify for this food assistance.





Irish Pixie said:


> Even more appalling, is that the administration has called for cuts to the SNAP budget.


Oh the HORROR!!
He wants to give them actual food instead of handing out cash.



> So what the president is proposing is to instead replace that with a box of really what are shelf-stable food items.


Appalling! Appalling!
How dare they give people food in a *nutrition* program!!


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

I bet it contains a lot of soy that the farmers can't sell. The golden grifter.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

SRSLADE said:


> I bet it contains a lot of soy that the *farmers can't sell*. The golden grifter.


Farmers can sell all the soybeans they can grow.
I'm not sure why you would want to pretend it's not a global market.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Farmers don't "get paid not to grow".
> They are paid rental fees to offset the losses from keeping land out of production, which increases wildlife habitat and helps with water quality.


I can't let this one pass. 

First, it sounds like the military argument regarding .50BMG sniper rifles. The .50BMG was originally designed as an antitank rifle so there are Geneva/Hague convention rules regarding using it as an antipersonnel weapon, thus the standard answer is that the sniper was intent on destroying the enemy soldier's backpack while the soldier inconveniently happened to be in the way as opposed to targeting the soldier.

Second, the program was invented by politicians, who are known for not being above lying. Regardless of how the program was packaged, "justified", and sold to us, I consider it absolutely impossible to believe that the economic implications of taking the land out of production were not considered among the primary issues in the process of developing this program.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Apples and elephants. Snap, along with all the other gimmes are designed to entrap people into a lifetime of government dependency. Ag subsidies are there to maintain a balance of production, thus ensuring our nation doesn't run short of food. Of course neither passes muster when brought face to face with our constitution and both should be done away with, but I thought you were confused as to how the two functioned and their purpose.


I would have to disagree. The sales pitch for subsidies is as you describe, but the reality is that for the most part the legislation for subsidies is bought and paid for by corporate agriculture and I am strongly inclined to doubt that farm.corp could compete with the family farm on a level playing field. Always follow the money.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

IndyDave said:


> I consider it absolutely impossible to believe that *the economic implications* of taking the land out of production were not considered among the primary issues in the process of developing this program.


The main purpose is land conservation and water quality, since most of the land is subject to erosion.



> The *Conservation Reserve Program* (*CRP*) is a cost-share and rental payment program of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Under the program, the government pays farmers to take certain agriculturally used croplands out of production and convert them to vegetative cover, such as cultivated or native bunchgrasses and grasslands, wildlife and pollinators food and shelter plantings, windbreak and shade trees, filter and buffer strips, grassed waterways, and riparian buffers.[1]
> *
> The purpose of the program is to reduce land erosion, improve water quality and effect wildlife benefits.*


Sometimes it's more economical to protect those things than it is to grow more crops, which aren't always food.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The main purpose is land conservation and water quality, since most of the land is subject to erosion.
> 
> Sometimes it's more economical to protect those things than it is to grow more crime, which aren't always food.


Two problems: First, you are taking politicians at their word. This is analogous to believing that the anti-gun crowd honestly gives a flip about crime.

Second: The land I have seen in such a program certainly didn't strike me as being in any erosion danger.

In the end, that may be the official narrative, but I don't see much truth in it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

IndyDave said:


> Two problems: First, you are taking politicians at their word. This is analogous to believing that the anti-gun crowd honestly gives a flip about crime.
> 
> Second: The land I have seen in such a program certainly didn't strike me as being in any erosion danger.


If it's *in* the program it's no longer in danger.
Saying politicians lie is empty rhetoric.

The program is what it is, whether you agree or not.
Everything else is speculation with no evidence.



IndyDave said:


> I don't see much truth in it.


I don't think you're looking for it.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If it's *in* the program it's no longer in danger.
> Saying politicians lie is empty rhetoric.
> 
> The program is what it is, whether you agree or not.
> ...


Really?

First, that is being in no danger of erosion at any time this side of Noah's flood regardless of the program.

Second, if you honestly believe that it is all about loving the land and the economic implications never crossed their little pea brains while working it through the legislative process, I would have to question your critical thinking.

Third, I have come to the conclusion you would argue about it if I were to say that the sun came up yesterday morning.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Timber companies bought up 1000's of acres of farm land around here over 30 years ago. They put it in the CRP and planted pines on it. The rent paid for the land at least twice. Purchase price was about $300 to $400 an acre. Its already been cut and replanted.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Some of our military personnel receive SNAP benefits. That is appalling. Even more appalling, is that the administration has called for cuts to the SNAP budget.
> 
> From: https://www.npr.org/2018/02/17/586759930/military-families-and-snap-benefits


Pixie I can answer that one you mentioned above...appalling? Not really....MANY of the military folks who are on SNAP or other hand outs is because they want to live way above their means or want what their pocket book can't really afford. The military offers, for free, classes on how to better your finances, how to budget, how to save up for what you want but many soldiers just don't feel they should or need to.

Others pop out babies because the military hospitals are pretty much free hospitalization with very little payment from that person. This is common as well in the military.

I don't feel sorry for many military folks who can't live within their means. My own husband went in at 18, then after basic and AIT sent for me and our daughter, we NEVER had to have assistance with food or housing goods or anything. Why? We lived within our means and we budgeted our money.

As for programs here, I have seen so many people on SNAP buy food they really don't need and is less than nutritious. We knew a guy who got over $650 a month for food for himself, his daughter, mom and dad....said it wasn't "enough" for food for them. Others have their weave in their hair, have top of the line clothing, but whine about not getting enough....no one wants to bargain shop, no one wants to do without so they can continue to pay bills, or try to shop and eat good. The SNAP program here has an allowance that you can put in a small garden AND get seeds for it but people are too danged lazy to even do that, its "too hard".


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> Pixie I can answer that one you mentioned above...appalling? Not really....MANY of the military folks who are on SNAP or other hand outs is because they want to live way above their means or want what their pocket book can't really afford. The military offers, for free, classes on how to better your finances, how to budget, how to save up for what you want but many soldiers just don't feel they should or need to.
> 
> Others pop out babies because the military hospitals are pretty much free hospitalization with very little payment from that person. This is common as well in the military.
> 
> I don't feel sorry for many military folks who can't live within their means. My own husband went in at 18, then after basic and AIT sent for me and our daughter, we NEVER had to have assistance with food or housing goods or anything. Why? We lived within our means and we budgeted our money.


That's your story, do you feel that everyone that was every in the military has the same one? Or could there be variations? I find it appalling.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> That's your story, do you feel that everyone that was every in the military has the same one? Or could there be variations? I find it appalling.


Pixie, my husband was in for 20 years...we lived in California, Texas, Arizona, North Carolina, Weisbaden, Bad Aibling, Fulda and Augsburg....I think I have a pretty good idea of how military folks life and my comment is based on FACT, I saw it every day and we lived in both military housing and rented off post...not assumption. Those who have never served only assume to know and fall into the "oh those poor families.....


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Google says:



United States Army® Pay Charts | Learn More at goarmy.com
Adwww.goarmy.com/Benefits/PayChart









Discover How the United States Army Compensates Their Active Duty Soldiers. Make a Difference. Earn Up to a $40K Bonus. Specialized Training. Tuition Assistance.
U.S. Army Bonuses
Soldier & Family Services
Health Care & Vacation
Education Benefits
army pay
chart 2018
military pay chart
2018 enlisted
army e1
monthly pay
army pay
calculator
army salary
per month
2019 military
pay chart
2018 military
pay chart dfas
army reserve
pay chart



Rank
*Rank* *<2 Years Experience* *6 Years Experience*
Private (E1) *$19,659.60*** *$19,659.60*
Private (E2) *$22,035.60* *$22,035.60*
Private First Class(E3) *$23,173.20* *$26,121.60*
Specialist or Corporal (E4) *$25,668.00* *$31,158.00*


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

IndyDave said:


> Google says:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As long as you lived within what the military paid you, it can be done. But you figure, the specialty job that the military "pays" you for is worth a whole lot more in the civilian world than what that soldier earns.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> Pixie, my husband was in for 20 years...we lived in California, Texas, Arizona, North Carolina, Weisbaden, Bad Aibling, Fulda and Augsburg....I think I have a pretty good idea of how military folks life and my comment is based on FACT, I saw it every day and we lived in both military housing and rented off post...not assumption. Those who have never served only assume to know and fall into the "oh those poor families.....


My daughter is an Air Force veteran, and her husband is active Navy (15 years and counting). You are entitled to your opinion, as I am mine. 



IndyDave said:


> Rank
> *Rank* *<2 Years Experience* *6 Years Experience*
> Private (E1) *$19,659.60*** *$19,659.60*
> Private (E2) *$22,035.60* *$22,035.60*
> ...


That's is appalling.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Never said you weren't entitled....just explainin what we saw in 20 years and 16 moves to many different bases and areas. You must realize also, some branches treat their military members a lot better than others, same with where they live....


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ETA: Nope, not arguing over opinion.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

IndyDave said:


> Third, I have come to the conclusion you would argue about it if I were to say that the sun came up yesterday morning.


It was cloudy all day yesterday here, so with lack of evidence to the contrary..........


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Irish Pixie said:


> That's is appalling.


Especially taken in the context that I know people making E1 pay working at McDonalds.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Irish Pixie said:


> That's is appalling.


Comparing for the change in the dollar - That's more than I made at that age when I was first married.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

mnn2501 said:


> Comparing for the change in the dollar - That's more than I made at that age when I was first married.


Are you going by official inflation values? If so, it will lead to a skewed outcome. I have found using actual cost if a few benchmark products a better guide.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mnn2501 said:


> Comparing for the change in the dollar - That's more than I made at that age when I was first married.


It's more than I make now.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

I wonder how many of those 42 million somehow find the money to buy, smokes, beer, and dope. Just saying. I grew up on raw milk, eggs, homemade bread, potatoes, and venison. With five brothers and three sisters, a sit down meal was more of a sporting event than a meal. In addition to farming and logging, my father drove a dump truck. When the minimum wage went up to $2.75 per hour, we thought we were rich. Two or three times a year the county would send someone out to tell us we were able to get some kind of assistance. Dad would tell them to close the gate on their way out.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> Are you going by official inflation values? If so, it will lead to a skewed outcome. I have found using actual cost if a few benchmark products a better guide.


There are always those that think they since they (or their parents) did it 50 years ago (no matter that it's a different time and economy) that everyone can. And there are those that deliberately kept their income at near poverty levels so they didn't pay income taxes, and because they have a working spouse.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> There are always those that think they since they (or their parents) did it 50 years ago (no matter that it's a different time and economy) that everyone can. And there are those that deliberately kept their income at near poverty levels so they didn't pay income taxes, and because they have a working spouse.


I guess I'm one of the rare few. I'm still doing it the way my grand parents and parents did or do. I can stay at the office and play on this computer as little as I like. My tenants all work for me.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

TripleD said:


> I guess I'm one of the rare few. I'm still doing it the way my grand parents and parents did or do. I can stay at the office and play on this computer as little as I like. My tenants all work for me.


Do you think because you did a certain way, ie. working for a grandparent or parent IIRC, everyone can? That was the point of my post.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Do you think because you did a certain way, ie. working for a grandparent or parent IIRC, everyone can? That was the point of my post.


I followed in their footsteps. I also don't live beyond my means. I've seen too many with new cars who cant pay the rent.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Grey Mare said:


> Pixie, my husband was in for 20 years...we lived in California, Texas, Arizona, North Carolina, Weisbaden, Bad Aibling, Fulda and Augsburg....I think I have a pretty good idea of how military folks life and my comment is based on FACT, I saw it every day and we lived in both military housing and rented off post...not assumption. Those who have never served only assume to know and fall into the "oh those poor families.....



Because 1 in 1000 fall into a real hard times situation we are supposed to pity the ones who get in the same situation from their own doing.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

IndyDave said:


> Google says:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A couple things to point out as the numbers, like in most cases, do not tell the entire story.

While this might offend, its simply the truth....E1 is a burger flipper.

This number does not include free housing, meals and health care......figure out the corrected math, add in what health care costs, food costs and what housing costs and those numbers almost double.

That does not include sign on bonuses either which can add well over 5K a year to those figures...…


To give a example of what those ranks equate to in job world...……

My friends son, did rotc in school, when graduated/turned 18 he enlisted...….20,000 sign in bonus, entered and when he graduates boot camp will be a E-4, he then goes directly in to officers school for 6 months and comes out a E-5. Depending on what he choses education wise and when he signs up next go round his bonus can be upwards of 30K and his rank above E-5.

I have buddies that get pushing 60K and up to 120K sign on bonus as a sniper to sign back for another 4 years...plus the rank pay.

E-1 is some one who needs supervision to perform the duties of mopping and sweeping...…..


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Perhaps most disturbing to me is the number of people who look at those less fortunate and conclude that those people should be able to do anything any others of us can do.

First and foremost, it isn't very likely that any of them are going to be able to do things they were never taught. There are two ways this seems to happen. 

First alternative is from people like my dad and maternal grandpa who had most things come to them easily enough that they just couldn't understand anyone actually needing to be taught leading to children dropping through the cracks. 

The other, and more prevalent in contemporary society, is that of neglect. When children have parents who are either completely absent or else worthless wastes of space, no matter how theoretically capable they are, they can't do it if they don't understand how. 

I will grant you the truth behind the expression that if you give a man a fish, you have fed him for a day but if you teach him to fish, you have fed him for life. The flip sides of this are that he needs to eat while learning and you have to go to the trouble of actually teaching him to fish rather than expecting him to magically figure it out for himself which seems to be expected most of the time from people who are in bad circumstances.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

shawnlee said:


> While this might offend, its simply the truth....E1 is a burger flipper.


In the armyyou have to be a food specialist to have MOS 92g, even.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

IndyDave said:


> Perhaps most disturbing to me is the number of people who look at those less fortunate and conclude that those people should be able to do anything any others of us can do.


This is America, we are taught and in many ways rightfully so, anyone can do anything if they do what needs to be done to do it. I myself have never, not once found anything I have not been able to do. nothing. As I get older, of course I am not abut to go skateboarding, or become a professional football player, but humans have remarkable abilities to push the envelopes , if they actually try to push the envelope. and the education s out there everywhere. the internet itself is such a huge source of learning if one utilizes it, then of course you get the experience, by getting the experience.
I think it is important to remember that the right to happiness and success is not 'the guarantee' of happiness nor success. ever.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Do you think because you did a certain way, ie. working for a grandparent or parent IIRC, everyone can? That was the point of my post.


 Yes, its a free country...the opportunity exists if they choose to use it, but most consider it too hard and roll over and let parents or the state take care of them.

I can`t pity or feel sorry for a person who chooses not to do what it takes...…..


I watched a buddy of mine....way more ,......enthusiastic.... than me work 2 jobs with low pay to afford to keep a roof and food for his wife and her 2 kids......worked a 8 hour job, then a part time 4 hour job, which ran 6 to 8 hours a lot of times. They did not go to McDonalds all the time or buy crazy stuff and did well, until he bettered himself to get a better job with more pay.

As a person who would do whatever it takes to work and now a business owner, I can tell you, every business has a job opening for a person who wants to work, there is always a person who is about to get fired or let go because they have a poor work ethic...their replacement has just not shown up yet.

Whats appauling is the work ethic and mindset of the general population...…..most deserve exactly what they get.....but it is free country so you are more than welcome to feel sorry for them, support them, but do not try to force me to do so thru laws or taxes...in the same free country my opinion is they are deadbeats, which might differ from your opinion...…..but I am not out pushing for rules and laws to force you into monetary support of my position.

Which I guess is my and others fault, maybe we should be proactive like some of the people and states who make right to work laws and push our opinion into a position where you are forced to monetarily support it...….but that goes against freedom and my core beliefs and that of many others, so you will never see that.


So you are right, not everyone can do that, but a whole lot more that don`t can......that's the problem, not few who honestly can`t, it`s the many that honestly can that is the problem.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bob M. said:


> This is America, we are taught and in many ways rightfully so, anyone can do anything if they do what needs to be done to do it. I myself have never, not once found anything I have not been able to do. nothing. As I get older, of course I am not abut to go skateboarding, or become a professional football player, but humans have remarkable abilities to push the envelopes , if they actually try to push the envelope. and the education s out there everywhere. the internet itself is such a huge source of learning if one utilizes it, then of course you get the experience, by getting the experience.
> I think it is important to remember that the right to happiness and success is not 'the guarantee' of happiness nor success. ever.


What do you expect from a kid whose dad walked out at birth and mom was a worthless dope who're who never did much of anything toward being a parent? Learn by osmosis from the air?


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Bob M. said:


> This is America, we are taught and in many ways rightfully so, anyone can do anything if they do what needs to be done to do it.



Yep, right until they exit school...….we all deserve a trophy, we are all A students for just trying......then upon entry to the real world, all of a sudden not everyone can do that, not everyone can find a job, not everyone can support themselves, not everyone is the same......LOL, a complete 180 from the mind washing garbage they are taught in school...….


