Dopey food stamp challenge

Of course 3 liberal commissioners can't live within a $21 a week budget...they would not be liberal. That is why they can't do it and why we have such a tax burden in this area. Hey commies, why don't you try to run the commissioners office on $21 a week and save us all money. Or hey if you have so much compassion put YOUR money where YOUR mouth is and donate YOUR money to help the poor, don't sit there an lecture us on how we need to ante up more of OUR money.

No votes yet

Commissioners are paid $84,000+ per year not counting benefits. The median income for Lucas County is around $38 thou. Perhaps a better challenge would be for the commissioners to live like the rest of us, and deal with covering all "our" bills first, then the outrageous levys, fees, assessments, put on us by the county and city. Do all of that after the fed,state, and city take their cut to help the "underserved". Let's see the commissioners do that. And for Commissioner Konop to admit that he spends $3 on a cup of coffee speaks volumes about his personal fiscal responsibility to say nothing of how he views the value of a dollar. If Mr. Konop gave up just one latte a day he could feed one person based on his flawwed $21 food stamp figure.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Where does the $21 per week figure come from? I know some folks on foodstamps and they get a hell of a lot more than that.

It's supposed to be $21. a week per person in the household. Do food stamps pay for non-food items (soaps, toilet paper, etc.)? If not, then that is an additional cost on the grocery bill each week. Are our commissioners taking that into account (if true)? Fred has it right on target - what they aren't taking into consideration, is that most families (welfare or not) pay the most urgently due bills first (utilities, rent), and are often behind on those. I'm sure our well paid commissioners have no clue what it's like to try to stretch a buck the way welfare or low income people do. Then, toss in the incidentals that can wipe out the budget - school clothes & supplies, a warm coat, shoes, Christmas gifts, etc. It can be soul breaking. I would suggest that if our commissioners really wanted to get the 'feel' of poor, they'd take the bus or walk. Take the experiment for longer than a week - make it 3 months - can they get by without pricey haircuts & cosmetics & lattes? I have no gripes with anybody paying $3. for a latte if you can afford it, go at it (the shame is that they even CHARGE $3. for a latte). I don't begrudge the better off to be able to afford those luxuries. But I think it's insulting for them to presume to be able to squeek by at $21 per person a week - on groceries alone, and think they have a true grasp on what people make do with.

Having said that - while I do believe that food stamps & welfare have their place ( 35 years ago, I also was in need for a few months), I also know that there's a lot of people on the welfare/food stamp roll that milk it for all they can get. I know a few families who have lived for generations on welfare, popping out baby after baby to stay on welfare (or just stupid about birth control). A couple of the families, it's almost like an inheritance to be passed down - grandma was on it, mom was on it, now the daughter is on it, and her daughter just had a baby & is on it, etc. - all at the same time, over decades. And there's some that abuse it by selling food stamps - sometimes maybe to be able to pay the bills, but often to buy booze or drugs. I was told that they revamped the welfare system - to limit how long a person could collect. I kind of questioned how they arrived at whatever limit they set. I know that when I was on welfare, they made it near impossible to get off. I wanted to get a part time job (I had a baby), and they said "sure you can, but we'll deduct whatever you earn from your check each month". I'd still have to pay for child care & transportation - it hardly seemed worth the effort. And I'd have lost the medical coverage for my son if I'd gone off it at that time - that was the main reason I stayed on. I think if they allowed medical coverage for a few years after you're off welfare, it may be more of an incentive to move up.

...it's a statistical average that's been used - incorrectly - for all these 'challenges' across the country. If you add up all the money spent on food stamps and then divide by the number of people receiving food stamps, you get an 'average' of $21 per week.

A single person with no other source of income or other resources (savings, etc) actually would get $35.67. And when you consider that it's actually a monthly benefit awarded at the start of each month, you'd be able to plan your purchases differently...such as buying in quantity at the start of the month and purchasing such staples as salt/pepper/seasonings, oil for cooking, etc...only once in a while. For instance, our family buys mayo only about twice a year, but if you want to be true to this 'fake challenge' you'd have to go without mayo for the week or give up something else. This is not realistic - which makes it even more of a 'fake.'

Any individual who gets "only $21" obviously has other sources of funds to put toward the purchase of food, according to the formulas used for the program. In fact, the expectation in the formula is that recipients will spend around 30% of their own personal resources on food.

Further, the concept of the food stamps is not to provide for you entirely - it's designed to be a supplement to help (not solve) your situation.

Interestingly, no one who's taken this fake challenge has indicated that the formula used to determine the amount of benefits is incorrect! But it sure does get great headlines.

(and as for the photo in the Blade, I wouldn't be buying 'instant' anything or 2-liter bottles of pop if I were living on a much smaller income)

Starling, i beleve that you can still get insurance coverage even if your not on welfare, depending on your income.

So I read the Blade article......and I swear I am hearing violins playing...and I kept thinking "Oh the humanity". My wife and I actually cook.....so we go to the vegetable store.....buy a bunch of vegies, meat, and cook for the whole week and a with a bag of apples and a bunch of bannanas...our lives are happy. We always purchase things on sale. Our food receipts are in the $42 range for the week. I bet you we could easily live on that amount.

"We're appropriately frightened to live on that little money"...oh boo hoo get off of your upperclass snooty mood and live like a normal person. Maybe a $5 fee is not that much for your dog.....but for others that is a lot....THANKS FOR STIKCING IT TO US SKELDON. Now it makes sense why you lifted it then spent it on a dog park....because to you $5 is not much. Well to me $5 can buy enough spinach or 3-4 celery bunches to eat a part of a meal for 2 or 3 days....don't even get me started on the pop tina SKELDON wozniak.

