# Starving Children? Blame the Parents



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0914/colon092214.php3

Starving Children? Blame the Parents.

Yes!! What about parental responsibility?

I've been waiting for someone in the press to raise this obvious but unspoken politically incorrect question. 

21-22 trillion dollars and we have only created an America half filled with takers dependent upon governmental largesse.

Yes, I agree,there are times when one struggles to feed their children - but to what extent? 
When does this stop and the government give back to the parents their responsibility to care for their children?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

I don't understand the attitude of today's parents.
People are trained by the left to be dependent. They are taught to believe they are disadvantaged, non sense trying, the rich people are keeping you down, yadda-yadda yadda, and people fall for it.
When I was raising kids, I worked 2 jobs, the ex worked, and we went without.
I never owned a new TV until I was well into my 40s, I bought used computers, and cell phones were a luxury we didn't have.
We drove used cars, raised pigs, and stayed out of bars.
I once sold the tires off my Jeep to buy groceries.
Parents today go to the welfare office.
I know it's not all of them, some people are still good parents, but if your kids are hungry, maybe you need to realign your priorities and not expect someone else to bail you out.
End of my rant.


----------



## Ardie/WI (May 10, 2002)

Cornhusker said:


> I don't understand the attitude of today's parents.
> People are trained by the left to be dependent. They are taught to believe they are disadvantaged, non sense trying, the rich people are keeping you down, yadda-yadda yadda, and people fall for it.
> When I was raising kids, I worked 2 jobs, the ex worked, and we went without.
> I never owned a new TV until I was well into my 40s, I bought used computers, and cell phones were a luxury we didn't have.
> ...


We were brought up by parents who did without to feed us too. I've tried to instill that in my children.

And, if they can't afford to feed and cloth said children, don't make them!


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Ardie/WI said:


> We were brought up by parents who did without to feed us too. I've tried to instill that in my children.
> 
> And, if they can't afford to feed and cloth said children, don't make them!


Exactly.
People today are selfish, put their own wants ahead of their children's needs.
I see people on facebook posting about how poor they are, "do you have any clothes to give my kids, boy did I get drunk last night, see my new fingernails and check out this tattoo, I can't afford Christmas presents for my babies, this new cell phone is awesome"
Just makes me sick


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

I was the director of a food pantry and total help outreach in our TX town. In my experience there are three reasons why children go without---mental illness, drugs, and alcohol. We found many of those that needed continual help would not buy food or buy diapers for kids could buy booze, illegal drugs, and cigarettes. The people that were just having relatively temporary problems came in for food for the kids, didn't ask for anything for themselves. The others tried everything to get cash, which we never gave to clients. If a bill was approved, we paid it directly. The good parents were hard to help, unless it was for the kids.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

I ate a LOT of bean, taters and corn bread as a kid because it was cheap, filling and about the only thing we could afford. 

We've been though some good times when I could go into the grocery store and buy what ever I wanted. And we've been through some hard times where putting a little cheese in with the rice was a huge treat. In all those times my kids NEVER went hungry because there was nothing to eat. 

Funny story. The DD had an assignment in college where the class was to put themselves in the place of a woman whose husband had died leaving her with X number of kids, no job and very little money in the bank. They were to come up with a plan on how the woman could 'survive'. Most of the students did the "get on welfare" route. My daughter told me she just wrote the woman should just start living the way she did when she was young. And went on to describe how to feed the family on MUCH less money than was allowed in the assignment, how when you didn't have a washer and dryer and there was no money for a trip to the laundrymat you could wash clothes in the bathtub and dry them on a line in the house and such things.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Wolf mom said:


> Starving Children? Blame the Parents.
> 
> Yes!! What about parental responsibility?


Oh sure.... blame the parents! Next you will be trying to pin the blame on junkies for their addictions, like they have a choice or something.

I just thought it would be nice to get that in first, before the usual set of bleedin hearts jump in.


----------



## Kmac15 (May 19, 2007)

I would like to jump in and say that there are good people going through hard times that need a bit of a hand up. I know we are not talking about these people.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Kmac15 said:


> I would like to jump in and say that there are good people going through hard times that need a bit of a hand up. I know we are not talking about these people.


Nope, we aren't talking about those people.


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

Ardie/WI said:


> We were brought up by parents who did without to feed us too. I've tried to instill that in my children.
> 
> And, if they can't afford to feed and cloth said children, don't make them!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RBqjZ0KZCa0


----------



## Belfrybat (Feb 21, 2003)

Good article. I concur completely with the author's position. 
I struggle with the whole issue of poverty in the US. As a teen (before foodstamps) I helped out with a program that helped with the USDA commodities program. We prepared recipes and menus with what was going to be available that month and people picking up the food were encouraged to come to a class to learn how to stretch the food. Of course, this was in the mid 60's when people still cooked.

Now I see people in the Dollar Stores using their Lone Star card to buy pre-packaged food that is expensive and pretty much devoid of nutrition while talking or playing on their smart phones. I was behind someone a few months ago who purchased 50 - 60 of those little ravioli, spaghetti, and noodle cups at $1.00 each. A can with twice that amount also costs $1.00. (How do I know? I'm a Chef Boyardi Ravioli junkie.) So by opening a can and pouring it into two bowls to microwave, should would have doubled her bang for the buck. And, if she had purchased dry beans, rice, tomatoes and onions, she could have quadrupled or more the value with better nutrition.

And don't even get me started on the food pantries. I worked at the one in town for over a year and quit before I ended up strangling some of the beneficiaries. Talk about demanding and rude people! Not all of them, but enough to sour me on the experience of helping the poor directly. 

Yet there are some people who are legitimately poor and need a hand up. So how do we help them, either individually or as a government, without giving handouts to those who don't need them? Beats me.


----------



## Pearl B (Sep 27, 2008)

I think you can thank welfare for starving kids. Seems to me the program has encouraged many who shouldn't have kids in the 1st place to have as many as they can.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

You can't welfare people into good judgement. You can provide the minimum needed to survive so the ones who can figure it out get the opportunity to do so. The rest are just a burden to be carried and not too much effort should be spent doing their thinking for them or hand holding when they inevitably screw up. 
There is much too much apologizing for people who will never make the good choices that most people do. Just shrug off the excuses, provide the minimum for survival and publicize the success stories so people realize that better is out there to be earned.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

Molly Mckee said:


> I was the director of a food pantry and total help outreach in our TX town. In my experience there are three reasons why children go without---mental illness, drugs, and alcohol. We found many of those that needed continual help would not buy food or buy diapers for kids *could buy booze, illegal drugs, and cigarettes.* The people that were just having relatively temporary problems came in for food for the kids, didn't ask for anything for themselves. The others tried everything to get cash, which we never gave to clients. If a bill was approved, we paid it directly. The good parents were hard to help, unless it was for the kids.


 Bold print. Those should be jailed, fined and put in a chain gang. The children should be taken away and given to the closest next of kin and give them the responsibility of raising and feeding those kids.

It's not my responsibility to feed those kids until the immediate family bears the burden.

At some point we have to stop raising/birthing wards of the state!


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Interesting thread. It goes along with my view on the "Sick And Tired Of Society" thread. Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## wally (Oct 9, 2007)

It is nice to see a thread like this . One where you take responsibility for your choices and actions. I will give anyone a helping hand when its needed, or a meal, but when I do they better be working a full time job and working part time someplace else. No vices and no smart phone.


----------



## mrs whodunit (Feb 3, 2012)

When I worked at a grocery store I saw time and time again kids who wanted candy, cookies, cereal, produce, meat or something like that and the parents would say I dont have the money for that YET the parents would buy cigarettes, or alcohol. REALLY???! The parents could have a treat but yet the kids couldn't.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> I don't understand the attitude of today's parents.
> People are trained by the left to be dependent. They are taught to believe they are disadvantaged, non sense trying, the rich people are keeping you down, yadda-yadda yadda, and people fall for it.
> When I was raising kids, I worked 2 jobs, the ex worked, and we went without.
> I never owned a new TV until I was well into my 40s, I bought used computers, and cell phones were a luxury we didn't have.
> ...


Post of the decade award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

watcher said:


> I ate a LOT of bean, taters and corn bread as a kid because it was cheap, filling and about the only thing we could afford.
> 
> We've been though some good times when I could go into the grocery store and buy what ever I wanted. And we've been through some hard times where putting a little cheese in with the rice was a huge treat. In all those times my kids NEVER went hungry because there was nothing to eat.
> 
> Funny story. The DD had an assignment in college where the class was to put themselves in the place of a woman whose husband had died leaving her with X number of kids, no job and very little money in the bank. They were to come up with a plan on how the woman could 'survive'. Most of the students did the "get on welfare" route. My daughter told me she just wrote the woman should just start living the way she did when she was young. And went on to describe how to feed the family on MUCH less money than was allowed in the assignment, how when you didn't have a washer and dryer and there was no money for a trip to the laundrymat you could wash clothes in the bathtub and dry them on a line in the house and such things.


Strange, isn't it?!
My mom moved from Chicago to a tiny town in the mid of KS in with her parents after my dad was struck & killed by a car. I was 2. She got a job, stenographer so notsorich, and G'ma took care of me during the day. GG'ma also lived with us. 
This is nearly unheard of these days. Big gov will take care of everyone.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

> In fact, there is a higher percentage of poor people in America than ever before. Now how can that be?


LOL. Seriously?

Certainly child starvation is a parental problem, but obesity is a much more common issue with today's poor, much in part, by the lobbying of junk food manufacturers, for the food stamp program.

If we are being honest, i can't help but wonder if the author put their children through a "private school" (Catholic) school for free, since they were of low income. That's how my I went to a "private" school.

I'll "go out on a limb" and state that it was probably easier being poor back then, anyway, when gas was 23 cents, bread 10 loaves for a dollar and a doctor visit was $10.

As fun as it sounds, that $22 trillion didn't just go for food stamps. I know of many who are old and/or crippled, so they could not work, if they wanted to. Their medical care needs are extensive.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Yes the food stamp program has to be revised.
It is hard to believe you can buy the most basic things with FS like deodorant, SOAP, TP Toothpaste, etc. But you sure as heck can buy chips, soda, candy bars, or even Lobster Tail if you want.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

plowjockey said:


> LOL. Seriously?
> 
> Certainly child starvation is a parental problem, but obesity is a much more common issue with today's poor, much in part, by the lobbying of junk food manufacturers, for the food stamp program.
> 
> ...


