# From 70K to food bank in 2 months......signs of the future?



## RockyGlen (Jan 19, 2007)

I think we will be seeing more and more of this in the coming months.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/pers...ily/index.html?eref=rss_topstories#cnnSTCText



> ALTADENA, California (CNN) -- When she was laid off in February, Patricia Guerrero was making $70,000 a year. Weeks later, with bills piling up and in need of food for her family, this middle-class mother did something she never thought she would do: She went to a food bank.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> ...


----------



## sparkysarah (Dec 4, 2007)

Bad decisions can have bad consequences.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Scene #2 in the "What would you do" thread. (I think #2 is the family lay off)

Angie


----------



## RockyGlen (Jan 19, 2007)

OK, I went back and watched the video..................................she mentions taking off her Tiffany bracelet and leaving her Coach bag in the car before she goes in the food bank. My sympathy level just went to Zero...........don't they have pawn shops in California?


----------



## sparkysarah (Dec 4, 2007)

How sickening is that! I can't even put what I'm thinking into words.


----------



## sparkysarah (Dec 4, 2007)

Ebay, perhaps? I've sold Coach on Ebay. That is probably a 300.00 purse. Tiffany? That says it all.....
What a loser.


----------



## uyk7 (Dec 1, 2002)

"She has had to take extreme measures to pay for her interest-only mortgage of $2,500 a month."

It seems to me that anyone who got an interest only loan was not interested in buying a home. They were actually speculating in the housing market, i.e. wait for the price to go way up and then sell. CNN did a story on another couple who lost their home because one of them lost their job and now they live in a leaky camper in a camp ground. Turns out they had an interest only loan.


----------



## unregistered29228 (Jan 9, 2008)

Almost everyone I know lives on less than $70,000 a year. We do it too, with one income, and four kids. We keep ourselves out of debt except for our mortgage, and we make extra principle payments on it every month. 

Of course MY purse is from Walmart, and it's 5 years old.

No sympathy here.


----------



## Explorer (Dec 2, 2003)

Those who fail to plan should plan to fail.


----------



## booklover (Jan 22, 2007)

I quit a 70K/year job a couple of years ago to be a full time SAHM. She has none of my sympathies. I saw so much waste, it sickened me. Some days I think about going back to that career... we are well off without it, but so much of that lifestyle is about appearances. Boo-hoo for her... she should have planned better.


----------



## Old_Grey_Mare (Feb 18, 2006)

It didn't even take her two months to burn through her savings as she was laid off in Feb and it is only March. I believe it said she was a loan processor. I worked as a loan processor for a while and I learned some good lessons. I took note of how the people who were better off had their money invested. DH and I both working never made much more than what she was making and we managed to pay off two houses and retire when he was 56 and I was 53. Sounds like she was banking on house values only going up.

BAD decisions! I personally don't feel that is is the job of the government to bail out the bad decision makers and hand the bill to the people who did the right thing.

Mary


----------



## erikj267 (Mar 25, 2008)

No I dont think it is the govt's job to bail people out because it is just the others that didnt have a coach purse or even been in tiffany's that pay for that. I didnt see it but she probably drove up in a new SUV too. They say that last year 70% or so of mortgages were of the interest only loans in GA. I am not sure about other places but I am sure it is similar. Erik


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

I'm getting very dehydrated from shedding so many tears for her and her kind.


----------



## Spinner (Jul 19, 2003)

I can't feel sorry for anyone who made that kind of money and frittered it away. She needs to be job hunting instead of hiding her expensive toys and begging.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Folks - lets think a bit.

1. She's in Southern California - housing there is outlandish. When I watch HGTV and they show $500,000 will buy what - and show southern Calif, a 1/2 mil house is what I'd expect to be under $100 K here in N. Alabama.

2. in 2002 my oldest daughter moved back to N. Ala from So. Calif.. She was offered $100K a year to stay at her Mortgage Closeing paperwork job, and she came back because that was not enough earnings for her to ever expect to be able to purchase a decent house. (Here she's earned about $50K and bought a town house a couple of years ago)... So 

3. those status symbols of jewelry and purse. Extravagent for sure, but are they the only ones or more available ? 

4. And then since I'm a divorced Mom that had two children (now grown), I went from $2000 a week in 1984 to run the house on, to welfare in one year. 
Saving anything was not a possibility, cuse in the divorce it would have been used up and there was not child support or other income at that time.... and I did not have a house that might sale - I see that she has the house, but can she sell it or is it bound up in the divorce settlement? Can she move the children to another less expensive state?
She did do something right, she got her mom to move in to help with expenses, and I would think, child care so she can go find another job. Said she worked in loans - wonder if she worked in Countrywide that's been downsizing so much. And I'm wondering about that statement in the clip about going to the food bank - 2 months ago she and her husband - then he left AFTER she was laid off.. where's his responsibility to this debt?

I think there's a LOT to this story that isn't there on the surface.

And you do have to sell your house and have NOTHING to get help from the money YOU pay into the system. 

Yep, they should have not had a house with a loan like that - I wonder how long they (both husband and wife) had the house and the loan? 

In my opinion, she should be looking out of state for a related field type of job, and if she can take the children out of state - do so, with her mom's help if she will and wants to.

If not, garden in the back yard , etc. 
And hocking jewelry is only about 1/10 or 1/5 of what you think it's worth (I don't have the jewelry I had either, electric bills, etc.)

So, on the surface - yes, bad planning...
in depth - I wonder where the other party to this house is, why is there not 1/2 payments from him, etc.

Just don't take the surface story - think about it.
Think about YOUR situation, 
as we've been saying in this forum - things in the financial world are changing, and resulting everything seems to be getting more expensive and there seem to be less jobs out there and more layoffs.

(she should be using the 401K money - that works also).

Think - don't just react.

Angie


----------



## sparkysarah (Dec 4, 2007)

I "think" she needs to start selling stuff. I "think" she has made some poor decisions, especially since becoming unemployed. I "think" she needs to help herself MORE before asking for handouts. Sounds to me like she is trying to take the easy way out by doing so.


----------



## Lindafisk (Nov 17, 2004)

I think you are right, but it doesn't seem like many people know how to help themselves. Maybe they just don't have a clue what to do? Maybe it's something we all need to teach our kids.....what to do before TSHTF......geez, expensive jewels and purses......she prolly doesn't know what a pawn shop is.....


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

It happened next door.

The gent wanted a SAHM, and so she was. There were 2 kids, and they just barely made ends meet. That was their own business: they DID make ends meet!

Then, he left her, without warning, and the income that just barely supported one household would not support 2. So, she had zero income and no savings. 

Enter the food pantry, as she could not find a job for a bit.

Time passes, and she got a very good job in another city. But, yes, you CAN go from a good living to a food pantry in the blink of an eye, ESPECIALLY if you do not have jewelry to sell! (That part about taking off the bracelet before she goes into the pantry makes me shudder!)


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

LOL, I read it and laughed.

She lost her job in February and is already at a food bank and has no money to pay bills.

I mean... we are poor and we are bleeding a death of a thousand cuts... but one month?

Stop the cell phones, send back the cars, put the house up for sale... and get a job only making 40K a year if you have to.

There are way too many people who need actual help, that are trying to do the right thing and help themselves... for me to worry about a woman who was making 70K and a month after her job is gone... is bemoaning how bad it is.

Now, I didn't read the whole article... 

If she was laid off, she should be getting unemployment. Or did I miss something.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Laid off.
Husband left after laid off
Used tax return for first month.

Angie


----------



## Lindafisk (Nov 17, 2004)

The article says she is getting unemployment checks. 

I would imagine she can't just send back a car- she would need one to go to work- assuming she can find a job. I wonder if she can sell the house or if it is tied up with whatever is going on with her and her husband?
Has to be a big shock for her. Makes me almost glad I'm poor after seeing that!


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

And just another thought
It's very hard to apply for help if you're use to having a job and paying the taxes that pays for the help, so some delay in applying for anything.

2. it takes time to sale a house, and if the whole market is down - she may lose it before it sales.


I still wonder what the marriage break up factor is in this equation? Does HE still have a job and would they have made it, even if tightly, until she got another job if he'd stayed?

I'm not defending her, in particular - but apparently two entered into the house contract and all the subsequent bills - so that 50% of the legal entity that signed the contract should be accounted for..and the whole entity should have planned better. And still she should use the 401K even with penalties taken out - to live on.

Angie


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

Lindafisk said:


> The article says she is getting unemployment checks.
> 
> I would imagine she can't just send back a car- she would need one to go to work- assuming she can find a job. I wonder if she can sell the house or if it is tied up with whatever is going on with her and her husband?
> Has to be a big shock for her. Makes me almost glad I'm poor after seeing that!


Well, I've helped counsel ladies who've been through their husband either going to jail, or leaving them.