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> Yes, its a free country...the opportunity exists if they choose to use it, but most consider it too hard and roll over and let parents or the state take care of them.
> 
> I can`t pity or feel sorry for a person who chooses not to do what it takes...…..
> 
> ...


I don't force you or anyone else to do anything, in any way. I volunteer and donate to a variety of causes tho.

I will never be convinced that compassion for another human being is misplaced. I find it appalling that someone could look at a hungry kid and punish them for the possible irresponsibility of a parent.


----------



## lmrose (Sep 24, 2009)

shawnlee said:


> I do not think anyone wants another to starve, but surely we need to fix some of the problems here before taking on new problems.
> 
> 40 million people needing money to eat seems like it should not be such a high number in what is considered a first world country...….seems like a lot to me.
> 
> Seems like a much more important issue than over sized soft drinks or straws......or a 3 toed frog.....


40 million is about 4 or 5 million more than the whole population of Canada! But there are millions going hungry in this country too. Little Yarmouth here population wavers between 6 to 8 thousand has numerous charities set up to feed the hungry. Last winter the town council started a meal every day hosted by various churches and organizations for anyone who cad to come. There were other Church breakfasts and lunches and suppers aimed at the needy and others for seniors. This continued through the winter until the end of March I believe it was. The idea was more people struggle with heating costs and don't have enough for food. Spring to fall are community gardens where anyone can have a plot and grow something to eat. None of the above are government sponsored but were started by local people who care that others have a meal. Then there are holiday meals and Salvation Army hampers of food. It is possible to feed people without government money but it takes a few to get things started in various communities..


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

IndyDave said:


> What do you expect from a kid whose dad walked out at birth and mom was a worthless dope who're who never did much of anything toward being a parent? Learn by osmosis from the air?


I don;t expect anything, this is America, land of the free. you are free to succeed and you are free to fail, I certainly have my way of doing things, but do not demand others to not do things their way, everyone makes choices, and then sometimes you have a little bit or a lot of luck and or opportunity tossed in for good measure as fate decides, and you either make something of it, or make your own luck and own opportunity or ..well you don't failing is ok, imo. Not something I choose to do often but thats my choice. I btw come from a family where my father left us when i was 5 yrs old and a mother who never actually amounted to anything, she is by far not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I love her for what she is, and am glad I at least had that. some have more, some have less, nothing is ever equal and that is just the way it is.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

IndyDave said:


> What do you expect from a kid whose dad walked out at birth and mom was a worthless dope who're who never did much of anything toward being a parent? Learn by osmosis from the air?


 Yes.….

I was bounced around like ball until I was 13, then entered the foster care system and by the time I was 16 I had seen/learned enough to drop out of school. work a full time job, split an apartment with buddies and build a career. Sure there were hard times, but it did not take long to figure out if I blew my cash on garbage there was no money for rent or food...…

I made much more than peers my age, even after they graduated college with basket weaving degrees or had gotten out the military in 4 years...…..some of them caught up and surpassed me in earnings when they were in their 30`s due to corporate and college education and jobs. 

But they did not develop real life skills, so I usually had way more extra cash for toys, they were always strapped for cash even though they made more than me.

Later I took my 8th grade education coming from a foster home and with less than 1000 bucks started a business that grossed more than 200K in sales, I hit almost 30K a month within 2 years......then opened locations in brick and mortar store for 4 years and became a contributing member of the business world in my town.....

So between a lack of education, 8th grade last complete year, a lack of parents, becoming a ward of the state, foster care , dropping out of school, being homeless living in my car for almost a year, no guidance a healthy party life style, going hungry and the usual ups and downs from the hard knocks. Putting in the effort to make myself a valuable productive desirable employee and then educating myself and more importantly putting in the hard effort required to start a business......health issues and drug habits …….you will not find much sympathy here for folks who just call it too hard.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

Some of my solutions for feeding the hungry and welfare/etc are simple, at least to my way of thinking and at the least a good start....
1) anyone can get welfare if they decide they need it. to get it they can apply, and they are then required to work and do things for the govt./community which is paying for it, in the form of the many govt. jobs, which we are also all paying for, but at minimal wage prices. a person needs $200 in food stamps, fine...do $200 worth of work. tax free even. min wage is what $7.25/hour...so to gain $200 in food stamps, a person would have to work for a lousy 27.5 hours. thats it. that is not even a full weeks work, we are talking like 3-4 days, and on top of it, they would be getting experience working, they would be repaying society. plenty of work that needs to be done for the community, plenty of work, we as citizens actually pay union tards $20-$30/hr for, that simple does not require some Einstein to do, like the goof who holds the stop and go signs for construction work. cleaning parks and roads or rivers and streams, being social workers/etc. Honestly more than most of our politicians should be making I think sometimes. One of those jobs they can do imo is become farmers and actually get/grow the food they are actually needing. we have govt. land, it can be used to grow food.
Of course non us citizens should be denied this ability...but there you go, people in need get need, and they , instead of just taking from society actually are earning for themselves.
We can also have govt run day care, run by some of those earning who are qualified so single parents "who cant go to work because I have to watch my babies" can feel fine going to work while their children are looked after. we can take a small cost of that service out of their pay/benefits, so big deal they have to work 32 hrs instead of 27.5nstill plenty of time and days to make appointments to go on other ob interviews should they decide to do so or go do their own business that needs to be done....heck we are talking 32 hrs/month or a lousy what 7/8hrs per week? for $50/wk in food
We can also allow some who are qualified to teach skills and abilities, why not? there we now have pretty much free education for any who somehow missed it the first time around. See, all sorts of benefits to doing this. What isn't beneficial is welfare as it is or has been since it was started. what solutions has that welfare done? the great solution of increasing the amount of people on or needing welfare....somehow I doubt anyone mentioned that being the goal when they pitched it so very long ago. Giving people stuff doesn't work, hardly ever.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bob M. said:


> I don;t expect anything, this is America, land of the free. you are free to succeed and you are free to fail, I certainly have my way of doing things, but do not demand others to not do things their way, everyone makes choices, and then sometimes you have a little bit or a lot of luck and or opportunity tossed in for good measure as fate decides, and you either make something of it, or make your own luck and own opportunity or ..well you don't failing is ok, imo. Not something I choose to do often but thats my choice. I btw come from a family where my father left us when i was 5 yrs old and a mother who never actually amounted to anything, she is by far not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I love her for what she is, and am glad I at least had that. some have more, some have less, nothing is ever equal and that is just the way it is.





shawnlee said:


> Yes.….
> 
> I was bounced around like ball until I was 13, then entered the foster care system and by the time I was 16 I had seen/learned enough to drop out of school. work a full time job, split an apartment with buddies and build a career. Sure there were hard times, but it did not take long to figure out if I blew my cash on garbage there was no money for rent or food...…
> 
> ...


You two sound like dad and grandpa. Thanks to their attitude, I had to learn piecemeal over a longer time when I could have been prepared far better much earlier. Much like grandpa, you both did well overcoming adversity than the overwhelming majority. My approach is to take what I know and use it to help others who struggle rather than using it as a measure by which to judge.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> You two sound like dad and grandpa. Thanks to their attitude, I had to learn piecemeal over a longer time when I could have been prepared far better much earlier. Much like grandpa, you both did well overcoming adversity than the overwhelming majority. My approach is to take what I know and use it to help others who struggle rather than using it as a measure by which to judge.


Thank you. I didn't have a peachy keen upbringing either, and Mr. Pixie grew up downright poor. We did the same thing, worked hard, went to school, worked up to a nice living, and still have compassion for people who are struggling.

ETA: Instead of "screw you, I got mine" we prefer "we did it, and now we can help".


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bob M. said:


> Some of my solutions for feeding the hungry and welfare/etc are simple, at least to my way of thinking and at the least a good start....
> 1) anyone can get welfare if they decide they need it. to get it they can apply, and they are then required to work and do things for the govt./community which is paying for it, in the form of the many govt. jobs, which we are also all paying for, but at minimal wage prices. a person needs $200 in food stamps, fine...do $200 worth of work. tax free even. min wage is what $7.25/hour...so to gain $200 in food stamps, a person would have to work for a lousy 27.5 hours. thats it. that is not even a full weeks work, we are talking like 3-4 days, and on top of it, they would be getting experience working, they would be repaying society. plenty of work that needs to be done for the community, plenty of work, we as citizens actually pay union tards $20-$30/hr for, that simple does not require some Einstein to do, like the goof who holds the stop and go signs for construction work. cleaning parks and roads or rivers and streams, being social workers/etc. Honestly more than most of our politicians should be making I think sometimes. One of those jobs they can do imo is become farmers and actually get/grow the food they are actually needing. we have govt. land, it can be used to grow food.
> Of course non us citizens should be denied this ability...but there you go, people in need get need, and they , instead of just taking from society actually are earning for themselves.
> We can also have govt run day care, run by some of those earning who are qualified so single parents "who cant go to work because I have to watch my babies" can feel fine going to work while their children are looked after. we can take a small cost of that service out of their pay/benefits, so big deal they have to work 32 hrs instead of 27.5
> We can also allow some who are qualified to teach skills and abilities, why not? there we now have pretty much free education for any who somehow missed it the first time around. See, all sorts of benefits to doing this. What isn't beneficial is welfare as it is or has been since it was started. what solutions has that welfare done? the great solution of increasing the amount of people on or needing welfare....somehow I doubt anyone mentioned that being the goal when they pitched it so very long ago. Giving people stuff doesn't work, hardly ever.


I am having difficulty understanding the contempt you are displaying toward those who perform manual work.


----------



## lmrose (Sep 24, 2009)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I'm sure a few people need assistance through some rough times in this country. But as others have pointed out there is simply no reason for 20 % of our population to not afford to feed themselves in one of the worlds wealthiest nations. It's a matter of priorities. Food is literally dirt cheap in this country. Maybe spend a little less on smart phones, fancy rims, tats, and Nike footwear, buy real food instead.


I agree with you there is no excuse for people going hungry in the USA and Canada. But the last few generations of kids have been brought up for the most part with a sense of entitlement. Now what us older people worked a life time for younger people want the same and more just starting out in life. So whose fault is it the kids today expect so much ? The parents raised them and their parents raised them and on back goes the blame. Now we see the results of spoiling kids and they in turn spoiling their kids. You can't un-ring a bell as the saying goes. Technology has accelerated the entitlement people feel today. The basic life skills have been buried by the latest technological advance. It is difficult to change anything that is running out of control. 

Parents who have young children have a chance to turn things around one family at a time though. Basic principles of life like learning to take care of your self and provide by working and earning and saving need to be taught along with empathy, compassion and sharing.

There is no free ride through life. Every able bodied person deserves the fulfillment and respect of having a job and earning their own living. Basics come first food, shelter and clothing. Everything else are extras that make life more pleasant and are fine if you can afford them. Demanding extras when they are not earned is that sense of entitlement rearing its ugly head again. People going hungry because of addictions need more than food to turn their lives around. To those who are lazy there is a principle that say; "If a person does not work they do not eat." There is a solution for the millions of hungry people but it won't come from government programs or handouts.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

IndyDave said:


> I am having difficulty understanding the contempt you are displaying toward those who perform manual work.


There is no contempt displayed toward anyone who performs manual work, so it would be strange if you did understand it from my post.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bob M. said:


> There is no contempt displayed toward anyone who performs manual work, so it would be strange if you did understand it from my post.


I could start at the point where calling someone a "goof" is generally considered disparaging.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

perhaps but you didnt say disparaging you said contempt now didnt you? are you going to make up your mind on what you are talking about some time in the near future or?

I said it didnt take a Einstein to do it...it simply doesn't. being realistic isn't per say disparaging at all imo, it is, as the name implys being realistic. The point is and was simply that many many many people could do such a thing and therefor it could be one of the things that could be done to earn the assistance. by anyone almost.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

IndyDave said:


> What do you expect from a kid whose dad walked out at birth and mom was a worthless dope who're who never did much of anything toward being a parent? Learn by osmosis from the air?


What I want to know is why a woman would sleep with a guy who "was a worthless dope who're who never did much of anything" let alone get pregnant by him?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> What I want to know is why a woman would sleep with a guy who "was a worthless dope who're who never did much of anything" let alone get pregnant by him?


Why do human beings do anything? Why do men stay with women that cheat on them? Why do women stay with men that beat them? Why do either stay with a partner that treats them as if they are worth less? It's a mess of self worth, hope, love, shame, and all manner of human emotion.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

mnn2501 said:


> What I want to know is why a woman would sleep with a guy who "was a worthless dope who're who never did much of anything" let alone get pregnant by him?


You misread that. Mom IS the worthless dope whore.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

I could cite examples all day long, but those that have it stuck in their heads that people are really going hungry need to do some work on their own.
Pick an area at random. Call the Department of Social Services or who ever handles the welfare checks. They should have a list of places that offer food. Ask about low cost or free housing. Ask about utility help. Call all the local Churches and see what they do for the hungry. Search Food Pantries in the area. Call Salvation Army. Call the Chamber of Commerce to see what food drives they know about. Check with the police department to see what they offer for the homeless. Check the bakeries and grocery stores to see if they donate food. Call the county seat to see what low cost or free public transportation is available.

You might see that the "hungry" are getting fed and plenty of folks that are simply cheap are getting fed free, too.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> I don't force you or anyone else to do anything, in any way. I volunteer and donate to a variety of causes tho.
> 
> I will never be convinced that compassion for another human being is misplaced. I find it appalling that someone could look at a hungry kid and punish them for the possible irresponsibility of a parent.


 When we support and pass laws, it does force people into supporting or being a victim of those laws...….a few nut jobs can`t hold their mustard so all gun owners get to pay. A select group thinks people need more free stuff, so we all pay......I did not mean you personally...…


I am compassionate for even those who deserve their fate, because if they truly understood they would never choose that. However consequences of actions is the teacher of lifes lessons and I would not deprive them of the reward of those struggles by stepping in and feeding them right before they go hungry a few days.....its good for them,....because we use the word starve liberally, I think the deaths from starvation are minimal to none...going hungry is different story, nothing wrong with that....it is the ultimate teacher for those who do not get it from words or stories.

I have to believe those who believe a child should be punished for the actions of the parent are far and few between......I certainly have not advocated that...….punishing the parent is a entirely different story. I have not seen anyone advocate we punish kids and make them starve...…

Again, what about the parents.....using the same delfacto logic, are they not making the kids pay for their poor choices and depriving them......that's what I find appauling.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

haypoint said:


> I could cite examples all day long, but those that have it stuck in their heads that people are really going hungry need to do some work on their own.
> Pick an area at random. Call the Department of Social Services or who ever handles the welfare checks. They should have a list of places that offer food. Ask about low cost or free housing. Ask about utility help. Call all the local Churches and see what they do for the hungry. Search Food Pantries in the area. Call Salvation Army. Call the Chamber of Commerce to see what food drives they know about. Check with the police department to see what they offer for the homeless. Check the bakeries and grocery stores to see if they donate food. Call the county seat to see what low cost or free public transportation is available.
> 
> You might see that the "hungry" are getting fed and plenty of folks that are simply cheap are getting fed free, too.



I have told the story several times on here,....as a business owner in the downtown area in the hub of homelessness I had the misguided belief they were going hungry and being located at ground zer0 I could give them food directly......LOL

Big shock to find out I could not hardly give away any food and they were eating better than me for free...…..as a matter of fact, they take turns and rotate panhandling for money outside the grocery store/mall parking lot because they get too many groceries, so they leave and let the next person in.....they know better than to let people know they have plenty of food...the rotation is in hopes of getting money, because no one, well some do, give them liquor,drugs or smokes....


They used to get a pizza for me all the time faster than I could with cash for free......bring it back and I would give them a couple bucks, then set it out and let people eat from it...….

Sure there are ones who are going hungry.....but they are far and few......and the other homeless usually give them some food as they get way more than they can possibly eat......or want or need. The ones that are going hungry are the ones that really need to be a care center because they are REAL crazy or not able to because of a disability....when I say real crazy I do not mean bipolar or hearing voices or have some sort of mania/skitzo….I mean loco like want to eat shoes or paint poop picaso`s…

Most people have no clue about that world...….I would offer work to them occasionally...sweep the parking lot or pic up cigarette butts, most of them were like, no, I get plenty of money and or food....some at the end of the month would be desperate as they blew it all already, not spent, BLEW it...….go buy 100 bucks in steak and sell it to the other homeless for 50 bucks cash to get liquor or drugs...

I had one that would come over and talk, help ocassionally to feel good and we would compare profits for the day, most days he was way ahead of me as a business owner and for hours worked pretty much always won.....where I pulled ahead was hours worked …...many days fro the entire day he would net more than I did, some days I would pull ahead 500 to 1000 bucks......but the very next day could be a 100 buck profit day and he would walk with over 100 in less than 4 hours.....