You are confusing the issue here


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

arabian knight said:


> Yes the food stamp program has to be revised.
> It is hard to believe you can buy the most basic things with FS like deodorant, SOAP, TP Toothpaste, etc. But you sure as heck can buy chips, soda, candy bars, or even Lobster Tail if you want.


Food stamps should be good for the basics, hamburger, bread, potatoes, etc
No prepared food, at least learn to cook.


----------



## whiskeylivewire (May 27, 2009)

I work for a Community Action Agency so I see some of what you are talking about. I will also say that most of our clients are elderly, disabled, or working families. A very small percentage are scammers but we don't hand out food stamps.

Look up the Paul Ryan Poverty Report. It's 56 pages of boringness but I truly believe in the Opportunity Grant that he is talking about. It holds the case workers accountable, the people needing welfare accountable, and the people handing out the grant accountable. Don't look up what other people say about the Opportunity Grant, actually read it yourself. I am 100% behind it.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Cornhusker said:


> You are confusing the issue here


How so?

The authors state how "easy" it was to be poor back then, even sending her own kids to a "private" school. I was just calling the story out as some BS, although no doubt they did scrimp and save as well as rely on handouts from family.

The typical temp factory job around here now pays about $10/hr most without insurance. That's about* double* the wages - *from 30 years ago*, when they at least offered some health insurance. The current cost of living is a lot more than double today and until Obamacare, healthcare may be too expensive to buy individually.

Government assistance is handed out by income level, more than actual need,anyway Corporations like Walmart could pay their employees more, even giving them insurance, but they choose not to, instead letting tax payers help feed and assist their part time employees.

Could the poor get by without Government assistance today?

Some probably could, but if they quality for Government assistance, they are going to take it.

The author in Spanish Harlem probably would have too, if it had been available.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

plowjockey said:


> How so?
> 
> The authors state how "easy" it was to be poor back then, even sending her own kids to a "private" school. I was just calling the story out as some BS, although no doubt they did scrimp and save as well as rely on handouts from family.
> 
> ...


I think the point is that government "assistance" run amok breeds poverty, even encourages it. By the time you add up the food stamps, energy assistance, rent assistance, cash money, free medical, etc, welfare people make more than a lot of hard working people.
Why should they work?
the Democrats then convince them they are poor, disadvantaged, and will never get ahead because of Republicans and rich people.
The government has made poverty worse by "helping"
If you do everything for people, give them food, shelter, money and an Iphone, those people will never learn to do anything for themselves, they'll be dependent and "poor" forever.
Just like when you raise your kids, if they get everything and never have to work for it, they will respect nothing and expect everything


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Cornhusker said:


> I think the point is that government "assistance" run amok breeds poverty, even encourages it. By the time you add up the food stamps, energy assistance, rent assistance, cash money, free medical, etc, welfare people make more than a lot of hard working people.
> Why should they work?
> the Democrats then convince them they are poor, disadvantaged, and will never get ahead because of Republicans and rich people.
> The government has made poverty worse by "helping"
> ...


I agree, but is it not true, with nearly any government handout.

Farmers can't get by without that subsidy check and that's about all a County Agent does any more, is deal in payment programs.

Defense contractors absolutely have to have wars and/or new fighter jet programs. They are not going to lose profits or worse go out of business for lack of need.

After 100 years we still cannot seem to build a highway, that does not need major repair often.

Assistance is a double-edge-sword, which incidentally is not the complete fault of Democrats. Conservative Republican Corporations and businesses, want the welfare handouts just as much as the poor. 

To go with the rougher times, there is a awful lot of more money involved and they want a piece of the action.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

plowjockey said:


> LOL. Seriously?
> 
> Certainly child starvation is a parental problem, but obesity is a much more common issue with today's poor, much in part, by the lobbying of junk food manufacturers, for the food stamp program.
> 
> ...


 Low wages with thosee low prices. I made less than $40 a week.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> Yes the food stamp program has to be revised.
> It is hard to believe you can buy the most basic things with FS like deodorant, SOAP, TP Toothpaste, etc. But you sure as heck can buy chips, soda, candy bars, or even Lobster Tail if you want.


And pot in states where it's legal.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

Yes, you can use your ebt card in the pot shops and the casinos. Makes sense to someone. Not to me.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

plowjockey said:


> I agree, but is it not true, with nearly any government handout.
> 
> Farmers can't get by without that subsidy check and that's about all a County Agent does any more, is deal in payment programs.
> 
> ...


It all boils down to votes.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Cornhusker said:


> Food stamps should be good for the basics, hamburger, bread, potatoes, etc
> No prepared food, at least learn to cook.


I understand the sentiment behind that, and I agree in concept. When "food stamps" were still the coupon books, they came with a pamphlet every month of thrifty recipes and tips for using basic, economical foods. But that ongoing educational opportunity doesn't exist with the electronic version. Also, keep in mind some people who receive food stamps are going to be physically or mentally disabled, not capable of scratch cooking. There are probably others who don't have a working stove and/or the tools for scratch cooking if they are really needy. And if somebody never learned to cook, we can't just wave a magic wand and they will know how if they get the benefits card. So we can't just say, nobody can ever buy a frozen dinner with their benefits. Even soda, diabetics might need it if their sugar falls too low. And if someone is managing their benefits wisely enough to afford a sweet treat after their needs for meals have been met, why punish them? They learned something and deserve a reward.


----------



## Becka (Mar 15, 2008)

Our local paper has an ad asking for people to donate money or food to fill backpacks for hungry children. The ad says these kids only eat at school (free lunch program, free breakfast for some) and on the weekends and after school they go hungry. They want donations of easy-to-serve stuff that kids can open and eat without much cooking prep.

I don't understand this. If the parents don't have money to feed their kids, they can apply for FS. Why do we need to fill backpacks of food on top of that? Is it because the parents are selling the FS for dope? And if they "know" these kids aren't getting fed evenings and weekends, why aren't they investigating the home situations to find out WHY? Not trying to be insensitive, but I just don't get it.


----------



## hickerbillywife (Feb 28, 2014)

Its not that parents don't have the money for the food its that they don't have the desire to buy it or serve it to their kids. There are not enough good foster homes out there to house all the kids that go hungry over the weekends. I'd say many of the kids are on there own while parents party or are hung over all weekend. There are many kids that eat only at school and it is a shame but I have no idea how to fix it other than the weekend backpack idea. It makes me mad too, until I look in the face of that hungry child.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Becka said:


> Our local paper has an ad asking for people to donate money or food to fill backpacks for hungry children. The ad says these kids only eat at school (free lunch program, free breakfast for some) and on the weekends and after school they go hungry. They want donations of easy-to-serve stuff that kids can open and eat without much cooking prep.
> 
> I don't understand this. If the parents don't have money to feed their kids, they can apply for FS. Why do we need to fill backpacks of food on top of that? Is it because the parents are selling the FS for dope? And if they "know" these kids aren't getting fed evenings and weekends, why aren't they investigating the home situations to find out WHY? Not trying to be insensitive, *but I just don't get it*.


Quite simple IMO. They are in on "the game", just like the rest.

They are likely tax-exempt non profits, taking in (tax deductible) donations, from individuals, corporations, maybe even getting some Government money.

They pay themselves, Likely have executives, who may get travel paid maybe company cars. They have paid employees.

They likely give out backpacks of food, to many children, who are not hungry. One could come from a rich family, and they would probably be handed a backpack of food. they hand out backpacks to kids who are already obese.

We need to understand, that in 2014, charity is no longer just about the poor.

http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fi...d-services/child-hunger/backpack-program.aspx


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

I am 59..in 1960 I was one of five children in my family who were truly hungry. No food stamps, free lunches / breakfasts, relied on the church, mother would not get out of bed to feed us if she had a house full of food. On and on....We NEVER had a breakfast or snack unless we were visiting relatives. I still cannot force myself to eat breakfast.

I spent weekends with relatives so I ate, my brothers did not. From age 2 on they would climb on the counters to reach boxes of cake mix. The picture looked good so they would eat it dry, out of the box. Cans of potatoes looked like pears to them. 

I am pretty conservative in my beliefs, but remembering those things, I think I do not care about the issues...I would support the "ready to eat" foods for children. Even an obese six year old feels hunger, shame, loneliness, and neglect. I wish someone had fed my siblings. My survivors guilt and their addictions are not productive or beneficial to society.


----------



## hercsmama (Jan 15, 2004)

Molly Mckee said:


> Yes, you can use your ebt card in the pot shops and the casinos. Makes sense to someone. Not to me.


Seriously?
I had no idea, is this true?


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Molly Mckee said:


> Yes, you can use your ebt card in the pot shops and the casinos. Makes sense to someone. Not to me.


Probably only to buy food items.

Bottom line, that that all businesses want a piece of the action and really, it's understandable.

Kraft Foods pays taxes. Mars Candy pays taxes. If Kraft gets to make hundreds of million$ off EBT, Mars feels that their products should qualify as "food" also for some of that money.

Who knows? maybe M&Ms have better nutritional value than kraft macaroni and cheeze, anyway. 

It's no different than Walmart and the local convenience store.

Everybody wants some.

Someone made a comment that only beans, rice and potatoes, should be given to the poor. that awesome of you raise beans rice and potoatoes. You will be extremely wealthy. Kraft Foods might see things a little different.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

plowjockey said:


> Probably only to buy food items.
> 
> Bottom line, that that all businesses want a piece of the action and really, it's understandable.
> 
> ...


At the end of the day, the object is to feed the poor, involving politicians is the reason we have obese children.
It all goes back to not allowing people to do for themselves.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

hickerbillywife said:


> Its not that parents don't have the money for the food its that they don't have the desire to buy it or serve it to their kids. There are not enough good foster homes out there to house all the kids that go hungry over the weekends. I'd say many of the kids are on there own while parents party or are hung over all weekend. There are many kids that eat only at school and it is a shame but I have no idea how to fix it other than the weekend backpack idea. It makes me mad too, until I look in the face of that hungry child.