You can indeed send a car back, they will auction it off and you will pay the difference. It's not good for your credit, but it's better than losing everything.

Her need right now is to eliminate as much debt as possible and to generate an income.

Selling off the big screen tv's, jewelry, etc. should all be on the table also.

It unfortunate that her husband is a scum ball, but those kids need her to pull it together right now.

She should be getting the equivalent of about 40K or so right now from unemployment. In ohio, the courts are pretty swift to set up emergency payments from husbands who are gainfully employed and split on the wife also, until the lawyers can work out settlements.

Bad things happen all the time... that's my point... one month and she's at the food bank... well that's good that's what food banks are for, but she needs to begin thinking totally different... and she's not.

She's hiding her jewelry, etc... she should be selling it.


----------



## Lindafisk (Nov 17, 2004)

seedspreader said:


> Well, I've helped counsel ladies who've been through their husband either going to jail, or leaving them.
> 
> You can indeed send a car back, they will auction it off and you will pay the difference. It's not good for your credit, but it's better than losing everything.
> 
> ...



I agree...but....she will still need a car if she is going to work......unless she commutes somehow, well, I would think with kids she would need one anyway. 
Of course, it is prolly an expensive car and a cheaper one would be better!


----------



## FrodoLass (Jan 15, 2007)

RockyGlen said:


> I think we will be seeing more and more of this in the coming months.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/pers...ily/index.html?eref=rss_topstories#cnnSTCText


I watched an interview with this lady and she said she took off her Tiffany bracelet and left her "coach" bag (whatever that is) at home when she went to the food bank. Maybe she could sell those things and buy some food? (BTW, not criticizing her, just offering an option for feeding her family).


----------



## sancraft (Jun 7, 2002)

Hmmp. Maybe if she wasn;t buying tennis bracelets and coach bags and trying to be in more house than she can afford, she would have had more than 2 months worth of money.


----------



## sancraft (Jun 7, 2002)

Now that I'm going to have afull time job again, the first thing I plan on doing is restocking my savings. I haven't had savings in years now since the divorce. I also haven't made anywhere near 70K. She's a loan processor. She didn't have better sense than to buy into an interest only loan? She knows sooner than anyone, the state of teh housing market in her area. Just sounds to me like yet another person trying to live above their means and got caught with their pants down. That's what I think.


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

Okay I agree, it's pretty dumb to take out an interest only loan.

However... what I'm hearing from these posts is that because this person earned a decent salary and owned some nice items, she and her children don't deserve help from the system they paid into?

Do you think a persons tummy is any less empty because they made more than you did last week?

Don't judge so quickly. Just because she earned $70k last year doesn't mean she's been earning a salary like that for years. 

Having no compassion for high income earners who hit difficult times is beneath all of you. An empty belly is an empty belly... and hard times can fall on even the most prepared and frugal families... been there, done that.


----------



## Amylb999 (Jan 28, 2007)

CJ said:


> Okay I agree, it's pretty dumb to take out an interest only loan.
> 
> However... what I'm hearing from these posts is that because this person earned a decent salary and owned some nice items, she and her children don't deserve help from the system they paid into?
> 
> ...


I figure she has plenty of money still. She just wanted to keep it and eat the government cheese too. This is the typical ohh poor me single mom story. I say sell your stuff, sell your house, get outa dodge or the princess should stop her griping.

Also, if it was the man that was wrong for leaving (like having an affair for instance.) They would have said. So she probably did something to make him wish to leave as well.

OOPS, this is me not she!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

Great idea. And while she's waiting for her stuff to sell, I suppose it's okay that she and her kids starve? There appears to be a shortage of disposable income these days... things aren't selling very well. They could get pretty darn cold and hungry before it all sells. 

As for marriages falling apart, it takes two to make it work, and two to break it.



Amylb999 said:


> I figure she has plenty of money still. She just wanted to keep it and eat the government cheese too. This is the typical ohh poor me single mom story. I say sell your stuff, sell your house, get outa dodge or the princess should stop her griping.
> 
> Also, if it was the man that was wrong for leaving (like having an affair for instance.) They would have said. So she probably did something to make him wish to leave as well.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Amylb999 said:


> Also, if it was the man that was wrong for leaving (like having an affair for instance.) They would have said. So she probably did something to make him wish to leave as well.
> 
> OOPS, this is me not she!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1


Why would you assume that?

The neighbor man who left his wife with no money. no income, and no savings was having an affair, but I never mentioned it because I did not see the point!

And, yes, the lady in the story DOES need to sell stuff. Though, that can take time and kids want to eat every day. And, yes, it bugs me that she has not sold her bracelet!


----------



## PineRidge (May 2, 2006)

CJ said:


> Great idea. And while she's waiting for her stuff to sell, I suppose it's okay that she and her kids starve? There appears to be a shortage of disposable income these days... things aren't selling very well. They could get pretty darn cold and hungry before it all sells.
> 
> As for marriages falling apart, it takes two to make it work, and two to break it.


It doesn't take time for something to sell at a pawn shop, btdt and watched dh sell his tools when he couldn't get a job. It was a hard lesson, but we learned from it, and hopefully will never repeat it.

If paying the mortgage is keeping her from eating, then she needs to walk away. I bet she could have moved in with her mother, or they could have gotten an apartment together cheaper than $2500 a month.

I wonder if she turned her cell phone, cable or internet off. For some reason I doubt it.

If you are desperate enough to use a foodbank, then you would have done all those things FIRST!


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

CJ said:


> Great idea. And while she's waiting for her stuff to sell, I suppose it's okay that she and her kids starve? There appears to be a shortage of disposable income these days... things aren't selling very well. They could get pretty darn cold and hungry before it all sells.
> 
> As for marriages falling apart, it takes two to make it work, and two to break it.


Go to Ebay and look up (tiffany gold bracelet) They seem to average around 1000.00 bucks. I could eat rather well on that.

As for the children starving... She is getting unemployment. At an income like 70,000. She is probably getting like 900-1000 a week in benefits. Boo Hoo to her.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

At $70,000 salary, I THINK she should get about $800 a month unemployement? 

She was probably foolish enough to try to stay current with her bills. Nobody said this lady was prudent!


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

This thread is a sad testament to what lies ahead. I see little compassion here, just judgemental opinions that are, simply opinions.

How many low income families accept food stamps, medicaid, wic, etc, while maintaining internet service? Or cell phones? Cigarettes, booze?

No one is innocent, I don't care how justified you think your reasons are, to the person poorer than you, they're ridiculous expenditures that you could do without.

Rich or poor, we are all in this together, and your life can change in a blink of an eye.

If I suddenly lost my job and feared for the rest of my belongings, home included, and I had a diamond bracelet in my possession... would I hoc it? Are you kidding? If we really are approaching a depression, diamonds could be a valuable asset much like gold, or any other precious metal/jewels. I'd tuck it away for that time when things were truly desperate. That would seem "prudent" to me.


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

CJ said:


> This thread is a sad testament to what lies ahead. I see little compassion here, just judgemental opinions that are, simply opinions.
> 
> How many low income families accept food stamps, medicaid, wic, etc, while maintaining internet service? Or cell phones? Cigarettes, booze?
> 
> ...


Unfortunately, the future is here...it is dog eat dog and no sympathy is shown to the "weak". It's real easy to sit around and armchair quarterback what this lady coulda shoulda done. But until you've btdt I am pretty sure no one here has any idea what she is going through. Panic and desperation and being fearful for the future of your kids and yourself can drive people to do all sorts of things they wouldn't otherwise do. It can also keep you from thinking as straight and as clearly as those who are not in the midst of the situation.


----------



## jlxian (Feb 14, 2005)

Yes she should have planned better. And I don't feel much sympathy either. However, I think the gist of the story is that this woman's situation is symptomatic of the general population who have been gross consumers all their lives. We will hear lots of these stories in weeks/months to come.


----------



## Gary in ohio (May 11, 2002)

Stop paying on the house, its a lost cause. With the current backlog of houses, stop paying, your going to lose the house but your going to loose it anyway you go. It will take close to a year before your evicted. Take the money saved not paying the house payment and spend that on buying outright a reliable car that you dont OWE on. Call the leasing company and tell them your not going to pay anymore come and get the car.

Now packup the items you dont really need and move to storage bin. Pay for that in advance for a year. Now when you do need to move only the needed items need moved.

Until they kick you out, look for a job knowing you have no car or house payment to worry about now. Granted your credits going to be screwed up, but get over it and get on with your life.


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2008)

PineRidge said:


> If paying the mortgage is keeping her from eating, then she needs to walk away. I bet she could have moved in with her mother, or they could have gotten an apartment together cheaper than $2500 a month.


I agree. She has no principal in the house and what she's paying amounts to rent for all intents and purposes. So she needs to just walk away and get a small apartment or something.


