BS: More Insult to the Poor

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Feb 06 - 11:43 AM

you too.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Feb 06 - 10:44 AM

To Guest; Poor 'G', you have just brought him down to your level.

(at least in your eyes) He will recover, you can't.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 09:22 PM

I don't feel I am giving anything of value to this place

True.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: autolycus
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 04:54 PM

Guest G.,

   Forgive me but I did not blame anybody for anything. You are rading in something I didn't say.

   I was just sketching in a few facts for chewing and digesting.

It's partly a matter of, surely the situation some of us are pointing at is terrible, immoral (?) and we are not, as a race, helpless victims.

I won't add more, oh God yet more, until the points some of us on this side of the debate get answered. Perhaps, as someone already suggested, we should take the lack of direct responses hitherto as all the answer we require to know already where you on the other side are at.

Personally, I'm not happy with that because these matters must be debated, or we'll all go down the pan even quicker than seems likely.

Just remembered - a conservative is someone ...... but no, however tempting, I'll stick to the request for direct responses, preferably ones that are not irrelevant, based on a misreading, or sheer bile.

Here's hoping,

Auto.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 11:08 AM

That last post was from both of me;o)

J

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 11:05 AM

G posted an acknowledgement that we will always have those who need care and assistance, sometimes from the cradle to the grave.

We can talk all we want of what might help and what might not to address the roots of poverty. We can debate the balance between individual and society responsibilites, rights and choices. And it is certainly appropriate and necessary to do so in a democracy.

The current reality is that a large portion of those "who need care and assistance" in this country at the present time, are not getting the care and assistance they require just to meet basic needs. Do they just sit and suffer while we debate?

There is some common ground with some conservatives already, and I think that is apparent in G's posts. We need to implement care for those we can based on that common ground, even if that care is largely a band-aid. We can stop the bleeding of lives and souls now.

Janie
Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Peace
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 10:35 AM

Some folks think they did it all by themselves. Wankers that they are.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 14 Feb 06 - 03:10 AM

"The amount of giving to the poor is amazing, particulary from a corporate point. But too many seem to think we should all be equal with regard to finances"

From a corporate point of view? Exactly how much do they give to the poor? Seems to me its the corporations that have the fancy accountants and the big tax cuts. I'd like to see some facts and figures on that big lie.

As to equal finances. Nobody said it had to be equal. Most of the poor in North America would settle for half of the average household income. Thats hardly equal.

...and Don, you are absolutely right.

"Most "haves" had a head start, being born into well to do families and eased into good education, and higher paying jobs. There's not too much personal achievement in that.

It's damn hard to climb that ladder with so many of the better off standing on your head."

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 11:25 PM

All these whiney well-to-do-white folks seem to have the same disability as George Dubya: born with a silver foot in their mouths.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: hesperis
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 11:23 PM

"If we decide to raise taxes and just give them the money then nothing will be accomplished. They will just be complacent to sit on their butts and wait for the check to come in each month."

I've asked every person in a women's shelter what they would need to not be in the shelter... They need housing, they need a job, they need help in transportation to that job until the first paycheck comes in, and some of them need health care or education so that they can get a job at all.

If people are sitting on their butts waiting for the check... that's not complacency, that's *despair* because the check will not allow them to pay for the things they require to get off their butts.

I left high school before graduating, because I was sick, but mostly because welfare refused to pay the transportation allowance so that I could get to school every day. They told me that a sick person could walk up and down a steep hill every day and if I wanted to take the bus outside my door to school I'd have to pay for it myself. Then they told me that if I didn't go to school I'd get cut off and wouldn't have any money for rent or food.

As I had $20 a month for food after rent, I just dropped out. You want to call that complacency?


Here's complacency. I need $35,000 in order to go to college for one year, because of health problems caused by growing up on welfare. The government loans would amount to $14,000. I'm too sick to work part-time and go to school part-time much less full-time. Most of the kids in college live with their parents and work full-time during the summer, AND work part-time during school, AND receive cash and food support from their parents.

So where am I going to find an extra $21,000 a year in order to go to school and take health treatments so that I can have a future?

Or, I need $20,000 now to take those treatments and wait for a year to be healthy enough to work.


You want to help someone who's trying? Find me $20,000.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 10:26 PM

G,

    I didn't see your last post until I just finished my own post before this one.

