Modern Poverty Includes A.C. and an Xbox

By and large, the link in the OP is a propaganda hit piece.

Look, when ownership of a coffee maker is presented as evidence that someone is leeching off taxpayers, it's just hard not to laugh, and much harder to not see the demagoguery of it. "Oh look, they have six rolls of toilet paper stashed in the closet, must be freeloaders!".

In the 21st century ownership of a PC is (or needs to be) taken for granted, given the huge second-hand and netbook market. What's more, it's virtually impossible to advance these days w/o one.

So basically the gist of the OP is this: if your living conditions are better than in Southern Sudan, you don't count as poor.

What bullcr@p.

Here's what I feel.

If I'm in line at the grocery store and someone talking on an iPhone is paying with food stamps, there is something wrong.

Thanks

reply to post by WickettheRabbit

If I'm in line at the grocery store and someone talking on an iPhone is paying with food stamps, there is something wrong.

The fact that the person is using a piece of technology crafted by modern day slaves?

Or what?

reply to post by haarvik


You are against the 4th and 5th amendments to the constitution?

Is that right?

reply to post by buddhasystem


I agree. As I posted earlier..

Originally posted by Indigo5
(A) Class warfare at it's ugliest courtessy of the Koch Brothers who fund the Heritage Foundation.

The Koch Brothers are the lovely folks who would like you to believe that your local grade school teacher, local fireman or civil servant is a socialist secretly living in a mansion and driving a ferrari on your taxpayer dollars.

(B) Cable companies routinely provide Free Basic Cable television to public housing and even in many well-to-do communities you can request and receive free (slimmed down) basic cable access. It is part of the agreement that Cable companies make with state and city officials to install infra-structure and cables on public property.

(C) Cell phone plans are less expensive than land lines. You can even buy them in gas stations throughout the US. For someone in bad economic circumstances uncertain of where they will live in the comming months or years, a cell phone makes sense and people looking for work need to be reachable.

It's obvious that there is a profound uptick in propaganda and efforts to hobble the middle class, I am just not certain as to what the end game is.

Is it for political gain?
A citizenry divided by class is easier to manipulate? Education and educators? The poor? The middle class? The Unions?
Is it the hope that if they hobble the middle class they will hobble the grass roots funding for progressive or democratic causes? That a GOP "permanent majority" will allow folks like the Koch brothers to operate unregulated and unhindered?

It seems that Billionaires that require a healthy consumer class like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are not on board with the "gut the working class" agenda because they require a healthy consumer class to sell their products.

Folks that profit from energy or disposables like paper plates etc. like the Koch Brothers will continue to make money even if the middle class is crushed, maybe more so with greater power in DC. Even the poor need gas, energy, electricity etc.

Edit to add: The other theorey I have flirted with as a motivation for gutting the middle and working class, plus education and educators...is it possible that certain Billionaires would prefer a shift from an educated, economically healthy middle class to a less educated, cheap labor class without a minimum wage so that they could have a "slave labor" resource in their backyard rather than go to China and India?

There have been several GOP iniatives to eliminate the minimum wage this year in concert with defunding education.

Haven't thought throught the full motivation for this propaganda war on the poor and middle class, but the goal seems clear and frightening IMO.

For me, and I'm sure others here as well, we know where we came from. Poor families and we managed to better ourselves through hard work and determination. We have an hard time with others we see who take advantage of a system that was intended to be a temporary solution to allow them to once again regain their lives.

I liken it to the murderer who blames his crime on being abused as a child. Nonsense! I was abused, yet I did not murder anyone. It's a scapegoat and an excuse. Unfortunately in this day and age everything has a label and our wonderful mind doctors just love to put the blame on someones environment so there is no admission of guilt. It's time for Americans to take responsibility for themselves and quit blaming everyone else for their misfortunes in life! Sure, there are always going to be cases where people really do attract bad luck, it's not the norm though.

And for those homeless who either took drugs and/or alcohol and found themselves without anything, that's their fault. No one held a gun to their head and forced them to do those things. Sorry, but it's YOUR fault and no one else! Yes society looks down on them as they should. The did it to themselves, no one else did. You live by the sword, you die by the sword!

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


WTF does that have to do with anything? no where in the constitution does it state that drug testing isn't allowed. And testing for drug use is no different than testing for alcohol.

reply to post by haarvik


Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

A search without probable cause is a violation of the 4th.

Using invasive medical tests without express consent is a violation of the 5th.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


Nope, sorry doesn't fly. No different that being subjected to a DUI breathalyzer. Same premise.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Just got off the phone with my wife...............................
Here's some ammunition for my detractors, LOL!

My wife and our Nanny are grouchy this week (you can figure out why).

Nanny? Yes, I said Nanny! Does that make me rich? Out of touch? Frivolous?