----------



## shellrow (Feb 8, 2007)

rkintn said:


> Panic and desperation and being fearful for the future of your kids and yourself can drive people to do all sorts of things they wouldn't otherwise do. It can also keep you from thinking as straight and as clearly as those who are not in the midst of the situation.


Thank you for saying that. I am not taking up for the woman and I would probably do alot of things really differently. This person is obviously what is referred to as "Sheeple"? on the forum. She did not have a plan in place but at the same time I bet her hubby up and leaving her with that expensive mortgage out of the blue was not planned as well! I am sure if she was making $70,000 he was probably making that much if not more. I hope she is chasing him down for child support and alimony but that being said, that kinda stuff takes time and if you go through the state system they are so backed up it is pathetic and she will be lucky if they hear her case in 6 months. It is quite obvious that if she is already going to a food pantry, she cannot walk in and plunk down the cash for a lawyer. As far as her selling her items, she should sell as much as possible, downsize from that extreme mortgage and stop trying to maintain the lifestyle she had previously been living. 

I can somewhat sympathize with her because I was laid off last year without warning. Once I started getting unemployment it was only 1/4 of what I had been making. Luckily for me, I had savings, I had food stored up, a garden and the common sense to get rid of the non-necessities. I did not have the big expensive items such as a "Coach" bag or a "Tiffany" bracelet. I had a food saver and canners. The one thing I did panic about was the two older boys college education. Both of them were scheduled to graduate and I was scared about affording their college. Both of them took a year off and got work experience and will begin classes this summer/fall. 

With all of that being said, anyone that has ever had a job are entitled to what the system can offer if they need it. If the person paid into it they should be able to recoop some of what they paid in. 

There will be more stories like this and the "Sheeple" will be made or they will break. Anyone ever see "Fun with Dick & Jane"? I think that things will get worse before they get better. I for one am going to continue to prep, prep, prep and prep some more.


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

Gary in ohio said:


> Stop paying on the house, its a lost cause. With the current backlog of houses, stop paying, your going to lose the house but your going to loose it anyway you go. It will take close to a year before your evicted. Take the money saved not paying the house payment and spend that on buying outright a reliable car that you dont OWE on. Call the leasing company and tell them your not going to pay anymore come and get the car.
> 
> Now packup the items you dont really need and move to storage bin. Pay for that in advance for a year. Now when you do need to move only the needed items need moved.
> 
> Until they kick you out, look for a job knowing you have no car or house payment to worry about now. Granted your credits going to be screwed up, but get over it and get on with your life.


Gary, I was reading about the "3 Million dollar squatters" down in Miami Beach that are doing this. It says some of them have been there for 2 years and there is no one buying the houses so they continue to live in them.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/67197-foreclosure-proof-homeowners


----------



## trixiwick (Jun 9, 2004)

CJ said:


> Rich or poor, we are all in this together, and your life can change in a blink of an eye.


I have to disagree with you, CJ.

I do not want to be "in it together" with someone who spent their income on jewelry and accessories and saved absolutely nothing, though I am sure people like that would love to be "in it together" with me.

And it really isn't "there but for the grace of God go I." You choose who you marry, how many kids you have, what line of work you go into, what home you buy and how you spend (or save) the money you earn. If either I or DH lost our job, we could continue living as we are, just tighten our belts some. If both of us lost our jobs, we have enough saved for probably a year, and of course that is NOT factoring in the additional contribution unemployment would provide. Between unemployment, our savings, and that which we could sell (and, believe me, Tiffany bracelets and Coach bags ain't on the list), it would be a very long time indeed before we'd be showing up begging.

I'm not thrilled and delighted by what happened to this woman and her family, but I think it is an incredibly bad idea to insulate people from the consequences of the poor choices they have made. It is the only way people learn.


----------



## RockyGlen (Jan 19, 2007)

I posted the original article because I had comassion for her, and for the millions of others I thing this has happened or will happen to.

1. $70,000 is not a huge amount of money in California
2. When they bought the house, they had TWO incomes
3. Her husband left her
4. I think having no savings to fall back on is a sign of our times
5. Although we do not know if they had savings and her husband took them?

I started to lose sympathy when I saw the video. When my first husband died, our bank accounts were frozen because they were in his name only. I did some very hard things, but my kids never knew we were in danger of losing our home - their lives did not change. Once the money we had saved was released, I was able to get things back out of pawn shops, etc. I did go on food stamps for 1 or 2 months, but that was after I had done everything else. 

This womans house is not only VERY fancy, but she had a lot of very expensive items in it. I'm not saying sell your couch and fridge. But that big screen tv could go, as could some of those fancy kitchen gadgets sitting on the counter, and the jewelry, and if she has a $300 purse, what about some clothing and shoes? Do they have thrift stores there? 

I think she tried to do the right thing by having her mother move in, but it might have been better to move into her mothers house and let the bank have that one back. 

My compassion tends to end when the action stops and the whining starts. 

I also like the fact that the state would not give her food stamps. They should be a last resort, and she still has many options.

As I said, I think this is something we are going to see more and more of, and her righteous indignation that she paid in all those years and now they tell her no - well, I think that is going to get more and more vocal as it cuts deeper and deeper into society.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

trixiwick said:


> I have to disagree with you, CJ.
> 
> I do not want to be "in it together" with someone who spent their income on jewelry and accessories and saved absolutely nothing, though I am sure people like that would love to be "in it together" with me.
> 
> ...


I agree 100 % ( yeah...a shocker I know )


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

I just have to ask... when this person is mad because " she paid into the system all these years..." 

What does that mean? There is no system that one pays into for future use of welfare... that logic is insane...this nation is becoming overwhelmed with people who feel entitled to be cared for... it actually makes me feel sick for our country...this will be our nation's demise....it's own people..not its government or it's businesses as so many believe :flame:


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Ain't -
I think she means that the money for this was taken out of her paycheck all these years and now when she thinks she needs some of what she put in, they won't give it back to her to help her out.

Angie


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

AngieM2 said:


> Ain't -
> I think she means that the money for this was taken out of her paycheck all these years and now when she thinks she needs some of what she put in, they won't give it back to her to help her out.
> 
> Angie


Oh I know what she means.. I am just irritated that people think they are paying _into_ something....therefore they are _entitled _to get some of it back down the road...not so. They are paying for someone else..it's taxes not a saving account...


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

then we get to the old arguement of our paycheck having taxes taken out without our say/approval for those that don't, won't, can't work.

The illusion is that we pay into the funds via taxes so when we need services that we've paid into they will be there for us.....


----------



## trixiwick (Jun 9, 2004)

I'm sure that's what she means, but it depends on what she's talking about. The tax dollars that we pay are not a savings account that we can tap into whenever we feel like (even Social Security, which sort of should be). She is certainly entitled to unemployment, unless there's something we don't know about her case. Is she entitled to handouts that are supposed to be reserved for poor people? I'd say not. 

It just doesn't work to give handouts to everyone who wants them - there are too many people who want them and too few people paying in. There have to be criteria for eligibility. They do not, rightly, include people who are simply in want rather than true need. If you could easily sell your bauble stash for $5,000, there is no excuse whatsoever for you to keep it for yourself and simply pull government checks instead. That isn't what they're there for; it takes money out of the pockets of people who genuinely need it; and, most importantly, it WRECKS people's faith in a fair system and further damages their willingness to put in.

It makes no sense to say, "Well, that's just the way people are now, and the government must adjust its expectations." This is a math problem that is not addressed by this kind of wishful thinking. Our government is itself in dire straits of debt, and it isn't possible for us to underwrite the day-to-day needs of every overspending citizen. Not possible as well as not desirable. Some folks are going to have to hurt because of the bad choices they made, and I don't think there is any real-world way to avoid it.


----------



## LynninTX (Jun 23, 2004)

NOT defending her... nope

but a touch of perspective here...

22 yrs ago I was a divorced single mom... I sold my wedding ring at a pawn shop (got $1.50 more than if I had *pawned* it)... it netted me $9 which I used to buy a pr of shoes for my son...

jewelry does not tend to sell or pawn for much....

I have NO CLUE what a coach bag is... or what some of this stuff might sell for on ebay....

Regarding income.... $70,000 does not go real far in CA... that is what my dh was making 4-5 yrs ago... we paid our bills & supported ourselves, but... we lived in a 1000sq ft home originally built as low income, we owned 2 cars... an 86 van and a 71 Chevy nova.... we had NO cable or satelite... did not take the paper... shopped in thrift stores... etc.... electric ran $400+/mo, water $100+/mo, trash service was mandatory...

4 yrs ago we sold that 1000sq ft tract house... in San Diego's east county.... 3 bedrm... suburban (SMALL lot)... originally low income built... we sold it to someone who intended to gut it and fix it up... selling price was between $400,000-450,000 (can't recall exactly)....

CA just does not compare with most of the country... we got out while we could.