"We're going to have to make those choices, like 'Do I buy milk or do I buy peanut butter?' that they have to make every day"
How about being wise and spending it wisely? Duh....BTW...why is tina SKELDON wozniak going to Krogers? Real shoppers know that Meijer is cheaper or she could even go to Aldi and I don't know if the Walmart super center is open, they have good produce at great prices. But then a bunch of libs would never think on saving money, just look at Benny's comments.

Konop..."My guess is we'll fail in some way"...duh take your snooty $3 a cup latte and buy 2 celery bunches and that will get you a good couple of meals. Way to want to try, but you have so much money, you probably would never know what it is like...living on a silver spoon but trying to act like everyone and understand the plight.

I am waiting for one of them to say...."Let them eat cake".....actually you can get cake that is about to expire at Meijer for around $3-$4..that sounds like desert for the whole week to me. Maybe that would be good advice....of course that kept ringing in my head during the article.

I think their attitudes reflect the poor state of leadership we have......using a serious issue for political grandstanding...when they can do it. Not wanting to poney up their own money.....let's make people more dependent by giving them more....and we wonder why businesses what to go to Wood county? With Commies like we have, there will be no end. How about cutting taxes, getting the city to elimiate the restrictive laws....that would be worth the time.

Maybe we are seeing the attitude that now propgates the Lucas County Commies....???? Dopey

Oh wait.....is that Tina's son that got arrested and said that his mom was the "mayor of lucas county"? Maybe with the extra change....she can go to a used book store and pick up a government book and read to her children....better than paying for a 8 dollar movie and much more useful in the Skeldon household.

I did some shopping this morning and will be posting not only the photos, but the list and prices of what I got for just a little less than $21. I can honestly say one person could eat for a week with what I bought. I will be talking about it tomorrow morning on the show and will have the photos posted by this afternoon I hope.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Are the 3 commissioners elected at large or do they each represent a certian area of lucas county?

This is off topic - but personally, if you can't afford the extra $5. for the dog license - you probably couldn't afford to own a dog. Vet bills alone can wipe you out. Flea applications once a month (for 3 months of summer) are easily $10 a dog per month (more for the Frontline that vets recommmend as safer & that actually do work). To have my dog's teeth cleaned, and a look at one upper tooth that may be causing pain, it will cost me minimum $300. ($15. more if the tooth needs to be extracted. Dogs must me completely under total anesthetic for teeth cleaning). Our other dog has a fat mass that needs to be removed, & the vet said to do it the same time we have her teeth cleaned to save money (anesthesia for both procedures) - that will be about $400. We don't run to have our dogs teeth cleaned unless there's a possible pain factor involved, who can afford that? (which makes us shoddy pet owners I'm sure). I am not saying I agree with the prices of dog licenses - and do agree that there's some disparity that cats are not required to be licensed - I think the dog license price is a bit high myself. Just making the point - dogs can be expensive, if you take care of them like you should, with vet care, etc. My only point, is if you can't afford the potential vet bill & flea meds, you shouldn't get a dog. And if you can't afford the license, you surely can't afford the vet bills.

Commissioners make 84,000 a year? For doing what?

Can one of the Commissioners answer that question for me please? Especially you Mr. Konop.

Yep, prnhurt - just another of those things that make me angry. Glad we can agree on something. But they intend to learn what it is to be poor by spending $21 per person a week on groceries (is this 'experiment' for one week, or a full month?)

Yep, prnhurt - just another of those things that make me angry. Glad we can agree on something. But they intend to learn what it is to be poor by spending $21 per person a week on groceries (is this 'experiment' for one week, or a full month?)

you wrote on the other post I agree with, only I see it from a black prospective. I do not see it from an American point of view because black people are not treated equally in America.

I can believe that most Blacks have had experiences of not being treated equally - or fairly. There's a lot of racism in this country even still. I've also seen plenty of examples where the black person got the job over the white person - to meet quotas or something, even if they didn't score as high on the tests or have the experience or seniority - kind a reverse discrimination if you will. If I were black, I'd find that insulting - to be given the job only based on my skin color. But I don't think every issue needs to be viewed with a racial slant - the issues I mentioned, have nothing to do with race. I also think women in general have been treated as 'less' in this country - the paychecks are often not as much as the man's for the same job. I feel that I have not been treated equally at times & I am not black. I am small, and people tend to talk down to me (maybe that's why my mouth got so big). Nobody takes me with any seriousness - even my kids didn't take it seriously when I was angry with them - they'd try to keep straight faces.

