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.
I have eyes. Too many need less food, not more. As if a plethora of those on free and assisted lunches are starving.
In my old neighborhood the 3 closest schools were between 90-95% free or assisted lunches. Are you actually going to tell me that parents are not feeding their kids enough?
I know what it is. The kids are like bears. They fatten up during the school year, then over the summer, since the don't get fed much, they loose it. Of course, that's it.
It's about the question of IF there are many food lines, what has changed from Dec 2013 when the UE rate was the same and there didn't seem to be a lot of food lines?
Again -
IF there are many food lines, what has changed from Dec 2013 when the UE rate was the same and there didn't seem to be a lot of food lines?
or is this more fake drama?
too obvious of a point, even though I was going to make it and hope it resonated with some people.
From 2009-2013, where was the need? Yes, we've always done Holiday dinner food drives, but why the massive drive-thrus this year?
Undoubtedly, many of the people we are seeing in food lines are there for the first time. The stat du jour is 40% of a recent survey said they had been food insecure for the first time. Without question, the vast majority in the food lines don't have money for food. And of that vast majority, the majority are "charitable cases" - that is, everyone sympathizes with their inability that's not of their own doing to put food on the table.
In case all of that is too arcane or detailed, it means - there are some folks that have no business getting the free food. Not the majority by any means, but a measurable some.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoBromhal
which assumes an all-or-nothing approach. Or "as long as we're helping those in need, it doesn't matter how much misuse or abuse of the system occurs"
Are you suggesting that the do nothing approach is the better answer???
I've not looked at statistics but I'm betting it's a nationwide "buyer's market" right now...
you would be wrong. The vast majority of homeowners neither lost their job nor had a crippling loss of income.
You're taking a small minority of the population, and assuming their situation is the norm (because that's what the media wants you to believe).
Less than 7% of the workforce is unemployed
Less than 4% of the US has tested positive, and less than 4% of the population is unemployed.
Less than 0.4% have been hospitalized.
Less than 0.01% have died
End the ridiculous regulations and open the country back up. Let everyone get back to work.
We had a great economy going until this scam.
Yes! Here in the meat industry/dog food industry area of the country, those people have been on-the-job through the pandemic, along with liquor store employees, fast food employees, Hostess making snack cakes (essential, who would have though), and nearly everywhere else in town with the exception of bars and small businesses in the downtown area. Everything has been open for awhile now in town, and we have a lot of cases due to the type of populations we have here.
The teachers are the biggest ones, along with government workers, that do not want to be back on the job.
There are even job openings here, and I suspect elsewhere. It is the liberal poop holes that are whining about stimulus. Open up and work. I'm thinking the best stimulus would be a foot up the butt of their leaders, so they can go back to work!
you would be wrong. The vast majority of homeowners neither lost their job nor had a crippling loss of income.
You're taking a small minority of the population, and assuming their situation is the norm (because that's what the media wants you to believe).
Less than 7% of the workforce is unemployed
Less than 4% of the US has tested positive, and less than 4% of the population is unemployed.
Less than 0.4% have been hospitalized.
Less than 0.01% have died
I am so sorry that I don't know the statistics on nationwide real estate sales. I live in a depressed area.
Even before this pandemic, houses here can sit on the market for a year...
The person that I was responding to previously had said that it's not easy just to sell your house and move if you're in dire straights due to the pandemic. I said that it would be adding insult to injury if you lost equity in your house to move out of it and downsize right now.
Not to mention that many folks are unemployed or underemployed and would find it difficult to move.
It's really all about empathy. There are a lot of people in this country that aren't in the financial shape that you are right now and as you said, it's not their fault.
It's been a long year for everyone...
I don't support subsidizing people to allow them to sit at home and not find a job.
But, I know there are a lot of folks that would truly benefit from a stimulus check right now at Christmas and property tax time.
That money would go right back into the local economy.
Are you suggesting that the do nothing approach is the better answer???
That's where we are today.
oh gosh no. Hopefully they were actually loading boxes of food in those cars.
And we know we had 1 round of stimulus, and 1 round of expanded UE where the average unemployed person got paid more to not work.
Now, in theory, we had a July 31 deadline because there was an expectation at that point the virus spread would be under control. Of course, by July 1 it was clear we wouldn't and so an additional UE benefit needed to be approved. One party wanted $400/wk, one insisted on keeping it $600/wk.
And so, we essentially got nothing (though the POTUS made an EO to fund some extra from unspent CARES funds for a few weeks so the Congress could keep arguing and posturing)
oh gosh no. Hopefully they were actually loading boxes of food in those cars.
And we know we had 1 round of stimulus, and 1 round of expanded UE where the average unemployed person got paid more to not work.
Now, in theory, we had a July 31 deadline because there was an expectation at that point the virus spread would be under control. Of course, by July 1 it was clear we wouldn't and so an additional UE benefit needed to be approved. One party wanted $400/wk, one insisted on keeping it $600/wk.
And so, we essentially got nothing (though the POTUS made an EO to fund some extra from unspent CARES funds for a few weeks so the Congress could keep arguing and posturing)
Again... I do not support the extravagant unemployment benefits. That is not encouraging anyone to look for a job.
Most people here don't make $15 an hour when they're working. That's what they're being paid to stay home...
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.