Like I say I am NOT defending her.... but I can see it going that fast...


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

It's Southern California. Here there are high paying jobs, and it takes every penny of it for living. Many folks are one paycheck from disaster.


----------



## unregistered29228 (Jan 9, 2008)

My dear departed Nannie used to volunteer at a food pantry, and also at those Government surplus handouts. She used to tell us how disgusted she would be (and have to hide it) when people she'd known their whole life would show up and take all they could get. She knew these people lived in nice houses, drove big fancy cars, had their hair done twice a week, manicures, vacations, and jewelry. And yet they wanted to get "what was owed to them". 

I'm sorry, I know people's health, jobs marriages and luck can change in a moment. But drifting through life without any backup plan, or savings, or food in the house is just naive and even stupid.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

AngieM2 said:


> then we get to the old arguement of our paycheck having taxes taken out without our say/approval for those that don't, won't, can't work.
> 
> The *illusion* is that we pay into the funds via taxes so when we need services that we've paid into they will be there for us.....


And that is exactly what it is an _illusion_..it is not a guarantee and this woman did not qualify because either she has too many assets or too much money coming in from somewhere ( child support maybe?)...she made the mistake of failing to plan, failing to make good decisions ( interest only house???) failing to jump on the situation immediately while she had savings...When I answered #2 in your scenarios...I said you must immediately act before the sun sets on the first day when you lose your job...I think she waited too long and now is whining because a "system" that most people know is completely broken didn't work out like she thought... I completely blame this woman for failing to do what was necessary to take care of her family and my guess is she is a person who sits around and blames the world for all the bad things that happenes to her...instead of getting herself together and making tough choices...


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I think we can all agree, she's about to get an education in the UHK (Univeristy of Hard Knocks). Maybe she will learn and find a board such as this one to prepare for it not to happen again.? Maybe, we can hope.

Angie


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

When asking about her income, there was no mention of child support. I wonder why?


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

Common Tator said:


> When asking about her income, there was no mention of child support. I wonder why?


I was wondering that myself...


----------



## RockyGlen (Jan 19, 2007)

Her husband just recently left her, and they are not divorced yet. Does that help with the child suport question?


----------



## sparkysarah (Dec 4, 2007)

She's probably still going out shopping. I would bet on it that she is still, even after whining and complaining, spending money on things she shouldn't.


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

CJ said:


> If I suddenly lost my job and feared for the rest of my belongings, home included, and I had a diamond bracelet in my possession... would I hoc it? Are you kidding? If we really are approaching a depression, diamonds could be a valuable asset much like gold, or any other precious metal/jewels. I'd tuck it away for that time when things were truly desperate. That would seem "prudent" to me.


I wonder if diamonds and other traditional stores of wealth (precious metals, paper money) will have any value, in a prolonged shtf...

In a minor, short lived emergency, or for individual emergencies, I couldn't agree more.

If the system has totally failed, and no goods or services (as we know it) are being produced, and we revert to barter only... what would 'valuables now' be worth then. There's only one reliable easy test that I know for diamonds (one of my Aunts was trying to impress me once with her big rock... I asked her if I could see it... looked at it... sure was 'purty'... asked her how much it set her back... she wouldn't say... Started to run it across my back window in the truck, and she said STOP!!!... Mentioned she mustn't have paid much for the chunk of GLASS... She gave me the 'evil eye' and put it back on...) Would I trade a pound of rice for a one carat diamond? ten carat diamond? maybe one the size of a banny egg. Also wouldn't trade food or ammunition or tools for gold, silver, platinum, or any amount of cash. If a person had a skill, such as cobbler, I'd feed them and their family for a while, in exchange for services..

_________________
Lots of people are in the same boat as this lady. She's made the paper! Woohoo!!! When there are thousands a day in the same boat, or millions, it'll be ho hum, another high fliers wings getting trimmed.

When the banks fail, and unemployment comp is just a dream, these people will be selling anything they have. When it gets painful enough, they'll wake up... till then, they'll keep on spending...


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

Lynn... you and your family chose wisely...


----------



## Staceyy (Jun 16, 2007)

A lot of times people don't learn until something bad happens to them. Maybe this is her wake up call. A couple years ago, I lost my 6 figure job as a mortgage banker. I have not worked since. Being a mortgage banker, I knew to only get a fixed rate mortgage, and I only used my income to qualify for the mortgage, not dh's too. Dh is a long distance truck driver and makes a good income, but not as good as what I was making. My unemployment check was for $1300 a month, and I understand my state pays one of the highest benefits. I contributed to a 401k while I was working, and had to use the savings when laid off. Once my unemployment benefits were exhausted, I became ill and was hospitalized for two weeks and had major surgery performed. Dh's hospitalization plan paid for this 100%. Six months later, dh became severely ill and lost his eyesight temporarily. Turns out he was diabetic and his eyesight did return after about 30 days. He could not work during this period, but did receive sick leave.

Still, thank God , we have made it through okay. My life has always been one of extreme ups and downs. Over time I realized it would be best to look ahead and prepare for down times, but it took time to come to this conclusion. Things are tight for us but we still save money and we have a year's worth of food put away. We are very frugal, though we have not always been so. In a way, I'm glad I was laid off when I was because we've had several years to adapt to hard times and strengthen ourselves for what may be coming ahead.

Looking at this woman's situation, I feel that when you are making a decent income, you somehow convince yourself that you will always make a good income, which of course is crazy but thats the way it is for a lot of people. Its as though the optimism is whats keeping the thing going and to be prudent and save is somehow acknowledging it could all come to an end. I was once caught up into this way of thinking, and saw it in a lot of my co-workers. We were mostly contract workers with lives of feast or famine. Some years we would be rolling in the dough and others barely able to eat. During the flush years, although we knew we were on contract and could be let go at any time, we would continue to spend and not save as though there were no tomorrow. Over time, some of us including myself, did get some sense knocked into us however, and began to prepare for those impending down times. Still, I know many mortgage bankers who lost their homes in the foreclosure process recently. You would think this wasn't the case but sadly it is. 

Also, I recently have witnessed several women whose marriages abruptly came to an end and who were not prepared. One worked all of her life but was encouraged to spend her earnings frivolously on whatever she wanted. She has no savings of her own. Her husband paid the bills. They never owned a home so had no equity there. The husband recently began to gamble and gambled away his 401k account as well as the kid's college fund. She took early retirement from her job just before all of this began. Then the husband began an affair and left my friend. Another was a SAHM whose husband left her at the age of 55. She had never worked before. Of course he took and spent his 401k before she even knew she was entitled to half of it. I'm telling all of this to say, many women do not pay attention to their own financial situation believing they will be automatically taken care of by their spouse. The woman in the above mentioned story probably believed her husband would step in and pay the bills once she was laid off. Instead, he left. I'm sure she was counting on her job and her husband to keep things rolling along nicely. But things have a way of going up and down and we need to put as many safety nets in place as possible. Her good paying job and husband were not enough. A lot of people falsely think it is.


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2008)

Staceyy said:


> Looking at this woman's situation, I feel that when you are making a decent income, you somehow convince yourself that you will always make a good income, which of course is crazy but thats the way it is for a lot of people.


That happened to my brother once. He was getting tons of overtime and WAY over budgeted himself. Then he lost all the overtime during an economic downturn, and had a horribly rough time making ends meet.

He learned his lesson though. He got everything paid off eventually, and now won't go into unecessary debt. The only debt he has is his mortgage and one car payment. Everything else he saves up and pays cash for.


----------



## LynninTX (Jun 23, 2004)

> Lynn... you and your family chose wisely...


We believe so... yet we are constantly asked "WHY did you choose -----, TX?!"


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

So let's say we have a married couple making a great income. The wife, to the agreeance of both parties, stays at home fulltime. They invest responsibly in their savings, they have little debt, perhaps a mortgage, own their vehicles, etc free and clear.

The husband hits that middle aged crises and decides he's walking out. He's so madly in love with his 20 year old secretary he stops thinking intelligently. Friday morning, he heads to the office. He empties out the bank accounts, sells off all their stocks and bonds (which of course he can do, because it's all in both of their names) and runs off to Vegas with the 20 year old.

Those 2 have a fabulous time over the weekend, gambling away their fortunes, eventually losing enough that the house is put on the line to cover the debt.

Meanwhile, back home at the ranch, the missus is frantically wondering where her husband is, she hasn't heard from him since he left the house Friday morning.

Soon, the reality of the situation hits when her husband comes back. Divorce is filed, and there are no assets left to split, in fact there is now debt.

In a blink of an eye, her irresponsible husband frittered their lifetime savings away.

She doesn't even have $100 left in her checking account. She has a really nice house though, (but the moneysharks will be there shortly to collect, leaving her homeless) filled with fancy stuff, nice clothes, and a nice car.

