Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-23-2008, 02:24 PM
 
3,255 posts, read 5,079,296 times
Reputation: 547

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
Donna Ricco only makes the black and white dress she wore on the View, and it was bought off the rack. The designer didn't even know until someone told her... Her clothing is actually very affordable, that dress retails for something like $99, I recognize the designer from Black|White Market and Nordstrom.
Everyone is spending their gas tax holiday money for the dress?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-23-2008, 04:38 PM
 
Location: Major Metro
1,083 posts, read 2,292,818 times
Reputation: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilypad View Post
Don't know that it is so affordable to the millions who receive welfare checks. Hopefully they are spending their money more wisely to feed all those kids.
You do know you can be on welfare with just one kid, just checking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilypad View Post
I make very good money and would not consider $99 inexpensive. But do try to live simply and not attempt to keep up with those "Obamas".
Anyone that shops regularly at Macys or a Nordstrom (or similar dept store) has probably spent $99 on an outfit so it's a very modest price for a candidate's wife. I liked the b/w dress and I would like it even if Cindy wore it. I think that's probably how buyers see it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2008, 05:01 PM
 
7,138 posts, read 14,636,912 times
Reputation: 2397
I believe one can be on welfare with just oneself even. But suspect that is the exception, not the rule. The Welfare Queens usually have 4-6 kiddies tagging along behind them....just my observation.

Since I am such a penny pincher by nature, and have no unwanted children (just one way to stay off welfare) I rarely frequent the department stores. I was just in Boston and visited Macy's, may have gotten several blouses on sale. Just not into consumerism, but maybe is for another thread. I do think people get into much financial trouble and debt by allowing themselves to be influenced by the media. Is a hard addiction to break.

Not sure how a $99 dress got such importance here, I don't care one way or another. But would definitely look twice before spending that amount, and am quite close to Michelle's tax bracket. Even though I do dress well, just look for bargains where I can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-23-2008, 05:03 PM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,655 posts, read 18,660,723 times
Reputation: 2829
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilypad View Post
I believe one can be on welfare with just oneself even. But suspect that is the exception, not the rule. The Welfare Queens usually have 4-6 kiddies tagging along behind them....just my observation.
Welfare to Work: Myths
Quote:
Myth: Welfare Encourages Out-of- Wedlock Births and Large Families

Fact: The Average Welfare Family Is No Bigger Than the Average Nonwelfare Family

The belief that single women are promiscuous and have large families to receive increased benefits has no basis in extant research, and single-parent families are not only a phenomenon of the poor (McFate, 1995). In fact, the average family size of welfare recipients has decreased from four in 1969 to 2.8 in 1994 (Staff of House Committee on Ways and Means, 1996). In 1994, 43 percent of welfare families consisted of one child, and 30 percent consisted of two children. Thus, the average welfare family is no larger than the average nonrecipient's family, and despite considerable public concern that welfare encourages out-of-wedlock births, a growing body of empirical evidence indicates that welfare benefits are not a significant incentive for childbearing (Wilcox, Robbennolt, O'Keeffe, & Pynchon, 1997).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top