So in effect you are supporting child abuse/neglect by making it easier these parents to ignore their kids all weekend. If this is really the case wouldn't it make more sense to just send a cheap cell phone home with the kid and tell him to dial 911 when his parents left him alone and/or without food? Then you could maybe save an abused kid, not continue to keep him in the abusive home.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

hercsmama said:


> Seriously?
> I had no idea, is this true?


AFAIK there's no limit on what you can buy at a store which "accepts EBT". There might supposed to be some kind of code the store is supposed to put on items to make sure when scanned it can't be paid for with EBT but who enforces this?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> At the end of the day, the object is to feed the poor, involving politicians is the reason we have obese children.
> It all goes back to not allowing people to do for themselves.


If the object was to feed the poor the government would keep its nose out of it. First off its NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB to feed them. Second, its not about feeding the poor its about making people dependent on the government to keep the pols in power.


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

watcher said:


> So in effect you are supporting child abuse/neglect by making it easier these parents to ignore their kids all weekend. If this is really the case wouldn't it make more sense to just send a cheap cell phone home with the kid and tell him to dial 911 when his parents left him alone and/or without food? Then you could maybe save an abused kid, not continue to keep him in the abusive home.


 After leaving that mess, I became a child protective service worker. Would you like to know the reality of what would happen if someone called saying a child was not eating over the weekend? Not much. Not much at all...maybe even a food voucher and a shopping trip to the grocery to insure the family "remains intact" as long as possible. And because I worked in the system, it is the great lesser of major evils.


----------



## Dutchie (Mar 14, 2003)

I am of the, very unpopular opinion, that just because you have the ability to procreate doesn't mean you should. I also believe that people who want to do so opught to go through a process to prove that they are financially and emotionally stable enough to do so. People don't have to be rich, but they do need to be able to support the children they want. 

Additionally, sex education and birth control availability is important. Telling kids and adults to "just say no" has been proven not to work.

I believe that is the ONLY way to break this cycle. But in the meanwhile there are children already in this country that go to bed hungry at night. And that is unacceptable.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

There's so many things wrong and so many contributing factors...where to start. I've seen it myself..daughter's friend comes to school with barely enough to eat, yet the mother picks her up in a Lexus. While there could be extenuating circumstances, I just don't agree at first glance. 

Unfortunately so many things are just a band-aid, a quick fix, a way to make the problem temporarily go away. Getting to the root of the problem takes time and many people don't want to deal with the root issue and try to solve it.  Education regarding nutrition and money management needs to be implemented but I think so often people wouldn't listen anyway, they just want their free food and to be done with it.

There was a huge EBT bust story a few years ago...http://kstp.com/article/stories/s1830297.shtml , and yes casinos are mentioned. It was shameful the way people were taking advantage of the system.


----------



## Tabitha (Apr 10, 2006)

watcher said:


> I ate a LOT of bean, taters and corn bread as a kid because it was cheap, filling and about the only thing we could afford.
> 
> We've been though some good times when I could go into the grocery store and buy what ever I wanted. And we've been through some hard times where putting a little cheese in with the rice was a huge treat. In all those times my kids NEVER went hungry because there was nothing to eat.
> 
> Funny story. The DD had an assignment in college where the class was to put themselves in the place of a woman whose husband had died leaving her with X number of kids, no job and very little money in the bank. They were to come up with a plan on how the woman could 'survive'. Most of the students did the "get on welfare" route. My daughter told me she just wrote the woman should just start living the way she did when she was young. And went on to describe how to feed the family on MUCH less money than was allowed in the assignment, how when you didn't have a washer and dryer and there was no money for a trip to the laundrymat you could wash clothes in the bathtub and dry them on a line in the house and such things.


So how did that go over? Good girl your daughter.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Dutchie said:


> But in the meanwhile there are children already in this country that go to bed hungry at night. And that is unacceptable.


I agree, but we have been throwing money at this problem for over 40 years with poor results, more kids are hungry today than ever. Obviously we need a different strategy. 

I propose we stop handing money to parents who are obviously not capable of handling money or taking care of their business. I vote we take hungry kids out of those homes and feed them, clothe them and take care of them in efficiently operated childrens homes. The parents?...... they can either think or thwim.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

Making parents prove they have the ability to provide for a child wouldn't work either. People might be well off one day & a few months later lose everything they have when they lose a job or whatever.

However, I do believe parents should feed their kids. First on my list of payments is the mortgage, after that it is food. All else follows. I work my butt off to grow most of our food. I know we qualify for food stamps, but I do not want them. 

People have their priorities all wrong. Their cell phone is more important than food. I have a niece that recently had a baby. She has no job, lives in her parent's basement, & the baby's dad wants nothing to do with that child. I think all of the people running around making these babies & then not stepping up should be held accountable. If they don't pay child support, throw them in jail & make them do some kind of community service. Make them work some kind of job while in jail & take that money & send it to the child. There are men going around making babies with several different women & are never made to take care of them. 

We live in time of smart phones & stupid people. Not many will step up & be responsible because they aren't made to. A lot of this falls on the parents that do not instill that in their children. Children live what they see everyday. If mom & dad are lazy welfare moochers, the kids will most likely follow the same way. There are oodles of jobs in our local area. I keep hearing the same story.....they can't find anyone that wants to work. They show up a week or 2 & then quit or they can't pass a drug test. It is a sad, sad world we live in when parents put their wants ahead of their child's needs.  I would go work 3 jobs if that is what I needed to do to feed my kids.


----------



## Pearl B (Sep 27, 2008)

> I propose we stop handing money to parents who are obviously not capable of handling money or taking care of their business. I vote we take hungry kids out of those homes and feed them, clothe them and take care of them in efficiently operated childrens homes.


 They are starting to serve dinners as well at some schools, in some states. Will probably be all states soon. 
Might as well just turn the gym into sleeping quarters at night & consider it a public boarding school.


> In California, dinners are now being served to students at almost 200 schools.&#8232;
> &#8232;These California schools are joining a new federally-funded effort to provide three meals a day to children from low-income families who also attend after-school programs across the state.


 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/09/school-supper-dinner-is-n_n_1265631.html


----------



## Dutchie (Mar 14, 2003)

Wendy said:


> Making parents prove they have the ability to provide for a child wouldn't work either. People might be well off one day & a few months later lose everything they have when they lose a job or whatever.
> 
> However, I do believe parents should feed their kids. First on my list of payments is the mortgage, after that it is food. All else follows. I work my butt off to grow most of our food. I know we qualify for food stamps, but I do not want them.


Falling on bad financial times does not mean you can't feed your kids. If a person is mentally and emotionally stable they will find a way.

[/QUOTE]
People have their priorities all wrong. If they don't pay child support, throw them in jail & make them do some kind of community service. Make them work some kind of job while in jail & take that money & send it to the child. There are men going around making babies with several different women & are never made to take care of them. 

[/QUOTE]

Right on!


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

I don't disagree with you Wendy but I have 2 questions. Who would take care of your children when you work those three jobs and how much could you afford to pay for childcare?


----------



## hickerbillywife (Feb 28, 2014)

Not at all. There are simply not enough foster homes to take all the kids away from the parents just because they do not fix their kids a meal. Kids are left to fend for themselves as long as they are not in danger of being beaten or worse. I didn't say it was a good plan but I have seen it with my own eyes. I will always believe that the child should be fed no matter what the parents spent the food stamps on. If a backpack with some ready made or easily prepared foods means the difference between spending a hungry weekend or not I say do it. A kid can get pretty hungry waiting for someone to come rescue them from a crappy home. It takes time, and parents get many chances to improve, and red lines have to be crossed before a kid can be taken away. Most kids would not call with the cel phone or even ask for help from teachers for fear of being taken out of the home.


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

I don't know if anyone has addressed the reality that children's brains need adequate nutrition to develop properly. If children don't get the necessary protein, carbs, vitamins etc. they are being put at a mental disadvantage for the rest of their lives. And that disadvantage will cost them AND society big time. I would like to see churches establish soup kitchens specifically for feeding children, up to 18 yrs. old and pregnant women. 

We keep sending millions(both govt. and private) to foreign countries while our own communities collapse. And we encourage more folks to come here and provide them with subsidies while we do not address our problems here with our own people. So the churches, and there are several, that act as connections with a lot of different countries, should stop, IMO, and start attempting to feed and help improve the lives of the children already here in the USA. If we do not take care of matters at home eventually there will be no more home.

You can divide the food and resources only so many times before it ends up nourishing no one.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

KentuckyDreamer said:


> After leaving that mess, I became a child protective service worker. Would you like to know the reality of what would happen if someone called saying a child was not eating over the weekend? Not much. Not much at all...maybe even a food voucher and a shopping trip to the grocery to insure the family "remains intact" as long as possible. And because I worked in the system, it is the great lesser of major evils.


One call for one weekend is one thing. Call after call after call weekend after weekend after weekend is child abuse. At that point the alleged parent should be arrested and the child removed just as if they were being sexually abused every weekend.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Tabitha said:


> So how did that go over? Good girl your daughter.


Initially it took off like a lead balloon but after some discussion it really took off. No one really thought you could do what she was suggesting. But she had practical experience in the area plus data showing how cheaply you really can make nutritionally balanced meals; how cheaply you can buy clothes (goodwill, salvation army, local church "closets") and the like.

As many people have said being poor has more of a mindset than the amount of money you have.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

light rain said:


> I don't disagree with you Wendy but I have 2 questions. Who would take care of your children when you work those three jobs and how much could you afford to pay for childcare?


You find other parents and take turn watching each other's kids. It used to be quite common.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

There is no reason for any child to go hungry. There are food banks everywhere. Some parents are too lazy to go to the food bank, or they go and sell the food to buy drugs, alcohol, and/or cigarettes. It might not be your choice of food, but it is food. Standing on the corner and begging is better than seeing your kids hungry.