She is destitute. She has her clothes, and her car, and that's it. No money to buy food, pay rent, fill up her nice car... She is about to become one of the homeless. Hoc the clothes, the household items? Sure why not, buy some food today, even though at some point she will need clothing and shelter and household items again... good luck affording them though, staying at home all those years left her without much in the way of job skills. Was she stupid? How many of you ladies are SAHM's, working your butts off, homeschooling the kids, tending to the homestead?

She heads downtown, using some of her remaing gas and asks about getting help. After filling out countless forms, she is told she isn't elligible for any assistance because she owns a nice new car, but if she sells it, in 6 months she could get help. 

Now pray tell... stories like this, and much, much worse happen all the time. Just when and how was she supposed to "plan" for this? Seems like she and her mate had it all planned out, doing everything by the book.

So remember... stop believing in yourself and your spouse, because they're probably plotting behind your back. And if not today, they might be tomorrow, sanity can go on a whim, and the person you trusted with your life yesterday is your enemy tomorrow. Become bitter, but safe.

Or wait... go ahead and believe in yourself, trust your spouse and the choices you make together, have faith in your plan... and pray it doesn't blow up in the blink of an eye, because it's pretty obvious your fellow man doesn't give a rats ass.

Honestly, you can't plan for everything, and even the best laid plans can come apart.

I wonder how many of you took that tax rebate you felt you were owed? I wonder if I spent the time cross referencing this thread to the tax rebate threads, how many of you felt justified receiving it? How many of you actually "need" it?

Entitlement abounds, indeed. We're all guilty of it. We are, wether you like it or not, in this mess together. We've all contributed in some way. We will all pay the price.

I hope, that if and when TSHTF, I am able to offer my hand and my compassion to my neighbor, instead of walking away in righteous indignation because they made some poor choices.

I hope, that if and when TSHTF, my neighbor will do the same for me, because I've surely made some poor choices, I am human after all.


----------



## trixiwick (Jun 9, 2004)

CJ, I get where you're coming from, but I still disagree, for a few reasons.

1) Lots of things are foreseeable. To have a healthy income and no savings is completely unjustifiable. Unexpected things happen to every single one of us - some have chosen to prepare themselves, and others have not. I am not a believer in robbing the ant to satisfy the grasshopper.

2) My own personal choice is that I would not ever be comfortable relying on another person's salary as my only source of support. People can choose to do this, but I certainly hope they comprehend that it is a choice with some inherent risks. No one here is a child who had all their choices made for them. Make a risky choice, and it might not work out for you. I don't think that means that people who made better choices are obligated to bail you out. What does "adulthood" mean anymore?

3) Nobody will ever "need" that Tiffany bracelet and Coach bag. What this woman and her family _need_ is food and shelter, and to beg for these basics from the government while (secretly) hanging onto her valuable but useless baubles is flat-out fraud as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## sgl42 (Jan 20, 2004)

The entire middle class has been stretched very thin, with little reserves over the last 30 yrs. Instead of relying on "what everyone knows to be true", much of which is false, this lady actually studied it: The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class by Elizabeth Warren, [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akVL7QY0S8A[/ame] (about 1 hr long)

Or, you read this interview, which covers most of what the video does:
http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people7/Warren/warren-con0.html



> http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people7/Warren/warren-con2.html
> 
> This was back in the early eighties, and I'll tell you what I set out to prove. I set out to prove they were all a bunch of cheaters. My take on this, my thrust, what I was going to do, is I was going to expose these people who were taking advantage of the rest of us by hauling off to bankruptcy and just charging debts that they really could repay, or who'd been irresponsible in running up debts.
> 
> I did the research and the data just took me to a totally different place. These were hardworking middle-class families who by and large had lost jobs, gotten sick, had family breakups, and that's what was driving them over the edge financially. Most of them were in complete economic collapse when they filed for bankruptcy. There was no option to bankruptcy except to just stay deep in debt for the rest of your life; they would never pay these debts off.





> One thing that you mention in your book, and actually you just said that your attitude about these people who had gone bankrupt was that it was their fault, that they had failed, that they had been spenders, that they had been whatever negative values we can associate -- that serves a political purpose, to believe that, even if it's correct. Did you begin to put those two things together?
> 
> Absolutely. That's how it began to work. I began to see that there were a lot of people who really just didn't care one way of another who the people were who were in bankruptcy. They'd taken a lot of money from the banks and the banks had said, the credit card companies had said, "This is the piece of legislation we want, we find it helpful." Well, in a democratically elected Congress how on earth are you going to pass legislation to benefit two dozen already powerful multi-billion dollar corporations at the expense of all the people who are your constituents? Because this is straight wealth transfer. Is it going to go to the credit card companies or is the money going to stay with these million and a half little families that are filing for bankruptcy every year?
> 
> ...


(too long... continued below)


----------



## sgl42 (Jan 20, 2004)

> http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people7/Warren/warren-con3.html
> 
> In the second half of the twentieth century the single most important economic thing that happened is that millions of mothers poured back into the work force, and that's the only thing that kept family income rising. Starting in about 1970 a fully employed male's wages completely flattened out, and in fact, a fully employed male today, on average, median, earns about $800 less than his dad earned a generation ago. So, [for] the family, unlike the first seventy years of the twentieth century, where productivity went up and wages went up, there becomes a split. Wages flatten for men and the family does better only if they can put two people on the workforce, and the norm switches from a one-earner family to a two-earner family, for those who are lucky enough to have it. Now if that were the only thing that's happened, you'd think we should be richer. We should have more savings, we should have very little debt. But expenses in the same thirty-year period far outstripped what the families are spending, and I'm not talking about consumer price index.
> 
> ...


There's millions of people out there which reporters had a choice of profiling in the story. Why was this one lady picked? What "narrative" are they trying to tell? Is this lady truly typical of the people facing foreclosure, getting help from food bank? Did you see any overall statistics in the story? Do often see any meaningful statistics in news stories? 

We've got concentrated media ownership in this country now; do you think that may have any impact on what narratives are told? Back when home builders and mortgage brokers were providing a huge amount of the classified ad revenue for local newspapers and many internet sites, did you get any good information about whether housing was in a bubble or not? The blogger world was lit up with lots of info about the housing bubble and how bad it was, but the mainstream media was virtually silent. Why? Who benefited?

--sgl


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

I think you summed it up when you said, "there but for the grace of God go I" because that is the truth, whether we like it or not. All the planning in the world won't make up for a run of ill fortune and bad luck.

Funny you mentioned that, I have had that thought in my head weekly for some time now... "there but for the grace of God go I" and I wonder why I am so lucky when so many are not?

Surely I didn't plan my good fortune. Likely I haven't even earned it. In fact when I look over my life and see all my shortcomings and failures, I can only conclude, "there but for the grace of God go I". Amen.



trixiwick said:


> CJ, I get where you're coming from, but I still disagree, for a few reasons.
> 
> 1) Lots of things are foreseeable. To have a healthy income and no savings is completely unjustifiable. Unexpected things happen to every single one of us - some have chosen to prepare themselves, and others have not. I am not a believer in robbing the ant to satisfy the grasshopper.
> 
> ...


----------



## jerzeygurl (Jan 21, 2005)

trixiwick said:


> I have to disagree with you, CJ.
> 
> *I do not want to be "in it together" with someone who spent their income on jewelry and accessories and saved absolutely nothing, though I am sure people like that would love to be "in it together" with me.*And it really isn't "there but for the grace of God go I." You choose who you marry, how many kids you have, what line of work you go into, what home you buy and how you spend (or save) the money you earn. If either I or DH lost our job, we could continue living as we are, just tighten our belts some. If both of us lost our jobs, we have enough saved for probably a year, and of course that is NOT factoring in the additional contribution unemployment would provide. Between unemployment, our savings, and that which we could sell (and, believe me, Tiffany bracelets and Coach bags ain't on the list), it would be a very long time indeed before we'd be showing up begging.
> 
> I'm not thrilled and delighted by what happened to this woman and her family, but I think it is an incredibly bad idea to insulate people from the consequences of the poor choices they have made. It is the only way people learn.



i too agree with this..its the whole ant and the grasshopper thing

she has been making bad choices, and I will have to pay for them....I dont have a coach bag or diamond bracelet ect.....I do however have a savings account and have paid ahead on my mortgage, her taking food stamps is taking money from me....how and in what world is that cool?

if it happened to us, I would start selling cows and tractors....below value even(but then again, I have lot less money in them than what they are worth) 
I would spend hours a day on ebay....fancy smancy clothes like what she has would sell for big bucks, and money in a week...

i would like to buy about 40-80 more acres, I could get a loan easy, BUT I wont, because I can see that I would leverage myself into having nothing....( i figgured that out without a degree mind you)

she made her choices while she had the job to live beyond her means( interest only loan) and not save....