That said - I can believe that blacks have suffered more ill treatment than most whites would be aware of, simply because the whites aren't living it day to day, they aren't that close to it. When I was in Jr. High school, they started to bus in black kids. I don't remember any of us ever thinking anything of it at the time - the white kids simply accepted them as new students, and we all got along pretty well. I do not recall ever hearing of any racial conflict in my school. A few of the black kids ended up being pretty good pals to me in school. But this was back in the 60's, and us kids were pretty ignorant of our history - I don't think it even occurred to us, that perhaps the black kids maybe were uneasy. One of the black girls I went to high school with, is Rose Russell Stewart, who writes for the Blade. She'd written a column a while back, that kind of hit me between the eyes. She wrote about the first days of being bussed in to our all white school. She described the uneasy fear, of having the school bus drive down different streets (to pick other kids up) - and wondering, "where are they taking us?". I'd learned a lot about all this, by the time she'd written the article - but it made me really stop & think. I don't think anybody in our school ever treated the new black students differently, or "less" - like I said, we all just got along very well - we had fun together. But it had never occurred to me in the 60's, that she was viewing this experience through eyes I had no knowledge of. It never occurred to me that the new black students would even be nervous about skin color. And I'm sure that those new black students had good reasons to be nervous -over experiences with whites in the past, or what they'd heard from family & friends. Us white kids were just clueless & ignorant - we had no idea that they may be nervous around us. I realize that my Jr. & High School were probably an exception - I know other kids in other schools did have conflicts (now I know). I've also read enough on black history to know that there were a lot of inequities. I guess I'm just naive enough to feel (or hope) that by now, things have improved & changed for the better. I do think that it'd be a step in the right direction, to stop viewing every issue in terms of skin color. But if there are issues that do have racial overtones & I'm just not aware of it, I do appreciate being educated. Some blacks seem to be just determined to make everything a racial issue. But I think some blacks may simply be cautious - some with good reason.

A church in Oregon posted a sign recently that said something like: "Stay out of debt; Act your wage." It's too bad that a minority of the population actually follows that advice. We have the poor largely acting like the middle class, and the middle class largely acting like the rich. Once this easy-credit spigot is turned off, I'm going to delight in all the pain that will be so richly resultant.

I am not sure this conversation should be on this thread about living off of $21 a week for food but I will add this:

Your experience as a student back in the 60's came from a white child's prospective. You state that Rose Russell's experience as seen through her eyes were very different from yours. Same place, different eyes.

Why am I expected to look through your eyes or America's eyes when my experiences are entirely different based solely on the color of my skin, which I love? Contrary to the popular belief of many whites on this blog I am not an "angry black woman." But if I was, I have every right to be.

I simply love myself and my people. And no one can take that away from me.

I've also seen plenty of examples where the black person got the job over the white person - to meet quotas or something, even if they didn't score as high on the tests or have the experience or seniority - kind a reverse discrimination if you will

I've worked three professional jobs since getting out of grad-school 10 years ago. My first job had over 200 office works - with no minorities (big local company at the time). My second job was a small dot-com in downtown Toledo; we had no minorities. My current job is a very respected company with a head quarters in the suburbs; there are about 100 of us, with only two black women and two Asian guys (in IT).

So for my 10 years as a white collar professional, I've never worked with a black male. I'm not calling it racism; not in the slightest, but I just don't see hordes of blacks coming out of the ghetto to take our jobs.

Purnhrt, you are by far more racist than any white person I have come into contact with.

Whatever!

Toledo has a higher proportion of black people than the nation as a whole. Does your 500 company employ 1200 people locally or nationally?

prnhurt - You're right- I saw the bussed in black kids through ignorant white eyes of a child. And it was an eye opener when I'd read Rose R's column - because there was never a time through all Jr. or high school where I witnessed any racial divide; we all just seemed to get along really well, no ugly names or looks or presumptions about each other - and yes, Rose R did see this same world through different eyes - I just didn't realize it as a kid. Like I said, I"ve done a lot of reading, trying to learn how it was, not how I thought it was. I do think you come off as an angry black woman sometimes - but I"ll take your word you are not, but I am also not an angry white woman. I admit, I am an angry woman sometimes about some things, but it has nothing to do with race. But your point is well taken.

GZ - you sound pretty self righteous & smug. Like somebody who really has no idea what it was to grow up poor decades ago, in a time when most people didn't even know about investments - or have money to invest. When I was a kid, that seemed like something for the wealthy to do, because we sure didn't have anything left over at the end of the week to invest or save either. When sometimes it was a question whether the electric bill could be paid - I won't quibble this with you. I think it's the height of arrogance to suggest that krazykat's parents were sloppy about saving money. It was a different era back then - and I think you have insulted an entire generation of people who didn't grow up with life as easy as you apparently had it. It's really easy to be an armchair quarterback, and presume to tell people what they should have done, but you can't judge people - you do not know what their lives were. Would you say the same thing to people in the depression - that they should have saved more? You sound like a smug prick to me.

prnhurt - You're right- I saw the bussed in black kids through ignorant white eyes of a child. And it was an eye opener when I'd read Rose R's column - because there was never a time through all Jr. or high school where I witnessed any racial divide; we all just seemed to get along really well, no ugly names or looks or presumptions about each other - and yes, Rose R did see this same world through different eyes - I just didn't realize it as a kid. Like I said, I"ve done a lot of reading, trying to learn how it was, not how I thought it was. I do think you come off as an angry black woman sometimes - but I"ll take your word you are not, but I am also not an angry white woman. I admit, I am an angry woman sometimes about some things, but it has nothing to do with race. But your point is well taken.

GZ - you sound pretty self righteous & smug. Like somebody who really has no idea what it was to grow up poor decades ago, in a time when most people didn't even know about investments - or have money to invest. When I was a kid, that seemed like something for the wealthy to do, because we sure didn't have anything left over at the end of the week to invest or save either. When sometimes it was a question whether the electric bill could be paid - I won't quibble this with you. I think it's the height of arrogance to suggest that krazykat's parents were sloppy about saving money. It was a different era back then - and I think you have insulted an entire generation of people who didn't grow up with life as easy as you apparently had it. It's really easy to be an armchair quarterback, and presume to tell people what they should have done, but you can't judge people - you do not know what their lives were. Would you say the same thing to people in the depression - that they should have saved more? You sound like a smug prick to me.

How many people in your life are you responsible for?