The answer is NO! In reality, daycare costs $150 per week per child, or $1290 per month during the summer when school is out. I posted an ad on a nanny website, and I found a nanny to live with us, watch the kids, cook, clean, and it only costs $600 per month! More than a 50% savings, plus a savings in gas money, plus more time at home with the kids, plus more value with the cooking and cleaning!

I wonder how many single mothers are paying $600 to $1200 per month for daycare and barely scraping by, and they never realized they could move a helper in with them, lighten the work load, save some time, and actually save money too?
* * * * * * * * * * * *
When school starts again, the "afterschool care" is $212.50 per month per kid. The nanny will be doing that for free! And still cooking and cleaning, just for free rent!

So I saved almost $700 per month all summer, and I'll save $425 per month this fall, I got more help for my wife and I around the house, and to all outward appearances, I look even more "rich."

What world are you living in where people on minimum wage can afford nannies?

To be absolutely honest with you if anyone here has their priorities wrong it's you. Most parents would never dream of palming off their kids to some stranger. And the ones who see no issue with doing that don't have the money.

When my Mum was working my Grandma or next door neighbor looked after us. It cost NOTHING. People with no money can't afford $600 a month. That's about 1/3rd of a wage right there.

You seem completely out of touch with the cost of living and the reality of minimum wage and being a single parent.

reply to post by haarvik


Can a DUI Breathalyzer distinguish between the beer you enjoyed last night with dinner and the beer you had less then an hour ago?

Then this is not even remotely the same premise.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


Constitutionality doesnt have any value.

Against that piece of paper and a direct SCOTUS ruling hospitals still test mothers for drugs and use false positives like poppy seeds to have the state take their babies away.

It doesnt matter what the Constitution says, the SCOTUS or all of Congress. If somebody wants to do a thing they do it.

Maybe in 5, 10, 20 or 30 years somebody complains loudly enough to spawn another round toothless and meaningless reminders of how those things shouldnt be done and then they continue on unphased.

reply to post by haarvik

You live by the sword, you die by the sword!

All these Republican and Democrat ---warhawks--- ........... (No don't say it, you'l get in trouble, Yes say it, No don't say it, yes say it,...mmmm.....)

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


I don't care if it does or does not. The fact that a positive drug result shows up shows the person uses illegal substances. Therefore, they have broken the law. Doesn't matter when, just like with murder. It doesn't matter when you commit the crime, you still committed it.

Let me guess, you smoke pot, right?

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by 0zzymand0s

 

Nope, sorry doesn't fly. No different that being subjected to a DUI breathalyzer. Same premise.

WOW...Here let me help you there. Police subject folks to breathalizers when they are suspected of illegal activity and there is probable cause or reasonable suspicion that they are breaking the law (Driving under the influence)

What you are saying is that being "poor" is the "same premise". That somehow income determines the legal rights to privacy you are entitled to.

That particular line of reasoning is particularly frightening. Poor = Criminal.

reply to post by dolphinfan


I havent seen any homeless on the streets yet with a 360 or ac. Are we discussing the dissolved middle into lower class?

reply to post by Indigo5


And by the same token if they are suspect of consuming an illegal substance then they are subject to drug testing. Receiving welfare is not a right. It is not guaranteed by the constitution. Therefore any stipulation necessary can be applied in order to obtain this assistance.

Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by woodwardjnr

 

Absolutely! In fact, just like seat belt and cell phone laws, if you are stopped for any violation you should be subject to a testing. If you are found to be positive, you are ticketed. If a repeat offender, you go to jail. I have no problem with this. This would put a huge dent in drug abuse. And by the same token, abuse of prescription drugs should be included and mandatory jail time for any physician caught dispensing it!

Your attitude displayed reminds me of them old vindictive people who are sour because kids no longer walk 10 miles to school.

You probably be all over this site stating the government is bad and over-reaching but you're actually ASKING for the government to nanny us with what you state above. All because you want everyone to live and believe as YOU do. You'll probably say you're a Conservative and just want to be left alone but what's up with this:

This would put a huge dent in drug abuse. And by the same token, abuse of prescription drugs should be included and mandatory jail time for any physician caught dispensing it!

Proof that people such as you really do want plenty of government and it's not liberals who wish to assimulate everyone into boring monogomy but instead Conservatives and Republicans. For instance, I can care less if someone wants to abuse drugs until their lungs collapse! See how that works...I'm someone who is really for freedom. Not the fake and tilted freedom you represent or the "freedom until you do something I don't agree with".

You are one of them sour grapes older people who I guess are just mad they can't have the fun the young people currently do. Bitter...

reply to post by DZAG Wright


Wow, you know me SOOO well...NOT! As long as they are illegal, then yes I agree to the testing. If they were ever legalized, do what you want but don't ask me or the government to fix your f***ed up life when you do. So you don't care if someone downs a fifth of Jack and then drives all over the city? Because that is what you are saying. getting stoned is no different.

reply to post by haarvik


Nope. I don't even drink. I took a civics class once, and actually paid attention. Let me guess? You didn't?