I too have worked at a food pantry, and was disgusted by the experience....


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

jerzeygurl said:


> I do however have a savings account and have paid ahead on my mortgage, her taking food stamps is taking money from me....how and in what world is that cool?


Okay. Let's play it this way then. We too have a savings account, and are debt free. My husband, bless his heart, put in so many overtime hours last year that we paid a fortune in taxes. We won't be getting one of those rebates everyone seems to happily adding to their networths. Some of those people didn't pay any of those taxes in, we however did.

How and in what world is that cool?

How many of you think you deserve that rebate, on the back and hard work of people who earn more than you, but work just as hard if not harder?

Is this type of "help" different? 

Find it within yourselves to find some compassion for others. There are going to be millions of people out of homes and on the stree due to bad choices, bad luck, or bad timing. 

I don't advocate socialism by any means. I abhore the welfare system and what it is, in truth.

But to sneer at a person who could be 2 steps from living on the streets for whatever reason, is the larger crime.

So many seem smug in their good fortunes. A blink of an eye...


----------



## Common Tator (Feb 19, 2008)

CJ, 
I understand where you are coming from, and in fact that happened to a friend of mine. She had three kids, one was a newborn. Her husband walked out the door one morning to go to work in California, and called her that evening from Florida where he had already set up housekeeping with his lover. What's worse, they were not American born, and when he dumped my friend (German born) and married his lover, he was able to apply for citizenship through her. The couple had originally entered the US legally on a work visa based on the husband's engineering skills. The kids were born here. Her status in the US was based on him. He controlled the finances and left her without the ability to hire an attorney for the divorce, so child support was the minimum the courts would issue, and she could never afford to take him back to court to get it raised.

This lady didn't need lectures. She needed help. She couldn't get any form of public assistance because of the citizenship issue. When she did call her ex in times of financial difficulty he would ridicule her for being so irresponsible. She could only find jobs that paid little more than minimum wage. She didn't ask for any of this. Soon, the daughter will be old enough to make some form of immigration application for her mom. then she can work here legally and as the kids are growing up and leaving home her expenses will lower. But this womans troubles keep her awake at night. Her face always looks worried, and like she has been crying.


----------



## Staceyy (Jun 16, 2007)

Well I'm praying for us all, we're all going to need it. You know I do think life is a training ground and even if you think you have all your ducks in a row, the one duck you hadn't thought of is the one thats going to get you somehow. It really doesn't pay to be smug, I know from experience.


----------



## RockyGlen (Jan 19, 2007)

This is from another message board, and I don't know how to verify it, so take it for what it's worth:



> Here's a little more information about Patricia Guerrero's financial situation from public records (LA County Assessor and Recorder):
> 
> The 2,948 square foot house on a quarter acre lot was built in 1948.
> 
> ...


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

RockyGlen, thank you, that explains a LOT!

Earning $70,000 in California is equal to earning $35,000 most places! I was trying to figure out how she got those fancy duds on what is a living wage but not a generous one! 

I was guessing credit cards, and she probably has, but $400,000 of home equity will buy a LOT! of jewelry!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, I think the school of hard knocks is going to give her a degree! 

I have ZERO problem with feeding hungry people, but, the bank is going to get that house! And the bank DESERVES to be saddled with a house when the market is down: who in their right mind would loan them so much?!?!?


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Rocky Glen - if this is true, my possible sympathy factor has lowered considerably. Tutition on UHK is high.

Angie


----------



## shellrow (Feb 8, 2007)

OK ALL SYMPATHY IS LOST! That is outlandish!


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

CJ said:


> So let's say we have a married couple making a great income. The wife, to the agreeance of both parties, stays at home fulltime. They invest responsibly in their savings, they have little debt, perhaps a mortgage, own their vehicles, etc free and clear.
> 
> The husband hits that middle aged crises and decides he's walking out. He's so madly in love with his 20 year old secretary he stops thinking intelligently. Friday morning, he heads to the office. He empties out the bank accounts, sells off all their stocks and bonds (which of course he can do, because it's all in both of their names) and runs off to Vegas with the 20 year old.
> 
> ...


This is what I meant by judgement. I would never rely on anyone for my own survival or that of my children. I have never thought well if times get bad I can get foodstamps or welfare. I have always made my own money as has my DH. He nor I can take any joint money without the other. I have my own savings as does he. I do not spend my money frivolously on jewlery/handbags...I never have...nor would I ever have a home on an interest only loan. But as she did not plan for her future then this is what she should have done: This woman had some time as evidenced by the article...while "she went through her savings". *Day one* after she lost her job, she should have began selling every useless thing she owned. She should have put the house on the market and moved to an inexpensive rental. She should not have paid any bill that was not related to basic necessities..and she should have taken any job or three if necessary. Saying that this could happen to anyone is not true...anyone making 70,000 a year and living beyond their means buying useless trinkets without saving...yes. Someone who has struggled, paid for their house and land as they went..did without everything but basics, lived frugally and saved everything over that...no...they would be able to survive. To allow yourself to become vunerable and live at the will of your husband "just because you are a woman or even a SAHM" in this day and age is no longer acceptable...even if you do stay home..you should live frugally, have your own savings, know where your families finances are at all times and plan for any crisis because none of us knows what tommorrow brings. It is not whether you trust him..it is your obligation to yourself, your kids and society to be able to care for your own. If we as a soceity continue to pay for hers and others food bills..how will we buy food for ourselves?


----------



## Irish farmer (Dec 21, 2007)

I believe in helping people. This lady is going to need help. What I dont think she realizes, is that she is going to have to start using common sense and drastically lower her expectations. People will be willing to help her, after she sells the expensive bags and jewelry, and after she gets out of that house. Even people who are struggling to provide for themselves will help her.....after she scales way back on her standard of living and quits trying to hide her expensive crap and live way above her means. I dont think this lady realizes even at this point in time.....how bad she has messed up. Some people never realize it. Once she realizes it, plenty of people will be willing to help her.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Irish farmer, well said!


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

Aintlifegrand said:


> Saying that this could happen to anyone is not true...anyone making 70,000 a year and living beyond their means buying useless trinkets without saving...yes.



Okay, I think I'll post this last time and then let it drop, because I don't seem to be getting my point across, and I really don't want to cause anyone to be mad.

But... you are making too many assumptions. Just because a person is making 70k this year, how do you know that for the last 5 (or forever) they may have only made 30k?

How do you know that a person making $70k didn't lose everything they owned 10 years ago to outrageous medical bills? Perhaps they started over mid life? 

My point here was never that this woman wasn't irresponsible. My point is that a large group here is ready to tar, feather and stone her to death, without a moment of compassion. Is that what you want if the TS really DOES HTF? Because I guarantee the vast majority of people in this country did not live their life born with the wisdom you think they should have at the tender age of 20 or so, when they're just starting out.

It's like watching a pack of wild dogs. One person has the misfortune to screw up and fall down, and it's all over, in 5 minutes there's nothing left but bones.

Most people haven't gone through life with a lucky star guiding them either. Bad luck can happen to anyone, at anytime, for any reason, and no amount of planning in the world can change that. Good planning can help, yes.

People screw up. That's how they learn. Using the SAHM scenario was simply one of many typical tragedies that take place on a daily basis.

One last point. You (and others) mention how it's wrong for society (you) to pay for others mistakes (via taxes, social services, etc). Do you not realize that the majority do just that everyday? Our system taxes those with the highest incomes the most. Therefore, someone who is better off than you are, contributes to your "income" as well, by reducing the amount of taxes that you pay, and taking on more of that debt to society. They also pay a larger share that goes towards "funding" these bailouts.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Of COURSE it could happen to anybody!

A disaster could wipe out any of us! Savings would not last long if our homes and our jobs were under water or on fire! And, while it would take a lot longer, if there was LONG TERM unemployement MOST of us would be in trouble!

Her problems were due to her foolishness, yes, but never say it could not happen to you!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

CJ said:


> Okay. Let's play it this way then. We too have a savings account, and are debt free. My husband, bless his heart, put in so many overtime hours last year that we paid a fortune in taxes. We won't be getting one of those rebates everyone seems to happily adding to their networths. Some of those people didn't pay any of those taxes in, we however did.
> 
> How and in what world is that cool?
> 
> ...


Now you and I agree on this..I do not believe anyone should get any stimulus package if they did not pay taxes...I have been totaly against Earned Income Credit for years....I consider this redistribution of wealth.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

CJ said:


> Okay, I think I'll post this last time and then let it drop, because I don't seem to be getting my point across, and I really don't want to cause anyone to be mad.
> 
> But... you are making too many assumptions. Just because a person is making 70k this year, how do you know that for the last 5 (or forever) they may have only made 30k?
> 
> ...