I wondered the same thing, Mccaskey. While I do agree with GZ that it's up to us to save for our own futures, I can't ignore the fact that I had never even heard of 'investing',until about 30 yrs ago, which was limited to my husband's 401K. Like I said, we, and many people, simply did not know about investing. Our own ignorance I'm sure, but the reality of it was (for us & my family at least), we associated 'investing' with the stock market - and had heard enough to instill a lot of fear about dabbling in something so risky - it was something the wealthy & financially educated with big degrees & old family money did. Even the idea of buying a piece of stock was laughable - there was never money to invest. Perhaps your family was more savvy than most back then. And no, they shouldn't have trusted the govt with social security - but they did. People trusted the govt. more back then, I think. I also think that people know more about investing than they did when our parents were younger. My dad knew about CD's, and has some, but he sure didn't when we were kids. He never had money he could stick in a CD that was untouchable for 6 months (or more). At any rate - whatever the reason (s) our parents generation (and before) weren't as "up" on it as your parents clearly were, your comments still strike me as smug & self righteous, and insulting beyond belief. You did not live their lives - you do not own the right to judge krazykat or his parents, or anybody else. GZ, you strike me as a guy who's figured out the stock market, investing & maybe has done pretty well & is feeling a little smug about it. My dad is a retired Toledo fireman who lives on his pension - which is not very much (I was quite surprised at how little my parents survive on). He didn't know the first thing about 'investing' - few people did unless they were wealthy or highly educated. Your comments are pretty insensitive. I'm done with this thread.

I've found that it's pointless to argue with somebody whose intelligence level is made clear by his repeated use of the word "fuck" and thinking he's getting his message across by typing everything in boldface.

Lets be nice to each other boys and girls.

The message is getting through/across.

He needs help to deal with his/her life but yet condemns every one else's. first.

"I really don't give a honk if people choose the latter option either by action or inaction. In fact, their suffering elicits my schadenfreude."

Says it all here, delights in someone else's suffering.

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

but better late than never.

As usual, McCaskey asks an appropriate question which deserves an answer and not just a trivial retort, either.

GZ? You're on.

KrazyKat:

Both my parents grew up during the great depression. Briefly, my mother's family were millionaires prior to the crash, dead broke three days later. This is literal history I'm relating. My Great Grandmother ran to the bank and withdrew all the money in her account, which was given to her in small bills. She carried it home in her apron, knowing that this money was the last, the absolute last cash available to the entire extended family. There's more, a lot more, and I won't relate it here.

Suffice to say, the extended family lived together. Then the breadwinner died of heart failure. So, you see, the family pulled together. It was the only thing left, and if you think that having three nuclear families living under the same roof in a four bedroom house is easy, let me tell you, very honestly, it isn't.

Here's my point: GuestZero didn't help your Mom and Dad decide to have seven children. They did that on their own, and according to you your parents did a good job raising the family. Now, since there are seven of you, how about each child putting $100 a month into the 'support our Mom' fund? If Mom won't take the cash, then you can buy food and other necessities with it.

Which, given everything your Mom has done for you, is the way things should be. Because you can't rely on the government to provide for you, and you can't rely on your neighbors. You can rely on your family.

I think GZ's point here is that it really isn't his responsibility to support other people who are impoverished. He can't afford it, and neither can the rest of us. We're doing good to take care of ourselves and our families.

What do you think, KC? Is it a plan?

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

I woke one day, almost 15 years ago, after moving to Monroe, Mi. and had 72 cents in my pocket. Single at the time. I made some mistakes. Divorced and living alone in the area after moving here.

A friend gave me 300$. Gave me, no strings.

I pulled my self up and paid him back.

People in my neighborhood have come knocking on our door and much as they did not want too asked us for some help. We gave food and some cash. Expect to see the cash back? No. Are we well off, certainly not. Food on the table and lights are on and we are making the mortgage.

What goes around comes around.

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

Sure the government takes our taxes and uses the taxes to fund road repair, NASA, military and so on.

Perhaps if we spent less of our taxes on issues of invading and toppling foreign governments and more on helping our people to succeed then there would be less need for our taxes to taken and given to those less fourtunate.

So many make claims about the founders and foundation of country and helping our fellow men and women was one of them, was it not?

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

I have read the article and the article still only relates to one person not a class or group of people.

So, when it is stated that the founders did not expect the government to take of the people, the founders anticipated what the U.S. would become by not delineating what the government can and cannot do.

It would seem that the founders left it open for the leadership to decide and it would seem that some leadership saw fit to help people that are less fortunate than others.

Is there something inherently wrong with the idea of helping others?

I find it odd that people would state the founders did not want the government to help people and yet at the same time claim that because it is not written therefor it cannot be done and at the same time there is no direct prohibition against the act.

"Caring for poor was never included in the enumerated duties of the federal government."

No, it was not and unlike the country we broke away from we thought differently when the size and complexity of the country changed from 1776 and required more programs or do we let the serfs fend for themselves?

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

No, but the interpretation and application of the document does change based on the times, no?

"The federal government today does many things it should not because it has no enumerated authority to do so. If states wanted to create welfare-type programs, I'd have no problem with that (as long as it didn't violate their own state constitution)."

And conversely there is no language that states that the federal government may not decide to do something, no?

As in, " To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

So if the constitution is silent does that negate the issue or does it allow for the issue to be addressed?

"BTW - the example was a single person - and if that was wrong, what makes it right to do the same thing for a larger group? Nothing."

In my opinion the person cited in the example was not needy.

