Lazy Women Complains She Has No Food For Her Kids

[Pogo]

Community meals, churches, friends, family. There is no excuse for letting your children go hungry. None. And of course, there are free breakfasts and lunches at school.

That community network, I just noted, is strained. It's in the article. I'm sure she's availing herself of what there is, otherwise they'd all be dead by now. I believe it's a story about how this computer glitch was a setback for some people.

And keep in mind if you're dependent on a food bank that even if it is functioning has a four-hour wait line, that's four hours you can't be seeking a job. A setback.

Unless what you're saying is that it's impossible to have to go hungry 100% of the time, and I know you know better.

By the way I've never seen a school that serves breakfast. Was I born too late?

Apparently. All the ones around here serve breakfasts.

Dayum!

Now if my schools had done that they might have sold me on the idea of going to school instead of the prison it was.

 

[Againsheila]

That's addressed in the OP article. The local food bank is overwhelmed, largely because of this computer malfunction.

Community meals, churches, friends, family. There is no excuse for letting your children go hungry. None. And of course, there are free breakfasts and lunches at school.

That community network, I just noted, is strained. It's in the article. I'm sure she's availing herself of what there is, otherwise they'd all be dead by now. I believe it's a story about how this computer glitch was a setback for some people.

And keep in mind if you're dependent on a food bank that even if it is functioning has a four-hour wait line, that's four hours you can't be seeking a job. A setback.

Unless what you're saying is that it's impossible to have to go hungry 100% of the time, and I know you know better.

By the way I've never seen a school that serves breakfast. Was I born too late?

You make sure your kids eat, if you have to go door to door begging. That's what I'm saying. One lady around here used to go door to door looking for odd jobs she could do to earn money for her kids. We all came up with simple jobs for her. She got money, she worked for it and we all benefited. I will say I try very much to find jobs for people who are in need. Even bought wood from one of the homeless guys we give lunches to at the church. Paid a woman money to hem my husband's pants, etc. There's always ways we can help people. We went through a lot of hard times but my kids NEVER went hungry. NEVER!

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

And how do we know when that picture was taken?

This is another thing that drives me nutz.

If you are so poor.... that if you lose your job, you are instantly going to be without food.....

Why do you have a cell phone? Do you not get this?

Cancel the cell phone, and save up that money you are blowing, into a banking account for when you have an emergency like an unexpected lay off.

As I said before, I've been unemployed many times. Never once have I been in a position that I was needing welfare and food stamps, because if I don't have money in the bank, I don't spend money on anything. ANYTHING. I save up money in the bank until I have enough that if something should happen, then I have cash ready.

Let's say that picture is from 6 months prior to her lay off. $600 in the bank more, can buy a lot of rice. You can feed your kids for weeks, before needing food stamps.

I've done this myself. Now granted the longest I have ever been unemployed was about 2 months, because I get out there, and find myself a job. But even then, I had several thousand in the bank, and cut my spending down to ZILCH. You can last a long time, if you buy the bare necessities, and if you are not dumb as a rock, and blowing every extra dollar out of every check, so you have no money in the bank.

When you are that dumb, why should society be forced to pay for you?

And again.... what we teaching these kids? We are teaching them that as an adult you don't have to be responsible and frugal, and society will bail you out when you don't have money set aside for emergencies.

Then we wonder why we have constantly poor people.

I think somebody covered this before, but a cellphone seems essential for keeping track of either the kids or whoever's watching them.

Plus, by now there are a lot of people who have a cellphone in lieu of a landline. It becomes their only phone. I would do that myself if I had a cell signal where I live. It would cut my costs.

And I'm not sure how you equate 6 months of cell phone to $600. If that's what you're paying you're not much of a shopper. As for "dumb as a rock, and blowing every extra dollar out of every check, so you have no money in the bank", you don't know that's any part of the story here; it's an assumption. It's all very easy to make assumptions about the lot of somebody you don't know and know you'll never meet.

She doesnt need a $600 smart phone for that.

 

[syrenn]

That's addressed in the OP article. The local food bank is overwhelmed, largely because of this computer malfunction.

Community meals, churches, friends, family. There is no excuse for letting your children go hungry. None. And of course, there are free breakfasts and lunches at school.

That community network, I just noted, is strained. It's in the article. I'm sure she's availing herself of what there is, otherwise they'd all be dead by now. I believe it's a story about how this computer glitch was a setback for some people.

And keep in mind if you're dependent on a food bank that even if it is functioning has a four-hour wait line, that's four hours you can't be seeking a job. A setback.