You completely misunderstood what i am saying..I do not want to tar and feather this woman...I actually feel sorry for her but I expect her to be held accountable and make the hard decisions by giving up material possessions. I just do not want to take what I have earned and give it to her by force via taxes. I choose to help through charitable organizations..because that is my choice. I am tired of others making mistake after mistake and the rest of us paying for them...I live a very frugal lifestyle and I resent all forms of entitlement programs that are taxed.

FWIW..In case you think i don't understand what this woman might be going through...I was a single mom once, and made very little even working three jobs as I was only 19..I ate canned corn or peas ( all that I had in my cabinet when DH left)....so that I could spend what I made on keeping the small trailer we lived in with utilities and buy the baby food for my child. I sold everything I had and even was sleeping on the floor for months...I had a wonderful extended family but hid this all from them because I would not take a handout even from them...much less welfare. I made it.. I worked hard, put myself through school with my own money and never looked back. It was hard but I would never think for one moment that i was entitled to the money others made through their work...


----------



## Lowdown (May 24, 2007)

I've never understood why some folks feel a windfall situation will last forever. Those in the real estate and home lending industry's just had there hayday. Did these folks think that the border line loans they were fudging for people would continue to go on and on for years without any repercussions to the economy? 

Definitely "make hay while the sun is shining", but most people forgot the fact that you need to put some hay in the barn because winter DOES eventually come. 

I've been through several ups and downs in income like this in my short life. I purchased my land during one of them, built my house and bought my AE system during other ones. Did I mention I was in my early 20's? If a 20 something that attended publix skewl sisteem can figure that sort of thing out, surely most people can. 

I think the trap is the same cycle the Israelites went through time and time again in the Old Testament- prosperity brought easy living/idiolatry which later brought BONDAGE. You can look at folks FINANCIAL cycles in the same way- prosperity brings the "I DESERVE this $1 mil chipboard McMansion" which IS a form of idolatry which of course leads to bondage.


----------



## Ann-NWIowa (Sep 28, 2002)

Duh -- interest only loan = NO EQUITY. Why let your family go hungry and pay $2500 a month for what is basically rent. NO WAY. Hint -- you don't make your house payment for two months you get nasty phone calls and threatening letters. At 4 months probably they will start foreclosure action. In Iowa if the property being foreclosed is your primary residence you can request a delay of sale. All in all you can live rent free for approximately one year. At the present time in California and Florida it is taking a LONG time to get foreclosures on the court docket so maybe even longer before a foreclosure could be completed. And I believe a foreclosure must be complete before they can kick you out. Mortgage companies are pretty overwhelmed with properties in default so that might increase time before a foreclosure. No way would I be at a food bank or asking for food stamps. If I had unemployment it would go for food and utilities and gas to look for a job. I would be selling everything possible in preparation for moving. This lady was/is making really bad choices.


----------



## pickapeppa (Jan 1, 2005)

It is so much easier to dig yourself a hole than it is to drag yourself back out of it.

These news stories always have so many holes open for interpretation by the reader. I'm with those who want to know what happened with the 'ex'. Having a personal bias in this direction, I'm inclined to add there are 'injured spouse' tax and financial laws for a reason. People can be very petty and immature when they leave a relationship.


----------



## JGex (Dec 27, 2005)

trixiwick said:


> I have to disagree with you, CJ.
> 
> I do not want to be "in it together" with someone who spent their income on jewelry and accessories and saved absolutely nothing, though I am sure people like that would love to be "in it together" with me.
> 
> ...


Thank you, Trixiwick. 

One of the reasons I feel little sympathy for this woman and others is because she was not willing to sacrifice all of the beautiful things like a Tiffany bracelet, the huge home and expensive car... she and many others got themselves up to the eyeballs in debt BY THEIR OWN CHOICE so they could live like they couldn't really afford. 

I, on the other hand, chose NOT to go into debt by sensibly living within my meager means. 

I do not believe I am in this "together" with the people who are going to be hit the hardest by their own bad decisions. I will be affected in some ways, and though I do have some compassion for their struggles, they need to learn this lesson on their own. If there is someone there to lift them out of their own mire, they will learn nothing.


----------



## JGex (Dec 27, 2005)

CJ said:


> I wonder how many of you took that tax rebate you felt you were owed? I wonder if I spent the time cross referencing this thread to the tax rebate threads, how many of you felt justified receiving it? How many of you actually "need" it?


I will take it. I've paid approximately 40% of my earned income in taxes every year since I was 15. I've been paying into entitlement programs others have been using over the years and I personally have never asked the govt for a dime in any sort of compensation such as food stamps, etc. 

The woman in California will be receiving hers and some for each of her children who have never paid a dime into the "system."

You would begrudge me my refund based on what?


----------



## JGex (Dec 27, 2005)

Irish farmer said:


> I believe in helping people. This lady is going to need help. What I dont think she realizes, is that she is going to have to start using common sense and drastically lower her expectations. People will be willing to help her, after she sells the expensive bags and jewelry, and after she gets out of that house. Even people who are struggling to provide for themselves will help her.....after she scales way back on her standard of living and quits trying to hide her expensive crap and live way above her means. I dont think this lady realizes even at this point in time.....how bad she has messed up. Some people never realize it. Once she realizes it, plenty of people will be willing to help her.


YES!!!


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

I don't begrudge you. I ask how it differs from this particular woman receiving help. She's paid into the system too, but no one seems to think she should be able to collect any of that. What do you think the tax rebate is, other than redistribution of wealth from the higher paying tax bracket earners?

I'd be interested in hearing how you've managed to collect a rebate if you pay 40% taxes in? That's a hefty salary indeed. We paid 33% in last year, and earned too much to qualify. We only earned that much because my husband slaved away 80 hours a week for the whole year, basically doubling his salary so we could get ahead.

But you are proving exactly my point. It's okay for folks to take a handout/rebate/social service that they think they've earned/deserve, but when someone else takes or expects it... that's an entirely different ballgame.

I've been guilty of it myself. And I'm sure I will be again. 




JGex said:


> I will take it. I've paid approximately 40% of my earned income in taxes every year since I was 15. I've been paying into entitlement programs others have been using over the years and I personally have never asked the govt for a dime in any sort of compensation such as food stamps, etc.
> 
> The woman in California will be receiving hers and some for each of her children who have never paid a dime into the "system."
> 
> You would begrudge me my refund based on what?


----------



## sparkysarah (Dec 4, 2007)

LOL, No one "asked" for the rebate. (no one that is receiving it anyhow)


----------



## RockyGlen (Jan 19, 2007)

CJ, you raise a very valid point that I have been pointing out here for awhile - if you do not have a tax liability, and do accept their "rebate" I do NOT want to hear you gripe about welfare or farm subsidies, or any other government handout.

We have no tax liability because of our children. We do NOT accept the earned income credit, the child tax credit, or the additional child tax credit. We also will not accept the so-called rebate. We prefer to provide for ourselves rather than ask Caeser to care for us.

My frustration with the woman in the article is that she does not yet NEED foodstamps. Charity used to be something shameful. It was an admission that you could not take care of your family. Even my great aunt, a widow with several children, refused charity back in the 40's. You scrimped, you saved, you sold, you prayed. I have NO problem with charity - I would be willing to bet we give more than most, in money % of income wise, in time, in effort, and in produce - but would we take it? Yep - after we had sold everything of value, took the most demeaning job imaginable if it was the only one available, and done absolutely everything possible to provide for ourselves. 

Charity is for those who need.....not those who want.


----------



## RockyGlen (Jan 19, 2007)

sparkysarah said:


> LOL, No one "asked" for the rebate. (no one that is receiving it anyhow)


What about all those on social security and disability who have no tax liability and yet will receive the rebate?

Also, true story - there was a guy in the grocery store today that was bragging about how he made $3,200 dollars last year. He "worked only when I had to so I wouldn't get kicked out of moms house" and will get a rebate. Of course, he is going to stimulate the economy, he was ordering half a pig for a pig roast/beerfest when he gets his check.


----------



## JGex (Dec 27, 2005)

CJ said:


> I don't begrudge you. I ask how it differs from this particular woman receiving help. She's paid into the system too, but no one seems to think she should be able to collect any of that. What do you think the tax rebate is, other than redistribution of wealth from the higher paying tax bracket earners?
> 
> I'd be interested in hearing how you've managed to collect a rebate if you pay 40% taxes in? That's a hefty salary indeed. We paid 33% in last year, and earned too much to qualify. We only earned that much because my husband slaved away 80 hours a week for the whole year, basically doubling his salary so we could get ahead.
> 
> ...


No, it's not my hefty salary. If you add up all of your income tax, sales tax, ad valorem tax, state tax, federal tax, school tax and in my case business tax and fees, it indeed comes to approximately 40% of our gross income. 