Now if we have a group of people who have contributed to the country, do we let them just fend for themselves and wish them well, why we are snug in our beds, turn a blind eye to them as they made their beds and now they have to lay in them or do we as a country that has social as well as moral values help our fellow man, also not written in the constitution but knowing that the Pilgrims and the latter people wanted a country to be ours and not a mine country the underlying principle is of helping our neighbors.

Has the system been abused and mismanaged? Sure.

Should we help people who need help? In my opinion yes. Do I mind my taxes being used for that, no.

Can we go back in time or with a candidate or candidates that claim that we should go back to the what the constitution says strictly in this day and age and not 1776, how can we?

Also the powers of congress are limited in this way also; "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;"

And there is no provision for pre-emptive war, is there?

I understand your position and the only question I have is how do we regress to a time and stance of strict constructionism?

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

In my opinion the person cited in the example was not needy.

Apparently having 50.00 a month to live on after she pays her taxes, scripts, utilities, and so forth makes her "not needy" in your opinion.

Now if we have a group of people who have contributed to the country, do we let them just fend for themselves and wish them well, why we are snug in our beds, turn a blind eye to them as they made their beds...

She has made many contributions to this country. Just because she did not work does not mean she did not make sacrafices for this country. If you use only financial contributions as your measuring stick then I guess your right. But, her husband (my father) whose SS she collects served this country in WWII at the expense of his education and ability to land a high paying job (it is worthy to note that he was not a dumb man and got his GED later in life). He always paid his taxes, earn enough money to provide for his family while MOM stayed at home to raise the kids. Surely my dads contributions should be credited to her as well.

I am done with this subject and close with the following salutations:

  • GZ...you are the living, breathing proof of the difference between sounding smart and being smart. You talk fast and use big words and could probably lead a group of lemmings over a cliff more effectively than George Wallace ever could. But GZ isn't smart. Can't be. To say what he said about my mother without a clue as to her or my families upbringing was stupid. (note: parafrased from Greg Doyle of CBS Sports)
  • Maggie...While we may not agree on the role government may/may not have when it comes to "promoting the general welfare" of its citizens I do appreciate your concern and will keep you posted of my mom's plight as you requested.
  • Handbanana...Thank You for your tip
  • Starling02...You seem to understand better then most here what my family went through and my Mom's situation today and how she got there. Thanks for understanding and for calling out GZ on his arrogance.
  • McCaskey and Westsider...Your insight and pointed opinions into GZ's comments were right on and appreciated.
  • NC...even though we may not agree on the definition of needy, your insightful input as to the role government should play in the lives towards the welfare of its citizens and the responsibilty of neighbors helping neighbors is IMO right on target.
  • James Kirk...Thanks for your sanity and level headness
  • Madjack...Your plan to take care of MOM by her children was already implemented. Thank You. But, I still do not believe that her childrens actions should relieve the government of their responsiblities and promises to our older population.

    IMO, Nuff said.
    -KraZyKat

  • If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    Did we ever define the term needy?

    It really is all about discussion. There is no right or wrong as there will be more discussion and who is to say which is right and which is wrong?

    The person holding the cards in the deck or the person being dealt the card?

    http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

    No food stamps won't help pay for soap or toilet paper but you can buy candy bars.
    Now I'm not saying just because you're on food stamps you don't deserve to have some candy I just think its odd that you can't buy a bar of soap to keep clean with but you can get a Hershey bar.

    At large

    This is off topic as well - How do we go about changing this so that each of the 3 represents a different section of lucas county? Is this something we can get put on the ballet?

    I feed a family of 4 for well under the average of $21/person/week. You just have to be a smart shopper. Coupons are your friend too.

    Sure, if all you're going to buy is prepackaged crap, pop, etc. then you might start to run over. But if you actually buy *ingredients* and (gasp) cook your own meals, its easy to get by on that grocery budget.

    I work 2 jobs, take college classes, and have 2 small children...if I can manage to take the time to shop properly and cook real meals, then anyone can.

    Belief...A single person with no other source of income or other resources (savings, etc) actually would get $35.67

    Reality...My mother who is 77 years old who only nets $815.00 (after the $93.50 Medicare charge is deducted) a month from her $908.00 Social Security checks attempted to apply for Food Stamps today. After the worksheet process from their website it was stated that she "might" qualify for $10-$15 worth of stamps. After she buys her scripts, pays her utilities, taxes, insurance and dr.'s she is lucky to have $50.00 a month to live on.

    Trust me, I dislike Welfare as much as the next guy but believe there are legitimat cases where we need to look out for people in situations similar to my Mom's. My father (deceased) worked his ass off every day of his life with a work ethic most unseen today. He paid his taxes and FICA, and was still able to take care of his family from a wage that would defidently be considered poverty. He was a proud man, hard worker, and resisted welfare. We never grew up with luxeries in life but he raised a family of seven with strong morals, strong work ethics and never spent a day in jail. He was not a Dead-beat dad or a looser. Just one who quit school to serve his country during WWII and as a result suffered the consequences of no formal education and unable to secure a high paying job. In the end it was his unrelentless work-a-holic regime to provide for his family which I think indirectly killed him at the young age of 58.

    Now...what burns me is that a welfare mother with ten tag-a-longs from different fathers enters the grocery store dressed in her $300.00 outfit, wearing Prada shoes and carrying a handbag from Coach shops for the T-Bones, Sirloins and Shrimp cocktails, pays for her groceries using a Food Card, climbs in her Escalade and leaves with enough extra cash to stop by the liquor store on her way home to pick up a couple of forty's for the nights activities. All the time I see this take place knowing that my hard earn tax dollars are going to her so she can live a lifestyle she thinks is owed to her instead of my Mother who does not qualify for but 10-15 dollars a week.