Unless what you're saying is that it's impossible to have to go hungry 100% of the time, and I know you know better.

By the way I've never seen a school that serves breakfast. Was I born too late?

i was under the impression....the phone was for looking for a job. Some reason they cant us it while waiting?

they have been serving breakfast here in public schools for a good 40 years now.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I don't understand. In our city, there are no less than 4 community meals each week. Free, all you have to do is show up. Plus, one of the churches hands out free lunches Mon-Thurs. They're not great, but they're free. Plus we have the foodbank. Plus food stamps. In this day and age, any woman who lets her kids go without food should lose custody of those kids. There is NO excuse.

That's addressed in the OP article. The local food bank is overwhelmed, largely because of this computer malfunction.

Community meals, churches, friends, family. There is no excuse for letting your children go hungry. None. And of course, there are free breakfasts and lunches at school.

You can probably forget about family and friends. She more then likely owes all of them money already.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Ever heard of "rape"?

Oh wait, that's something 'God intended to happen'...

You're really going to go there?

"There" was already went to. In both senses.

Brilliant. You managed to say absolutely nothing germane to the conversation yet again.

 

[Pogo]

This is another thing that drives me nutz.

If you are so poor.... that if you lose your job, you are instantly going to be without food.....

Why do you have a cell phone? Do you not get this?

Cancel the cell phone, and save up that money you are blowing, into a banking account for when you have an emergency like an unexpected lay off.

As I said before, I've been unemployed many times. Never once have I been in a position that I was needing welfare and food stamps, because if I don't have money in the bank, I don't spend money on anything. ANYTHING. I save up money in the bank until I have enough that if something should happen, then I have cash ready.

Let's say that picture is from 6 months prior to her lay off. $600 in the bank more, can buy a lot of rice. You can feed your kids for weeks, before needing food stamps.

I've done this myself. Now granted the longest I have ever been unemployed was about 2 months, because I get out there, and find myself a job. But even then, I had several thousand in the bank, and cut my spending down to ZILCH. You can last a long time, if you buy the bare necessities, and if you are not dumb as a rock, and blowing every extra dollar out of every check, so you have no money in the bank.

When you are that dumb, why should society be forced to pay for you?

And again.... what we teaching these kids? We are teaching them that as an adult you don't have to be responsible and frugal, and society will bail you out when you don't have money set aside for emergencies.

Then we wonder why we have constantly poor people.

I think somebody covered this before, but a cellphone seems essential for keeping track of either the kids or whoever's watching them.

Plus, by now there are a lot of people who have a cellphone in lieu of a landline. It becomes their only phone. I would do that myself if I had a cell signal where I live. It would cut my costs.

And I'm not sure how you equate 6 months of cell phone to $600. If that's what you're paying you're not much of a shopper. As for "dumb as a rock, and blowing every extra dollar out of every check, so you have no money in the bank", you don't know that's any part of the story here; it's an assumption. It's all very easy to make assumptions about the lot of somebody you don't know and know you'll never meet.

She doesnt need a $600 smart phone for that.

Are you completely illiterate?

Nobody has evidence that her phone costs $600; that was that wag who quoted an arbitrary figure -- a number he completely pulled out of his ass.

From the beginning of this thread people have been making up fairy tales about this woman they don't even know. Again -- talk is cheap.

Learn to read.

 

[Pogo]

Community meals, churches, friends, family. There is no excuse for letting your children go hungry. None. And of course, there are free breakfasts and lunches at school.

That community network, I just noted, is strained. It's in the article. I'm sure she's availing herself of what there is, otherwise they'd all be dead by now. I believe it's a story about how this computer glitch was a setback for some people.

And keep in mind if you're dependent on a food bank that even if it is functioning has a four-hour wait line, that's four hours you can't be seeking a job. A setback.

Unless what you're saying is that it's impossible to have to go hungry 100% of the time, and I know you know better.

By the way I've never seen a school that serves breakfast. Was I born too late?

i was under the impression....the phone was for looking for a job. Some reason they cant us it while waiting?

Good point, that's another reason to have a phone. You can call around for work while waiting in that line, but you can't be going to interviews.

they have been serving breakfast here in public schools for a good 40 years now.

They must have known to wait until I was done with school, 'cause I never heard of that until here tonight.

 

[Pogo]

You're really going to go there?

"There" was already went to. In both senses.

Brilliant. You managed to say absolutely nothing germane to the conversation yet again.