----------



## Junkman (Dec 17, 2005)

We have tried and tried to give away excess apples. I called one family that I knew had "problems" and was told when I suggested they could make applesauce for the kids, Momma replied "I don't know how?" These apples did not even need sugar. Another neighbor told me she was just too tired to work them up. Another said they have no freezer and didn't can anymore. Well I wont see 69 anymore and we put up quarts. One family brought their group and took 22 bushels. We have 5 trees and the Lord really blessed us this year. Oh yeah, one man said he would take them off our hands to feed the deer! So glad to hear your comments. I was afraid I was becoming senile. Jklady


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wendy said:


> Making parents prove they have the ability to provide for a child wouldn't work either. People might be well off one day & a few months later lose everything they have when they lose a job or whatever.
> 
> However, I do believe parents should feed their kids. First on my list of payments is the mortgage, after that it is food. All else follows. I work my butt off to grow most of our food. I know we qualify for food stamps, but I do not want them.
> 
> ...


True, true, true.
When I was in college, for RN, my OB rotation was at Parkland Hospital, Dallas County charity hospital. The minute an unwed mom had a baby, welfare was in her room, signing her up. In virtually all cases, that mom's mom had been on welfare too. 
This was 1978.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

watcher said:


> You find other parents and take turn watching each other's kids. It used to be quite common.


Exactly, I had 3 pttime jobs at one time too...


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

Not everyone takes the "free stuff" even when desperately needed. There is a such thing as pride or at least there used to be.


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

watcher said:


> One call for one weekend is one thing. Call after call after call weekend after weekend after weekend is child abuse. At that point the alleged parent should be arrested and the child removed just as if they were being sexually abused every weekend.


That may be true in theory, but not in law. I remember when we switched from paper files to computerized. I had work carts LADEN with files for one family wheeled to my desk. The first few numbers of a case show the year the family was first brought to the attention of the agency. Believe me, we had cases from the 70's and had to find the fiche for the records of the parents when they were children.

I can also detail the horrors of foster care, the disrupted adoptions, and of course the children who find their parents the minute they can access a computer. The system is so broken; there are no easy answers. And this goes on for generation after generation. I just choose to focus on being a part of helping some break the cycle...and some of us do.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

Dutchie said:


> Falling on bad financial times does not mean you can't feed your kids. If a person is mentally and emotionally stable they will find a way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I agree. My husband has lost 2 different jobs during the course of our marriage. Neither time did we sign up for food stamps. He was off about 3-4 months the first time & about 6 months the second time. I took a part time job to help pay bills until he found another full time job.

As far as who would watch the kids, mine are old enough now they don't need a sitter. If needed, I have family that would help me out. I at one time was working 3 part time jobs. 2 were in the evening & I would wait until DH was home & then would go in. I was cleaning 2 different banks & could go in when I wanted after they closed. The other was another cleaning job that I did on Saturday afternoon, again when DH was home.

I grew up in a family of 11 kids. Not once did my parents take any help, not even free lunches at school. My mom canned all summer long to provide for us & dad raised cattle & hogs. We also had chickens. This is the same thing we do. I have 4 freezers packed full & over 1,000 jars of canned stuff. I will make sure my kids do not go hungry.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

I remember when I was 7 we had no food, there was 5 of us kids. We couldn't get any Government help so 4 of us kids stole all the food we could.

big rockpile


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

I would also help anyone that I thought needed it. However, they must be willing to work a little for it. I will give produce from the garden, but I will not pick it & clean it for you. I can't believe the people that say they want food, but refuse to work for it. One year I picked 33 gallons of cherries from a nice older woman. They were free, I just had to pick them. She said most people that called would ask if she could have them picked & ready to be picked up. She was 80 years old. 

Laziness is most people's problem!


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

BRP glad you survived those difficult times...


----------



## dizzy (Jun 25, 2013)

I know someone. He's in danger of having his electric and cell phone turned off-if it hasn't happened already. He's driving w/no insurance. The church had been helping him, but every month he had a new emergency. Finally we sat down w/him and found ways that he could cut his bills. But, he had to do certain things-like put up a clothes line. And until he did those things, we were NOT going to help him. I think the only thing he did was unplug a freezer. He was given a clothes line, but he never set it up. His excuse? He doesn't have a post hole digger. There are people that would have helped him put it up-if he had asked. And almost every time I'd drive by, there would be a big light on on the front porch-in broad daylight! 

It is not easy to tell him no, but at the same time, unless he's willing to help himself, we cannot do anything else. This is just a small church and if we "help" him every month, we are unable to help anyone else. If he had done the things on his list, he would have been able to live on what he earns.


----------



## summerdaze (Jun 11, 2009)

Kind of weird when you hear one day that there is an obesity problem with America's children, and the next 1 child in 5 doesn't get enough to eat. Which is it?

I don't have any answers, I'm just noticing that most of our poor aren't really poor. They just make bad choices, have no pride, and probably don't love their children enough. Love sacrifices. It does whatever it takes to protect and provide.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

mrs whodunit said:


> When I worked at a grocery store I saw time and time again *kids who wanted candy, cookies, cereal*, produce, meat or something like that and the parents would say I dont have the money for that YET the parents would buy cigarettes, or* alcohol*. REALLY???! The parents could have a treat but yet the kids couldn't.


 Ive been in those stores with those screaming families and at times its made me WANT Alcohol !


----------



## Elffriend (Mar 2, 2003)

summerdaze said:


> Kind of weird when you hear one day that there is an obesity problem with America's children, and the next 1 child in 5 doesn't get enough to eat. Which is it?


Both. If 1 in 5 aren't getting enough to eat, it says nothing about what the other 4 are eating.

Also obesity amongst the poor is more about the quality of the food and not the quantity.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

^ Bingo. Very often overfed = undernourished. There's a reason all the sweet cereals are on the shelf they're on..perfect eye level for a kid in a grocery cart to whine and beg for and for a parent to placate because of life fatigue and a coupon.

This thread depresses me so much because I have an aquaintance who receives EBT and her kids get the free lunch at school, yet the mother makes choices that I personally wouldn't make. Whenever the girl comes comes over to play she finds me baking bread or making granola bars, chopping veggies..I've taken her to the farmer's market and I've sent her home with good organic food (we go on bikes and receive $ vouchers), she's helped me hang laundry, compost, go to the co-op... so many things she's seen me do and helped with, all these things I do to be a good steward of our money to help it go further without waste. She's even come to church with us.

I know her mother is too far gone to listen but I keep trying to instill these things in her daughter and get her to realize that true happiness can't be found in getting your nails done every week, leasing a new car every year and having the latest iphone. 

Hard to tell if they stick, but I really want to help teach her that self-sufficiency is the key and that a hand-out should be a temporary thing...the old "teach a man to fish.." I'm trying, I am! If I can save one person from the cycle of poverty, my job here is done.


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

I agree the system is broken beyond belief. I also believe as a society, we no longer care about one another. Not truly and not like we should. I see a lot of people saying "I'll help BUT only if xyz is done or being done first" and I find it particularly disheartening when it comes from Christians and churches. I believe that if you are able to help and want to help it should be done with no stipulations. Degrading those who are already down really does not help. Everyone's situation and circumstance is different and what works for you may not work for someone else. More love and less judgement is really what is needed but I fear our society is way beyond that.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

big rockpile said:


> I remember when I was 7 we had no food, there was 5 of us kids. We couldn't get any Government help so 4 of us kids stole all the food we could.
> 
> big rockpile


Today kids stealing food is not required... the government simply robs someone, and hands the money to the parents to buy food. This seems to be a much more politically correct method to rob the haves so the have nots get something to eat.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

sidepasser said:


> Not everyone takes the "free stuff" even when desperately needed. There is a such thing as pride or at least there used to be.


I personally know of other family members who stayed hungry and had rotten teeth/ poor health, because their parents had too much "pride", to accept charity.

Of course they did not have the smarts to take care of their kids properly themselves.

Hard to imagine anything more selfish, pride over making sure one's kids are taken care of, at least by soembody.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

> I agree the system is broken beyond belief. I also believe as a society, we no longer care about one another. Not truly and not like we should. I see a lot of people saying "I'll help BUT only if xyz is done or being done first" and I find it particularly disheartening when it comes from Christians and churches. I believe that if you are able to help and want to help it should be done with no stipulations. Degrading those who are already down really does not help. Everyone's situation and circumstance is different and what works for you may not work for someone else. More love and less judgement is really what is needed but I fear our society is way beyond that.


I agree with you to a point. How is expecting someone to come & pick their own produce from the garden degrading to them? If they are truly hungry & want help, they would run to that garden & glean that food. My tomatoes didn't do well this year. My neighbor called to see if I'd like some of theirs. I was very grateful for the offer & met him the following morning to pick some. I ended up going back 2 more times & picking some more for a total of 13 (5 gallon) buckets. I didn't expect him to pick them for me or bring them here. 

While we may not know why someone needs the help, I don't think handing over food time after time while requiring nothing from them is helping them. I would offer to help process the food if they didn't know how. I'd offer to show them how to grow something or butcher if they wanted to learn. I will not feed & help someone that sits in their house day after day & does nothing to help themselves. The above example with the guy getting money from the church is the perfect example. Why should that church give him money month after month when he is doing nothing to try to fix his situation? They can help more people if those people take the advice given & do what they can to help. If I gave someone some money for food & then saw them smoking or drinking, I would be upset. If they could not give up a nasty habit to feed themselves, then why should I care if they are hungry? Kids are a different story. I'd feed any hungry kid that came here. They can't help it if their parents make bad choices. However, giving food stamps to those parents doesn't mean those kids will get food. They find ways to sell those benefits so they can feed their own habits & not their hungry kids.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

Wendy said:


> They find ways to sell those benefits so they can feed their own habits & not their hungry kids.


When I was a kid, I remember one of the 'bad girls' at school I wasn't allowed to play with. She would get a roll of lunch tickets each month because her family was poor. The crafty little thing daily would trade a ticket for the .50 and pocket the cash. I have no idea what she did with that money, nor what happened to her but even at a young age I could tell it was wrong. :facepalm:


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

I don't think that you can help people that are not willing to help themselves. When someone that is capable will not put up a clothesline, pick produce, or do anything to help themselves, I'm done. There are so many that need help, and as someone said, you are not able to help others if you are supporting a lazy person, who is probably getting lots of help. It's amazing how much effort some people will put into not working.


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

I never said having them pick their produce was degrading them. Telling them that they can come and get it if they want it and then judging them because they don't, is. I never said keep giving them food constantly while they are not helping themselves. Which raises the question of how exactly any one person can for a fact know what happens in another household. You don't. You are making judgements from your perceptions and the filters of your life experience. Canning equipment is expensive. If they can't buy food how will they get the equipment to preserve it? Maybe those folks knew they wouldn't eat the produce and choose to leave it for someone else rather than waste it?