Most pan handle for a couple hours until they pop a few 10 buck or 20 buck hand outs......when there is enough for food, they did not want the free garbage hand out food, and enough for smokes, any liquor or drugs they wanted, they would call it quits and head down to the beach to BBQ, smoke cigs, drink liquor or do drugs for the rest of the day...…

So stories/flavors/situations of the homeless are as varied as mixed colors from the rainbow...…..ones that are truly just a victim of circumstance do not stay long or even the other homeless will give to help them get out.....many are perfectly happy with their lifestyle choice.....

Those are the stories never told when wanting to invoke pity...….there are lots who are very happy, have all they want and enjoy the day more than most who have houses and jobs......they like it and choose it and do not want it any other way...except for more money...LOL

It took me a while to wrap my head around it...think of it, you get up when you want....go stand around for a couple hours, people give you money and food, you go get liquor/drugs/smokes, head to the beach and ejoy the day hanging with others just like you or others than are not homeless, but happen to frequent the beach to surf each day....eat food, drink and be merry.....go crawl up some where, wake up and do it again...….

I was lucky to get a rare inside look over a few years time to really see what is going on.....and hundreds of other aspects of it not mentioned in my post.....mindsets, beliefe systems, morals, self policing....shelter places,...police interactions...community attitudes/responses/support and a pile of other daily things most of the population has no clue even exists,much less how they function and work together on a daily basis....

What if I told you a lot of them wish people would quit forcing their beliefs on them.....if they wanted a house they would go work for it, but why wants to work all week to pay for a house because you just sleep there.....they could not hang at the beach and party all day if they had to do that...….people take what they believe everyone should be doing and they project that on to them...… a lot live the life they want/choose , they do not want the life you live....they just want to be left alone by the city or the police and not ran off from a sleeping area or issued illegal camping tickets....they are happy where they are....and would be much happier if you worried about yourself instead of them...….

Most that are not crazy are very up to date on politics, who to vote for and whats going on in the news than I was......I laugh when I see people who think they know what they are talking about, because I can easily tell when they have no clue. The homeless also find it very funny too, a topic of great entertainment actually...….silly people think because they have a job they know something..LOL, fools think I am hungry or am worried about a place to sleep...LOL Goto work sucka and have fun payin them taxes, we are headed to the beach to BBQ and get wasted...LOL Poor homeless, out there living free, getting handed money and food, not working, not paying taxes on property, but enjoying the local parks and beaches more than the paying citizens....they look at housed up people working a 9-5 as the crazy ones, thinking how could anyone want to live that way.....


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> When we support and pass laws, it does force people into supporting or being a victim of those laws...….a few nut jobs can`t hold their mustard so all gun owners get to pay. A select group thinks people need more free stuff, so we all pay......I did not mean you personally...…
> 
> 
> I am compassionate for even those who deserve their fate, because if they truly understood they would never choose that. However consequences of actions is the teacher of lifes lessons and I would not deprive them of the reward of those struggles by stepping in and feeding them right before they go hungry a few days.....its good for them,....because we use the word starve liberally, I think the deaths from starvation are minimal to none...going hungry is different story, nothing wrong with that....it is the ultimate teacher for those who do not get it from words or stories.
> ...


The bottom line is that the US isn't a third world country and we don't allow kids to go hungry or homeless due to the possible irresponsibility of the parents.

So you think allowing young kids to go hungry (for even a few days) because of the irresponsibility of the parent(s) is OK? Do you understand what food insecurity is? How it effects kids long term? If not, here is a bit of reading:

https://hungerandhealth.feedingamerica.org/understand-food-insecurity/

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/foo...y-in-the-us/definitions-of-food-security.aspx

http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/...poverty-food-insecurity-health-well-being.pdf


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

IndyDave said:


> You misread that. Mom IS the worthless dope whore.


I see you are correct, but it still begs the question.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> So you think allowing young kids to go hungry (for even a few days) because of the irresponsibility of the parent(s) is OK? Do you understand what food insecurity is? How it effects kids long term? If not, here is a bit of reading:
> 
> https://hungerandhealth.feedingamerica.org/understand-food-insecurity/
> 
> ...


 Horse malarkey......I never said that...….or anyone else I have seen.

Food insecurity is psycho babble written by those who have never went hungry...…and lack a basic grasp of how things really work. The same people who came up with micro aggressions …….

Yes I understand what it is, I was that kid and I fully understand how it effects me long term, a lesson I did not forget and to this day motivates me to get out of bed and fight the good fight...….

Teach a man to fish, give a man a fish lesson is apparently ungraspable by you.


If fire did not burn and teach the lesson of do not stick your hand in it, how would we ever learn......stupid poor choices are supposed to hurt and carry consequences....even when it is not your fault. Do not step in and deprive them of the reward of learning and understanding...…

*A donation now can keep a person from learning a valuable lesson today, please donate now.*


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

shawnlee said:


> ...
> What if I told you a lot of them wish people would quit forcing their beliefs on them.....if they wanted a house they would go work for it, but why wants to work all week to pay for a house because you just sleep there.....they could not hang at the beach and party all day if they had to do that...….people take what they believe everyone should be doing and they project that on to them...… a lot live the life they want/choose , they do not want the life you live....they just want to be left alone by the city or the police and not ran off from a sleeping area or issued illegal camping tickets....they are happy where they are....and would be much happier if you worried about yourself instead of them...….
> 
> Most that are not crazy are very up to date on politics, who to vote for and whats going on in the news than I was......I laugh when I see people who think they know what they are talking about, because I can easily tell when they have no clue. The homeless also find it very funny too, a topic of great entertainment actually...….silly people think because they have a job they know something..LOL, fools think I am hungry or am worried about a place to sleep...LOL


I have many years of first hand experience with the homeless from the poor, the unbalanced, the addicted, Vets, battered women, abandoned kids and on and on.
It is humorous how ignorant the majority of the "concerned" do gooders are. The more a segment like this rejects society the more certain demographics want to "help" them.
They seem to believe they know what is best for the homeless "victim" moreso than the individual themselves. They are pathetically dense to this world, yet they seem to believe imposing themselves onto others is in the name of humanity and all that is good is proper.
They diagnose, label, and pronounce their cure without ever leaving their ivory towers.
Ironically, some seem to feel that any opposing viewpoint to theirs is "judging". How amusing from those who consider a holiday check as participating in the cause.
Wealth, security, comfort and a cappuccino equals knowledge to them while their arss sweats in a chair all day proclaiming the truth on the interwebs; it is how laughably absurd people can be.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Liberals measure success by how many people they put on government programs to "help them".
Conservatives measure success by how many people they help to get off of government programs and become able to support themselves.

Which one* really* has the best interests of the person in mind?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> Liberals measure success by how many people they put on government programs to "help them".
> Conservatives measure success by how many people they help to get off of government programs and become able to support themselves.
> 
> Which one* really* has the best interests of the person in mind?


Why do you do that? Make generalizations and insist everything is political? Can't it just be that some people genuinely want to help others? I don't rely on the government, my husband and I give of our own time and money. I'm not saying that you or anyone else has to, only that some do and not for political reasons.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> When we support and pass laws, it does force people into supporting or being a victim of those laws...….a few nut jobs can`t hold their mustard so all gun owners get to pay. A select group thinks people need more free stuff, so we all pay......I did not mean you personally...…
> 
> 
> I am compassionate for even those who deserve their fate, because if they truly understood they would never choose that. *However consequences of actions is the teacher of lifes lessons and I would not deprive them of the reward of those struggles by stepping in and feeding them right before they go hungry a few days.....its good for them,....because we use the word starve liberally, I think the deaths from starvation are minimal to none...going hungry is different story, nothing wrong with that....it is the ultimate teacher for those who do not get it from words or stories.*
> ...





shawnlee said:


> Horse malarkey......I never said that...….or anyone else I have seen.
> 
> Food insecurity is psycho babble written by those who have never went hungry...…and lack a basic grasp of how things really work. The same people who came up with micro aggressions …….
> 
> ...



If you punish the irresponsible parent and withhold food benefits who is directly involved? The kids. Correct?

And you did say that going hungry a few days is good for them, correct? I highlighted in your post.

Food insecurity is just a way of saying that a kid doesn't know where their next meal is coming from. You can think of it as psychobabble if you choose. 

No one helped you, so no one should be helped? My husband and I went the other way, and now we help others. Ye ken?


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> If you punish the irresponsible parent and withhold food benefits who is directly involved? The kids. Correct?
> 
> And you did say that going hungry a few days is good for them, correct? I highlighted in your post.
> 
> ...


 Not all irresponsible parents have kids....

No one ever died from missing a couple meals....as a matter of fact, a bunch look like it would be a help to miss a few.

You think you know where your next is coming from, but its false security,its highly probably, but not a certainty.....we assume we will wake in the morning but it not certain, the sooner people learn nothing is certain the better. Everyone here in Montecito thought they knew where their next meal was coming from....massive mudslide changed that in a couple minutes. Food security is a jedi mindtrick to lul one into a false security....it breeds complacency and false expectations .

I never said that, lots of people need, some even deserve and I also help some out, does that mean everyone is blameless or deserves it......I get it, some people give no matter if a person deserves or not and that's fine, heck, I even respect you for that.…..what I said/meant/implied was a bunch of them have it within their power to help themselves......there are very few circumstances where it is just beyond their control. Lots choose to be helpless.


----------



## tiffanysgallery (Jan 17, 2015)

While in college, some of our classes required students to do volunteer work. I picked several that would be of interest to the professors so to get the best grade possible. 

One of the areas of interest to one of my professors was a food pantry. So, I worked a semester organizing and selecting non-perishable food items to go into bags so the pantry could be efficient when the doors opened. All people had to do was show up, show their id, and complete a simple online form. There was no proof of income needed or necessary. Those who needed food were allowed by the pantry a bag a week. This was to supplement their food supply. There were a lot of good people who had a genuine need. But, the problem came when some people wanted to pick up food bags more often than once a week. Although I never seen it happen, it was my understanding from others that they would sometimes exchange their food for drugs, cigarettes, alcohol, and then need more food. Unfortunately, this happen way too often and they had to be turned away by the director of the food pantry.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> Not all irresponsible parents have kids....
> 
> No one ever died from missing a couple meals....as a matter of fact, a bunch look like it would be a help to miss a few.
> 
> ...


Nope. Food insecurity and obesity go hand in hand for a variety of reasons. You can start your reading here:

http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/frac_brief_understanding_the_connections.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5394740/

Jedi mind trick? Seriously? Food insecurity isn't a one time deal, it's a kid that isn't sure when there next meal is coming from over time. Did you think it was a Jedi mind trick when you experienced hunger as a kid? Or was it real?

I agree that not everyone is blameless or deserves help, except kids. They are blameless, and should never be hungry.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Jedi mind trick? Seriously? Food insecurity isn't a one time deal, it's a kid that isn't sure when there next meal is coming from over time. Did you think it was a Jedi mind trick when you experienced hunger as a kid? Or was it real?


 It was real and taught a real lesson....to do whatever required to not be hungry again......I will never be lulled into a false security again on anything, food to money to a house to anything...food security or believing its OK now so no worries is the mind trick. It can happen to anyone at any time....best be prepared, it taught a valuable lesson millions never learn.

While traumatic then, isn't everything when you are young or living it, looking back now its almost funny....a couple missed meals and you think you will die/starve and the world is going to end. It teaches in fact the world is not going to end, you are not going to die ….it also teaches even if I did, the world goes on, life goes on and people go on...….


Lots of life lessons were learned....but had some one said you poor thing and given me food, many valuable lessons would have been stolen from me......I would have probably ended right back in that same situation at some point.

There are probably lessons learned from that, that are beyond my conception that effect the decision I make to this day.....but I think most were for the good, I know later in life when those same instances occurred again due to my own making and others were in the same boat,.....it was funny how much differently I handled it, I knew we were not going to die and it would probably take a week of not eating before any real effects happened, but others who did not already have the life skills of dealing with it, thought 24-48 hours was going to kill them, they were going to die.....lol, much like my childlike reactions.

This taught me even more lessons the others did not learn and allowed me to help others get thru it better at the time than they would have...….


I am glad now for it and would not trade what it taught me for anything....some people never learn and some people try to pay to learn, but until one experiences it for themselves they never really know or learn.....


So while sad and more power to those who never learn these lessons, I am not going to say its bad or the end of the world to go hungry, big difference than starving, which takes weeks and most people will mentally break before they actually starve.


So while sad/tragic or any other descriptor/adjective one wants to assign going hungry......it IS a learning experience and has valuable lessons stretching far beyond food.


Do I wish it on anyone....no, of course it is sad.....but its not the end of the world either and more good could come from it than harm...…..I think it would be a good lesson for everyone under controlled circumstances and with the proper guidance to insure it did not mentally scar them,,,,far too few have been hungry, if they did, it would completely change their perspectives on many things in life...…..but with a full gullet we are free to obsess over the latest trends and have that same end of the world feeling because we do not have a certain phone or brand of jeans on at school....LOL

Why, because they have never known hardship....it is crucial to making a well rounded person...… hardship can not be deleted, because that deletes crucial life lessons that can not be had any other way.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

many of the so called poor in our country here are doing far better than the so called middle class in many other countries. not many go hungry here really unless they choose to by not doing what they need to, to not go hungry. ie, they give up, they do not try really like they could, and they do not push their limits. Nature has a sure fire way of removing those traits from our species, and it has worked for millions of years with all species without prejudice.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> It was real and taught a real lesson....to do whatever required to not be hungry again......I will never be lulled into a false security again on anything, food to money to a house to anything...food security or believing its OK now so no worries is the mind trick. It can happen to anyone at any time....best be prepared, it taught a valuable lesson millions never learn.
> 
> While traumatic then, isn't everything when you are young or living it, looking back now its almost funny....a couple missed meals and you think you will die/starve and the world is going to end. It teaches in fact the world is not going to end, you are not going to die ….it also teaches even if I did, the world goes on, life goes on and people go on...….
> 
> ...


Did you deserve to be hungry? I don't think any kid does, so I will continue to support my local food programs, and you don't have to. How's that?


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> I agree that not everyone is blameless or deserves help, except kids. They are blameless, and should ever be hungry.


There are problems that don't have simple answers.
For a long time, people were issued food surplus, beans, rice, dry milk, dried eggs, canned meat, etc. But I was determined to be unfair for the hungry. They should be able to buy what they want. So food stamps were given out. Worked good for awhile. But the poor complained that it was embarrassing to pay for food with "welfare money". So now they get a debit card. They are free to buy whatever food they want and no one knows they are getting free food.
But since some parents apparently misuse the freedom the taxpayers provide, it is the children that suffer. How do you, on one hand, give "food security" to the poor, without controlling their spending habits, while, on the other hand, insure the children won't have to worry that their parents won't sell the cans of baby formula for weed, again?

The blameless children need placed in institutions where they won't be subjected to living in a Crack House. If it is the children you are really concerned about then wouldn't you want them out of a culture where no one works and drugs are common. Sending money to adults with children often isn't in the child's best interest.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

haypoint said:


> There are problems that don't have simple answers.
> For a long time, people were issued food surplus, beans, rice, dry milk, dried eggs, canned meat, etc. But I was determined to be unfair for the hungry. They should be able to buy what they want. So food stamps were given out. Worked good for awhile. But the poor complained that it was embarrassing to pay for food with "welfare money". So now they get a debit card. They are free to buy whatever food they want and no one knows they are getting free food.
> But since some parents apparently misuse the freedom the taxpayers provide, it is the children that suffer. How do you, on one hand, give "food security" to the poor, without controlling their spending habits, while, on the other hand, insure the children won't have to worry that their parents won't sell the cans of baby formula for weed, again?
> 
> The blameless children need placed in institutions where they won't be subjected to living in a Crack House. If it is the children you are really concerned about then wouldn't you want them out of a culture where no one works and drugs are common. Sending money to adults with children often isn't in the child's best interest.


I dunno. I just know that kids shouldn't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, so I donate money to our local food programs.

How do you suggest making sure that kids are fed, rights are not violated, *and* remove government food programs?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Irish Pixie said:


> Why do you do that? Make generalizations and insist everything is political? Can't it just be that some people genuinely want to help others? I don't rely on the government, my husband and I give of our own time and money. I'm not saying that you or anyone else has to, only that some do and not for political reasons.


If it were not political, it would be charity rather than taxpayer money funding these programs. You know that, why pretend you're outraged?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> If it were not political, it would be charity rather than taxpayer money funding these programs. You know that, why pretend you're outraged?


I don't pretend anything. Just based on the responses on this forum there is no way that the vast majority of people would not voluntarily give anything to a food program. It may have worked even 30 years ago, but it wouldn't today. It's a "I've got mine, screw you" society now.

I'm not outraged, saddened yes, but not outraged or even surprised.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> I dunno. I just know that kids shouldn't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, so I donate money to our local food programs.
> 
> How do you suggest making sure that kids are fed, rights are not violated, *and* remove government food programs?