    Meanwhile, my mother is wondering where her next meal is going to come from, digs through her change jar and finds enough coins to purchase a box of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. Her children do look out for her and offer their assistance when able (we all have families too) but she, like my father, is proud and embarrassed to ask for help from either the Government or her family.

    Now I ask you...Where is the equity and parity in the way Government Welfare is dished out?

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    I do not see it from an American point of view because black people are not treated equally in America.

    Have you been talking to Donovan McNabb?

    from CBS Sportsline
    McNabb, who went on HBO's Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel on Tuesday night and slapped the race card on the table.

    The Eagles' McNabb said: "There's not that many African-American quarterbacks, so we have to do a little bit extra. ... Because the percentage of us playing this position, which people didn't want us to play this position, is low, so we do a little extra."

    And McNabb said: "I pass for 300 yards, our team wins by seven (and critics say), 'Ah, he could've made this throw, they would have scored if he did this.' "

    And of white Carson Palmer and Peyton Manning, McNabb said: "Let me start by saying I love those guys. But they don't get criticized as much as we do. They don't."

    I am so sick of this shit! Purnhrt, It seems everytime an African-American is critized you believed it is somehow "whities" fault. When are you and those with similar beliefs like yours going to take responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming the White man for every misfortune in your life.

    In the case i cited above; McNabb just SUCKS as a quarterback. Not a Black Quarterback, not a White Quarterback, just a Quarterback who is faltering in the NFL. No excuses needed! Some QB's are better then other. Race is not the issue.

    What next? are you going to blame OJ's most recent legal troubles as a result of the white man?

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    I agree GZ.

    This country was built on the foundation that people could build something from nothing through sheer hard work. The problem with today's entitlement generations is they feel they should have it now and with no work at all.

    If they can get it from the government or from a lender they want it and will take it irregardless of the reprecussions.

    MikeyA

    MikeyA

    Ive been 7 years in a fortune 500 company and we have a larger porportion of blacks working at the headquarters than is the porportion of the black population to the rest of the country's population.

    Ive worked for blacks and had them work for me, male and female. There is a black man on our board of directors, so I cant say Sensor's experiences mirror everyone's. Where I work there are over 1200 of us.

    You're right: I am self-righteous and smug. I have great reason to be, since I'm also not going to end up eating dog food when I'm 70. It's incumbent upon each person to secure the prosperity of their lives. If you stupidly believed some LIE that your golden years would result from somebody taking care of you, then you literally deserve what you get. All this "boo hoo pity me pity my mother" is insipid and detracts from the real point of the matter.

    I grew up as a poor kid in the 1970s, so I really must FUCKING BEG TO DIFFER that I somehow don't know what it's like. One family emergency later, and I would have ended up in a foster home. Don't even think you have the moxie -- much less being in command of enough facts -- to lecture me about understanding the poor.

    The point here is that the middle class ONLY had the power to downsize their standard of living and therefore save money on the basis of the margin therein revealed. That was as true a century ago as it is today. Fuck, it was as true in the Roman Empire as it is today.

    So, let's shit out this stupid fucking argument: I AM a smug and arrogant prick. KC's mother IS a silly person who is now reaping what's she's sown. None of your faux umbrage changes those facts. Her status as a helpless old woman ALSO doesn't change those facts.

    SAVE MONEY OR SUFFER. I really don't give a honk if people choose the latter option either by action or inaction. In fact, their suffering elicits my schadenfreude.

    Having aroused my ire with your stupidly-misdirected umbrage, I have more things to say, which is assuredly Classic GuestZero.

    It sure as fuck looks like KraZyKat will have to stop pretending s/he lives in some 1950s SciFi future, and will have to return to the Old Way of taking care of the elderly parent. The middle class NEVER had enough wealth to become spread across the land as a family in some sort of twisted Diaspora. Only the extreme granting of credit and cheap oil allowed us to pretend that that was sustainable. Well, folks, that glorious era is coming to an end. Mommy and daddy will have to depend on you, and in turn, you will have to depend on your own children.

    KraZyKat, move mom in and stop whining. The Hypercapitalizing of America assures that no other option is sustainable. Wealth is being locked up in individuals. If you no longer care (as your class certainly DOESN'T, from ample evidence) to use the power of government to enact socialistic ways as well demonstrated in Europe, then you must either lock up some wealth yourself, or become one of the walking dead.

    ...between a voluntary decision to help/donate to someone (as N.C. has done) versus the government TAKING, in the form of taxes, to give to someone else. This is the distinction that is often missing.

    I was brought up that it was my reponsibility to help those in need. Further, my impression while growing up, was that it was wrong to expect to be 'excused' from such obligation simply because the government was doing it with money it'd taken from me and everyone else.

    The sad part about all of this is, in relation to the food stamps, is that Congress deciding to put more money into the program means that it has to come from somewhere. Which means - in some form or another - more taxes. And those taxes come from everyone, including those families who don't qualify for food stamps, but still live on very meager budgets and are least able to afford the additional taxation.

    ...and we've had this discussion numerous times on multiple threads.

    The founders didn't intend for GOVERNMENT to take care of our fellow men and women - they expected us to do it, leaving the ability for individual states to perform such actions if they chose...but not the federal government. (you might want to read about such actions here: http://www.house.gov/paul/nytg.htm)

    National defense is a function of the federal government (and good people can disagree on the extent of that function). Caring for poor was never included in the enumerated duties of the federal government.