    Thanks for engaging in this dialogue. If we were to live in the same town, and were to talk and share our ideas over a period of time, I think we could eventually get to "Yes." I think we could find a 'middle way'. It wouldn't be exactly what either of us thought was best, but we would find a balance, and people would be helped mopre than they are now.

    All the best,

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 10:16 PM

G,

When children must be removed from their families, I am certainly in favor of an improved system of care that will better meet the needs of those children than the system of care we have now. However,the act of the determination of the best interests of a child is fraught with conflicting values, ambivalence, ambiguity, and conflicting needs, both within (internally) the stakeholders, and among the stakeholders.   It is rarely an unequivocable choice.

Elsewhere I have said that poverty is a complex matrix of individual and societal values, choices and priorities, and that every institution in society impinges on poverty. Certainly that encompasses the institutions, including but not limited to the family, that are involved in the care and socialization of children.

However, I have never seen, read, or experienced anything that would suggest that bad child-rearing, and failure to teach personal responsibility are anywhere near being core causes of wide-scale poverty and deprivation such as exists in our country. Factors, sure. Central to systemic poverty? No.

So,if I were Queen, I would certainly want to promote the welfare of families and children. The center of any program to help aleviate real deprivation would rest on a number of pillars at the center, including effective support and empowerment of families and communities in their efforts to raise children who can be effective in their lives and who will have the skills, values and means to be good citizens of the human race and good stewards of the Earth.

When children must be removed from their families, not only the parents have failed. We as a society have also failed.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,G
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 09:46 PM

auto - just go on blaming someone or something rather than addressing the problem directly. There have always been the "haves" and the "have nots" and there will always be that combination. The amount of giving to the poor is amazing, particulary from a corporate point.
But too many seem to think we should all be equal with regard to finances. That will never happen - even socialism could not accomplish that.

Guest - I am glad you don't care what I think. It is good to know we are on an even playing field with regard to feelings. Thoughts and ideas, now that is another subject and there you are hopelessly outclassed.

Good luck, Janie. I know I have given my "pound of flesh" over the years. Only I know the extent and that is all that is important to me.

I don't feel I am giving anything of value to this place, judging from some of the posts, nor do I think enough value is being given to you. A lot of unhappy, discontented and maybe in a couple cases, mal-adjusted people here. On that note, I shall leave as there is so much else to do with my time. I have come back here more than once just to be polite with regard to responding to posts.

I know, "don't let the door hit me in the aqq on the way out".
Don't worry, it won't.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 06:46 PM

'While that one act on your part does not make you a hero in my eyes, it was an admirable act.'

I don't give a shit what you think, Guest G. Never have and never will.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: autolycus
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 06:43 PM

Don (wyziwyg)T. - thanks.

Guest,G . Someone asks for the connection between bonuses and poverty.
    So I spend time, thought and energy to suggest some specific suggestions.
    Then you ask what the connection is.
    Don proved that what I wrote is visible and on the thread.
    May I humbly recommend you to re(?)read my earlier post.

    Auto.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,G
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 06:30 PM

Again, what is the relationship between a bonus and being poor?
Why does not everyone get a bonus? Why is not everyone poor?

Don; I sure as hell was not born into a "well to do family"! So, why do my offspring have nice houses. drive new cars and dress my Grandchildren well and send them to sports camps, etc.
Answer; Even less well to do families can raise their children to be responsible, hardworking individuals who realize that a 12th grade (or less) education just doesn't cut it. This a was a known fact in the 60's. We must stop making excuses for those that don't try, realizing that a few fail even when they do try.

Janie, I know all about the indians. That was done for a somewhat different reason and a pathetic reason at that. I only advocate removing those where it is determined that it is in the best interest of the kids. Of course, this may result in more numbers than you feel is required but we can discuss that later.

Emma, that is so much BS in calling it post natal abortion. Please explain the circumstances of a "worst but loving family background".

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 05:52 PM

Damn right Auto.

We keep hearing from "haves" that the poor made the wrong choices, and should be left to get themselves out of the mire. They constantly bang on about how they worked for what they have, and they are not about to give up even a few cents to help their fellow man.

To me, the only ones who earned their way are the few that started out at the bottom and climbed out.

Most "haves" had a head start, being born into well to do families and eased into good education, and higher paying jobs. There's not too much personal achievement in that.