I have a solution, but you aren't going to like it.
Turn welfare over to the Churches. Poor families get help finding suitable employment from members of the Church. Yard work, baby sitting, house painting. Pay is food and utilities. Sinful living results in shunning and the help dries up. Child abuse includes not properly feeding them, let the Courts assign foster parents. Let Church members be their foster family. When I think of Church, I assume a focus on the rules of a civilized society, AKA Ten commandments.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

haypoint said:


> I have a solution, but you aren't going to like it.
> Turn welfare over to the Churches. Poor families get help finding suitable employment from members of the Church. Yard work, baby sitting, house painting. Pay is food and utilities. Sinful living results in shunning and the help dries up. Child abuse includes not properly feeding them, let the Courts assign foster parents. Let Church members be their foster family. When I think of Church, I assume a focus on the rules of a civilized society, AKA Ten commandments.


OK. Start a grass roots movement (community activism) to implement your solution. Keep us updated on your progress please. In the meantime, my husband and I will still donate to our local food programs. ETA: Two of the programs are run by Catholic Charities because they utilize the donations best.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

I dare say that some among us have never dealt with children experiencing food insecurity and the night and day difference it makes when they know there is someone who won't let them fall through the cracks.

For those advocation separation and institutionalization of children, you have apparently never experienced feeling the bond with your parents being severed at a tender age. Had you ever experienced such a thing you wouldn't be able to consider that much less recommend it unless dealing with an abusive situation rather than merely lacking parenting skills or means to provide.

Like most problems, these are simple from the curb.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

I grew up poor, but without any realization of any safety net. I think it impacted my level of ambition. I always had a job and at least one "side gig". Just the rumor of a lay-off and I was angling for another job. I've never been rich, but I've never been hungry either.

I worked in prisons for 27 years and met many people that never gave much thought to sustaining themselves. They lived in the realization that no matter what you do, welfare will smooth out your life. Their dream come true was several women with children, each collecting government money and each vying for your attention.

Then I moved to a low income area with several NA Reservations. Money flows into these communities from several branches of Federal government. Again, no worries about working or earning a living.

Recently, I spent several years in Detroit. Same thing. Generations, whole communities where no one has ever held a job. Nice car, nice clothes, plenty of food, living in a run down government subsidized rental home. Lots of folks with a "side gig" earning undeclared cash. A side gig can range from backyard tire repair to prostitution to drug dealing. 

Detroit Salvation Army raises millions for their bed and bread program. They did a documentary to promote more donations. But the food trucks showed that the program just gets folks that own homes and were eating just fine to start feeding off the trucks, because it is free.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

There was a sign they put up down at the local lake where everyone went and hung out...…..It said do not feed the animals, they will not take care of themselves and migrate, then freeze to death and starve in the winter when no one shows up in the cold to feed them.


I find it shocking almost no one has a open mind anymore....everything is black or white in their beliefs.

I admit is sounded unplausable at first that helping some one was hurting some one, but upon a inspection of the results it appeared that it was exactly what happened. Once I opened my mind to even entertain that thought, examples started magically appearing to support it. 

The more you dig, the more examples of people helping in many aspects has made the situation worse more times than not.....in many things over many years.


I am not so set in my ways I can not open my mind to other possibilities, I know I do not have all the solutions and all my beliefs and answers could be wrong,..not one, all...……


When you are young you think you know it all, some never progress from there, then you get older and realize you do not know it all, then older yet and realize you know nothing and a lot of what you think you know is wrong...…...then you get older yet and realize no one really knows anything and it could all be wrong.....but now your peace of mind/ security is not in knowing it all or thinking you have it all figured out,have the answers..... you realize that knowing anything is meaningless....people right or wrong or that simply know very little all get by and live and then die.

Knowing changes nothing....being right changes nothing...being wrong changes nothing...….lack of knowledge or being smart changes nothing....

What you do changes everything...…..no matter what you believe, what you know or your education level, black or white, it does not matter, think anything, believe anything and in this world you will no better or worse off...….it comes down to what you do that matters......nothing else.


----------



## tiffanysgallery (Jan 17, 2015)

When children go to get their shots for school don't they have regular checkups by a Dr to see if they're thriving? If children are going hungry, how are they slipping through the cracks?


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

haypoint said:


> I have a solution, but you aren't going to like it.
> Turn welfare over to the Churches. Poor families get help finding suitable employment from members of the Church. Yard work, baby sitting, house painting. Pay is food and utilities. Sinful living results in shunning and the help dries up. Child abuse includes not properly feeding them, let the Courts assign foster parents. Let Church members be their foster family. When I think of Church, I assume a focus on the rules of a civilized society, AKA Ten commandments.


Good luck with this. We didn't have an issue here back when the churches took that seriously.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> I dunno. I just know that kids shouldn't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, so I donate money to our local food programs.
> 
> How do you suggest making sure that kids are fed, rights are not violated, *and* remove government food programs?


I agree, kids really should not have to worry about where their next meal is coming from. Do we need to remove government programs? Some of them... Yes! Any program that hands money to a financially irresponsible individual needs to be done away with. How to insure kids get fed... That's easy, let the government feed them, three squares a day every day. As in cook and prepare nutritious meals and feed these children. Don't hand the addicted parents a check and expect them to feed their kids.


----------



## dodgesmammaw (Jun 19, 2013)

We all agree children should not have to worry about their next meal. I watch these people weekly at the mission. My mind is always thinking what can be done to really help these people? Locally children can start into the school system as young as 3. So those children are being provided with free breakfast , lunch, snack and backpacks of food for the weekend. We also have a local church that cooks and serves hot meals 6 days a week to the whole community. So the lack of food would not be the issue. I worked in the Head Start program before it joined the ISD. I worked as a teacher and also a social worker. It was a good program then. We served the whole family. I think some kind of education should be mandated in order to receive aid from programs. But I also have seen first hand how hard it is to break the cycle. If this is all you have ever been shown by your parents and grandparents it is your normal. I wish I had answers these things weigh heavy on my heart. I always remember There But By The Grace Of God Go I.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I agree, kids really should not have to worry about where their next meal is coming from. Do we need to remove government programs? Some of them... Yes! Any program that hands money to a financially irresponsible individual needs to be done away with. How to insure kids get fed... That's easy, let the government feed them, three squares a day every day. As in cook and prepare nutritious meals and feed these children. Don't hand the addicted parents a check and expect them to feed their kids.


This really bugs me as well. I'm all for some sort of safeguard to prevent addicts from receiving government handouts so they can go get wasted, or be worthless lops in general. Mandatory drug testing would be a great place to start, but then people start squealing about human rights...
That right there, bothers me more than people who don't know how to cook affordable and nutritious food for themselves or their kids. At some point, you need to help yourself.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

dodgesmammaw said:


> We all agree children should not have to worry about their next meal. I watch these people weekly at the mission. My mind is always thinking what can be done to really help these people? Locally children can start into the school system as young as 3. So those children are being provided with free breakfast , lunch, snack and backpacks of food for the weekend. We also have a local church that cooks and serves hot meals 6 days a week to the whole community. So the lack of food would not be the issue. I worked in the Head Start program before it joined the ISD. I worked as a teacher and also a social worker. It was a good program then. We served the whole family. I think some kind of education should be mandated in order to receive aid from programs. But I also have seen first hand how hard it is to break the cycle. If this is all you have ever been shown by your parents and grandparents it is your normal. I wish I had answers these things weigh heavy on my heart. I always remember There But By The Grace Of God Go I.


Are you familiar with the WIC program at all? They provide certain, very specific foods to mom's and kids, much of which needs to be cooked. They also make mothers go to classes to learn to be decent parents, learn about nutrition, and learn to prepare food (to a point). I think an expansion of the idea into other programs such as the food stamps system would be a good place to start helping people help themselves. It provides a small amount of accountability at least, and promotes responsible eating and parenting. Cooking classes, at the least, would be helpful.


----------



## dodgesmammaw (Jun 19, 2013)

Yes I am. I agree anything to help them help themselves.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I agree, kids really should not have to worry about where their next meal is coming from. Do we need to remove government programs? Some of them... Yes! Any program that hands money to a financially irresponsible individual needs to be done away with. How to insure kids get fed... That's easy, let the government feed them, three squares a day every day. As in cook and prepare nutritious meals and feed these children. Don't hand the addicted parents a check and expect them to feed their kids.


How do you implement and pay for that? Soup kitchens? Not everyone has a car or access to public transportation. And if they do, three times a day? It's not feasible, in my opinion. It's better for kids when school is in session, they could get breakfast and lunch. School breaks and summer vacation are huge problems. 

Remember this thread? https://www.homesteadingtoday.com/t...riest-time-for-some-kids.539024/#post-7462469 Every time someone brings up that people will voluntarily give money, I think of it and just laugh. 

Not all poor people are addicts, and we'll have to define addict too- illegal drugs? Alcohol? Addiction is a mental illness, have they been treated? Rehab?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> This really bugs me as well. I'm all for some sort of safeguard to prevent addicts from receiving government handouts so they can go get wasted, or be worthless lops in general. Mandatory drug testing would be a great place to start, but then people start squealing about human rights...
> That right there, bothers me more than people who don't know how to cook affordable and nutritious food for themselves or their kids. At some point, you need to help yourself.


Shouldn't people squeal about rights? Especially human rights? Most states that implemented drug testing for government programs found there wasn't rampant drug use. And it still boils down to kids shouldn't pay the price for the irresponsibility of a parent.


----------



## dodgesmammaw (Jun 19, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Shouldn't people squeal about rights? Especially human rights? Most states that implemented drug testing for government programs found there wasn't rampant drug use. And it still boils down to kids shouldn't pay the price for the irresponsibility of a parent.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> It's better for kids when school is in session, they could get breakfast and lunch. School breaks and summer vacation are huge problems.


Add to the above:
Schools supply breakfasts and lunches to supplement the food that taxpayers provide. Never meant to replace it.


Irish Pixie said:


> And it still boils down to kids shouldn't pay the price for the irresponsibility of a parent.


We can agree that some parents create food insecurity due to being irresponsibility. Dumping more money in their collective laps isn't cutting food insecurities. It is creating a class of citizens that have an increasing dependency.

There are not enough quality foster homes to place all these children that face food insecurities. Perhaps a sort of modern orphanages would provide far better homes than the trailer trash, meth lab, crack houses they now reside in. An important side benefit would be not supporting able bodied adult citizens.Cutting the safety net that has become a hammock, could serve as an encouragement to try out the concept of working for a living.


----------



## dodgesmammaw (Jun 19, 2013)

Pixie when I was raising my three sons without any kind of assistance. I still had things I had to be responsible for. If you need a ride you can find a way. These people don’t need any more excuses. I have never said it was all drug addicts. They should still be tested and glad to do it in order to get help for the family. No free rides. Education at every corner. You gotta do what you gotta do.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

haypoint said:


> Schools supply breakfasts and lunches to supplement the food that taxpayers provide. Never meant to replace it.
> 
> We can agree that some parents create food insecurity due to being irresponsibility. Dumping more money in their collective laps isn't cutting food insecurities. It is creating a class of citizens that have an increasing dependency.
> 
> There are not enough quality foster homes to place all these children that face food insecurities. Perhaps a sort of modern orphanages would provide far better homes than the trailer trash, meth lab, crack houses they now reside in. An important side benefit would be not supporting able bodied adult citizens.Cutting the safety net that has become a hammock, could serve as an encouragement to try out the concept of working for a living.


Don't cut up my posts to change the meaning, it's unethical and against HT rules. 

The rest of your post is simply opinion, and rather ignorant opinion at that.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

dodgesmammaw said:


> Pixie when I was raising my three sons without any kind of assistance. I still had things I had to be responsible for. If you need a ride you can find a way. These people don’t need any more excuses. I have never said it was all drug addicts. They should still be tested and glad to do it in order to get help for the family. No free rides. Education at every corner. You gotta do what you gotta do.


Do you think everyone can do it because you did? When was that? Did you have church, friends, or family help? 

My post wasn't addressed to you, so I never indicated that you said anything.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Don't cut up my posts to change the meaning, it's unethical and against HT rules.
> 
> The rest of your post is simply opinion, and rather ignorant opinion at that.


Isn't name calling unethical and against the rules?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

haypoint said:


> Isn't name calling unethical and against the rules?


Yes and no. It's against the rules, but not unethical. Who name called?


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Yes and no. It's against the rules, but not unethical. Who name called?


Nope, I'm not going to play that game.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> Shouldn't people squeal about rights? Especially human rights? Most states that implemented drug testing for government programs found there wasn't rampant drug use. And it still boils down to kids shouldn't pay the price for the irresponsibility of a parent.


No, I firmly believe that if you are going to surrender your income and livelihood to the Government's control and collect money from the taxpayers, you have lost your right to not be scrutinized thoroughly, be it through drug tests or other means. And I don't believe that there is not a rampant drug problem, what states test and where did you get that info please?


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

I say, if your going to be on SNAP or WIC or anything else, then you should be forced to get nutritional food...not chips, ice cream, soda, frozen foods, food that has no nutritional value what so ever...You need help with food, fine, then your going to eat healthier and have to educate yourself to make smart choices. 

Like others, my husband and I were married at 18, he went into the Army so he could provide for his family and I worked what I could while taking classes to get a CNA certificate to learn a trade. If we had to, we worked two jobs, we had baby and no one gave us a hand out. We lived within our means, we had second hand furniture or clothing, but we did it on our own. People now a days don't want to budget, they don't want to make due with something not shiny and new....

And while this will probably enrage others, allow free birth control, condoms and abortions. Woman, man or both don't want the baby....then don't bring it into the world and your "oops" won't be a burden to everyone else. It is harsh, yes, but when do we as tax payers say enough is enough? The children didn't ask to be born into poverty or abuse or neglect...


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> No, I firmly believe that if you are going to surrender your income and livelihood to the Government's control and collect money from the taxpayers, you have lost your right to not be scrutinized thoroughly, be it through drug tests or other means. And I don't believe that there is not a rampant drug problem, what states test and where did you get that info please?


It's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but that doesn't make it correct. Everyone has rights as a human being, and we do as Americans. 

States that currently test- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_testing_welfare_recipients

Here's a link: http://prospect.org/blog/tapped/welfare-drug-testing-promotes-stereotypes-not-efficiency

Here's a state specific one: http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/content/results-coming-states-drug-testing-welfare-recipients


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> I say, if your going to be on SNAP or WIC or anything else, then you should be forced to get nutritional food...not chips, ice cream, soda, frozen foods, food that has no nutritional value what so ever...You need help with food, fine, then your going to eat healthier and have to educate yourself to make smart choices.
> 
> Like others, my husband and I were married at 18, he went into the Army so he could provide for his family and I worked what I could while taking classes to get a CNA certificate to learn a trade. If we had to, we worked two jobs, we had baby and no one gave us a hand out. We lived within our means, we had second hand furniture or clothing, but we did it on our own. People now a days don't want to budget, they don't want to make due with something not shiny and new....
> 
> And while this will probably enrage others, allow free birth control, condoms and abortions. Woman, man or both don't want the baby....then don't bring it into the world and your "oops" won't be a burden to everyone else. It is harsh, yes, but when do we as tax payers say enough is enough? The children didn't ask to be born into poverty or abuse or neglect...


I agree with your last paragraph...


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Grey Mare said:


> I say, if your going to be on SNAP or WIC or anything else, then you should be forced to get nutritional food...not chips, ice cream, soda, frozen foods, food that has no nutritional value what so ever...You need help with food, fine, then your going to eat healthier and have to educate yourself to make smart choices.
> 
> Like others, my husband and I were married at 18, he went into the Army so he could provide for his family and I worked what I could while taking classes to get a CNA certificate to learn a trade. If we had to, we worked two jobs, we had baby and no one gave us a hand out. We lived within our means, we had second hand furniture or clothing, but we did it on our own. People now a days don't want to budget, they don't want to make due with something not shiny and new....
> 
> And while this will probably enrage others, allow free birth control, condoms and abortions. Woman, man or both don't want the baby....then don't bring it into the world and your "oops" won't be a burden to everyone else. It is harsh, yes, but when do we as tax payers say enough is enough? The children didn't ask to be born into poverty or abuse or neglect...


I can agree with much of what was said here, for the most part. I have always wondered how and why one can buy soda, chips, energy drinks, candy and the like with SNAP benefits.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> How do you implement and pay for that? Soup kitchens? Not everyone has a car or access to public transportation. And if they do, three times a day? It's not feasible, in my opinion. It's better for kids when school is in session, they could get breakfast and lunch. School breaks and summer vacation are huge problems.
> 
> Remember this thread? https://www.homesteadingtoday.com/t...riest-time-for-some-kids.539024/#post-7462469 Every time someone brings up that people will voluntarily give money, I think of it and just laugh.
> 
> Not all poor people are addicts, and we'll have to define addict too- illegal drugs? Alcohol? Addiction is a mental illness, have they been treated? Rehab?