I didn't "earn" a rebate; it's MY money in the first [expletive] place. I earned the money that's being taken from me without my consent by the govt. Isn't it just magnanimous that they're letting me keep some of my own money by calling it a rebate? And your husband isn't the only one who "slaved away" 80 hours a week to "get ahead." My husband and I own our own business and 80 hours a week WITHOUT overtime is normal for us.

The lady in the story is going to get her rebate, is she not? Is she not going to get checks for each of her children, too? If so, what's your point?

I'm not saying the woman should not be able to ask the system for help, but she hasn't exhausted all of her own avenues yet. She's been out of work for just over a month and she's already at the food bank hiding her jewelry and Coach bag so she can get food? Puh-lease. She needs to get out of that house, find a job in a more affordable location/state and sell what she can in the mean time to feed her and her kids. 

She hasn't hit on hard times if she can't give up the Tiffany bracelet yet.


----------



## JGex (Dec 27, 2005)

And let me add this: assistance programs are not set up to assist someone with all of their expenses while enabling them to keep all of their assets, i.e., diamond bracelets, big screen tvs, etc, etc. Assistance programs are set up to help those who are truly scraping the bottom.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

JGex said:


> And let me add this: assistance programs are not set up to assist someone with all of their expenses while enabling them to keep all of their assets, i.e., diamond bracelets, big screen tvs, etc, etc. Assistance programs are set up to help those who are truly scraping the bottom.


That was my point.. if the woman was truly in need she would have qualified. She did not for one of two reasons.. too much income or too much assets..and once again I repeat..welfare is not a savings account where you pay into it and then collect at some later date... that is totally absurd to even think like that...not to mention that that type of thinking is exactly what is destroying this country.


----------



## JGex (Dec 27, 2005)

Get used to seeing these stories: http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/31/news/economy/copes/index.htm?cnn=yes

Over the next 2 years there will be an avalanche of them.


----------



## CJ (May 10, 2002)

I'm just going so say that this entire thread, and those in agreeance with it... it's just sickening.

Those of you with some compassion, it's good to know you're out there. I like to surround myself with like minded people.

But it seems like the majority are so pathetically naive, smug and self righteous. I have no desire to surround myself with people of this mentality. 

I really have enjoyed this site for all the years I've belonged. And I realize no one really gives a damn if I leave, but I believe I'm done here. 

Enjoy your big screen TV, or whatever you spend your "earned" rebates on... may you reap what you sow.

Chow!


----------



## pickapeppa (Jan 1, 2005)

sgl42 said:


> There's millions of people out there which reporters had a choice of profiling in the story. Why was this one lady picked? What "narrative" are they trying to tell? Is this lady truly typical of the people facing foreclosure, getting help from food bank? Did you see any overall statistics in the story? Do often see any meaningful statistics in news stories?
> 
> We've got concentrated media ownership in this country now; do you think that may have any impact on what narratives are told? Back when home builders and mortgage brokers were providing a huge amount of the classified ad revenue for local newspapers and many internet sites, did you get any good information about whether housing was in a bubble or not? The blogger world was lit up with lots of info about the housing bubble and how bad it was, but the mainstream media was virtually silent. Why? Who benefited?
> 
> --sgl


Exactly. It's psychowarfare. And it works against us, but for the people who own the legislators.


----------



## JGex (Dec 27, 2005)

CJ said:


> I'm just going so say that this entire thread, and those in agreeance with it... it's just sickening.
> 
> Those of you with some compassion, it's good to know you're out there. I like to surround myself with like minded people.
> 
> ...


Wow. So being realistic is smug and self righteous? 

Life isn't fair. Never has been, never will be. We aren't all going to hop and skip over the finish line at the same time holding hands and singing Kum-ba-ya.

How can you call people who were diligent enough to handle their own finances carefully as to not get themselves in a bind "pathetically naive?" You're saying we're being judgmental, yet you're leveling some pretty sharp judgments there yourself. I guess logs are hard to see.....

There will be hundreds of thousands of people like Patricia Guerrero in the next few years. I have sympathy for their having to go through their hard times, but many of them are guilty of living waaaaay beyond their means and they have some serious course curriculum at the UHK to put in before they learn the lessons that brought them to where they are now. 

Out of curiosity, how many of those people do you think regularly donated to food banks? How many of them felt sorry enough for homeless folks to buy one a sandwich occasionally? Maybe a few did, but the demographic that's in the most trouble financially right now may be reaping what they have sown in the way of a lack of compassion for those less fortunate than themselves while they were riding the crest of their imagined success. 

I'll be putting the $600 "rebate" of my own earned income towards the balance of my HELOC. It was money I wasn't counting on, but I will use it to get that much closer to being debt free so I won't be contributing to the burden on the system these sub-prime loanees have created. 

I also do not have a big screen tv, nor do I plan on getting one any time in the near future because I CAN'T AFFORD it and I don't want or NEED one. But IF I did have one and I lost my job, you can be sure I would sell it BEFORE I went to the food bank to ask for a hand out.


----------



## Aintlifegrand (Jun 3, 2005)

I for one am sorry to see you leave just because others do not agree with you. It's okay really...no need to let a healthy debate cause you to leave a site where you offer valuable contributions.


----------



## sparkysarah (Dec 4, 2007)

Whatever CJ...although if you really left you'll never read this...I'm guessing that you will not leave though. It's addictive and I'm sure I will read your future posts...anyhow....(many threaten this and most could care less).

I personally love reading different sides to every story....that's how I learn and grow to form my own opinions, I still consider myself young and need those debates, whether I agree or not.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

I think that people who fuss a LOT are trying to convince themselves that it could not happen to them. 

Of course it can: this world is not safe. A person can prep for everything under the sun, only to get wiped out by something else.

But, of course, if bed things ONLY happen to foolish people (and yes this ONE! lady has been foolish), then some folks like to convince themselves that it will NEVER happen to them!


----------



## pickapeppa (Jan 1, 2005)

CJ, sorry to see you go. Sometimes people just need a break from the BS, and you wouldn't be the first one to get to that point. I hope you'll decide to come back when you're ready.

To convey some realistic information for those who would prefer to sell their belongings during hard times - you aren't likely to get much for them.

A couple of years ago I went to a jewelry store that purchases gold to see what I could get for a 1/2 oz piece made of 24K gold. Gold prices were somewhere between five and six hundred dollars an ounce. They offered me $20. 

A Tiffany would be worth more in sentimental value (say if you bought it to celebrate a promotion, or it was an anniversary gift) than what these people are willing to pay when it comes time to sell. 

The article never mentions if she tried to sell it or not. It gives just enough information to convey she has these items, and let your imagination run with it. Some people will read that and interpret that she has gone from riches to rags with a job loss (something 80 to 90% of the population would experience in the same situation), and some people will interpret it in a more judgmental manner that she was an irresponsible person who didn't have any business making such high-priced purchases.

There will always be people who give the benefit of the doubt, and those who won't. A broken clock is right at least twice a day.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

CJ - Your original last post was good and explained a good bit. But this post is consise and lets people know what you think about them and the situation.

I'm really sorry you're feeling so badly about so many, and even if I agree there are more sides to this story, ...... I have to remember that all the members here have their own backgounds, histories, and reasons for their opinions. I'm sure everyone is just as valid to them as your's is to you.

I value you as a member of this forum, and I sure hope even if you leave this forum, you don't leave the HT site. There's too much intesting information, and too many people you may get along with better on the other forums.

Peace, and good moving into your new house.

Angie


----------



## crafty2002 (Aug 23, 2006)

CJ, hang in here. Some of us know where you are coming from. Me for one. I haven't ever made 70K a year. I got close to 50k a couple of years and thought it would be forever. 
But it didn't take but a few accidents to change it all. Last one was the big bummer. I'm hanging on by a thread and it's rotten. 

Don't give up on us here. 

Dennis


----------



## Explorer (Dec 2, 2003)

Guess I need to start spending more time down in Singletree





and get to be a lot,





lot more foolish!! :walk::icecream::walk::icecream::walk:





Terri said:


> But, of course, if bed things ONLY happen to foolish people


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

Explorer - I was wondering what the heck you were talking about, UNTIL I saw that you quoted Terri...

Angie


----------



## Explorer (Dec 2, 2003)

Angie, I have been accused of having a wicked sense of humor, but at least it gives me smiles. :banana02::rock:

Now, I am open to counter offers.:angel:


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

CJ
Hope you don't leave.
I can see all points of view. Sometimes bad things happen to good people. Hopefully, something is learned by all of the other good people, so that the same bad things don't happen to them.

I would be as generous as I could be, in a minor localized situation... my generosity would be situational... whether the people enjoying my hospitality was willing to shed their previous lives and adjust to the new paradigm...

If folks didn't agree with me, I'd've had to left a long time ago... half the people on this board (HT in general, not S&EP) have views I find objectionable. Even though I may disagree with them on issues, I'd think most of them would make good neighbors.


----------

