Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Between breakfast/lunch/snack at school and food stamps and food pantries I honestly don't know how any parent lets their kids go to bed hungry at night.
Is it pride that are keeping them from filling out that free breakfast/lunch form for school or applying for food stamps or visiting a food pantry ?
Poor people tend to have more babies who have fewer resources and less education growing up and therefore end up in poverty as adults. 8 in 10 black children born into poverty remain in poverty as adults. For white children the number is 3. I don't know why this is, but I heard the numbers on NPR last year
Between breakfast/lunch/snack at school and food stamps and food pantries I honestly don't know how any parent lets their kids go to bed hungry at night.
Is it pride that are keeping them from filling out that free breakfast/lunch form for school or applying for food stamps or visiting a food pantry ?
No. It's generally drug addiction and neglect....and selling the food stamps.
There is an active trade in foodstamps for cash out there.
Heck, in a pinch one social worker told me that people would buy big water jugs ($5 deposit) take them out into the parking lot and pour them out....then come back in to get the deposit $$$.
This is crazy... by recent standards I grew up in proverty and didn't know it. These 'poor' children have more than most people had as I was growing up.
It is also important to bear in mind the difference between "poverty" (defined level of economic hardship, owned stuff notwithstanding) and "destitution."
The economic landscape is changing, perhaps now just slowly, but surely. Wht is now a smaller percentage could become a much larger one, depending on economic policies (ha) that are geared toward job creation and retraining in tech fields. To pull people out of varying degrees of poverty in the U.S. is going to require (1) recognition, (2) will, (3) thought, and (4) policies in action (in that order). As I've said before, we can't seem to get past #1 and 2.
Let's check back in on this in a year. Those who have lost their jobs and homes will be added to the statistics, accurately reported or un(der)reported, and those who still have their jobs and their homes will be crying foul at any real reports.
But all oe has to do to see that governamnt is not the real answewr to poverty i thsi county is realise that 80% of poverty i tis country is in two rural areas the appalachians and the delta. They get 20% of governamnt aid to overty. Urban america tht has 20% gets the 80% because of the politics of pverty reality.Tha is the exact reason the Bush'Clinton movement to take the politcal shell game ot of poverty by indivdualk giing. They poi tout the even takig the polcial based waste out of it can mean 405 more use to manage it by using volunterr help instead of more governamnt employment. Last I knew poverty was 18000 or less income without counting any aid being added in.
Poor people tend to have more babies who have fewer resources and less education growing up and therefore end up in poverty as adults. 8 in 10 black children born into poverty remain in poverty as adults. For white children the number is 3. I don't know why this is, but I heard the numbers on NPR last year
Completely irrelevant to the "new poverty" and its causes today.
No. It's generally drug addiction and neglect....and selling the food stamps.
There is an active trade in foodstamps for cash out there.
Heck, in a pinch one social worker told me that people would buy big water jugs ($5 deposit) take them out into the parking lot and pour them out....then come back in to get the deposit $$$.
Stereotyping, once again. Sure some do this, but not all, not by a long shot. A drug addicted welfare recipient is one thing, a father and/or mother who was once a hardworking member of the middle class and now fell out of that is another. Please stop mixing up your social issues, and doing the rant thing by glumping all individuals into one big "handout" camp.
This is crazy... by recent standards I grew up in proverty and didn't know it. These 'poor' children have more than most people had as I was growing up.
Can you honestly say (not just for the purposes of making your point on this forum) that you went to bed hungry as a kid?
I too could qualify in the almost "poverty" group income-wise growing up - 7 people on $110/week. We always ate three solid meals per day, had a house and family car, a dog, took a family vacation. We were all well educated, my dad just happened to not make lots of money. Income-wise, we were almost poor. But due to the relevant cost of income to housing, food, and goods, we had everything we needed. We were not destitute, nor, would I suspect, were you (if you didn't know it, you weren't poverty stricken. You'd know it if you were).
Huh? These were middle class families that lost their jobs. Jobs they had before and when they had kids. Has nothing to do with the number of kids, don't confuse your social issues. And these families had no intention of having you support them. BTW, you are paying big bucks to support tax evading government subsidized corporations, so what's the beef about paying a scrap of your income toward helping the poor. You probably loved the role of Javert in Les Mis.
You are right that we should not confuse the social issues, but all or most of them are related. So, if you could get away with NOT paying as much tax, you wouldn't? You would gladly pay more?
You are right that we should not confuse the social issues, but all or most of them are related. So, if you could get away with NOT paying as much tax, you wouldn't? You would gladly pay more?
Charles Sands
Smyrna, TN
Plain and simple.
I would much, much rather have my taxes going to help out those who are legitimately in need than having my taxes go to subsidize the tax-evading, government-subsidized corporations of this country (you have heard the term "corporate welfare"?).
Also realize the social cost of thousands of homeless people on the streets. This scenario will unsettle the status quo pretty fast. Tax payers will pay one way or another to aid the bottom tiers, always have, always will. It's what keeps the ball rolling, and the rich rich. The rich need a middle class (which in turn needs a lower class) in order to survive, whether they realize it or not (and of course, they don't).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