I suggest removing the children from parents who for whatever reasons cannot keep a child taken care of. You mention schools. That's good for a couple meals a day, during week days but it does sorta put hungry kids in a central location where they get fed. How about setting up someplace where these kids could have three squares a day, every day, plus get an education, decent clothing, proper medical care, a warm, comfortable, safe place to sleep and all of the other things a kid deserves all in one spot? If the day comes that mom and dad get their poop in a group, can show the state they are ready willing and able to care for children, send them home.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

I agree completely with the drug testing. Think of it this way, nobody squeals about human rights when they get pre-employmemt drug tests, or randoms to maintain their jobs, now do they? So why on earth should we not implement a similar policy to those who for whatever reason can't or won't work, and need government assistance? Is this sort of thinking not a part of what's wrong with our society? 


dodgesmammaw said:


> Pixie when I was raising my three sons without any kind of assistance. I still had things I had to be responsible for. If you need a ride you can find a way. These people don’t need any more excuses. I have never said it was all drug addicts. They should still be tested and glad to do it in order to get help for the family. No free rides. Education at every corner. You gotta do what you gotta do.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I suggest removing the children from parents who for whatever reasons cannot keep a child taken care of. You mention schools. That's good for a couple meals a day, during week days but it does sorta put hungry kids in a central location where they get fed. How about setting up someplace where these kids could have three squares a day, every day, plus get an education, decent clothing, proper medical care, a warm, comfortable, safe place to sleep and all of the other things a kid deserves all in one spot? If the day comes that mom and dad get their poop in a group, can show the state they are ready willing and able to care for children, send them home.


So an orphanage of sorts? An internment camp? Something along those lines? How is it going to be paid for?


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Oh, yeah, drug use must run rampant. Let's see, 0.19%. Hey, that's an awful lot, right, more than half, I bet. Too bad I don't understand exactly how numbers work, but I'm, betting 0.19 percent is most of them.Let's see, 1% of a million is probably about 5 million, so 0.19% must be half a million.
"Analysis of data on US state programs provided by CLASP shows that of the total population screened in 9 states, 0.19% returned positive tests, or 0.57% if refused tests (where reported) are treated as positives" From the PDF here.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> So an orphanage of sorts? An internment camp? Something along those lines? How is it going to be paid for?


I'm thinking more along the lines of a private school setting where the kids are supervised, housed and cared for 24/7. Payed for by state and local governments and private donations.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I'm thinking more along the lines of a private school setting where the kids are housed and cared for 24/7. Payed for by state and local governments and private donations.


Kind of a boarding school of sorts? Have classes there? Meals, friends, warmth and a room?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

That sounds wonderful! What are you doing to implement it?

ETA: Average boarding school cost in the US is $38,850 per kid. From: http://www.collegebound.net/content/article/how-much-does-boarding-school-cost-/18833/

ETA: Requirements for boarding schools: 
https://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/regprivschl/index.html


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Grey Mare said:


> Kind of a boarding school of sorts? Have classes there? Meals, friends, warmth and a room?


Exactly! Couldn't think of the name for it. "Boarding school"! Just like the rich kids go to!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> That sounds wonderful! What are you doing to implement it?


Trying to steer things in that direction every chance I get.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> That sounds wonderful! What are you doing to implement it?
> 
> ETA: Average boarding school cost in the US is $38,850 per kid. From: http://www.collegebound.net/content/article/how-much-does-boarding-school-cost-/18833/
> 
> ...


Instead of finding the bad or hard in everything posted how about finding the GOOD in what this might do for some child who otherwise has nothing?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Trying to steer things in that direction every chance I get.


Sorry. I was adding things- ETA: Average boarding school cost in the US is $38,850 per kid. From: http://www.collegebound.net/content/article/how-much-does-boarding-school-cost-/18833/

ETA: Requirements for boarding schools: 
https://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/regprivschl/index.html


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> That sounds wonderful! What are you doing to implement it?
> 
> ETA: Average boarding school cost in the US is $38,850 per kid. From: http://www.collegebound.net/content/article/how-much-does-boarding-school-cost-/18833/
> 
> ...


What is the cost of incarcerating the kids who grow up to be criminals? Seems a rather small price to pay to save a child.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> Instead of finding the bad or hard in everything posted how about finding the GOOD in what this might do for some child who otherwise has nothing?


Sure. Isn't the reason that some are complaining is the cost? The boarding school is absolutely wonderful until you consider the real world of cost.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> What is the cost of incarcerating the kids who grow up to be criminals?


Nope, no diversionary rabbit holes today. Stay on topic, please.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Nope, no diversionary rabbit holes today. Stay on topic, please.


I'm on topic. Or do you think the two are not related?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I'm on topic. Or do you think the two are not related?


Sigh. I guess you can't stay on topic. Sad.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Sigh. I guess you can't stay on topic. Sad.


Costs are costs. To me it's cheaper, although expensive to give a kid a chance than to let them be neglected and then pay nearly double the cost to incarcerate them later in life. On the topic of costs, have you factored in the cost savings of not providing public education separately? We wouldn't be spending that money on these kids, they would be getting that at my "boarding school".


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Sigh. I guess you can't stay on topic. Sad.


Actually, they are staying on topic:
"Self-reported childhood abuse and neglect Overall, 68 percent of the incarcerated adult male felons reported some form of early childhood victimization before age 12, either physical abuse, sexual abuse, or
neglect. The most common type of reported victimization was physical abuse. Using a measure of “very severe violence,”

the study found that about 35 percent of the sample reported severe childhood physical abuse. Sexual abuse and neglect were less commonly reported and often occurred in combination with other types of abuse. About 14 percent reported some form of child-hood sexual abuse. Fewer than a quarter of the sample reported more than one type of abuse or neglect." 
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/fs000204.pdf


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

AND...
In terms of violence: 3.3 million children witness domestic violence in their homes each year

1 in 5 teen girls and 1 in 10 teen boys are victims of dating violence

1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men will experience domestic violence in their lifetime

Children exposed to violence are more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol; suffer from depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic disorders; fail or have difficulty in school; and become delinquent and engage in criminal behavior

Sixty percent of American children are exposed to violence, crime, or abuse in their homes, schools, and communities

Almost 40 percent of American children were direct victims of 2 or more violent acts, and 1 in 10 were victims of violence 5 or more times

Children are more likely to be exposed to violence and crime than adults

Almost 1 in 10 American children saw one family member assault another family member, and more than 25 percent had been exposed to family violence during their life

A child’s exposure to one type of violence increases the likelihood that the child will be exposed to other types of violence and exposed multiple times.
http://www.naasca.org/2012-Resources/010812-StaisticsOfChildAbuse.htm


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> AND...
> In terms of violence: 3.3 million children witness domestic violence in their homes each year
> 
> 1 in 5 teen girls and 1 in 10 teen boys are victims of dating violence
> ...


I'm sorry. I'm not seeing the connection between your posts, hungry kids, and boarding schools, can you explain?

ETA: You're good, I followed you down the rabbit hole.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Poor parenting in each case would be the connection. These kids deserve better.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

When I was a kid, another kid went away to boarding school, and until he came back and explained it to me, I thought he'd gone to some sort of carpentry school, to learn to be a carpenter, and I wanted to go to boarding school!!
Eventually I did become a carpenter, but without the schooling!!!


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Poor parenting in each case would be the connection. These kids deserve better.


I didn't ask you. I'm sure I responded to Grey Mare's post, can you let her answer? 

It's just a diversion from the topic, and it's a very common thing when one really doesn't have a leg to stand on. If people whine about feeding kids via SNAP and WIC they're going to have a complete and total melt down over something as ridiculous as boarding schools.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Clem said:


> When I was a kid, another kid went away to boarding school, and until he came back and explained it to me, I thought he'd gone to some sort of carpentry school, to learn to be a carpenter, and I wanted to go to boarding school!!
> Eventually I did become a carpenter, but without the schooling!!!


Thank you for a real laugh rather than the snort of derision that occurred earlier.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Life should be an adventure, and laughing should be as common as eating. We should feel some sense of empathy for those who can do neither.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> What is the cost of incarcerating the kids who grow up to be criminals? Seems a rather small price to pay to save a child.





Irish Pixie said:


> Nope, no diversionary rabbit holes today. Stay on topic, please.


That was on topic with what YOU posted.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> I didn't ask you. I'm sure I responded to Grey Mare's post, can you let her answer?
> 
> It's just a diversion from the topic, and it's a very common thing when one really doesn't have a leg to stand on. If people whine about feeding kids via SNAP and WIC they're going to have a complete and total melt down over something as ridiculous as boarding schools.


Yep, she can answer, just like everyone else can... I also recognize that not everyone wants to see a workable solution to a serious problem. They seem to be fine with the status quo of simply tossing good money after bad. Where has paying irresponsible parents gotten us so far? More irresponsible parents, more hungry kids! Whooda thunk it?!


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> That was on topic with what YOU posted.


Can you explain the connection? Or just here for much needed support? Perhaps you should read the thread first tho.

Question, do you support the "boarding school for poor kids" program? ETA: And the premise that all (or even most) poor kids end up in prison?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

It's been shown that most of our current prison population come from the poorer segment of society. Neglected, abused, hungry kids are more likely to fall into a life of crime than do kids who attend boarding schools. Why not solve several problems in one swoop?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> It's been shown that most of our current prison population come from the poorer segment of society. Neglected, abused, hungry kids are more likely to fall into a life of crime than do kids who attend boarding schools. Why not solve several problems in one swoop?


You did work in the "hungry" which is the topic under discussion. Good job. 

Implement it, quickly! The poor kids deserve it now!! Do a power point presentation and link it here. You may have to ask your wife what that is...


----------



## flewism (Apr 2, 2007)

The bottom line is that a higher percentage of children born in America every year are born to parents who cannot or will not provide for them, and this is acceptable behavior in this country.

This article is a perfect example where Bloomberg has written this story that "Trump's economy has not produced positive results in "rural America". In it, it describe the life of 30 year old pregnant waitress that has 5 kids at home and is struggling to provide for them even with food stamps. She has never been married and doesn't seem to want to go after the fathers, but does want someone/ something to provide more for her. I mean you guys draw your own conclusions but is this a fit mother? based on the information provided. This woman life is screwed and she as created a life of hardship for the 5 that exist and the sixth on the way.

Bloomberg's writer portrays this as somehow Trump's or federal, state or local governments fault as to the quality of this woman's and her children's lives

*https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...mpaign=pol&utm_medium=bd&utm_source=applenews*

* 


*


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

flewism said:


> The bottom line is that a higher percentage of children born in America every year are born to parents who cannot or will not provide for them, and this is acceptable behavior in this country.
> 
> This article is a perfect example where Bloomberg has written this story that "Trump's economy has not produced positive results in "rural America". In it, it describe the life of 30 year old pregnant waitress that has 5 kids at home and is struggling to provide for them even with food stamps. She has never been married and doesn't seem to want to go after the fathers, but does want someone/ something to provide more for her. I mean you guys draw your own conclusions but is this a fit mother? based on the information provided. This woman life is screwed and she as created a life of hardship for the 5 that exist and the sixth on the way.
> 
> ...


I can't find in the article where it says she's never married or asked the father(s) for support (can you point it out, please?), but I did find this- "When you apply for food stamps, officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, you'll be asked about your finances. This includes being asked if the father of any children you may have is providing financial support. If not, enrolling in SNAP won't automatically obligate him to pay child support. But it will lead to a child support case being opened by your local child support enforcement agency. As a condition of receiving food assistance, you'll be expected to help them locate your child's father and establish a support order." From: https://legalbeagle.com/7793564-getting-place-father-child-support.html

Is she a fit mother? I think SNAP can do home visits if they feel it's warranted, and I know CPS can. Since we don't know, and she's employed, I'll err on the side of yes. Should she have that many children and be marginally employed? I don't know, I do know that the government shouldn't be allowed to limit the amount of children. Think of the hissy fits the conservative "quiverfull" movement would have, or the Amish and other religious groups. 

The article definitely indicates if SNAP is cut (which the Trump administration has said they'll do) it will be "catastrophic".


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Yep, she can answer, just like everyone else can... I also recognize that not everyone wants to see a workable solution to a serious problem. They seem to be fine with the status quo of simply tossing good money after bad. Where has paying irresponsible parents gotten us so far? More irresponsible parents, more hungry kids! Whooda thunk it?!


I agree with this post wholeheartedly, even if I don't share your enthusiasm for the boarding schools idea. I think the implementation of such would turn a good part of our nation into a completely government-run state. These boarding school kids would grow up as wards of the state (or feds, scary idea) and would be treated as such throughout their adult lives also. I don't think Uncle sam should be in the business of farming children.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

At some point, people become chattel. I can't imagine a worse caretaker and chattel owner than the government.

All the money spent, surely they can redirect a little of it into helping people stand on their own 2 feet. Why do we not hear about, or talk about that program??


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

flewism said:


> The bottom line is that a higher percentage of children born in America every year are born to parents who cannot or will not provide for them, and this is acceptable behavior in this country.
> 
> This article is a perfect example where Bloomberg has written this story that "Trump's economy has not produced positive results in "rural America". In it, it describe the life of 30 year old pregnant waitress that has 5 kids at home and is struggling to provide for them even with food stamps. She has never been married and doesn't seem to want to go after the fathers, but does want someone/ something to provide more for her. I mean you guys draw your own conclusions but is this a fit mother? based on the information provided. This woman life is screwed and she as created a life of hardship for the 5 that exist and the sixth on the way.
> 
> ...


It looks to me as if this woman works for a living, is not using drugs, and is making an honest effort to provide for her children, no matter how many she happens to have. That's a far cry from the drug addicted, kid neglecting abusive homes that are being discussed here.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> It looks to me as if this woman works for a living, is not using drugs, and is making an honest effort to provide for her children, no matter how many she happens to have. That's a far cry from the drug addicted, kid neglecting abusive homes that are being discussed here.


The majority of SNAP recipients are employed.


----------



## bobp (Mar 4, 2014)

I personally am in favor of giving a hand up to those in need....how ever im wholeheartedly against hand outs....

Our system is heavily built on socialists points of veiw from our system of taxes on up....it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see a post humous impeachment of FDR and Johnson, among many others for perpetuating the hand out programs to begin with...

Hunger is a hell of a motivator....and if that doesn't work then let natural selection sort it out.

I do see some light in a couple of socialists points of veiw....it would be better for our society if would control population growth, enforce a sterilization program...
Maybe even enforce a pre breeding application with criteria such as minimum income, IQ, family history of being able and willing to feed, cloth and care for ones own family ect.... If you cannot stand on your own two feet as an adult and feed yourself youve got no business burdening the world with your progeny....just saying...


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

bobp said:


> I personally am in favor of giving a hand up to those in need....how ever im wholeheartedly against hand outs....
> 
> Our system is heavily built on socialists points of veiw from our system of taxes on up....it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see a post humous impeachment of FDR and Johnson, among many others for perpetuating the hand out programs to begin with...
> 
> ...


So rights as an American are only for a select few? 

Do you think hunger is a good motivator in kids?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Irish Pixie said:


> Question, do you support the "boarding school for poor kids" program? ETA: And the premise that all (or even most) poor kids end up in prison?


No, I don't want government run 'boarding schools'

Change "poor kids" to "generational welfare recipients" and I'll agree.

Many kids are raised poor and do just fine. I was raised poor myself and am now middle to upper middle class. When I was young I didn't know we were poor. We were always fed and clothed and had a roof over our heads. My parents didn't drink (other than the occasional beer - a case would last over a month in our house) or do drugs. Food was simple, we had a large garden (on a city lot) and us kids helped take care of it. Mom, Dad, Grandpa and Grandma (who lived with us) canned in the fall.

Dad and Grandpa (and sometime Grandma) fished and we ate fish at least once a week, sometimes more. I do remember getting government cheese (anyone else remember government cheese?) but that's all I remember for assistance.

I should probably mention my parents and grandparents lived through the Great Depression, so they knew how to "make do" long before I came along.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> No, I don't want government run 'boarding schools'
> 
> Change "poor kids" to "generational welfare recipients" and I'll agree.
> 
> ...


Thank you. The government run boarding school is just a horrible idea.

I had government cheese cuz my mother and father were alcoholics, he lost a good job and we had to move back to the family farm when I was 16. It went down hill from there... I'm not (nor my husband who grew up poor) have never been in trouble with the law or been in jail/prison. Have you? Were you abused, beaten, or neglected? It's another theory of the dude that wants government boarding schools for poor kids.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

Where I came from, getting a beating for almost anything was par for the course. Daddy would hold me with one hand, and beat the living daylights out of me with a belt. I'd run, more or less in a circle, cause he was holding me. He'd beat me til his right arm was tired, then switch to left handed, holding me with the right. Seriously, beaten til I bled. Momma was too little to do much whipping, so she'd call me names that just weren't acceptable, even then, and hit me with her fist.