It's damn hard to climb that ladder with so many of the better off standing on your head.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Emma B
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 05:35 PM

Please excuse my typos in the last post and put it down to simmering anger!

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Emma B
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 05:33 PM

May I just reiterate what Janie said in her last post
I trained under the UK Home Office as A Child Care Officer working with children who, for various reasons, suffered periods of seperation from their families. The results of an upbringing in residential establishments were as well documented as they were detrimental and even the best foster homes could not, in most insatnces, provide an adequate subsitute for even the "worst" but loving family background.
Many of my colleagues would refer to the type of forcible removal Guest G adovates as "post -natal abortion"

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: autolycus
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 05:23 PM

I laid out some of the conservative position - no response from conservatives to the analysis.

Then I request some strsight answers to some straight questions that various people have put -another thundering silence.

Comparing vast bonuses with the starving of the U.S. and we're asked what the connection is supposed to be. I'll suggest one in a tick. Then comes the cracking, quality response, "It smacks of socialism." Wow. Brilliant. What a knockout blow.

I don't just say, "That's rather conservative" and leave it at that, I set out some of the conservative position and suggest a flaw. In other words,I try to be consrtuctive, discussion-wise.

Connections between obscene bonuses and poverty elsewhere.

1. More for one group (on a scale that I'd say NOBODY needs) must mean less for those in desperate need. After all, where do we think the money for those Wall Street bankers come from, apart from thin air.

2. It's not a Christian set-up , is it? What was that about giving to the poor, about not storing up riches in this world?

3. People with extraordinary wealth pay more at the top of each product pyramid, and at every level all the way down the pyramid, the sellers can say,"Prices have gone up on the level above, so we'll push ours up some more", the whole thing being like a reverse-domino effect. End result , more and more becomes beyond the reach of those at the bottom.

4. Is the desired end-game as we have in Brazil, say, with the rich behind walls, and the poor living in desperation on hillsides?


      Many have posted very specific points on the thread.

      They get ignored.

      What time does the dialogue start?


Auto.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 05:08 PM

G--you mean, sorta like we did with the "Indian Schools"?

Ask Native Americans about that wonderful experience of benevolence.

Watch "Rabbit Fence."



Newflash.

Most parents do the very best they can for their children, given the knowledge and the resources, both internally and externally, available to them.

How about we look at the myriad ways we as a society can support families and parents. If at all possible, families need to be left whole. There are times when parents are emotionally or physically unfit or unable to provide nonabusive or non-neglectful care of thier children, and then I agree, the children need removed from the home.   

But a policy of routinely removing children from their families in order that they learn the correct values and skills to stay off the public dole sucks for air.

Talk to professionally trained Child Protective Service Workers. Ask them about the scarcity of resources to help families function in emotionally and socially healthy ways.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,G
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 04:47 PM

Hey, where have I ever suggested that we will never have those that require continual aid and care, some from cradle to grave. That is a given. We will never see the need for group homes and mental institutions go away in our lifetime.

Janie, you and I don't seem to agree that starting a program to save the very young - yes, in some cases, an orphange type situation as the parents don't have to be physically dead for the child to be treated like one. Once the pattern of skipping school, learning to live on the dole, (and here is that big catch phrase) not learning personal responsibility is adapted, changing the direction of those is almost an impossibility and at the least, untenable.

And, "name not given", I am not against helping one individual. If everyone did that, the problem would would cease to exist. (with adequate followup) Why would you expect grief from me? While that one act on your part does not make you a hero in my eyes, it was an admirable act. You make my point; a leg up until the person is able to stand on their own two legs.

Additionally, some of cases will never get to a point where they will start receiving "Christmas bonuses". Janie, your two examples involved people in their 30's and 40's. I am insisting on action with those BEFORE preteens. Never liked the adage that "you can't teach an old dog new tricks". One of the reasons is I am now one of those old dogs and in many cases, it is true. As you well know, when a pattern of behavior is established and allowed to exist, change is very, very difficult, if not impossible, in most cases.

I have had experiences where an eighteen year old awarded a full athletic scholarship could not carry on when put in a college atmosphere where he had to interact with his peers. His growing up with one abusive parent obviously caused him to self destruct when placed in a group that did not have the same societal experience that he had while living at home.