    I make the distinction between the federal government whose powers are specific and limited ... versus state government which has all powers not specifically restricted to the federal government.

    The Constitution is not an ever-changing document. It's pretty precise and specifically written. The federal government today does many things it should not because it has no enumerated authority to do so. If states wanted to create welfare-type programs, I'd have no problem with that (as long as it didn't violate their own state constitution). But every one of us should have problem when the FEDERAL government exceeds the limited power and duties it's supposed to have.

    BTW - the example was a single person - and if that was wrong, what makes it right to do the same thing for a larger group? Nothing. The number of people isn't the issue - the action is.

    Actually, I do think GZ is pretty damn smart and the truth is I usually get a kick out of and appreciate his very-pointed, take-no-prisoners approach in his opinions and postings.

    In this case, I feel the level of vitriol he displayed went beyond reasonable limits and crossed lines that didn't have to be crossed. But, that's just my opinion.

    Furthermore, I agree in general with his underlying premise that, in the end, we are all responsible for our own economic fortune or misfortune and the sooner you begin doing the things (saving, investing, eliminating or at least reducing debt levels) that will put you on the road to financial wellness the better.

    But, there is no one-size-fits-all strategy that works here, and it's far easier for a single individual (or couple) who has no children, no ailing elderly parents to care for, hasn't lost a job he/she has worked at for 25-30 years before being downsized, or any of the other curveballs life throws at all of us to take the necessary steps to secure their financial future.

    When you are an island, it's very easy to point out the rights and wrongs other people are making in their lives, people who are responsible not just for themselves but for other loved ones and family members.

    Whether this is GZ or not, I really don't know, but it is why I asked this question of him, one that has at this point has gone unanswered.

    Actually, I've got a question for you since you mentioned that your mom used the farmers market program. Which market did she use the vouchers at? I was talking with a neighbor and she's checking on whether her dad qualifies, but she wanted to know if she could use them at the farmers market downtown.

    ---------
    "When I say your dumb name, please stand up briefly, but then quickly drop to your knees and forsake all others before me." -Ignignokt

    There's a city full of walls you can post complaints at

    I remember when I was 16. I took a job at the Kroger's at Spring Meadows. I was trying to save money to buy a car.

    I distinctly remember people bringing in food stamps, buying one pack of gum, and pocketing the change. I'm sure this behavior isn't the norm of everyone but it definitely made an impression on me.

    In today's technology age maybe we can prevent this. Instead of food stamps we give people a debit style card to use. Enable the stores to compile a list of what was purchased with a card. Anything that was not listed on as an "appropriate food item" previously designated would be deducted from their total for the next month as penalty. If they kept up the behavior eventually they wouldn't recieve any money.

    MikeyA

    MikeyA

    ...for commissioner are a matter of state law...of the 88 counties, only 1 has a different form of government (Summit County) which includes district representatives (county council) and an elected county executive - similar to how cities are structured with councils and mayors.

    To elect the commissioners from areas would require a change in the state law - and the support of the County Commissioners Association of Ohio. They are the association of commissioners and they regularly weigh in on issues that impact all counties across the state.

    I don't see the organization supporting such a change in law to create a third option for county government structuring. And it would have to be a third option as I don't believe that CCAO would support such a structure in general for the whole state...IMHO.

    ...very good point. I hope she doesn't just rely upon the worksheet - it's not anywhere near as comprehensive as an actual application process. While the worksheet gives an indication, it's not able to include all variables.

    And please keep us posted on how it goes...

    KraZyKat, your mother is 77, hence she had a good 50 years to prepare for this time. Where are her investments and savings?

    Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program

    This program allows seniors to shop at participating farmers markets and produce stands using vouchers. I don't know which markets and stands are affiliated with this program, but it appears to be in addition to food stamps, so your mom could use it to suppliment her monthly WIC stipend.

    ---------
    "When I say your dumb name, please stand up briefly, but then quickly drop to your knees and forsake all others before me." -Ignignokt

    There's a city full of walls you can post complaints at

    God bless you, Sarah. We need more people like you in this world.

    Mad Jack
    Mad Jack's Shack

    GZ

    GZ makes good points in provocative ways but crosses the line many times. When he crosses the line it makes the majority of us discount his opinion.

    Many times he seems content on bullying than debating. That's when I have a huge problem with it.

    MikeyA

    MikeyA

    McNabb just SUCKS as a quarterback. Not a Black Quarterback, not a White Quarterback, just a Quarterback who is faltering in the NFL. No excuses needed! Some QB's are better then other.

    Eagles QB Donovan McNabb went 21-for-26 for 381 yards and four touchdowns in Philadelphia's 56-21 win over the Lions in Week 3

    KraZyKat is sent to the corner with a plate load of crow to eat!

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    She went to Keils on Hill Ave. near Reynolds. I do believe they are able to use them at the Farmers Market as well but she has physical disabilities which prevent her from making her way downtown.

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    ...that's exactly what they have today...the grocery machines read food vs. non-food items and you can swipe your card, paying only for the food items. The clerk then asks for the balance due. The card is 'loaded' each month with your allotted amount, adding to any carryover... and there is no expiration for the dollars on the card.

    Modern technology does wonders.

    I believe they are debit cards now.

    If you read the post you will see that my family struggled. We never lived beyond our means and never collected welfare. That being said. I grew up in the 60's and 70's where a working Mom was uncommon. She stayed at home and raised her children while my Father worked all day to suupport us.
    Rarely did we have enough money to take a 1 day family adventure let alone a 1 week family vacation. We never visited Cedar Point till the kids could afford to "pay their own way". We never had a new car. We watched a B/W tv till the mid 70's. Christmas was always sparse and usually consisted of gifts of underware, socks and mittens. (I must admit here that the Old Newsboys did provide us kids with winter coats one year which is why I always give generously to that organization today.)

