Lawmakers Find $21 a Week Doesn't Buy a Lot of Groceries

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

Did you notice the part of the article that said There are more working people today getting food stamps than six years ago? What do you suggest those people do?

"get better jobs..."

**wink wink , nod nod**

Now...something else I heard this morning too...

A study shows that for those of us that are working full time job with benefits here in the US, do not get as much paid time off as other countries in the world.

The avg. time off for the American worker is 15.9 days annually...unguaranteed...

Whereas Finland has the highest, at least 39 days annually....guaranteed.

[OneTimeSBX]

i'll do you one better daemon.

i am expecting and i get a newsletter every few days about different pregnancy topics.

maternity leave in most every other country is a guaranteed full pay event. i believe australia offers 6 MONTHS of paid maternity leave.

i have a degree, i work 40 hours a week, i never call in, i work overtime, and i do not have maternity leave. i have short term disability that covers 6 weeks at 60% pay. i am having to skip all my vacation time (im due in November) and sick time and hope it covers that whole 6 weeks...

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by OneTimeSBX

i'll do you one better daemon.

i am expecting and i get a newsletter every few days about different pregnancy topics.

maternity leave in most every other country is a guaranteed full pay event. i believe australia offers 6 MONTHS of paid maternity leave.

i have a degree, i work 40 hours a week, i never call in, i work overtime, and i do not have maternity leave. i have short term disability that covers 6 weeks at 60% pay. i am having to skip all my vacation time (im due in November) and sick time and hope it covers that whole 6 weeks...

Just don't get pregnant for another 4 or 5 years mmkay? *wink*....LOL

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

Did you notice the part of the article that said There are more working people today getting food stamps than six years ago? What do you suggest those people do?

I would first want to ask what a "working person" is. Democrats often refer to "working people" as anyone who is not rich.

So do I doubt that more people get food stamps now than 6 years ago? Nope. We have a larger population now than 6 years ago.

6 years is a pretty arbitrary figure unless you're trying to somehow show that Bush is the cause for people signing up for welfare benefits (otherwise, I couldn't imagine why 6 years would be relevant unless 7 years ago, there were more people using food stamps than there are today).

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I would first want to ask what a "working person" is. Democrats often refer to "working people" as anyone who is not rich.

So do I doubt that more people get food stamps now than 6 years ago? Nope. We have a larger population now than 6 years ago.

6 years is a pretty arbitrary figure unless you're trying to somehow show that Bush is the cause for people signing up for welfare benefits (otherwise, I couldn't imagine why 6 years would be relevant unless 7 years ago, there were more people using food stamps than there are today).

Ok...let's not make it into a name calling thing...Bush is not a point in this...fact of the matter is, food stamps and the issues arising from it has been a thorn in the side of many a president since it's inception in the late 1930's

Reagan tried to make cutbacks in the 80s and Clinton instituted welfare to work programs in the 90s.

But now, for the few changes and buget increases that they have made, someone is starting to wakeup to the fact that the money the put into this program doesn't help the poor eat an adequate amount and variety of food.

Let's face it, the policy has failed because where it was supposed to work for the better good in emergency situations, it caused more dependency than anything, and yanking the rug from under it would be seen and a drastic and inhuman way to deal with the situation....


damned if you do...damned if you dont.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Ok...let's not make it into a name calling thing...Bush is not a point in this...fact of the matter is, food stamps and the issues arising from it has been a thorn in the side of many a president since it's inception in the late 1930's

Who is name calling? I was simply searching for a definition for the term "working people" -- a definition Democrats often attribute to people who actually don't work. I would still love someone to tell me what "working people" are for the purposes of GP's statement.

Reagan tried to make cutbacks in the 80s and Clinton instituted welfare to work programs in the 90s.

They didn't go anywhere near far enough.

But now, for the few changes and buget increases that they have made, someone is starting to wakeup to the fact that the money the put into this program doesn't help the poor eat an adequate amount and variety of food.

Show me some starving poor folks.. like the kind you see in 3rd world countries. Then you can make this claim. The fact is that in America, our "poor" have an astounding rate of obesity. Here are some other fun facts about American "poor" courtesy of the Heritage Foundation (their facts were obtained from the Census Bureau):

The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

• Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.
• Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
• Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
• The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
• Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.
• Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
• Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
• Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

Let's face it, the policy has failed because where it was supposed to work for the better good in emergency situations, it caused more dependency than anything, and yanking the rug from under it would be seen and a drastic and inhuman way to deal with the situation....

I agree. I don't claim to be an expert in solving this problem. I'd like to see a lifetime cap instituted on the amount of benefits anyone may receive over their lifetime. I'm not sure of the feasibility of programs like the old T.V.A. or W.P.A. of the great depression, but I'd sure like to see someone look into 'em.

All you ever hear are stopgaps being discussed -- never solutions. Never ultimatums for people who simply choose to be poor. If they can make it on $21/week. Fine. If they could make it on less, I say we cut 'em back.

damned if you do...damned if you dont.

Wrong attitude

[PenguinTrax]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I started reading, but will admit that I gave up when they started on the guilt trip about us being the richest country, etc. etc.

