That wasn't a reply to you. It was an attempt to inject a fact or two into the general bellowing.
Americans Say “Too Much Welfare” Number One Cause Of Persistent Poverty…
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
That wasn't a reply to you. It was an attempt to inject a fact or two into the general bellowing.
Tech would you go ahead and tell me what you make of the chart appearing above? What does it tell us?
Well, excuse me!
Ahhhh... food insecurity
Which includes worry of being hungry at some point in their lives.
What a load of BS. Using peoples unreasonable fears as a statistic to justify all this. The means are there.
We in the US have no idea what real hunger is.
And here we are...
Last edited:
The reference statistics to California on this graph remind me of the line "Build it and they will come".
I agree people working two or three jobs have no time to raise their kids they are just attempting to survive. The kids do then turn to gangbanging. It would be cheaper for your society to address those concerns than it is for you to absorb the crime and the ensuing costs...see how this works?
sorry you were so deluded prior to your visit but glad we were able to set you straight now. Feeling less inferior are you?
well by the tone of your post I am sure you are just dying to give me your theories so have at it.
we are up to 25% or more in our maritime provinces and our territories in other provinces much lower...so let's focus on Canadians as it would appear you are heading down some kind of path here.
I live in a very wealthy, highly educated city with two universities and 1 college funny thing is though when working in our poor schools there is a lot of obesity. The school where I currently work is extremely wealthy their average income would likely be double that of the average Canadian and out of 210 kids there are likely 5 or 6 chubby kids...nobody waddling around and no one unable to run across the field due to being winded too quickly.
Possibly. Almost certainly, if by "more" you mean a higher dollar total. I would imagine the part of "welfare" funds in California that go to fraud is higher than the total welfare funds of, say, Wyoming.
If one is comparing fraud, however, I would suggest that a more accurate measure would by what percentage of a state's total welfare funding (Federal, state, and sub-state jurisdictions) is misdirected by fraud.
Personally, I would only class "very low food security" as "hunger."
It seems to me that what you mean when you say "hunger" is what I think of as "chronic malnutrition" or "starvation."
So, the underlying question is: Did you and your wife rely on the take-out window to feed your children?
In Canada I believe the "average" Canadian likely has more choice as we do not have inner cities with no grocery stores for miles. In studies on poverty to the country below us they have immense problems with grocery stores locating in slum areas, they won't do it. From a business perspective I understand it from a humanitarian perscpective it's tough for them. That's why they have started those garden projects where you can grow your own produce, sometimes in old parking lots or abandoned lots.
There are not you are right but there are so many societal issues that have to be factored in. You want to make it clean and logical and and while I can understand that perspective, it is not how human beings function. It simply is not that simple.
There are psychological components to people and systemic issues and poverty and education along with choice.
I know some people who have high paying jobs and are quite bright normal individuals...they are obese, two have had lapband surgery and gone through nigthmarish hell to be thin. Both were for a while. And that's just middle class.
There is so much to the problem. It isn't as simple as buying cheap carrots.
Are you white and what are your roots? Do you live in a middle class area or inner city slum? Were your parents essentially middle class or dirt poor? Are you literate? Are you well educated or at a grade 8 level or lower? Are you balanced or do you have a mental health illness? Do you have substance abuse problems or are you free and clear of that demon?
Are you a single parent or did you partner parent?
all factors
I say this very respectfully Sal, but all you are doing is making excuses here.
I don't think that the problem is nearly as complex as is being suggested... It really wasn't that long ago when there were fewer fast food options and easy (physical) access to them was more inconvenient. On the other hand, access to a grocery store has probably not changed much on a per capita basis over the years. Sure, some select neighbourhoods may not have a retail grocer for the reasons you suggest, however, that is not a broad-base generalization that I believe applies equally across the board, nor does it prevent someone from travelling to one of these locations.
I think we have to differentiate between us and the States. We do not have the same type of inner city ghettos that they do although I know huge cities such as Toronto have some pretty bad areas. I maybe wasn't clear enough on that.
I think the problem is very complex or we would have solved it by now. I don't know how much poverty research you have done or who you have spoken to or interacted with. What I do know is my experience of working in a not for profit environment gave me a very different perspective on a whole different part of society. I feel richer for that, I think most people live without ever wanting to delve too deep into poverty and the endless cycle and what helps it to proliferate. If we dehumanize the situation and remove the little kids living in misery and squalor, it makes it so clean and removed...but that is not real life.
Have a screaming child in a filthy carriage in dirty clothes with a snotty nose and a desperate crying mum in front of one and we don't sleep quite as comfortably at least I don't.
Fair enough, but does that circumstance answer for the remarkably high percentage of the population that are in this particular health category in the USA?... Canada?
In the end, it still does not answer to the reality that simple alternatives exist. The only question is, are those that are located in inner city locales prepared to adopt change?.. What if the fast food joints decided to close for the same reasons that the grocers did?.. People wouldn't just lay down and die
I believe that the issue (problem) is simple human nature... Choosing the path of least resistance in the short term and worrying later about the long-term and the ill effects... That is a choice, plain and simple
In short, the 'solution' is (in my opinion) entirely an individual responsibility and solution.