My point is, there is a lot of dehumanising of the poor that goes on in this board. If you can keep in mind that they are human beings capable of love, hate, having preferences etc it might help to put things in perspective. I try really hard to treat others like I would want to be treated. It's not always easy and I don't always succeed but I try. 
Judging these folks is not my job. .


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

> I never said having them pick their produce was degrading them. Telling them that they can come and get it if they want it and then judging them because they don't, is. I never said keep giving them food constantly while they are not helping themselves. Which raises the question of how exactly any one person can for a fact know what happens in another household. You don't. You are making judgements from your perceptions and the filters of your life experience. Canning equipment is expensive. If they can't buy food how will they get the equipment to preserve it? Maybe those folks knew they wouldn't eat the produce and choose to leave it for someone else rather than waste it?
> 
> My point is, there is a lot of dehumanising of the poor that goes on in this board. If you can keep in mind that they are human beings capable of love, hate, having preferences etc it might help to put things in perspective. I try really hard to treat others like I would want to be treated. It's not always easy and I don't always succeed but I try.
> Judging these folks is not my job.



Actually, I have seen the opposite on this board. I have found the people on HT to be the most giving & kind people around. And seriously, you can usually tell who is truly in need versus who is just a user & taker. I don't know of anyone on this board that would not help a person that was truly in need. 

If I offer something to someone in need & they accept, but then refuse to come & pick it up, I will judge that. They are then depriving someone else of that item because they didn't have the courtesy to call & say they changed their mind or say no in the first place. We are to judge people's actions, we are not to condemn them for it. That is God's job. However, judging people on their actions is how people are held accountable for things. That doesn't mean I run around telling people how wrong they are & think I am better. It means I look at that person's lifestyle & judge whether I am going to enable them in that lifestyle or let them hit rock bottom first. You are not helping someone when you enable them. Giving them food week after week after week is not helping them. Teaching them to feed themselves is. If I choose to help someone there are no strings attached. I do it because I want too. If I see them abusing the gifts they are given, yes, I will stop my help as I am really not helping them, but enabling them which is not helping them in the long run. I may or may not try to talk with them on how they can change things to help themselves. 

I have volunteered at our local food pantry. You can tell who is there because they are truly in need versus the ones that are their because they are too lazy to work. The really needy are grateful for whatever they get & thank you as they leave. The lazy turn their noses up & ask why they can't have certain items & are just generally rude when they come through. Sorry, I am going to judge that attitude. 

I also treat others as I'd like to be treated. We are considered poor by the government's standards & by most other people. You are as poor as you choose to be. What we don't do is run around crying whoa is me, & expect everyone else to do things for us. Their is a huge difference between being poor & being lazy. The lazy are the ones that cry about their lot in life all the time & want to take everything they can get for free. All the while not doing anything to make their situation better. I believe those are the "poor" that you say everyone dehumanizes. Sorry, but those kind of people bring it upon themselves. The truly poor that I am speaking of would give their last dime to help someone else in need that is worse off then they are.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

rkintn said:


> I agree the system is broken beyond belief. I also believe as a society, we no longer care about one another. Not truly and not like we should. I see a lot of people saying "I'll help BUT only if xyz is done or being done first" and I find it particularly disheartening when it comes from Christians and churches. I believe that if you are able to help and want to help it should be done with no stipulations. Degrading those who are already down really does not help. Everyone's situation and circumstance is different and what works for you may not work for someone else. More love and less judgement is really what is needed but I fear our society is way beyond that.


Why should I care or help isn't that the government's job? Why should I give money where's all the money I pay in taxes going?

There's your reasons and reasoning there's so many problems today.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

rkintn said:


> I never said having them pick their produce was degrading them. Telling them that they can come and get it if they want it and then judging them because they don't, is. I never said keep giving them food constantly while they are not helping themselves. Which raises the question of how exactly any one person can for a fact know what happens in another household. You don't. You are making judgements from your perceptions and the filters of your life experience. Canning equipment is expensive. If they can't buy food how will they get the equipment to preserve it? Maybe those folks knew they wouldn't eat the produce and choose to leave it for someone else rather than waste it?
> 
> My point is, there is a lot of dehumanising of the poor that goes on in this board. If you can keep in mind that they are human beings capable of love, hate, having preferences etc it might help to put things in perspective. I try really hard to treat others like I would want to be treated. It's not always easy and I don't always succeed but I try.
> Judging these folks is not my job. .


yeppers, canning equipment is expensive.... if you buy everything new. My pressure canner cost me 5 bucks, jars I have been accumulating at the cost of maybe a buck or two a dozen at yard sales and auctions. Lids are another matter, those rascals are indeed expensive. I spose anyone can find an excuse not to provide for themselves if they look hard enough.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

rkintn said:


> I never said having them pick their produce was degrading them. Telling them that they can come and get it if they want it and then judging them because they don't, is. I never said keep giving them food constantly while they are not helping themselves. Which raises the question of how exactly any one person can for a fact know what happens in another household. You don't. You are making judgements from your perceptions and the filters of your life experience. Canning equipment is expensive. If they can't buy food how will they get the equipment to preserve it? Maybe those folks knew they wouldn't eat the produce and choose to leave it for someone else rather than waste it?
> 
> My point is, there is a lot of dehumanising of the poor that goes on in this board. If you can keep in mind that they are human beings capable of love, hate, having preferences etc it might help to put things in perspective. I try really hard to treat others like I would want to be treated. It's not always easy and I don't always succeed but I try.
> Judging these folks is not my job. .


Calling a spade a spade is not "dehumanizing" someone. Sometimes the most loving thing you can do for someone is let them learn a lesson, ya know? The old "give a man a fish/teach a man to fish" concept. 

Who said people need to be able to can to pick out of someone's garden? You don't have to pick the whole crop, just what you can manage. Then there is freezing, drying, and just eating it fresh until it comes out your ears! Flattened baggies don't take up much space, you don't need a deep freeze, either. 

I don't see that people love each other any less these days. When there is a disaster, donations come pouring in. When the local tv station features a human interest "hard luck" story, people come out of the woodwork to help. Goodwill has more stores than ever, obviously they are getting donations. There are more food banks than there used to be. So my observation is, people do love one another and stand ready to help. They are just tired of helping people who have made a career out of getting help.


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

I guess it all boils down to a person doing what they feel is best and what helps them sleep at night. It's a complicated problem (hunger, poverty, and laziness) with far more gray areas than black and white and won't be solved by mankind anytime soon.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

dizzy said:


> I know someone. He's in danger of having his electric and cell phone turned off-if it hasn't happened already. He's driving w/no insurance. The church had been helping him, but every month he had a new emergency. Finally we sat down w/him and found ways that he could cut his bills. But, he had to do certain things-like put up a clothes line. And until he did those things, we were NOT going to help him. I think the only thing he did was unplug a freezer. He was given a clothes line, but he never set it up. His excuse? He doesn't have a post hole digger. There are people that would have helped him put it up-if he had asked. And almost every time I'd drive by, there would be a big light on on the front porch-in broad daylight!
> 
> It is not easy to tell him no, but at the same time, unless he's willing to help himself, we cannot do anything else. This is just a small church and if we "help" him every month, we are unable to help anyone else. If he had done the things on his list, he would have been able to live on what he earns.


Yep why should I mounter every light in my house to help someone pay their electric bill that could care less how many lights they leave on :umno:

I don't mind helping until it starts to infringe on my intelligence :hammer:


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

rkintn said:


> My point is, there is a lot of dehumanising of the poor that goes on in this board. If you can keep in mind that they are human beings capable of love, hate, having preferences etc it might help to put things in perspective. I try really hard to treat others like I would want to be treated. It's not always easy and I don't always succeed but I try.
> Judging these folks is not my job. .


A lot of the people on this board grew up poor, that may be the reason for the self sufficient attitude you see here.
I thought we grew up poor, but when I got older, I realized, we weren't poor, we were just short of money most of the time.
Dad always made sure we had a roof over our heads and we had plenty of plain, good food.
Most of my life, I never had 2 nickles to rub together, but I never felt the need to blame anybody else.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

Elffriend said:


> Both. If 1 in 5 aren't getting enough to eat, it says nothing about what the other 4 are eating.
> 
> Also obesity amongst the poor is more about the quality of the food and not the quantity.


 or access and ABILITY TO PAY FOR IT!

IE: For the price of a bag of potato chips, you can buy 1.5 pounds of boneless chicken or pork.......................................

No one on food stamps should be allowed to buy that crap. Make them use food stamps to buy food! Chips and the like or not food they are pacifiers!

I don't buy that crap, why should I help pay for someone else to buy it!


----------



## Kmac15 (May 19, 2007)

I object to paying to feed these children twice for every meal. I believe that if we send home backpacks for weekend food and every meal at school then the EBT should be cut by half. 

I would like to relate my mothers story. Her parents were dirt poor (1950's) when she started school and had no money or food for lunches, yes she did get breakfast and supper at home. So starting in kindergarden she worked her recess period in the lunch room. At first her job was to place napkins and forks at each chair for the other students and this paid for her lunch. After a few years she was working in the kitchens so when her younger brother started school her work paid for his lunch as well. In 7th grade the kitchen staff went on strike just after school started, she was pulled out of class and asked if she thought she could feed the whole school. She was able to name a hand full of girls that she knew would be able to help and they pulled it off. The whole school was feed by young girls for two weeks. It didn't hurt her or her pride, in fact she is proud of how she could help out her family.


----------



## po boy (Jul 12, 2010)

Kmac15 said:


> I object to paying to feed these children twice for every meal. I believe that if we send home backpacks for weekend food and every meal at school then the EBT should be cut by half.
> 
> I would like to relate my mothers story. Her parents were dirt poor (1950's) when she started school and had no money or food for lunches, yes she did get breakfast and supper at home. So starting in kindergarden she worked her recess period in the lunch room. At first her job was to place napkins and forks at each chair for the other students and this paid for her lunch. After a few years she was working in the kitchens so when her younger brother started school her work paid for his lunch as well. In 7th grade the kitchen staff went on strike just after school started, she was pulled out of class and asked if she thought she could feed the whole school. She was able to name a hand full of girls that she knew would be able to help and they pulled it off. The whole school was feed by young girls for two weeks. It didn't hurt her or her pride, in fact she is proud of how she could help out her family.