If you don't want to live on food stamps, get a job. If someone can survive on the current food stamp budget, power to 'em. The government should only provide the very basic minimum needs. If food stamp recipients want to be able to afford some cheese for those chips, they can enter the work force.

Roughly 15 years ago I worked a fulltime job and was eligible for food stamps. After paying minimal rent/utilities and medical bills (I was uninsured) I subsisted on $10 a week for gas (to get to work) and food. This went on for over a year. Getting a job isn't always the answer.

[Tom Earp]

There are many more programs today than ever before to aid students.

It used to be you had certain grades, then you qualified for scholarships and if you did not, you paid for it yourself if you could afford to go to college.

Today scholarships abound for sports, band, cheer leading and even being a cowboy.

There are also loans or grants given by the colleges. If you keep your grades and stay in school, it is free payable only if leave school or do not keep GPA up. I saw a report a while back that should college grants that covered 1/2 - 2/3s of the yealy cost.

If college is not your place, there are vocational schools to learn a trade.

I grew up poor and had a choice, work my senior year, save money, go to college, or get a job and buy a car. I opted for college, the first in my entire family to attend college. There I washed, mopped and waxed floors for extra money.

I found out years later that my folks house $19.00 a month and were strapped for it each month with both working full time jobs. I did not know we were poor, I just figured we were like everyone else in the neighbor hood and lived with it.

So if some whine about not getting into the Law School they wanted and had to opt for a lesser one, what a shame or if someone wanted to go to a more prestigious college and couldn't, to sad.

There are programs out there for people in need if they look for them. But the problem is today is so many people use it because that is there job, not working and depleting the funds for those who do.

Do I agree with Kevin on many points, yes I do. I know people who live on the streets and want nothing more. They do not want jobs!

For the poster who opted not to have kids, there is nothing wrong with that. When I graduated from college, I was middle management for RH Macy and made $550.00 a month and my then wife made $350.00 a month. Seemed like a lot of money in the late 60's but it really wasn't but costs were cheaper then compared to now.

If some people want to find out, then they should ask and not cry about not having a job. I see help wanted signs all of the time and no takers? Why?

Next time you ae in a fast food eatery, check out the cash registars, they have pix of the products so the people do not have to read and everything is automated so they can look to see how much change is to be given back.

[AKA_Monet]

I don't think anyone here thinks that no hard work should not be instituted when one truly desires something. At least I am not saying that and if my posts conveyed that message, I never intended it to be.

What I am saying is many poor people do not know these resources exist even after speaking to those options. Yes, there will have to "extra credit" or volunteer time. And yes, there are some who choose not do that. And there are also some that make their matters worse than where they started...

If one absolutely does not have any funds to make it, how will they know to go to a library first, then review it without guidance or assistance and then fall under a deadline?

Yes, we need standards and rules for people to follow. And yes, you may be a model or mentor to follow. But, do those less fortunate know that about you?

And the one thing I find about poor people, they don't like to be reminded of it. Why live in that humilation? And should that be something one should be ashamed about? And ultimately, so what? And how do you think one who is poor gets that way? Is poverty a choice?

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

There are many more programs today than ever before to aid students.

It used to be you had certain grades, then you qualified for scholarships and if you did not, you paid for it yourself if you could afford to go to college.

Today scholarships abound for sports, band, cheer leading and even being a cowboy.

There are also loans or grants given by the colleges. If you keep your grades and stay in school, it is free payable only if leave school or do not keep GPA up. I saw a report a while back that should college grants that covered 1/2 - 2/3s of the yealy cost.

If college is not your place, there are vocational schools to learn a trade.

I grew up poor and had a choice, work my senior year, save money, go to college, or get a job and buy a car. I opted for college, the first in my entire family to attend college. There I washed, mopped and waxed floors for extra money.

I found out years later that my folks house $19.00 a month and were strapped for it each month with both working full time jobs. I did not know we were poor, I just figured we were like everyone else in the neighbor hood and lived with it.

So if some whine about not getting into the Law School they wanted and had to opt for a lesser one, what a shame or if someone wanted to go to a more prestigious college and couldn't, to sad.

There are programs out there for people in need if they look for them. But the problem is today is so many people use it because that is there job, not working and depleting the funds for those who do.

Do I agree with Kevin on many points, yes I do. I know people who live on the streets and want nothing more. They do not want jobs!

For the poster who opted not to have kids, there is nothing wrong with that. When I graduated from college, I was middle management for RH Macy and made $550.00 a month and my then wife made $350.00 a month. Seemed like a lot of money in the late 60's but it really wasn't but costs were cheaper then compared to now.

If some people want to find out, then they should ask and not cry about not having a job. I see help wanted signs all of the time and no takers? Why?

Next time you ae in a fast food eatery, check out the cash registars, they have pix of the products so the people do not have to read and everything is automated so they can look to see how much change is to be given back.

[Anniebell]

I was actually interning for Congressman Ryan during the Food Stamp challenge, he may not have made it through, but believe me did he try. It was actually kinda funny to be in the office that week. Someone brought in doughnuts one day I thought they were going to get fired. lol