When I was 11, I stood still, glaring at my daddy while he beat on me. When he got tired, he was looking at me kinda funny, and I said "Time to switch arms". He did, but that was the last time he ever did that. A month or so later, we were in the car, and momma turned around and started beating on me with her fist, as usual. I grabbed her wrist, and wouldn't let go, daddy pulled the car over, and turned around to hit me. I said, quite loudly, "I'm tired of getting beat on"

And that was that. However, you have to realize they both came from big families, 9 and 11 kids respectively, and that's the way they were raised, too. And, most likely, their momma and daddy was raised like that too.

Took a lot of self realization to break that chain.

Just want folks to know that getting the living you know what beat out of you every couple days for 11 years don't turn you into a bad person.

I once spilled all the salt from the salt shaker on my watermelon. Salt on watermelon was a thing in SC in the 50's, I don't know why.
A whole salt shaker full.

My momma made me eat it. All.
And I'm just fine today. I know people that don't like me will want to say something smarmy. Go ahead, if you think crap from an anonymous troll behind a keyboard is important, go ahead, make yourself feel good.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> You did work in the "hungry" which is the topic under discussion. Good job.
> 
> Implement it, quickly! The poor kids deserve it now!! Do a power point presentation and link it here. You may have to ask your wife what that is...


I'll not bother my Yvonne, anymore than I plan to implement anything just because you don't think we could do some good by sending neglected children to a boarding school where they would be properly fed, supervised and tended to. Why are you so apposed to actually solving child hunger?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> I agree with this post wholeheartedly, even if I don't share your enthusiasm for the boarding schools idea. I think the implementation of such would turn a good part of our nation into a completely government-run state. These boarding school kids would grow up as wards of the state (or feds, scary idea) and would be treated as such throughout their adult lives also. I don't think Uncle sam should be in the business of farming children.


I certainly wouldn't want the Feds involved... No how no way. As to the children being wards of the state... Why? Could they not simply be sent to any existing private boarding school? Let the state, charity, or county, city governments pay the tab? Might even get the deadbeat parents involved as far as paying part of the cost.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> So rights as an American are only for a select few?
> 
> Do you think hunger is a good motivator in kids?


I'm pretty certain the vast majority of Americans can and do feed their children.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

bobp said:


> I personally am in favor of giving a hand up to those in need....how ever im wholeheartedly against hand outs....
> 
> Our system is heavily built on socialists points of veiw from our system of taxes on up....it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see a post humous impeachment of FDR and Johnson, among many others for perpetuating the hand out programs to begin with...
> 
> ...


If these ideas as far as sterilization go were actually implemented, then you would be throwing a fit about government overreach...


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I certainly wouldn't want the Feds involved... No how no way. As to the children being wards of the state... Why? Could they not simply be sent to any existing private boarding school? Let the state, charity, or county, city governments pay the tab? Might even get the deadbeat parents involved as far as paying part of the cost.


Many times when a government agency steps in and takes a child from their parents, they become at least temporary wards of the state. Think foster children, kids awaiting reunification with their parents, orphans. What you are advocating almost certainly would require that custody be stripped from the parents that you don't think deserve to be parents, and given to.... whom? See what I'm trying to get at here?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I'll not bother my Yvonne, anymore than I plan to implement anything just because you don't think we could do some good by sending neglected children to a boarding school where they would be properly fed, supervised and tended to. Why are you so apposed to actually solving child hunger?


Who decides what is neglect? Or defines bad parents? This sort of power, in the hands of a few, could be dangerous indeed...


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Thank you. The government run boarding school is just a horrible idea.
> 
> I had government cheese cuz my mother and father were alcoholics, he lost a good job and we had to move back to the family farm when I was 16. It went down hill from there... I'm not (nor my husband who grew up poor) have never been in trouble with the law or been in jail/prison. Have you? Were you abused, beaten, or neglected? It's another theory of the dude that wants government boarding schools for poor kids.


I recall seeing percentages of current inmates who didn't have the best parents compared to those whose parents were good parents that did not forget to feed them. Wonder reckon why so many inmates come from the neglected, abused group? Sure, some kids not only survive lousy homes, some have done quite well for themselves. Won't get into his ethics or honesty here but iirc we have even had a president raised on welfare.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> Many times when a government agency steps in and takes a child from their parents, they become at least temporary wards of the state. Think foster children, kids awaiting reunification with their parents, orphans. What you are advocating almost certainly would require that custody be stripped from the parents that you don't think deserve to be parents, and given to.... whom? See what I'm trying to get at here?


Custody could be given to the school. Maybe? I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me parents for whatever reason don't feed their children should not have custody. Certainly shouldn't be paid for such neglect!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> Who decides what is neglect? Or defines bad parents? This sort of power, in the hands of a few, could be dangerous indeed...


We can start with hungry kids.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I recall seeing percentages of current inmates who didn't have the best parents compared to those whose parents were good parents that did not forget to feed them. Wonder reckon why so many inmates come from the neglected, abused group? Sure, some kids not only survive lousy homes, some have done quite well for themselves. Won't get into his ethics or honesty here but iirc we have even had a president raised on welfare.





Yvonne's hubby said:


> I recall seeing percentages of current inmates who didn't have the best parents compared to those whose parents were good parents that did not forget to feed them. Wonder reckon why so many inmates come from the neglected, abused group? Sure, some kids not only survive lousy homes, some have done quite well for themselves. Won't get into his ethics or honesty here but iirc we have even had a president raised on welfare.


Ok, I do see your point here. But, in trying to fix these issues, we may actually be making things worse. Can't we let Darwin sort anything out anymore?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Custody could be given to the school. Maybe? I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me parents for whatever reason don't feed their children should not have custody. Certainly shouldn't be paid for such neglect!


I'll agree with the fact that kids shouldn't go hungry, but giving custody to the schools is where we start going down the Communist rabbit hole. Our schools are funded and maintained by...... oh yea, the government. We can, however, agree that parents should feed their kids so I think there's some common ground here lol


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> Ok, I do see your point here. But, in trying to fix these issues, we may actually be making things worse. Can't we let Darwin sort anything out anymore?


We should let Darwin rules apply. The mistake we as a society made was interfering to start with. Thanks to FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, and Obama we've created quite a monster. I know for a fact that paying people to be poor creates a lot more poor folks than promoting prosperity does.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> We should let Darwin rules apply. The mistake we as a society made was interfering to start with. Thanks to FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, and Obama we've created quite a monster. I know for a fact that paying people to be poor creates a lot more poor folks than promoting prosperity does.


Absolutely. Why work like a slave and have tons of money come out of your checks in taxes, so others don't have to work like slaves? At the end of the day, who "makes" more? And who's the real idiot in this situation? The working man, or the man who knows he doesn't have to to obtain the same things as the working man?

The disappearance of the middle class has greatly compounded this problem too, as far as I can figure.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> Absolutely. Why work like a slave and have tons of money come out of your checks in taxes, so others don't have to work like slaves? At the end of the day, who "makes" more? And who's the real idiot in this situation? The working man, or the man who knows he doesn't have to to obtain the same things as the working man?
> 
> The disappearance of the middle class has greatly compounded this problem too, as far as I can figure.


I keep hear about the "loss of the middle class" but haven't actually seen it. Those folks are still here, living well in spite of our government raising their imaginary bar between poverty and middle class. I never considered myself "poor" even in the early 80s when I was feeding a family of five on less than $3k a year. I was doing ok, keeping my land payments up, feeding the family and still tucking away some for that proverbial rainy day.  seems today if yer not taking home $100k yer living in abject poverty!


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I keep hear about the "loss of the middle class" but haven't actually seen it. Those folks are still here, living well in spite of our government raising their imaginary bar between poverty and middle class. I never considered myself "poor" even in the early 80s when I was feeding a family of five on less than $3k a year. I was doing ok, keeping my land payments up, feeding the family and still tucking away some for that proverbial rainy day.  seems today if yer not taking home $100k yer living in abject poverty!


I think there are a few considerations that have to be taken into account when discussing the middle class. First, if you make 100k per year and are spending 80k of it in housing costs because you live in.... oh, I dunno, the Bay Area of california, can you really be considered to have a median income? Is that middle class? Things such as housing costs, taxes according to your particular geographical location, transportation, student loans, all sorts of other issues and expenses come into play. I think that a much clearer picture of middle class would be obtained by looking at expense to income ratios, with geographical considerations factored in. Something more along those lines than income alone.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> I think there are a few considerations that have to be taken into account when discussing the middle class. First, if you make 100k per year and are spending 80k of it in housing costs because you live in.... oh, I dunno, the Bay Area of california, can you really be considered to have a median income? Is that middle class? Things such as housing costs, taxes according to your particular geographical location, transportation, student loans, all sorts of other issues and expenses come into play. I think that a much clearer picture of middle class would be obtained by looking at expense to income ratios, with geographical considerations factored in. Something more along those lines than income alone.


Right up front if yer spending 80% of your income on housing costs you have a fool for a banker, and another one staring back at you in the mirror!  cars cost the same in Kentucky as they do in New York or in California. Groceries about the same as well. So goes fuel and most other expenses. Student loans are a matter of choice too. My point here is that $100k per year "should" be an exorbitant amount of income regardless of where one lives. If your housing cost is more than 25% of your income.... You need to increase your income or relocate. (Mine is a bit less than $500 year) That's basic lending 101. Student loans are temporary, and certainly not mandated anywhere.... At least not yet.... Again... Basic money management 101.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Right up front if yer spending 80% of your income on housing costs you have a fool for a banker, and another one staring back at you in the mirror!  cars cost the same in Kentucky as they do in New York or in California. Groceries about the same as well. So goes fuel and most other expenses. Student loans are a matter of choice too. My point here is that $100k per year "should" be an exorbitant amount of income regardless of where one lives. If your housing cost is more than 25% of your income.... You need to increase your income or relocate. (Mine is a bit less than $500 year) That's basic lending 101. Student loans are temporary, and certainly not mandated anywhere.... At least not yet.... Again... Basic money management 101.


I would invite you to spend a year here in California, and see for yourself what it's like. Lack of housing makes the homes that are available extremely spendy. Gas prices do vary pretty wildly from area to area, so I can't validate that statement from you either. Groceries, well, we have enough grocery threads on this forum for you to grasp an idea of how much costs vary from place to place. Taxes, another highly variable expense.
Relocation is often a distant dream for those already struggling to put a roof over their head, particularly with renters. There is no equity or means to obtain the funds to do so.

We can agree on student loans being a (poor) personal choice but other than that, if you truly believe what you just wrote... you need to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before making such assumptions.

Edited: I personally spend much, much more than 25% of my income on rent. Closer to 85%. For an RV space, at that... Granted, I lost my job due to a wildfire and am in limp mode financially right now, but the costs here are horrific. Another 10,000 or so houses just got done burning down in this last wildfire, and I consider myself lucky to even have what I do. And yes, I am looking for a way out.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> I would invite you to spend a year here in California, and see for yourself what it's like. Lack of housing makes the homes that are available extremely spendy. Gas prices do vary pretty wildly from area to area, so I can't validate that statement from you either. Groceries, well, we have enough grocery threads on this forum for you to grasp an idea of how much costs vary from place to place. Taxes, another highly variable expense.
> Relocation is often a distant dream for those already struggling to put a roof over their head, particularly with renters. There is no equity or means to obtain the funds to do so.
> 
> We can agree on student loans being a (poor) personal choice but other than that, if you truly believe what you just wrote... you need to walk a mile in someone else's shoes before making such assumptions.
> ...


I lived in California for several years, I'm familiar,,,, won't be going back anytime soon. If it were me I'd do the same thing I did last time..... Point my front bumper toward the sunrise and drive until I was east of the Mississippi and start looking for a landing spot. I know you are in a tough spot and I really admire your grit for hanging in there. If you really want out, it can be done.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I'll not bother my Yvonne, anymore than I plan to implement anything just because you don't think we could do some good by sending neglected children to a boarding school where they would be properly fed, supervised and tended to. Why are you so apposed to actually solving child hunger?


No more discussion until you prove that you're implementing *your* plan (power point would be best) for a government run boarding school for poor kids. After all, you've spent posts describing how great it will be... Talk is cheap.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> Who decides what is neglect? Or defines bad parents? This sort of power, in the hands of a few, could be dangerous indeed...


Exactly. Which is why the old type orphanages, psych centers, poor houses, etc. were closed decades ago. Greed and power is ugly.


----------



## Grey Mare (Jun 28, 2013)

Pixie...The reason I posted what I did was because I wanted to show that yes, many live in poverty, abused, abandoned, neglected and it isn't a small percentage. This DOES lead to illegal activity and jail/prison time. 

Not sure why your brow beating Yvonne's hubby when you say you and the hubby give, but yet we never see YOUR proof...as you said, words are cheap.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Grey Mare said:


> Pixie...The reason I posted what I did was because I wanted to show that yes, many live in poverty, abused, abandoned, neglected and it isn't a small percentage. This DOES lead to illegal activity and jail/prison time.
> 
> Not sure why your brow beating Yvonne's hubby when you say you and the hubby give, but yet we never see YOUR proof...as you said, words are cheap.


Generalizations truly suck. Many kids grow up in poor homes, some are neglected, some are abused, and not all commit crime.

ETA: It's fairly obvious that he's trolling, well at least to me.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

ShannonR said:


> Can't we let Darwin sort anything out anymore?



The government steps in right before consequences are rendered, so no learning, no lesson and no change...…….but they still do get the suffering, just no reward at the end...…..which is learning, lessons and change.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Generalizations truly suck. Many kids grow up in poor homes, some are neglected, some are abused, and not all commit crime.
> 
> ETA: It's fairly obvious that he's trolling, well at least to me.


Not all poor kids who are abused or neglected end up in prison. Nobody other than yourself has even alluded to that possibility. Do you not get the difference? Do you not see the correlation when the prison population consists of a heavy percentage of those kids?


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

shawnlee said:


> The government steps in right before consequences are rendered, so no learning, no lesson and no change...…….but they still do get the suffering, just no reward at the end...…..which is learning, lessons and change.


I have to agree. Doing for yourself seems like a foreign concept these days... some still do, but the majority have learned that it isn't necessary.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Irish Pixie said:


> Exactly. Which is why the old type orphanages, psych centers, poor houses, etc. were closed decades ago. Greed and power is ugly.


And private boarding schools were closed when?


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

Irish Pixie said:


> It went down hill from there... I'm not (nor my husband who grew up poor) have never been in trouble with the law or been in jail/prison. Have you? Were you abused, beaten, or neglected? It's another theory of the dude that wants government boarding schools for poor kids.


Nope, no jail for me, no abuse, no beatings (although I did get spanked as a young kid with an open hand when my parents felt a correction was needed - but it never actually hurt - just got my attention). no neglect (although today's parents might consider "going out to play" for most of the day to be neglect, it was just the way we were back then and nobody thought anything of it).



Irish Pixie said:


> It's another theory of the dude that wants government boarding schools for poor kids.


 Actually, I believe he wants it for those kids being neglected and not fed - but I may have "him" mixed up with someone else.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Not all poor kids who are abused or neglected end up in prison. Nobody other than yourself has even alluded to that possibility. Do you not get the difference? Do you not see the correlation when the prison population consists of a heavy percentage of those kids?


YH, I don't feel like we've had a truly horrible discussion, despite the fact we don't always agree with one another.

Yes, there is a correlation. But is trying to "fix" it really the best way forward? I find myself wondering what putting ALL poor or hungry kids in boarding school would really do, especially since I think we've already established that not all poor or hungry kids end up in prisons. Those who do not slip through the cracks are strong, resilient and highly productive members of society and we need them. Let's not ruin that. Boarding school might sound good on paper, but the more I think about it, the more I shudder inside.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Grey Mare said:


> Pixie...The reason I posted what I did was because I wanted to show that yes, many live in poverty, abused, abandoned, neglected and it isn't a small percentage. This DOES lead to illegal activity and jail/prison time.
> 
> *Not sure why your brow beating Yvonne's hubby * when you say you and the hubby give, but yet we never see YOUR proof...as you said, words are cheap.


its what she likes to do, been at it for years.  it's all good.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> And private boarding schools were closed when?


Hey, I know... Let's privatize the theoretical boarding school system, exactly like we have done with the prison industry!
Those neglected and hungry kids are potentially big money.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> YH, I don't feel like we've had a truly horrible discussion, despite the fact we don't always agree with one another.
> 
> Yes, there is a correlation. But is trying to "fix" it really the best way forward? I find myself wondering what putting ALL poor or hungry kids in boarding school would really do, especially since I think we've already established that not all poor or hungry kids end up in prisons. Those who do not slip through the cracks are strong, resilient and highly productive members of society and we need them. Let's not ruin that. Boarding school might sound good on paper, but the more I think about it, the more I shudder inside.


I am mostly in agreement with you on this. I just tossed the idea out in response to a question of how to get the kids fed. Tossing the parents a check certainly isn't working.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I am mostly in agreement with you on this. I just tossed the idea out in response to a question of how to get the kids fed. Tossing the parents a check certainly isn't working.