You asked, I answered.

If you don't want the answer, don't ask the question.

 

[syrenn]

That community network, I just noted, is strained. It's in the article. I'm sure she's availing herself of what there is, otherwise they'd all be dead by now. I believe it's a story about how this computer glitch was a setback for some people.

And keep in mind if you're dependent on a food bank that even if it is functioning has a four-hour wait line, that's four hours you can't be seeking a job. A setback.

Unless what you're saying is that it's impossible to have to go hungry 100% of the time, and I know you know better.

By the way I've never seen a school that serves breakfast. Was I born too late?

i was under the impression....the phone was for looking for a job. Some reason they cant us it while waiting?

Good point, that's another reason to have a phone. You can call around for work while waiting in that line, but you can't be going to interviews.

they have been serving breakfast here in public schools for a good 40 years now.

They must have known to wait until I was done with school, 'cause I never heard of that until here tonight.

agreed... a phone is a good thing.... a cricket phone.

No email, no web surfing,no games, no apps, no camera, no video and no texting.

 

[Pogo]

i was under the impression....the phone was for looking for a job. Some reason they cant us it while waiting?

Good point, that's another reason to have a phone. You can call around for work while waiting in that line, but you can't be going to interviews.

they have been serving breakfast here in public schools for a good 40 years now.

They must have known to wait until I was done with school, 'cause I never heard of that until here tonight.

agreed... a phone is a good thing.... a cricket phone.

No email, no web surfing,no games, no apps, no camera, no video and no texting.

That's what I use.
I gave Verizon a hundred bucks last August to buy time. I'm still using that $100.

 

[Againsheila]

That's addressed in the OP article. The local food bank is overwhelmed, largely because of this computer malfunction.

Community meals, churches, friends, family. There is no excuse for letting your children go hungry. None. And of course, there are free breakfasts and lunches at school.

You can probably forget about family and friends. She more then likely owes all of them money already.

I don't care how much you owe me, you ask for food, you can have it.

 

[Barb]

No, I am quite sure I'm right:


parasite  
Use Parasite in a sentence

par·a·site [par-uh-sahyt] Show IPA
noun
1.
an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
2.
a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.
3.
(in ancient Greece) a person who received free meals in return for amusing or impudent conversation, flattering remarks, etc.

Try a little harder next time.

Don't truncate my post to make yourself seem correct. Your name fits you.

You have a quote by a fellow dingbat. I have a reputable dictionary definition. I think "Dingbat" would be a very suitable name for you.

Try harder again.

Why I bother with you at all is a mystery even to me.

How a USM professor became an Internet meme*|*USM Free Press

To clarify, Read said the main point of his statement was that “if people are concerned about those making money without work, then they should look at the top 1 percent.”

 

[Barb]

Well she is 44 and has five kids. You don't think she started collecting last year do you? She probably started four units ago. Not only that. The second lady Camilla Lewis who says she can't feed her brood is tapping away on her smart phone right in the picture.

Okay, so you, too are a

Barb I really don't want to be rude. So if you want to be stupid do it with someone else.

Well, I want to be rude.

The bolded you stated as fact, then backed off a bit to suggest that it stands to reason, because you assume it's so, and so to make others assume such as well. And so, I stand firmly behind the observation.

We've dealt with the question of the phone already, and the fact that people getting food stamps often DO have jobs, and people on hard times also often DO have nice things from happier days. When more than half of the country is either on some kind of public assistance or a paycheck or a a banana peel away from it, and when there are 6 applicants for every available job, you've got to be out of your fucking MIND to think the "success = virtue" bullshit will be taken as anything BUT bullshit.

 

[Barb]

I don't see a link, but it doesn't matter -- all of this is hypothetical. The poster (Claudette) made a blanket statement based on an assumption of motivations that none of us knows. I pointed out an exception that disproves that blanket statement.

Five times?

No you didn't

Didn't what?

Again, what this woman's story is, none of us knows. The hatemongers have been filling that vacuum by making it up since this thread started, and here we have wags going on and on as if that made-up crap is real. So you're gonna sit there and tell me my made-up scenario of rape doesn't apply, while other made-up scenaria do? Please.

If bullshit points of bullshit logic were dollar bills, we could feed that family and put all the kids through college on this thread alone.

"you must spread some rep around before giving it to Pogo again."

 

[Barb]

i was under the impression....the phone was for looking for a job. Some reason they cant us it while waiting?