 Km,
We were poorer than church mice. Three of my four brothers drove school buses in high school to help the family out. My fourth brother was severely handicaped and couldn't walk without braces similar to FFR's. I washed dishes in order to save my dad a quarter.

My brothers and i have never felt deprived for anything and were proud we help to support OUR Family. We were family and did what it took to get by!


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

I can assure you, we were one of the least deserving families to be found. When we were asleep my mother would order pizzas and subs. Part of my survivor guilt is she would sometimes let me sneak out of bed and eat with her if I cleaned her house.

She hoarded candy bars between her mattress and box spring. When she was asleep we learned to sneak in the room and carefully slide our hands under the mattress trying to reach them. She just pushed them farther back.

She could not live without her cigarettes and soda. The men at the gas station felt so sorry for me struggling to carry them home they sometimes helped. We saw all this junk and could not touch it. Suffice it to say, there is no soda in my house and I was never tempted to smoke. Too much bitterness.

All that does not change what happened to us. 

I am so thankful the church did not judge our mother and provided what they did; believe me, I judge her enough for everyone. Past and present tense. 
In the end, the system is not going to fix anything. All any of us can do is follow our heart and let the chips fall where they may.


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

I know this is not the subject, but, KentuckyDreamer, why do you think your Mom was/is like this. I just gotta ask.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

I also worked in the school cafeterias at every school I attended. I not only got my lunch for free, I also was given a small amount of money. I know it wasn't much, but it sure felt like it at the time.


----------



## KentuckyDreamer (Jan 20, 2012)

light rain said:


> I know this is not the subject, but, KentuckyDreamer, why do you think your Mom was/is like this. I just gotta ask.


Selfish.. does not have a maternal bone in her body. Children were a means to get attention and people feel sorry for her. Had five children, the baby severely mentally delayed. My father left and she went to bed. Stayed up all night reading the Bible for comfort and slept all day. 

She is now bedridden and still uses whatever means possible to manipulate others. Tells everyone to "Just pray". 

Siblings are major drains on society. Many of their children are the same. At least once a month I wonder if my siblings might be different people if they had been fed and clothed.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

KentuckyDreamer said:


> Selfish.. does not have a maternal bone in her body. Children were a means to get attention and people feel sorry for her. Had five children, the baby severely mentally delayed. My father left and she went to bed. Stayed up all night reading the Bible for comfort and slept all day.
> 
> She is now bedridden and still uses whatever means possible to manipulate others. Tells everyone to "Just pray".
> 
> Siblings are major drains on society. Many of their children are the same. At least once a month I wonder if my siblings might be different people if they had been fed and clothed.


They might have been better people, but then again you could have been a carbon copy of your mother. Please try to let go of that "survivor guilt", instead be proud of yourself for rising above your circumstances. You broke the cycle!!


----------



## michael ark (Dec 11, 2013)

I am a dreamer i think everyone is a dreamer and hopes the best but accepts the worst.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Today kids stealing food is not required... the government simply robs someone, and hands the money to the parents to buy food. This seems to be a much more politically correct method to rob the haves so the have nots get something to eat.


 I might add the only reason we couldn't get Government help is because at the time we was running from the Law.

big rockpile


----------



## Dutchie (Mar 14, 2003)

Junkman said:


> We have tried and tried to give away excess apples. I called one family that I knew had "problems" and was told when I suggested they could make applesauce for the kids, Momma replied "I don't know how?" These apples did not even need sugar. Another neighbor told me she was just too tired to work them up. Another said they have no freezer and didn't can anymore. Well I wont see 69 anymore and we put up quarts. One family brought their group and took 22 bushels. We have 5 trees and the Lord really blessed us this year. Oh yeah, one man said he would take them off our hands to feed the deer! So glad to hear your comments. I was afraid I was becoming senile. Jklady


Several years ago we encountered 2 men looking for firewood. They looked like they were pretty poor and it was cold out so we told them they were welcome to come to our property and get a bunch from downed trees. They were excited until they realized they had to cut it stll.

Smh


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

Molly Mckee said:


> I was the director of a food pantry and total help outreach in our TX town. In my experience there are three reasons why children go without---mental illness, drugs, and alcohol. We found many of those that needed continual help would not buy food or buy diapers for kids could buy booze, illegal drugs, and cigarettes. The people that were just having relatively temporary problems came in for food for the kids, didn't ask for anything for themselves. The others tried everything to get cash, which we never gave to clients. If a bill was approved, we paid it directly. The good parents were hard to help, unless it was for the kids.


I used to live in a small city that had to discontinue their "backpack program" because so much of the food, and the backpacks themselves, were being traded for drugs, usually meth.



Also, I volunteered at a food pantry one summer when I was in college, and most of the clientele was senior citizens. That was surprising to me too.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

thesedays said:


> Also, I volunteered at a food pantry one summer when I was in college, and most of the clientele was senior citizens. That was surprising to me too.


Yes, here too. I was at ours a few weeks ago donating and got to talking to someone who I thought was a volunteer..turns out he was there to collect food. He told me bluntly that for him it was a choice between meds and food. For him it made sense to use his limited pension for his pills and come to the food pantry.

The whole situation seemed so wrong to me. :facepalm: Next spring we will have a huge garden, more than we can eat so I asked the director if they accept fresh veggies and he said yes, but only if they were organically grown. Not sure what that entails, but I'll jump through those hoops, gladly, to help people like that old man. It was really sad.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> Next spring we will have a huge garden, more than we can eat so I asked the director if they accept fresh veggies and he said yes, but only if they were organically grown.


_
Seriously_? :facepalm:


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

Why would they need to be organic? A food pantry shouldn't be too picky about the food someone gives them. I can see if it is outdated, but organic??


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

I assume it has something to do with liability? I'm pretty sure this is the reason why there were so few fresh veggies there to begin with... I also don't know of too many people who would buy organic items at a grocery store and bring them into the pantry to donate...which is a shame. Everyone needs to eat more fresh fruit and I know there's people in some areas who just don't have access to it.

(I wonder how they'll feel about the zoo poo I plan to use?!)


----------



## light rain (Jan 14, 2013)

I liked Jax-mom's post because of her plan to help folks. While I prefer organic produce I buy conventional produce for my DH and myself also. 

Over 28 years ago we rented a plot from avowed organic growers and what I saw them putting on their asparagus beds,  was definitely not considered organic. So this whole rule about donations, how would they enforce it, anyway?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

light rain said:


> I liked Jax-mom's post because of her plan to help folks. While I prefer organic produce I buy conventional produce for my DH and myself also.
> 
> Over 28 years ago we rented a plot from avowed organic growers and what I saw them putting on their asparagus beds,  was definitely not considered organic. So this whole rule about donations, how would they enforce it, anyway?


Its easy to see the difference. It must be, since organic is so much better for us.


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

Good question - probably a form to sign, like an honor system? But still..what if someone lied. And I don't see how they could even label it organic..I doubt they could? So I have a feeling it's more or less to cover their rear ends, but I know it involves paperwork! Hey..they can come check out my garden and garage and see for theselves.

We had another food pantry who essentially refused snacks, cookies, etc. Last year we tried to donate our troop's extra Girl Scout cookies and were told no. I don't know if that rule has been overturned though. We instead took them to the local Women's Shelter and the kiddos there were very happy. 

Anyway, this is assuming we even get anything to grow. This past summer was lame-o.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

Jax-mom said:


> Yes, here too. I was at ours a few weeks ago donating and got to talking to someone who I thought was a volunteer..turns out he was there to collect food. He told me bluntly that for him it was a choice between meds and food. For him it made sense to use his limited pension for his pills and come to the food pantry.
> 
> The whole situation seemed so wrong to me. :facepalm: Next spring we will have a huge garden, more than we can eat so I asked the director if they accept fresh veggies and he said yes, but only if they were organically grown. Not sure what that entails, but I'll jump through those hoops, gladly, to help people like that old man. It was really sad.


If his income is low enough, he may be qualified for Medicaid. Many people do not know this.

As for "organically grown", do they have to be certified organic, or is "pesticide free" adequate?


----------



## unregistered358967 (Jul 17, 2013)

Not sure. The person I talked to have been mistaken-- that's what he probably meant by "organic". I'm sure they will have more details which I will check out next spring.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Today kids stealing food is not required... the government simply robs someone, and hands the money to the parents to buy food. This seems to be a much more politically correct method to rob the haves so the have nots get something to eat.


Actually the process is to take from the middle to feed the poor so they can work for the rich. :thumb:



po boy said:


> No one on food stamps should be allowed to buy that crap. Make them use food stamps to buy food! Chips and the like or not food they are pacifiers!
> 
> I don't buy that crap, why should I help pay for someone else to buy it!


I think it takes a LOT of nerve to tell someone else what to eat.
Most food stamp recipients are working poor , is simply the part of THEIR income the government contributes so they can work for less to make the rich richer.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

When someone is not paying for their food themselves then I see no problem with guidelines being set for what they can buy. Work it the same way that WIC is done.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Wendy said:


> When someone is not paying for their food themselves then I see no problem with guidelines being set for what they can buy. Work it the same way that WIC is done.


I agree, those who are doing the giving should have some control over what they are giving.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Actually the process is to take from the middle to feed the poor so they can work for the rich. :thumb:


We hear that a lot, but when one actually looks at the numbers.... the "middle" contributes very little to the federal food stamp program.... or to any of the other "entitlement" programs funded by the feds.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> I think it takes a LOT of nerve to tell someone else what to eat.
> Most food stamp recipients are working poor , is simply the part of THEIR income the government contributes so they can work for less to make the rich richer.


When someone is eating at my table... I feel like I should have some say in whats on the menu. :shrug:
If you were forced into buying my booze, one bottle per week.... should I be able to take my pick off the top shelf? Or would you rather I select from the cheaper brands on the bottom shelves?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I agree, those who are doing the giving should have some control over what they are giving.


I can understand the sentiment behind that, but in practical application terms, it turns the clerk at the store into the "food police". 