I sort of (strongly) feel like your boarding school idea is punishing the children for the actions of the parents. I like to think that looking elsewhere for the answers, such as holding the parents instead of innocent children accountable, might bring healthier results. Parents can take classes to learn not to be dirtbag burdens on society, to learn to cook, to manage money better. I think it would be far cheaper and we would see better results if we focused on the root of the problem and not throwing all the hungry kids together in a school or something. That solution is like a band aid for the result of the problem and does nothing to address the cause of the issue


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

mnn2501 said:


> Nope, no jail for me, no abuse, no beatings (although I did get spanked as a young kid with an open hand when my parents felt a correction was needed - but it never actually hurt - just got my attention). no neglect (although today's parents might consider "going out to play" for most of the day to be neglect, it was just the way we were back then and nobody thought anything of it).
> 
> Actually, I believe he wants it for those kids being neglected and not fed - but I may have "him" mixed up with someone else.


I'm glad you've never been in jail or in trouble. 

Poor kids are more likely to be neglected and/or not fed, at least in my experience. But you're right, it was neglected and not fed in the ridiculous government run boarding school scheme.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> I sort of (strongly) feel like your boarding school idea is punishing the children for the actions of the parents. I like to think that looking elsewhere for the answers, such as holding the parents instead of innocent children accountable, might bring healthier results. Parents can take classes to learn not to be dirtbag burdens on society, to learn to cook, to manage money better. I think it would be far cheaper and we would see better results if we focused on the root of the problem and not throwing all the hungry kids together in a school or something. That solution is like a band aid for the result of the problem and does nothing to address the cause of the issue


I hadn't gotten around to how to deal with the parents since the discussion was about getting the kids taken care of. They too could be sent to a school of sorts. Apparently they didn't pick up much during their first go round.

ETA: we already toss our kids together in schools. Most kids seem to get through it.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I hadn't gotten around to how to deal with the parents since the discussion was about getting the kids taken care of. They too could be sent to a school of sorts. Apparently they didn't pick up much during their first go round.


There ya go....!! Do their children get to go with them? Day school maybe, or lots of classes?
There are drug rehab places that let parents recover while still having their children with them. I have no statistics, but from what I hear It's effective. If you take away a junkie Mama's drugs AND her kids, what else does she have to live for? I found that logic to be solid, even if I do feel a little sorry for the children involved. 

I like how your ideas are evolving, though.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> There ya go....!! Do their children get to go with them? Day school maybe, or lots of classes?
> There are drug rehab places that let parents recover while still having their children with them. I have no statistics, but from what I hear It's effective. If you take away a junkie Mama's drugs AND her kids, what else does she have to live for? I found that logic to be solid, even if I do feel a little sorry for the children involved.
> 
> I like how your ideas are evolving, though.


Not sure I'd want the kids mixed in with the adults, my idea was to keep the kids away from that type of folks. Ya know, keep them safe and outta harms way. Maybe, depending on which parents we are discussing.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Not sure I'd want the kids mixed in with the adults, my idea was to keep the kids away from that type of folks. Ya know, keep them safe and outta harms way. Maybe, depending on which parents we are discussing.


I believe that studies have shown that children do better with their parents. Not government, not guardians. Parents. Dirtbags or not. That is exactly the reason many parents get reunited with their kids after losing custody. It really is what's best for the kids... most of the time anyway. Do you expect a private institution, or, God forbid, the government to try and emulate a mother's love? And what happens to those children who don't receive that love? You've just inadvertently increased that prison population we were discussing, near as I can figure. Hunger is NOTHING to a child compared with the absence of parents. I could never advocate what you are suggesting, and you might be hard pressed to get other folks to agree with you on this, as well.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> I believe that studies have shown that children do better with their parents. Not government, not guardians. Parents. Dirtbags or not. That is exactly the reason many parents get reunited with their kids after losing custody. It really is what's best for the kids... most of the time anyway. Do you expect a private institution, or, God forbid, the government to try and emulate a mother's love? And what happens to those children who don't receive that love? You've just inadvertently increased that prison population we were discussing, near as I can figure. Hunger is NOTHING to a child compared with the absence of parents. I could never advocate what you are suggesting, and you might be hard pressed to get other folks to agree with you on this, as well.


I'd buy this argument if it weren't for the rich kids being sent away to private boarding schools success rate versus the incarceration rates of kids kept at home with useless parents.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I'd buy this argument if it weren't for the rich kids being sent away to private boarding schools success rate versus the incarceration rates of kids kept at home with useless parents.


Rich kids in private boarding schools realize that 1. They are loved by their parents. And 2. That the government or some other institution didn't rip them away from their parents. 3. Presumably, these children still get to spend time with their parents on a fairly regular basis.
How many rich kids in boarding school do you, or have you, actually known anyway?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> Rich kids in private boarding schools realize that 1. They are loved by their parents. And 2. That the government or some other institution didn't rip them away from their parents. 3. Presumably, these children still get to spend time with their parents on a fairly regular basis.
> How many rich kids in boarding school do you, or have you, actually known anyway?


I've known several adults who had gone to private boarding schools. They all seemed like well educated, responsible people to me.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I've known several adults who had gone to private boarding schools. They all seemed like well educated, responsible people to me.


Ok.... well educated and responsible. Got it. Can we look at the opposite end of this spectrum now?

What about homeschooled kids? Often, those parents aren't working. I imagine that at least some of the time, these children may go hungry themselves....but it's hard to say really, because these children are largely kept away from public scrutiny.
Do we have any stats on how many of those homeschooled kids end up in prison? Because your description of well educated and responsible seems to fit what I've seen of people who were homeschooled.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> Ok.... well educated and responsible. Got it. Can we look at the opposite end of this spectrum now?
> 
> What about homeschooled kids? Often, those parents aren't working. I imagine that at least some of the time, these children may go hungry themselves....but it's hard to say really, because these children are largely kept away from public scrutiny.
> Do we have any stats on how many of those homeschooled kids end up in prison? Because your description of well educated and responsible seems to fit what I've seen of people who were homeschooled.


Sorry, no stats on homeschooled kids here. Anecdotally of the 50 or 60 kids that I know who were homeschooled virtually all of them got a much better education than their public schooled counterparts and none have gone to jail. I've also not seen them hungry or with parents not working. Self employment counts.


----------



## ergo (Aug 15, 2017)

shawnlee said:


> https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/pove...ood-stamps/ss-BBKRUn8?ocid=spartanntp#image=1
> 
> 
> *42 million Americans struggle to afford food*
> ...


We've had 5% average annual inflation since then. So, if poverty had not gone down, the Food stamp program would be costing 8x as much today (and I'd bet that it IS, actually) not be the same. Back then, it was shameful to be on Food Stamps. Now, it's just accepted. So is having lots of kids with no daddy, no discipline, no sense, and no reason to be alive.


----------



## flewism (Apr 2, 2007)

ShannonR said:


> Ok.... well educated and responsible. Got it. Can we look at the opposite end of this spectrum now?
> 
> What about homeschooled kids? Often, those parents aren't working. I imagine that at least some of the time, these children may go hungry themselves....but it's hard to say really, because these children are largely kept away from public scrutiny.
> Do we have any stats on how many of those homeschooled kids end up in prison? Because your description of well educated and responsible seems to fit what I've seen of people who were homeschooled.


You know parents who are homeschooling their kids and not providing for their nutritional needs?, or is your imagination running wild? Everyone I ever known that has homeschooled had been ultra dedicated. It takes a lot of hours of preparation to homeschool and it is always one stay home parent who shoulders that that responsibility.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

flewism said:


> You know parents who are homeschooling their kids and not providing for their nutritional needs?, or is your imagination running wild? Everyone I ever known that has homeschooled had been ultra dedicated. It takes a lot of hours of preparation to homeschool and it is always one stay home parent who shoulders that that responsibility.


Please educate yourself using the links provided below, as well as any additional research you may find on the subject. This Turpin family case is far from being just one isolated homeschool abuse case. In short, yes it happens. Possibly much more often than people presume.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-...l-turpin-homeschool-abuse-20180117-story.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...e-exposes-lack-oversight-home-schools-n839281

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/16/us/california-home-schooling-abuse/index.html


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

flewism said:


> Not nice, but truthful,


Oh really? So, where would I go to college to get that degree so I can also determine who does and does not have a reason to be alive, as ergo just stated??


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

ShannonR said:


> Oh really? So, where would I go to college to get that degree so I can also determine who does and does not have a reason to be alive, as ergo just stated??


No college degree needed.


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

I know a woman that earns a comfortable living. But she shows up at all the local free meals or food pantries to get free stuff. She tells people how deprived she is. Lots of people give her things, even money. She obviously is taking advantage of people. When I asked her about it, she explained it. "People love the feeling of helping the poor and needy, I'm providing a service, I allow them to feel good about themselves."

I guess in a way it is that same convoluted thought that some prisoners felt about prisons, " If it wasn't for me, you would be out of a job. I stimulate the economy by creating jobs for Prison Guards."

Whole communities have become so accustom to the countless free food, subsidized utilities, housing and transportation. Free education, food, clothes. Numerous "make work" projects. Even income tax refunds to people that had no income. It has become the norm, expected.


----------



## ridgerunner1965 (Apr 13, 2013)

food is so abundant here its hard to avoid it. I was raised poor but we always had plenty to eat, my parents made a point to raise good food to feed their kids. we lived on hardscrabble farm but we had cattle. every year me and my dad would shoot a cow,skin it and butcher it. we would only butcher runts and cripple cattle cuz they would not bring much at the market.

it was what I consider a very valuable life lesson.

it didn't matter what kind of meat we had my mom could make it absolutely delicious.

back then we didn't have any venison roaming around. today I can shoot enuf meat in one day to last all year. I know that's not true for everyone but its true here.

my gpa once told me that during the depression he felt sorry for city folk cuz they had no food and no way to raise or hunt it.

he said they were basically helpless while his family ate like kings. ham and bacon they preserved, eggs from the chickens and fresh beef in the winter,garden and canned stuff most of the year. small game they hunted, but once the depression took over he said ther was no game left.


----------



## gilberte (Sep 25, 2004)

I sure ain't the sharpest pencil in the box, but I just don't get it. All these starvin' folks yet this problem of being amongst the most overweight people in the civilized world. Perhaps it is time for Soylent Green. I know every time I go to Walmart I see many folks who could feed a lot of these starving unfortunates.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

gilberte said:


> I sure ain't the sharpest pencil in the box, but I just don't get it. All these starvin' folks yet this problem of being amongst the most overweight people in the civilized world. Perhaps it is time for Soylent Green. I know every time I go to Walmart I see many folks who could feed a lot of these starving unfortunates.


They are overweight because the cheapest food is processed food which is very fattening with little usable nutritional value.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

IndyDave said:


> They are overweight because the cheapest food is processed food which is very fattening with little usable nutritional value.


Yes and no... Cheapest food is high carb food, cause govt subsidizes raising of grain and guess what, using that in manufacturing food results in cheapest high profit food. In USA most food isnt even sweetened with cane sugar, its sweetened with high fructose *CORN* syrup. Corn is highly subsidized. 

So what is this about carbs. Well think how farmers fatten livestock for market. Even if the animal is pastured, it is brought into a feedlot and fed grain the last month of its life. Anymore most livestock ends up grain fed their whole life. Higher weight animals bring more money so you want them as fat as possible long as they can stay standing long enough for the sale.

At one point post WWII, there was a surplus of coconut oil on market at basically give away prices. Ah lot free calories!!! Farmers fed it and their hogs LOST weight. Carbs will fatten you up, its not about calories, its about carbohydrates. Cheap food is high carb. Unless you are undergoing a famine, a high carb diet will make you fat. Even an unprocessed whole grain based diet.

So you want a healthier society, stop subsidizing grain, tax it heavily, subsidize fresh produce instead!


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

SJW Scam


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

What this thread is still continuing and everyone hasn't solved the problem yet? This is shocking.... yet people blame representatives for not agreeing on things and implementing solutions all the time. well, they are people just like us...and this is why it doesn't happen...add that with their own special interests and agenda's and it gets even worse.


----------



## DKWunlimited (Sep 11, 2006)

shawnlee said:


> I do not think anyone wants another to starve, but surely we need to fix some of the problems here before taking on new problems.
> 
> 40 million people needing money to eat seems like it should not be such a high number in what is considered a first world country...….seems like a lot to me.
> 
> Seems like a much more important issue than over sized soft drinks or straws......or a 3 toed frog.....


Watching much of this first hand, my observations are that people are not being taught how to cook OR shop. I am seeing more people in their 30's who simply buy heat and eat premade items. and Buy whatever is advertised the most on TV. I know that we have started requiring new SNAP recipients to watch a video on heathly food choices, but I also think a basic cookbook on how to cook from scratch would be helpful. 
A class on budgeting would not be bad as well. Several friends of my kids have come over to show me their new cell phone or tattoos and then come back a week later to mooch a meal because they ran out of money before payday.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

Does one bird decide if another deserves to live or die when it eats the last berries from a bush and doesn't save it for others, and doesn't bring others food? Does ANY animal? No they do not....yet that is nature and nature works. a wolf hunts, and there is a hierarchy to their feeding, they 'allow' others to eat usually, but they do not 'supply' all the wolves from all over the country and/or world, and they do not sit back and go "Well,golly, that wolf pack over there has cubs that are starving so I'm going to go drop them off a deer." Maybe it happens in weird isolated cases, but it simply is not the rule, it at best is the exception. You are taught to hunt and to contribute, and if you cannot, then well, you die and they move on as a pack.
It isn't a sad thing thing, death is not a sad thing...it is merely a thing. death allows us to appreciate life, and to push ourselves harder to fight for it. it allows us to move on. No need to worry, people will only starve to death once. The problem really can just solve itself.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

Animals migrate across boarders without having their children taken away


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

bull...you go into the wrong animals territory and they will tear your rear end apart and leave you for dead if you don't get the hint quick enough. There is plenty of "This place is mine jerk,leave it or die" in nature. Go explain to a hippo there are no borders as you dive into theirs. go ahead and take your kids with you if you want too, and see if it changes anything.

They do not make it our ways of formality, with written laws and such obviously, and they can only do so much as they are not technological advanced, but they certainly do the same thing in their own ways, and it works. I mean you are right of course they typically do not take others children per say (We do that because we try to protect the children), but usually a intruder doesn't bring their family along either, and some animals have been known to adopt others children, even across species, but as a general rule, instead of the exception, if one kills another and leaves their children starving because of it, I doubt they lose sleep over it or give it a second thought. and that includes eating the children even also.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

ergo said:


> your inability to think and weakness shown thereby excludes you from this convo.


Your insulting and condescending treatment of Shannon is well outside any reasonable boundaries.

Your feeling of entitlement to judge whether others should exist also says much about you.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

ShannonR said:


> Yea, that's nice.... move along now sweetie





IndyDave said:


> Your insulting and condescending treatment of Shannon is well outside any reasonable boundaries.


I believe she started the insulting and condescending treatment in this instance, or at least perpetuated it, no?



IndyDave said:


> Your feeling of entitlement to judge whether others should exist also says much about you.


I also, my opinion, do not think anyone is judging who should exist or not. Allowing others to exist or not based on it just happening is not the same thing as judging it. People exist and then they do not. no one here decides if someone else brings someone else into the world, and no one here should decide if they leave it. Not helping someone in need is no more interfering or judging if someone exists or not, than someone who does interfere is doing.
bunny rabbits are cute, but you get too many of them and it turns into a bad thing...nature balances this itself, when they eat all the food in the area, then some go without and they die.it isn't a sad or happy thing. a farmer who doesn't plant more for them to eat is not making a choice that they die. It is not the farmers duty to provide food for them so they can grow out of control even more. and that includes the little bitty baby bunnies to.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

Bob M. said:


> I believe she started the insulting and condescending treatment in this instance, or at least perpetuated it, no?


You don't have an issue with someone who walks in the door throwing bricks and has enough of a superiority complex that he feels entitled to say who should or should not live, particularly in the absence of any of those he has determined to be untermenchen unworthy to live actually harming anyone else?


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

I expanded my explanation above. but in short, if I were to have a issue so to speak then it would be myself who would be claiming to be superior enough to decide who was unworthy or not. he answered, we answered....we each have reasons for believing the way we do usually. even if everyone but me is wrong. haha. but the response was about whom was being condescending to the other first and their treatment of them. we both know she dishes it plenty so deserves to get it back plenty also.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

DKWunlimited said:


> Watching much of this first hand, my observations are that people are not being taught how to cook OR shop. I am seeing more people in their 30's who simply buy heat and eat premade items. and Buy whatever is advertised the most on TV. I know that we have started requiring new SNAP recipients to watch a video on heathly food choices, but I also think a basic cookbook on how to cook from scratch would be helpful.
> A class on budgeting would not be bad as well. Several friends of my kids have come over to show me their new cell phone or tattoos and then come back a week later to mooch a meal because they ran out of money before payday.