Your is an excellent direct experience and I do apply weight to your words.
However, take a look at the expressions that you just used
"most people live without ever wanting to delve too deep into poverty and the endless cycle and what helps it to proliferate".
Society can only provide the tools to affect this form of change, but it is ultimately up to the individual to incorporate that change into their life.
... And while I appreciate the impact that it will have on younger children, those same children are also exposed to what the alternative looks like (at the extreme, it is in an amplified sense through the media). One might argue that there is stronger pressure on the younger generation to strive to achieve (for material purposes likely) than there is to accept a low status quo.
No one does, but I'll also wager that scenarios like that witness an outpouring of unsolicited assistance from strangers that see that kind of distress.
no it doesn't and that is what I am saying, it is not only poverty that contributes to obesity for some parts of our population, but there are deep psychological components involved for some people as well.
actually many of them feed themselves in the corner stores, they load up on chocolate bars and starch. You would need to see a few documentaries on the problems facing people who live inner city and their inability to have access to fresh produce. We are not speaking from the same base.
It is not a choice when one has been raised that way and believes what has been told to them, no different than you or me. They must break free from that mind set or stay enslaved.
Code:
In short, the 'solution' is (in my opinion) entirely an individual responsibility and solution.
I just do not agree with it. thanks
I agree with that, but then the hand up has to be given and the existence of the problem can not be denied just because it is not our reality. That is part of the problem. People who have it good want to project their experience onto someone else who comes from a different world with different skills levels, and differing education and mental health and colour and background. We are not all the same.
they are but their survival is at home where things are not so good. They come to school and I know teachers that spend an hour diffusing just one kid who has had no breakfast and watched dad punch mum through the wall last night. Then the parents do drugs together and peace reigns for a few hours. That is their tiny reality. Some kids beg teachers to take them home with them...they beg them. Burn out in those schools is over the top.
no they don't people think it is her fault and there is not much money to hand out or cheap housing to be given so they get sent with a few food vouchers to hold them over and told where social services are that's it baby...hope ya cope and see ya later... and the church kitchens are over run...even in my rich city...
I get why people look the other way, I couldn't handle it either. I tried to make their small interaction with me as pleasant as I could, to look them in the eye and acknowledge their humanity even if only briefly...but in the end, it doesn't do much.
Two decades after President Bill Clinton promised to "end welfare as we know it," Americans blame government handouts for persistent poverty in the United States more than any other single factor, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released Thursday.
Given a list of eight factors and asked to choose the one most responsible for the continuing problem of poverty, 24 percent of respondents in the poll chose "too much government welfare that prevents initiative."
Whether Americans are too dependent on government was a flashpoint of the presidential campaign last year, and shrinking government has been a focus of the Tea Party movement, which has risen since the election of President Barack Obama.
more
Many Americans blame 'government welfare' for persistent poverty, poll finds - In Plain Sight
No doubt it is sort of a self fulfilling prophecy. Another huge cause is questionable spending practices. With summer weather here I notice a lot of exposed skin and with young people much of that exposed skin is covered with very elaborate tattoos. I bet the cost of one of those tattoos would pay for several bags of groceries! -
I don't know about snap as it is not something we have here... good to know though that the States has no dire poverty...
what income level would you say is dire poverty?
Now I'm curious, what kind of psychological components that exist for those that do have access to alternatives?
That's a choice Sal (assuming that they have access to a grocer)
C'mon.. Are you saying that some kids are told that they can only turn to fast food outlets or convenience stores?
yes I see that.
We are probably best to just agree to disagree
A fine line between a hand-up and perpetuating full-on dependency
I don't know a single person that hasn't experienced a broad spectrum of economic scenarios all the way from well off to living on Ramen noodles many times a week.
You're assuming that people can't learn or adapt without someone leading them by the nose
A tragic scenario, but at the extreme risk of sounding heartless, what is society to do?
Short of removing the kids from the home and spaying/neutering the bio parents, how is society to respond?
You are generalizing, but lets also not forget that decisions were/are made by the mom and dad and there are consequences. To me, it absolutely defies logic how someone can make a conscious decision to have a family when they cannot functionally afford one.
.. And yes, I get it - there are a ton of unplanned pregnancies, but if you can't afford a box of these for $3.99 for the night, then what would make someone think that a kid is more affordable
I, on the other hand have seen first-hand a man pay for all the groceries for a young mother standing in line beside him... Many times people coming out of Safeway with a couple extra bags of milk, cheese, bread and fruit and drop it in a strangers lap.
SNAP is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, often called "food stamps." The other primary Federal sources of "welfare" are TANF, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, which is a cash payment, and the Housing Choice Vouchers Program, sometimes called "Section 8," which subsidises rent.
States and some counties also have various cash and kind assistance programs, which vary widely in eligibility and benefits.
Dire poverty? Varies according to cost of living. What would be serious poverty in Washington, New York, or Los Angeles would be a decent living in Kansas or Indiana. The Federal poverty line for a single person is $US 11,300 ($US 5.65 per hour for a 2000-hour work year) or for a family of four, $US 23,550 ($US 11.77 per hour for a 2000-hour work year).