I don't think we need to get into the business of telling people what they can and can't eat, even if they are receiving benefits. If you asked 20 different people what "healthy eating" was, you would get 20 different answers anyway. 

Perhaps the solution would be, if they buy more than X percent of "luxury food" like soda, snacks, expensive meats, just cut their bennies by a certain percent going forward. This isn't Oliver Twist, you don't need to live on gruel if you are poor. But if you are chronically using your card to buy snack foods and top shelf items, then obviously you don't need as much as you are getting, so adjust it. 

Maybe one of the requirements to get benefits in the first place should be, to demonstrate knowledge of how to plan meals around simple, affordable ingredients. Some kind of test? Some people didn't learn it growing up, walking through the store looking at all the temptations doesn't teach them anything either, so make some kind of "home economics" info. with a quiz part of the requirements.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Actually the process is to take from the middle to feed the poor so they can work for the rich. :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Say there's a bum asking for a hand out and you offer him a buck you think he has the right to demand you give him a twenty and if you refuse to have the police force you to do it?

Or offer to feed a hungry man that he should be able to demand you feed him T-bone steak and lobster instead of pot roast and cabbage?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> I can understand the sentiment behind that, but in practical application terms, it turns the clerk at the store into the "food police".
> 
> I don't think we need to get into the business of telling people what they can and can't eat, even if they are receiving benefits. If you asked 20 different people what "healthy eating" was, you would get 20 different answers anyway.
> 
> ...


How about a simpler solution. You disallow specific foods: e.g. sodas and candy. IIRC, the feds have a list of 'necessary items' they use to calculate the poverty level we could just put anything not on that list as disallowed. 

The you have the system set up where you must scan the "someone else is supporting me" card before checking out. Then if something not allowed is scanned the computer informs the checker that item is not allowed to be bought. Much like the store's computer system flags items which you must be 16, 18 or 21 to buy.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> Perhaps the solution would be, if they buy more than X percent of "luxury food" like soda, snacks, expensive meats, just cut their bennies by a certain percent going forward. This isn't Oliver Twist, you don't need to live on gruel if you are poor. But if you are chronically using your card to buy snack foods and top shelf items, then obviously you don't need as much as you are getting, so adjust it.


Wanted to address this in a separate post.

Maybe it SHOULD be Oliver Twist. If you are being provided nothing but 100% nutritionally balanced FREE 'gruel' then maybe just maybe you'll see if there's something you can do to FEED YOURSELF rather than sucking on the government's teat.

I'd have no problem at all if food stamps only provided food for one type of breakfast, say oatmeal, and one type of lunch and dinner, say rice and beans. Don't like it? Then buy your own food. 

There was times in my life when I was sick of eating fried taters, white beans and corn bread because I ate it for lunch and dinner over and over and over. Many times breakfast was cold cornbread crumbled in butter milk. It got old, it got boring but I was never hungry due to the lack of food. 

I'm sick and tired of standing in line watching someone yacking on a smart phone dressed to the nines stacking name brand products on the belt then paying with a "someone else is supporting me" card while I'm pushing a cart full of generics while dressed in dirty from working clothes which came from goodwill to begin with and knowing they are eating food that could be going into my belly if the government wasn't unconstitutionally taking money from me and giving it directly to them.

To paraphrase LET THEM EAT GRUEL!


----------



## michael ark (Dec 11, 2013)

I cant believe all the people calling for more government control over the poor..Sounds alot like the past.:ashamed: 
Thomas Jefferson, said, &#8220;If the people let government decide what foods they eat and medications they take ,their bodies will soon be in as sorry state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
Does this sound familiar?They don't even need a judas goat.


----------



## Wendy (May 10, 2002)

If you want to have junk food & soda, get a job & pay for it yourself. There was a guy that worked at my family's sawmill business. Bragged on how he & his girlfriend finally got food stamps. He went to the store & bought a bunch of junk food & snacks & brought it to work. He wanted to make sure he used all of his benefits because he didn't want to lose any of them. Well, if he wasn't using it all, he apparently didn't need that much in benefits. He finally was fired because he rarely showed up to work on time. In 6 months he hadn't worked a full week. Was really surprised when he lost his job because he hadn't missed any days in awhile. Well, the rest of the employees, which are mostly family, haven't missed work in the past few years! He just didn't get that to earn a good paycheck he needed to show up & actually work everyday. 

People like this getting food stamps make me mad. I struggle every week to pay for our groceries. My husband works hard everyday to earn money. Yet this guy can show up to work only when he feels like it, live with is girlfriend & they have 2 kids, he has 2 kids by his ex girlfriend, & we are paying for his food. Really?? How about he works a full week (they also offered overtime) & takes care of his own food like so many of us do. If he doesn't want to, then he shouldn't complain if he is only allowed to buy certain items. I'd be grateful for anything I was getting for nothing. Shoot, I went & picked 12 (5 gallon) buckets of apples today & plan to can some applesauce, apple slices, apple pie filling, & apple butter. 

There are quite a few jobs in the area & yet all I hear is how they can't find anyone that actually wants to work. Maybe if people got a little hungry or had to eat certain things it would motivate them to get off their butt & actually work!


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

michael ark said:


> I cant believe all the people calling for more government control over the poor..Sounds alot like the past.:ashamed:
> Thomas Jefferson, said, âIf the people let government decide what foods they eat and medications they take ,their bodies will soon be in as sorry state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
> Does this sound familiar?They don't even need a judas goat.


Hows about we take all the controls off the poor? No more government handouts at all, no regulations, no forms to be filled out, no control over what they do with their lives. They can eat whatever they buy, live in any house they want to rent, or under a tree down by the city dump. Would that make you happy?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

watcher said:


> Wanted to address this in a separate post.
> 
> Maybe it SHOULD be Oliver Twist. If you are being provided nothing but 100% nutritionally balanced FREE 'gruel' then maybe just maybe you'll see if there's something you can do to FEED YOURSELF rather than sucking on the government's teat.
> 
> ...


Those cases are the ones you notice. Others, like my grandmother, who had to live on Social Security, over the years her rent went up to over half of it. She shopped wisely with her stamps and later the EBT card and you could tell she was still ashamed every time she did. Many other families are using the benefits as they were intended, temporarily, and some of them have posted their stories on this forum. So I don't paint the whole lot with the same broad brush, and even if mom is a benefits queen I don't want the children to have to live on gruel. Save the gruel for the prisoners!

We have seen some tough times, too, our staple was rice. That was many years ago but I still get complaints from DH when rice appears on the table today! We didn't qualify for food stamps, I checked into it, and I made just a little too much money. I would have been darn grateful for some extra grocery money for 6 months while DH was out of work, healing up from a broken and pinned hip. We lost our house but nobody starved to death and we appreciate a good meal all that much more today. 

So I am not as hard core about it as you, but I think we agree in part.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

michael ark said:


> I cant believe all the people calling for more government control over the poor..Sounds alot like the past.:ashamed:
> Thomas Jefferson, said, âIf the people let government decide what foods they eat and medications they take ,their bodies will soon be in as sorry state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
> Does this sound familiar?They don't even need a judas goat.


Buzz. . .wrong answer but please feel free to play again 

I think those you see as wanting the government to "control" the poor want just the opposite. They want the government to have no control of the poor. They want the poor to have all the power and rights every other citizens should have. But if that poor person freely gives up his power and rights by taking its support then the government has the right and power to control them. Don't want to be controlled? Then stand on your own two feet not lay on your belly sucking on the governmental teat.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> Those cases are the ones you notice. Others, like my grandmother, who had to live on Social Security, over the years her rent went up to over half of it. She shopped wisely with her stamps and later the EBT card and you could tell she was still ashamed every time she did. Many other families are using the benefits as they were intended, temporarily, and some of them have posted their stories on this forum. So I don't paint the whole lot with the same broad brush, and even if mom is a benefits queen I don't want the children to have to live on gruel. Save the gruel for the prisoners!


I don't care if you are dependent on SS or if you are scamming the system. Those who truly need food will gladly eat gruel and they will eat it three meals a day 7 days a week if necessary. 

And to show how hard core I am, good for your grandmother, she should be ashamed to have to live on money which was taken from someone else's pocket by force. My children would have to be on the verge of starving and there was no other help before I'd stoop to taking money stolen from someone else. But I'd have no shame at all if circumstances out of my control resulted in me having to go to my church and ask for help. Because that help that would be FREELY given not taken by force.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Hows about we take all the controls off the poor? No more government handouts at all, no regulations, no forms to be filled out, no control over what they do with their lives. They can eat whatever they buy, live in any house they want to rent, or under a tree down by the city dump. Would that make you happy?


But then how would the rich get them to work for pennies?


You guys seem to feel that foodstamps benefit the poor .
Which would you rather have $400 in food stamps or a job that paid $400 more?
Most government programs for the poor suck for the poor but the work well for the rich.


----------



## Sawmill Jim (Dec 5, 2008)

Thing about talking about the poor and them being on the Gov. dole is just a means of a distraction from the real problem :hammer: That being that the country has moved so far from the constitution that we can't even see it anymore . Folks like to yell that they are paying for the people from their taxes when in effect their taxes would be the same if every Gov program was tossed out the window yesterday . 

Income tax came about near the same time as the Fed. Reserve Act some say so those owning the Fed. would be assured that the Gov. could pay them their interest . Next just in bailouts of the to big to fail just 10% of that money would housed and fed untold numbers of people . Even today's pay out each month of the Fed's bond buying of 25 Billion per month is more than insane ,all money wasted not even feeding one poor person . 

We haven't even touched the free money given to those country's that hate us . I'm just proud that some Americans are getting some of the cash being racked up on the tab that never is going to be paid :thumb::soap:


----------



## michael ark (Dec 11, 2013)

watcher said:


> Buzz. . .wrong answer but please feel free to play again
> 
> I think those you see as wanting the government to "control" the poor want just the opposite. They want the government to have no control of the poor. They want the poor to have all the power and rights every other citizens should have. But if that poor person freely gives up his power and rights by taking its support then the government has the right and power to control them. Don't want to be controlled? Then stand on your own two feet not lay on your belly sucking on the governmental teat.