I have said I could feed the world's hungry on rice, chicken (or other cheap protein) and beans.

I grew up on beans, potatoes and corn bread. Fresh veggies when the garden produced, canned in the winter. Tasty home cooking. I was blessed being surrounded by good cooks who cared.

I have always wondered why city poor don't use vacant lots as gardens.


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

HDRider said:


> I have said I could feed the world's hungry on rice, chicken (or other cheap protein) and beans.
> 
> I grew up on beans, potatoes and corn bread. Fresh veggies when the garden produced, canned in the winter. Tasty home cooking. I was blessed being surrounded by good cooks who cared.
> 
> I have always wondered why city poor don't use vacant lots as gardens.


There would probably be more of that if someone would teach the city folk who are several generations from anything resembling growing and preserving food.


----------



## DKWunlimited (Sep 11, 2006)

HDRider said:


> I have said I could feed the world's hungry on rice, chicken (or other cheap protein) and beans.
> 
> I grew up on beans, potatoes and corn bread. Fresh veggies when the garden produced, canned in the winter. Tasty home cooking. I was blessed being surrounded by good cooks who cared.
> 
> I have always wondered why city poor don't use vacant lots as gardens.


More and more cities ARE doing community gardens, the issue is that people need to be taught how to actually use the produce and cook from scratch. 
I gave a neighbor a bunch of leeks. I asked her later what she made. Her answer was that they went bad and she threw them out because she didn't know how to use them. I suggested google for future events.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

DKWunlimited said:


> More and more cities ARE doing community gardens, the issue is that people need to be taught how to actually use the produce and cook from scratch.
> I gave a neighbor a bunch of leeks. I asked her later what she made. Her answer was that they went bad and she threw them out because she didn't know how to use them. I suggested google for future events.


Think about all the "poor people food" so in fashion today. Fajita used to be the cheapest cut of beef. Oxtail, cows tongue, tripe, menudo, chicken feet, hog jowl and so much more.

City poor people have been robbed of the joy of discovery with food by government do gooder programs.

I would love to teach people to cook. The key ingredient in cooking is love. The taste is sour, or bitter if love is left out.


----------



## Clem (Apr 12, 2016)

One winter in the 70's, I was getting hog kidneys for 19 cents a pound. Battered and fried, I just told the kids it was pork.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Clem said:


> One winter in the 70's, I was getting hog kidneys for 19 cents a pound. Battered and fried, I just told the kids it was pork.


Dad's special scrambled eggs had pork brains in them.

There ain't nothing better than a smoked hog's head.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

DKWunlimited said:


> Watching much of this first hand, my observations are that people are not being taught how to cook OR shop. I am seeing more people in their 30's who simply buy heat and eat premade items. and Buy whatever is advertised the most on TV. I know that we have started requiring new SNAP recipients to watch a video on heathly food choices, but I also think a basic cookbook on how to cook from scratch would be helpful.
> A class on budgeting would not be bad as well. Several friends of my kids have come over to show me their new cell phone or tattoos and then come back a week later to mooch a meal because they ran out of money before payday.


Kids learn watching their parents. We are several generations away from anybody having parents paying for everything with cash and budgeting. Let alone cooking from scratch. People dont have clue where food comes from except from 'the store'. Far as cooking info, there is one sub channel on free broadcast PBS that pretty much 24hr cooking shows. Lot useful info on there if anybody has any interest and its FREE. I find it lot more entertaining than lot of the so called entertainment shows. Some of it lot more fancy than most would cook at home, but still lot basic stuff. Shows like Americas Test Kitchen even explain some of the science to cooking.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Both of my adult kids love to cook.

This is what my daughter is getting for Christmas









This is for my son


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Bob M. said:


> I expanded my explanation above. but in short, if I were to have a issue so to speak then it would be myself who would be claiming to be superior enough to decide who was unworthy or not. he answered, we answered....we each have reasons for believing the way we do usually. even if everyone but me is wrong. haha. but the response was about whom was being condescending to the other first and their treatment of them. we both know she dishes it plenty so deserves to get it back plenty also.


Yep, law of the jungle, if you are hungry just kill and eat the rich, since they are too fat to run very fast.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

HermitJohn said:


> Yep, law of the jungle, if you are hungry just kill and eat the rich, since they are too fat to run very fast.


And the politicians, they make good eating too


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

ShannonR said:


> And the politicians, they make good eating too


I dont know, they give me gas.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

Part of the issue is there just really is not a 'need' to get people to learn how to do things anymore. and I believe part of that reason is frankly all the benefits that are just gave out like candy to everyone. I also believe in large part a lot of those benefits were gave out not for the good of the people or the lil bitty babies but instead because of politicians and govt who wanted to insert itself as a middle man and those gain control which allows them to funnel things for their own benefits rather than others.
lets ook at the truth of things...people hardly ever use axes anymore to fell trees, it is because chain saws are around. a axe does work, has worked for many a long time, but chainsaws are easier. if people are gave chain saws easily enough they will hardly ever use a axe when they could use a chainsaw. if you give people little cards they can use to buy themselves food and it is easy that is what they are going to do. If you allow them to buy whatever they wish with those cards, that is what they are going to do. If you sallow people from other countries to come into this one and get those little cards when in their own countries they didnt have whatever food they wanted or other things, then that s what they are going to do.
To stop the dependency what needs to be done is stopping things being so good. the chinese people fed their people 1 cup of rice a day for decades and people survived. They fed their children. their children worked and they also broke out of that poverty just like they should of, if they were determined to do it.
I've said this more than a few times, but what we should simply do is stop giving people welfare. We need things as a society done, so to get $200 worth of food all a person has to do, is work for minimal wage, jobs we as tax payers are paying others way more to do currently. we'd save money and they would earn what they get. this would stop them from being static and not working, even possibly gain skills but most importantly staying active and earning it.
We could have some who are qualified do day care for those who have children and need it to work these govt jobs. we could have some help raise produce/farm/build roads/clean parks/etc. the produce can be used to feed the hungry or themselves, at a reasonable cost. We already pay union people way more than minimal wage to do a lot of these things, and we are already just giving these people welfare for free anyways, so we'd be saving taxpayer money. we could have some be teachers who can train and give education also so many things. do we as taxpayers really need to pay govt workers $15/hr to staple papers together or do so many silly meaningless tasks when we have a whole workforce of welfare recipients to choose some who can do it for a lot less? no we do not.
If they refuse to work for their welfare then they get what they deserve. nothing. To make the $200 in welfare they need to eat, at minimal they only need to work 24.5 hrs. that is it. 3 lousy days of work. or 2 - 12 hr shifts if they are nurses or etc, and no reason we can;t have govt nurses or healthcare professionals also. we have govt healthcare facilities as it is, not many of them that I know are rocket scientists or brain surgeons that is for sure...in fact almost all the healthcare people I know are alcoholics and druggies...it is pathetic. but the point is anyone can clearly do the job. at least NA's or simple wound/urgent care. This would surely lower healthcare costs drastically. and these people should NEVER have a opportunity to get a raise.(unless minimal wage goes up which is usually a mistake and bad for the country and the lower class also, since it raises the costs of all goods more than the increase in wages.) no, sorry if you want a raise then go get a regular job and get off welfare. Heck have a bunch of them on our borders securing them or reporting illegals, or building the wall.


----------



## Bob M. (Nov 5, 2018)

Doing the above is not punishing anyone for success, it is not stopping anyone from furthering themselves or doing what they wish to or interfering with their right to happiness or success. Nor is it so called picking who makes it or not, they decide for themselves. It is allowing them the opportunity to live if they choose to. The right to happiness and success also comes with the right not to have happiness and success too. you have the ability to succeed and the ability not to, otherwise it would be the guarantee of happiness and success, and well there is no guarantee of happiness and success. Someone succeeding is not the cause of someone else failing. sorry the so called rich are not to blame because they made things work in their favor, or did good for themselves. That is something we are all pretty much trying to do, and we all have the freedom to try to do it in our own ways. Only one sperm generally makes it to the egg, the rest are just losers and die. thats life and death. it was never equal from the start, but they all had the chance.


----------



## jerry arnold (Dec 1, 2018)

IndyDave said:


> As Judas Iscariot was informed about 2000 years ago by a well known personage, the poor will always be with you. My first thought is that constitutionally it is not within the authority of the federal government to engage in redistribution of wealth, and that charity falls under the venue of private charity, including and especially the organizations which exist ostensibly in honor of the aforementioned personage. If those organizations followed through with their part of this I doubt that there would have been a temporary turned permanent federal program which grew and grew. At the end of the day, constitutional or not, it is difficult to justify allowing people not to eat regularly.


so many greedy folks hide behind a religous symbol to do their dirty deeds and to line their pockets...sad but true


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Old NASCAR saying, second place is just the first loser.


----------



## jerry arnold (Dec 1, 2018)

shawnlee said:


> I do not think anyone wants another to starve, but surely we need to fix some of the problems here before taking on new problems.
> 
> 40 million people needing money to eat seems like it should not be such a high number in what is considered a first world country...….seems like a lot to me.
> 
> Seems like a much more important issue than over sized soft drinks or straws......or a 3 toed frog.....


so many hungry folks are in urban settings w/o knowledge of growing their own food...so many urban areas don't even encourage urban gardening...even though SNAP pays for seeds and edible plants


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

IndyDave said:


> Your insulting and condescending treatment of Shannon is well outside any reasonable boundaries.
> 
> Your feeling of entitlement to judge whether others should exist also says much about you.



Yet you judge me ?


----------



## jerry arnold (Dec 1, 2018)

shawnlee said:


> Pure vanity...….a lot of peoples moral compass is soo skewed the ship is already on the rocks.
> 
> American society teaches that if people have a nice car and look a certain way they are A Ok and have it made, its the happy life and what many now consider the American dream.
> 
> ...


i am homeless, paying for a bit of land and make too much for food stamps...yet can not afford rent and chose to be homeless so my commute to work isn't 2hr 1-way (including a 6mi walk from the nearest bus stop


----------



## jerry arnold (Dec 1, 2018)

Sourdough said:


> The food stamp program was created as a subsidy for the "FARMERS" in America. Which is why it is under the Dept. of Agriculture, and "NOT" Department of Health and Human Services.


nope...the USAid program is the price control program supposedly for farmers which now serves corporate farms and sets artificial food prices for almost all foodstuffs grown in the USA


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

jerry arnold said:


> i am homeless, paying for a bit of land and make too much for food stamps...yet can not afford rent and chose to be homeless so my commute to work isn't 2hr 1-way (including a 6mi walk from the nearest bus stop


I hope you get set up.

I used to live in Houston. I have to think it is a tough place to be homeless, like being homeless could ever be easy.

Do you spend much time in the library?


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

oneraddad said:


> Yet you judge me ?


You are the one who for whatever reason made the decision to be hostile to me. Most people tend to have a negative reaction to that.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

IndyDave said:


> You are the one who for whatever reason made the decision to be hostile to me. Most people tend to have a negative reaction to that.



You were stalking a former member and looked foolish


----------



## IndyDave (Jul 17, 2017)

oneraddad said:


> You were stalking a former member and looked foolish


You are a real comedian. Of course, if one thinks with his plumbing I could see that conclusion.


----------



## crehberg (Mar 16, 2008)

HDRider said:


> Both of my adult kids love to cook.
> 
> This is what my daughter is getting for Christmas
> 
> ...


HD I love my Worksharp...so much quicker (and easier) than the old wetstone, and seems to give a better edge on newer knives. I know he'll love that!


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

crehberg said:


> HD I love my Worksharp...so much quicker (and easier) than the old wetstone, and seems to give a better edge on newer knives. I know he'll love that!


I dont know anything about the worksharp, but looks like a small belt sander. I love my el cheapo HF 1x30 belt sander to sharpen things. I gave like $30 for mine, though looks like they are over $50 now. Also looks like they redesigned them a bit, more plastic. I know on mine, had to replace the motor capacitor twice and switch once, and take the belt tensioner apart and weld a metal handle (piece rebar) to replace that silly plastic one that fell off first time I tried to use it. Silicone carbide belts will only sharpen old high carbon steel. The aluminum oxide belts work on both old high carbon knives and stainless steel. There are also zirconium belts that also do both, but they are expensive. Aluminum oxide is way to go.

Anyway belt sander is so much easier than old honing stones which again worked ok on high carbon steel, not so great on the stainless unless you got the diamond dust ones. And heck of a lot quicker, especially if you have to reshape the edge and not just hone it. Lot cheaper knives and bladed stuff has poorly shaped edge out of factory.


----------



## ShannonR (Nov 28, 2012)

jerry arnold said:


> i am homeless, paying for a bit of land and make too much for food stamps...yet can not afford rent and chose to be homeless so my commute to work isn't 2hr 1-way (including a 6mi walk from the nearest bus stop


Sometimes living in this country can be both strange and difficult-- kudos to you on buying your own land.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

ShannonR said:


> Sometimes living in this country can be both strange and difficult-- kudos to you on buying your own land.


Yeppers, strange and difficult are pretty accurate. But that's the beauty of freedom! We get to explore new things, (strange to us) and figure out ways to make those things beneficial to us.(difficult) makes life interesting that way.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

crehberg said:


> HD I love my Worksharp...so much quicker (and easier) than the old wetstone, and seems to give a better edge on newer knives. I know he'll love that!


I have one too. I can sharpen a lot of knives very fast.

It is made in the US and they really stand behind it. I had something break, and I have had it for 6 or more years. Call and Bam, new part, no cost.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

HermitJohn said:


> I dont know anything about the worksharp, but looks like a small belt sander. I love my el cheapo HF 1x30 belt sander to sharpen things. I gave like $30 for mine, though looks like they are over $50 now. Also looks like they redesigned them a bit, more plastic. I know on mine, had to replace the motor capacitor twice and switch once, and take the belt tensioner apart and weld a metal handle (piece rebar) to replace that silly plastic one that fell off first time I tried to use it. Silicone carbide belts will only sharpen old high carbon steel. The aluminum oxide belts work on both old high carbon knives and stainless steel. There are also zirconium belts that also do both, but they are expensive. Aluminum oxide is way to go.
> 
> Anyway belt sander is so much easier than old honing stones which again worked ok on high carbon steel, not so great on the stainless unless you got the diamond dust ones. And heck of a lot quicker, especially if you have to reshape the edge and not just hone it. Lot cheaper knives and bladed stuff has poorly shaped edge out of factory.


You are right, it is basically a little belt sander. It has a slot for the knife. Handy dandy


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

HDRider said:


> SJW Scam


Nah, it's the alt right nationalists that care nothing for anyone but themselves. It's the "screw you, I got mine" mentality.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Nah, it's the alt right nationalists that care nothing for anyone but themselves. It's the "screw you, I got mine" mentality.


It is better than the Socialist Justice Warriors that pretend to care about others with other people's money. It's the "screw you, I'll take yours" mentality.

I am proud to be an American nationalist. It’s undeniable: Around the world, nationalism is on the march, and the media and reigning political elites would have you believe this is a dangerous disaster in the making.


----------



## jerry arnold (Dec 1, 2018)

thx shannon


ShannonR said:


> Sometimes living in this country can be both strange and difficult-- kudos to you on buying your own land.[/


----------



## jerry arnold (Dec 1, 2018)

HDRider said:


> I hope you get set up.
> 
> I used to live in Houston. I have to think it is a tough place to be homeless, like being homeless could ever be easy.
> 
> Do you spend much time in the library?


i'm homeless to avoid a 2hr commute 1-way which includes a 6mi walk...i've got a youtube channel..."jdawgs place"...can't find a hyper link


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

jerry arnold said:


> i'm homeless to avoid a 2hr commute 1-way which includes a 6mi walk...i've got a youtube channel..."jdawgs place"...can't find a hyper link


Let me know when you make you move to Hardy. Maybe I can lend a hand some way or another.


----------



## jerry arnold (Dec 1, 2018)

Clem said:


> Where I came from, getting a beating for almost anything was par for the course. Daddy would hold me with one hand, and beat the living daylights out of me with a belt. I'd run, more or less in a circle, cause he was holding me. He'd beat me til his right arm was tired, then switch to left handed, holding me with the right. Seriously, beaten til I bled. Momma was too little to do much whipping, so she'd call me names that just weren't acceptable, even then, and hit me with her fist.
> 
> When I was 11, I stood still, glaring at my daddy while he beat on me. When he got tired, he was looking at me kinda funny, and I said "Time to switch arms". He did, but that was the last time he ever did that. A month or so later, we were in the car, and momma turned around and started beating on me with her fist, as usual. I grabbed her wrist, and wouldn't let go, daddy pulled the car over, and turned around to hit me. I said, quite loudly, "I'm tired of getting beat on"
> 
> ...


you're absolutely correct a person's environment does not make the person; his choices do...


----------