    There was no money to put aside for savings or investments. But we survived and are the better for it because of our struggles. It has taught us the values of working hard and how to avoid frivolus spending.

    For you to insinuate that my Mom was irresponsible in her cash management and failed to save for her retirement when there was no "Extra" cash to do so is ignorance on your part. Regardless of your utopia ideas that everyone can be prepared for their finacial futures if they just live within their means, the reality is there are people out there who followed the rules and still struggle to survive in this country.

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    She did recieve produce from this program this year after insistance from me that she apply. She said she felt "weird" spunging off someone else untill I reminded here that my tax dollars were being used to fund this program so think of it as me helping her. She was ok with it then.

    This is a good program which benefits both the seniors and local produce merchants.

    WIC? She does not recieve this. WIC=Woman, Infant and Children and is designed to provides Federal grants to States for supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk.

    At age 77 I hardley think she qualifies. LOL

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    ---------
    "When I say your dumb name, please stand up briefly, but then quickly drop to your knees and forsake all others before me." -Ignignokt

    There's a city full of walls you can post complaints at

    Which is why you have people loitering outside (for example) the Krogers on Manhattan Blvd. When they see someone they think might be "cool" (such as a younger guy like myself) they flag me down. The pitch usually goes a little like this....

    "Hey man, I'm hurtin for cash, my (car broke down)(rent is late)(kid is sick). I have the stamps, so just let me walk around with you. I'll be cool, don't worry, i'll help you shop. I'll pay using the stamps and you can just throw me the cash. Whaddya say? (pause) c'mon man, I'll throw you an extra $20. (pause) 30? c'mon man, $30 and all you gotta do is let me shop with you"

    I don't shop there often, but I've had this happen to me three times over the past, say, 7 years.

    I was raised to save money, and I found sound reasons enough to do so even beyond that. Apparently that background was missing in your family. Well, you might note America is waging a war on the middle class and poor, and the middle class and poor are definitely LOSING. Save money or fall under the wheels.

    Finally, I'm not talking about utopia; this is fucking SURVIVAL we're discussing. The middle class and poor should be canceling their stupid fucking cellphones and credit cards. What's coming is BAD. We're heading for a big-D Depression. If there's any expression of ignorance here, it's from YOU.

    FYI, because of my experience growing up and the knowing the value of money, I DO NOT OWN a cell phone, I have NO Credit Cards (only an ATM Check Card for those times when a Credit Card is required for deposits like renting a car) and pay cash for what I buy only when I can afford to do so. I was fortunate enough to understand the value of savings, invested wisely and have made a few dollars because of it.

    I now take care of my Mother when I am able; to make up for the failure of the government to do so. People of my Mom's generation were trained to trust in SS for their future. Remember, one of our greatest Presidents FDR signed the SS act in 1935. This was a president so well respected and trusted that he is the only president to have served three terms. Emerging from the Great Depression he promised Americans that their futures would be secure with Social Security. There was no reason to believe it wasn't so, after all this was FDR telling them it was.

    If I live beyond my means it is by investing into my 401k more then I feel comfortable with as it sometimes leads to a shortage of capital for the day-to-day expenses.

    So when you say that learning how to save was Apparently that background was missing in your family you really are clueless. It was quite the opposite and feel I am a much better person for it.

    I refuse to get in a pissing match with you over the values my parents instilled in their children. I will just say that your arrogence and ignorence are clearly highlighted in your last posting.

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    You claimed your mother was 77, hence she was raised throughout the entire Depression and only reached adulthood post-WWII. The Depression era folks I've met well understood that you have to provide for yourself. YOU are only stating that you mother believed the LIE that somebody (likely, the government) would care for her in her declining years. I have no duty to honor the lies or lie-beliefs of others. I have no duties towards scoundrels and chumps.

    She was fooled and by the time she was in her 40s (i.e. the 1970s) she should have seen through every bit of the Great Lie that was told to her. YOU are just telling us that even with a clean 20 years to prepare, she did NOTHING.

    Arrogant, I am. Ignorant, I am not. Too bad your mother is falling under the wheels of Hypercapitalism. You might bother voting for Ron Paul when you get the chance, instead of the corporation-owned Dem and Repub candidates, eh?

    Let us know when you re-arrange your home situation to have dear mother move in with you. That's what the REAL middle class does. Didn't you get the memo?

    YOU are only stating that you mother believed the LIE that somebody (likely, the government) would care for her in her declining years. I have no duty to honor the lies or lie-beliefs of others.

    This must mean that you have "no duty to honor" the Constitution of the United States of America. One only has to look to the Preamble of the Constitution to realize that government does play a role in securing the welfare of the citizens as our Founding Fathers intended:

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the government to provide for the Welfare of those who take advantage of the system and think that they are "owed" something they would otherwise not be entitled to. But I do believe they are legitimate cases where government does have the responsibility for to promote the general Welfare to those in need.

    If you do not subscribe to these beliefs then I will go as far as to say you are betraying the intent and rule of the Constitution and hence this country. So GZ...if you hate this system of government so much maybe you would feel more comfortable in some other. Like some deserted isolated island where you can live your own little existence without having to worry about your social and economic responsibilities to the the people of this country the Preamble to the Constitution so clearly defined.

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    Comment viewing options

    Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.