I think we must start with the young, the very young, as I believe we had proven in the past 40 years the current methodology is not accomplishing the goals we all like to think are going to occur any day now.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 03:47 PM

Vote for Pedro

J

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,Name not given--need no grief from cops or g
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 03:17 PM

About six months ago I was in another city doing some work. I stayed at a hostel-type place. I encountered a woman there who was bruised up pretty good. I spoke with her. She had been beaten by a gang that has a reputation for dealing drugs, running prostitution and weapons. The gang was looking for her because they thought she was going to speak with the police and testify against them. The police wanted to speak with her but they then intended to release her without any protection. Long and the short: I got her out of town to a 'safe house' where she received treatment she'd needed for a long time. (She was/is on a methadone program and she has AIDS. Her mental state was terrible--as you might imagine.) She returned to the hostel a few weeks back while she was in town for a day. The fellow at the desk told me she said hello and that she was looking healthy, happy and peaceful. All she needed was a break, and she got one. Sometimes, that's all people need--a break.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,Just a Mudcat Brit
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 03:05 PM

I don't confess to know any thing about US politics but why isn't this woman (Janie) in your parliament or President even?
Yes, I know, it's money isn't it?

Subject: another Insult to the Poor
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 02:54 PM

If you want to give the poor a fighting chance, lets make the tax cuts permanent.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 02:46 PM

Real situation #2. Again with demographics changed.

Single white female in her late 30's. Borderline intellectual functioning. Terrible childhood history of physical, emotional and sexual abuse. Significant history of alcohol and drug problems. Significant family history of emotional and psychological dysfunction.   

   She put the alcohol and drugs down several years ago. She actually began to work in therapy. She has been clean for about 5 years now. She works 3 jobs and works 7 days a week. She lives in the cheapest, worst housing available in my area. If no financial emergencies come up (car breakdown, visit to the ER, etc.) She can just pay her rent and utilities with the pay she gets from 3 jobs. She does her laundry in her bathtub because she can't afford the laundry mat. When she doesn't have the money for gas to get back and forth to work, she has an acquaintance who will take her, provided she has sex with him. I will occasionally round up food and clothing for her. I help her with her budgeting--there just isn't enough to go around.

She has all the job skills she is capable of developing, and is working at her level of ability. She is not eligible for any kind of financial assistance.

I'd also like to hear the plan to "pull her up" to a place where she gets a living wage and a nice Christmas bonus.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Peace
Date: 13 Feb 06 - 01:49 PM

The Right does run out of momentum--but not bullshit. It has ever been thus.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Greg F.
Date: 12 Feb 06 - 05:26 PM

I think (hope) the Right has run out of momentum

Not.

(more's the pity)

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 11 Feb 06 - 11:13 PM

In some ways, this discussion really illustrates that poverty is a mega-issue. A complex soup that all mixed together, finally reflects the balance of values of the culture. The ingredients, their number and their proportions, are not fixed. The recipe-and the end product-vary. But every institution within a society plays a role in the amount and nature of poverty, and visa versa.

Our government is not something other than us. WE are the society. WE are the culture-bearers. The government is OUR agent. It reflects US. And it lags behind the shifting values of a culture.

I think (hope) the Right has run out of momentum. The time is right for change. The pendulum appears to be just past that point of weightlessness. Liberals, minorities advocacy groups, the Left, Labor, progressive religious institutions, and Civil Libertarians need to be moving toward an effective coalition. They(we)need to already be trying to reach some modicum of balance among their own differences.

And let us encourage our young people to be involved. We need their vigor, their idealism, their knowledge of their world today and where they want to go with it.

Jeez! Sounds like I'm writing a speech. We need a good, martial hymn right here:>)

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Troll
Date: 11 Feb 06 - 12:54 PM

Bobert, until people start to value education for its own sake again, we will have a major drop-out problem in this country.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 11:47 PM

Common man...disposable commodity....I know! Let's go start a war! It will give jobs to all the poor people. Yeh! And training and education too! That will take care of those high school drop outs. Get 'em off the streets. Teach'em a little dicipline.

Hey--so some kids die. They weren't doing anything but sucking up tax dollars anyway. Shucks, alot of 'em aren't even white. Civilian casualties 'over there?' Hey--we try to minimize collateral damage, but we've got some profits to protect. And if we are going to war, it is especially important that we protect our oil interests.