NO what i'm saying is your a fat old christian by your own admission so the 18 to 35 crowd is subsidising your health care now and they have about as much right to put you on a vegan diet as you have someone to tell someone else what to eat jew ,christian or muslim .We all answer to god and no one else .To judge someone is a sin.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

watcher said:


> Say there's a bum asking for a hand out and you offer him a buck you think he has the right to demand you give him a twenty and if you refuse to have the police force you to do it?
> 
> Or offer to feed a hungry man that he should be able to demand you feed him T-bone steak and lobster instead of pot roast and cabbage?


A nice beef roast does taste good on Sundays watching football. I have yet to buy lobster tails but someday I may do just that. Until things change i don;t feel a bit of what some call ashamed. i paid taxes for years and if I buy a few things that are not considered basic foods so? The Change Things. Elect those that WILL do something to change things around, and limit FS program to just the basic food groups and that is it. i am all for it. But until then i will enjoy a nice roast and make 3 meals out it also.~ SS does not pay that much and who knows if we get a COLA adjustment or if there will be one at all. One thing I will say Insurance premiums will go UP 27% for me on Jan 1st for my Medicare (Humana) costs.
Some ought to sit back and THINK about THAT~~


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

michael ark said:


> NO


Yes. As long as someone else is providing for you they have control over you. If you refuse to do what they demand they can remove their support. Its much like the pimp/pusher-hooker/user situation. The pimp/pusher has control over the hooker/user because he is providing the needed/wanted drugs. The pimp/pusher uses that control to get power and money.

The government has control of millions of people because it is providing food, housing, medical care, et al. If you are taking the government's money you are nothing more than its hooker providing it with power.




michael ark said:


> what i'm saying is your a fat old christian


Yep.




michael ark said:


> by your own admission so the 18 to 35 crowd is subsidising your health care now


Nope. The ONLY one who pays for my health care is me and the company I have a business agreement with to provide insurance. Not a SINGLE penny stolen out of anyone's pocket by the government is used.




michael ark said:


> To judge someone is a sin.


Your ignorance of the Word of God is quite overwhelming. If judging is a sin why are Christians told to do just that? If you like I can provide passages to show you.

Also if you happened to actually read the Word in context and not just take what someone has told you or pull bits out of context, you would know that after the great 'judge not" passage which sinners LOVE to take out of context you have this: ". . ._first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother&#8217;s eye_." It does NOT say after you remove the beam from your eye just let your brother suffer because you aren't allowed to judge him.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> A nice beef roast does taste good on Sundays watching football. I have yet to buy lobster tails but someday I may do just that. Until things change i don;t feel a bit of what some call ashamed. i paid taxes for years and if I buy a few things that are not considered basic foods so? The Change Things. Elect those that WILL do something to change things around, and limit FS program to just the basic food groups and that is it. i am all for it. But until then i will enjoy a nice roast and make 3 meals out it also.~ SS does not pay that much and who knows if we get a COLA adjustment or if there will be one at all. One thing I will say Insurance premiums will go UP 27% for me on Jan 1st for my Medicare (Humana) costs.
> Some ought to sit back and THINK about THAT~~


You were lied to and stolen from. Each and EVERY dollar which you were told you were paying in for your old age via SS was stolen from you so the pols could give it to someone else. Now each and every dollar you are getting from SS is being stolen from someone, who is being told the same lie you were, to be given to you. 

SS is nothing but a ponzi scheme where the suckers who get in early are paid back with money from the suckers who are just coming in. And like all ponzi schemes at some point there just aren't enough suckers at the bottom to pay everyone above them.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

And that is why it needs to her revamped. Plain and Simple. Don't care what some say it HAS to be overhauled.
One in 10 collected when SS first started now it may even be over 6 in ten, and soon if not corrected will be more taken out then is pout in, 11 in !0 will be taking SS, and that is not sustainable at all. even at a 1 to 1 ratio.
It must get back to its roots.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> And that is why it needs to her revamped. Plain and Simple. Don't care what some say it HAS to be overhauled.
> One in 10 collected when SS first started now it may even be over 6 in ten, and soon if not corrected will be more taken out then is pout in, 11 in !0 will be taking SS, and that is not sustainable at all. even at a 1 to 1 ratio.
> It must get back to its roots.


Why would you need more people working and in than drawing out? After all isn't the money coming out just the money those getting it have already paid in?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

watcher said:


> Why would you need more people working and in than drawing out? After all isn't the money coming out just the money those getting it have already paid in?


Not exactly... the money being paid in by todays workers is going out to yesterdays workers, whose money was paid out to the generation before them. At one time there was actually some money building up in the fund that would have helped cover todays workers when they were ready to retire. Sadly, politicians couldnt stand the thought of money laying there not buying votes so they figured a way to tap into it and give it to the welfare crowd. There is no money left in the fund, just a bunch of IOU's.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

watcher said:


> Why would you need more people working and in than drawing out? After all isn't the money coming out just the money those getting it have already paid in?


No, it's not hardly at all.

Between SS and Medicare, most retirees take out a lot more than they ever paid in. They paid in little ,because their wages and the tax rates were relatively low. plus they are living 20 years into retirement.

My gm got SS medicare, for 35 years until she died at 100 (1995). I doubt if her or my GF, ever paid more than a few hundred dollars in, to the system.

SF recent got $100,000 worth of artificial knees from medicare, which he has been eligible for 20 years now. This is in addition to the SS/ other medicare he already gets.

If retirees died sooner, then sure, but that not usually happening.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

arabian knight said:


> And that is why it needs to her revamped. Plain and Simple. Don't care what some say it HAS to be overhauled.
> One in 10 collected when SS first started now it may even be over 6 in ten, and soon if not corrected will be more taken out then is pout in, 11 in !0 will be taking SS, and that is not sustainable at all. even at a 1 to 1 ratio.
> It must get back to its roots.


The only way it going to get "back to it's roots", is for most retirees to die at age 65, which was the average lifespan, when SS was started.

The sick and disabled need to be left to die.

Any volunteers?


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

michael ark said:


> I cant believe all the people calling for more government control over the poor..Sounds alot like the past.:ashamed:
> Thomas Jefferson, said, &#8220;If the people let government decide what foods they eat and medications they take ,their bodies will soon be in as sorry state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
> Does this sound familiar?They don't even need a judas goat.


Not more, less. If the gooberment doesn't pay for it it's *LESS*.


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

watcher said:


> Why would you need more people working and in than drawing out? After all isn't the money coming out just the money those getting it have already paid in?


Gee, are you saying that the money that has been taken from my paychecks for 35+ year, and put into an account for me by the government, isn't just for me?

Say it ain't so....:yuck::facepalm:

Not really.

The issue is how many people decided to rely *totally* on SS for their retirement.

Tha old addage is something about "All your eggs in one basket" comes to mind.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

Pearl B said:


> I think you can thank welfare for starving kids. Seems to me the program has encouraged many who shouldn't have kids in the 1st place to have as many as they can.


The tax deductions for each dependant hasn't helped either.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

watcher said:


> Nope. The ONLY one who pays for my health care is me and the company I have a business agreement with to provide insurance. Not a SINGLE penny stolen out of anyone's pocket by the government is used..


You seem to forget about all the tax dollars that went into training your doctors and discovering your treatments. :shrug:






watcher said:


> Your ignorance of the Word of God is quite overwhelming. If judging is a sin why are Christians told to do just that? .



Good catch.:thumb:


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Riverdale said:


> Gee, are you saying that the money that has been taken from my paychecks for 35+ year, and put into an account for me by the government, isn't just for me?
> 
> Say it ain't so....:yuck::facepalm:
> 
> ...



A lot of people didn't DECIDE on that, but circumstances made it happen.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> A lot of people didn't DECIDE on that, but circumstances made it happen.


I think those folks choices (personal decisions) led to most of those circumstances. Quite often there is a lot of truth to the saying "one makes his own luck".


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Riverdale said:


> Gee, are you saying that the money that has been taken from my paychecks for 35+ year, and put into an account for me by the government, isn't just for me?
> 
> Say it ain't so....:yuck::facepalm:
> 
> Not really.


So you readily admit that the government lied about SS?





Riverdale said:


> The issue is how many people decided to rely *totally* on SS for their retirement.
> 
> Tha old addage is something about "All your eggs in one basket" comes to mind.


A lot of people believed the government lie. That it would take care of them in their old age. If some tells you they will send you on an all expenses paid vacation to a place of your choice is you worked for them for 12 months would you put part of each paycheck away to pay for your vacation?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

watcher said:


> A lot of people believed the government lie. That it would take care of them in their old age. If some tells you they will send you on an all expenses paid vacation to a place of your choice is you worked for them for 12 months would you put part of each paycheck away to pay for your vacation?


Yep. I wouldnt trust anyone promising me something for nothing. If I want to take a vacation I figure to pay for it. I also planned on retiring when I got old and no longer able to work... and I worked out a plan for that too. My plan got cut a bit short, but I still had enough laid by to take care of myself. Anyone who trusts our government wasnt paying attention to Sitting Bull or the other native American chiefs in history class. :shrug:

As an aside.... I dont recall any government official offering to take care of me in my old age. I was told only that I would be required to pay into social security and medicare. I did so, not so they would take care of me, but because I was not givin an option. I am curious as to who promised anyone anything in their old age? I musta been absent that day.


----------



## Riverdale (Jan 20, 2008)

watcher said:


> A lot of people believed the government lie. That it would take care of them in their old age. If some tells you they will send you on an all expenses paid vacation to a place of your choice is you worked for them for 12 months would you put part of each paycheck away to pay for your vacation?


It seems this Administration is doing something right then, cutting back on those 12 month, all expense paid shooting trips. :yuck:


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

watcher said:


> So you readily admit that the government lied about SS?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow the Government didnt lie people just didn't like what they said. To the point they made them drop the word "INSURANCE" from the SSI.

Remember it is INSURANCE and it explains a lot of things.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Wow the Government didnt lie people just didn't like what they said. To the point they made them drop the word "INSURANCE" from the SSI.
> 
> Remember it is INSURANCE and it explains a lot of things.


All of my other insurance companies give me a copy of the policy when I buy insurance... It gives me all the details, how much I will be covered for and what the criteria for said coverage is... the mailman musta lost the one from SSI. :shrug:


----------