Good point, that's another reason to have a phone. You can call around for work while waiting in that line, but you can't be going to interviews.

they have been serving breakfast here in public schools for a good 40 years now.

They must have known to wait until I was done with school, 'cause I never heard of that until here tonight.

agreed... a phone is a good thing.... a cricket phone.

No email, no web surfing,no games, no apps, no camera, no video and no texting.

Why stop there? Why don't we reinstate the English Poor Laws?
The general attitudes and talking points are already in place, and many of the results:

The Poor Law

The Poor Law was the way that the poor were helped in 1815. The law said that each parish had to look after its own poor. If you were unable to work then you were given some money to help you survive. However, the cost of the Poor Law was increasing every year. By 1830 it cost about £7 million and criticism of the law was mounting.
The money was raised by taxes on middle and upper class people, causing resentment. They complained that money went to people who were lazy and did not want to work.
Critics also suggested that allowance systems made the situation worse because they encouraged poor people to have children that they could not afford to look after.
Another criticism of the old Poor Law was that it kept workers' wages low because employers knew that wages would be supplemented by money provided by the Poor Law.

BBC - GCSE Bitesize: The Poor Law

Are there no workhouses?

Economic Security in America

When the English-speaking colonists arrived in the New World they brought with them the ideas and customs they knew in England, including the "Poor Laws." The first colonial poor laws were fashioned after those of the Poor Law of 1601. They featured local taxation to support the destitute; they discriminated between the "worthy" and the "unworthy" poor; and all relief was a local responsibility. No public institutions for the poor or standardized eligibility criteria would exist for nearly a century. It was up to local town elders to decide who was worthy of support and how that support would be provided.

As colonial America grew more complex, diverse and mobile, the localized systems of poor relief were strained. The result was some limited movement to state financing and the creation of almshouses and poorhouses to "contain" the problem. For much of the 18th and 19th centuries most poverty relief was provided in the almshouses and poorhouses. Relief was made as unpleasant as possible in order to "discourage" dependency. Those receiving relief could lose their personal property, the right to vote, the right to move, and in some cases were required to wear a large "P" on their clothing to announce their status.

Support outside the institutions was called "outdoor relief" and was looked upon with distrust by most citizens. It was felt that "outdoor relief" made things too easy on the poor who should be discouraged from the habit of poverty in every way possible. Nevertheless, since it was expensive to build and operate the poorhouses, and since it was relatively easy to dispense cash or in-kind support, some outdoor relief did emerge. Even so, prevailing American attitudes toward poverty relief were always skeptical and the role of government was kept to the minimum. So much so that by as late as 1915 at most only 25% of the money spent on outdoor relief was from public funds.

Social Security History

I swear, the petty and casual cruelty I've seen in this thread is an appalling reminder that we are devolving as a species.

 

[Politico]

Wtf are you talking about? Nice things from past good times? I said I didn't want to be rude. Never said I can't. If your talking about $216 worth of food stamps which is what she claims, you lose the fucking phone. That right there would make up for most of it. You don't keep it and let your kids starve.

 

[Barb]

Wtf are you talking about? Nice things from past good times? I said I didn't want to be rude. Never said I can't. If your talking about $216 worth of food stamps which is what she claims, you lose the fucking phone. That right there would make up for most of it. You don't keep it and let your kids starve.

Happier days - she was employed - read the fucking story before you go making things up. How much do you think a used cell phone goes for these days, especially if a poor person is selling it back to the store?
Do you ever stop to listen to yourself?
Does it hurt?
I sincerely hope it does.

And she's not letting the kids starve, she goes hungry herself first, and some of the ramen noodles are squirreled away so they aren't eaten all at once - rationed in order that they'll be available until a computer fuck up is resolved and she can stock the pantry again. You're forgetting that this did not happen to ONE mother, it happened to a community.

 

[Politico]

Again wtf are you talking about? I made nothing up. I am the only one who read it obviously. She was employed. Hasn't been for months. When that happens you make changes. And your neg is returned.

 

[Claudette]

But, then you would be ainvading my privacy by telling me to wear a condom, or to stop having sex.

/sarcasm off.

LAMO It is her privacy and her decsion.

Your an idiot.

That's "You're" and "decision"
If it's her business and decision,then why should I be responsible for paying for them?

You shouldn't be and neither should I or any other taxpayer. No way should we be forced to bankroll her life for her.

She had the choice of using birth control or demanding her partner wear a condom. She obviously didn't, hence all her kids. She should be the one supporting them not we taxpayers.