Ah. I'm just getting more pissed off by my own sarcasm. And mad ain't always smart and effective. Good night.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Ron Davies
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 10:46 PM

So, Guest G, you were going to tell us how the woman Janie cited was to get a Christmas bonus. We're still waiting.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 10:35 PM

The history of the labor movement keeps running through my head as I read this thread. I also can't help but contrast worker conditions and protections in West Virginia, where labor unions have been strong to those in North Carolina where I now live, and where workers have few protections. It is, and always has been a "right to work' state. The rise of the labor movement in this country was the result of the big industrialists treating most of the labor force as nothing but a commodity. The rise of the great middle class after World War II was largely the result of the unions securing living wages and improved working conditions for millions of blue collar workers. The 'great capitalists' largely were content to treat the labor force like dirt until they were forced to change. And societal responsibility to the individual as being supportive of the collective good was a national value that developed out of the labor movement.
    The pendulum swings. The unions became big businesses themselves, and many union leaders were just as currupt as many corporate leaders. And the world changed. Third world countries on their way up the capitalist economy ladder became able to effectively compete with the American and European labor forces. Their workers and their environments weren't and aren't afforded the same protections, so they can work and produce 'on the cheap.' Globalization caught the labor movement unprepared. Instead of trying to encourage decent labor practices abroad, they relied on protectionism and shot themselves in the foot. It would have been in the enlightened best interests of the labor movement to have encouraged and supported workers abroad to organize as their industries grew.
    Now the unions have lost much of their power and effectiveness as technology and cheap overseas labor have reduced our own labor force.
    And the 'great capitalists' of today--the huge multinational corportations and their CEO's, once again view the common man as a disposable commodity. They again have pretty much full control of our national government. And you see what is happening.
   
Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 09:23 PM

I totally agree, bobert.

The trouble is that the people in power are only interested in short term solutions, if at all. They are not at all interested in 'the greatest good'. They know that their immediate family will have access to education and all the finer things in life. They could care less about the struggling masses.

The middle and lower classes are so embroiled in racism, homophobia and nationalism that they waste all of their energy on negativity. Imagine what could happen if the middle and lower classes would stop reacting to the propaganda that divides them. They are also struggling to pay the rent and put food on the table.

Its gonna take a miracle.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 08:22 PM

I recently heard that 76% of black males do not graduate from high school in Baltimore City...

Yes, Janie, this is a major social problem and major problems aren't easily solved... What we need to do is take the Great Society, the New Deal and throw in a healthy dose of the Marshall Plan and really make the efforts to bust up some rather disturbing cycles...

And we need to stop incarcerating folks who have drug problems and we need to reduce out incarceration rates drasticly and this is going to take a major comittment but, hey, if we mirror who things have been going the wrong way for the last 20 years over the next 20, how is America to survive it's own self??? I mean, who will be left to pay to incarcerate 10,000,000 to 20,000,000 folks when the Chinese money runs out???

These are some serious qustions...

What the US is doing now ain't working... A 76% black drop out rate in Baltimore will come back 'round and cripple us over a given period of time...

This has to be America's largest domestic challenge and one that it can not afford to loose...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 08:12 PM

There are many different groups of poor people. What I am concerned about, are the mentally challenged who are left to roam the streets and become prey to drug dealers and pimps. There are also those who are physically challenged. I think these people deserve to be in a category all by themselves. In other words, there should be no dispute about their entitlement to basic needs and we should have the decency to provide for those who are less fortunate.

The other categories are the single parents, drunks and drug addicts. There are probably a few more categories, too.

Single parents and those who are unskilled or uneducated need job training or higher education as well as access to daycare.

I guess that leaves us with the drunks and the drug addicts.

Unfortunately, everyone wants to tar welfare recipients with the same brush. I think we need to approach the problem based on the needs of specific groups. To talk about all of them in one breath is pretty insensitive and very stereotypical.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 07:26 PM

It was Humphrey House (1960's biographer of Dickens) who pointed out that Dickens was apolitical and hated politicians. House pointed out, what Dickens was saying was that our political allegiances are irrelevant. What matters is that we behave well towards each other.

Just basic human decency.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: number 6
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 04:47 PM

From Charles Dickens A Christmas Carol

"Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude," returned the gentleman, "a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?"

"Nothing!" Scrooge replied.

"You wish to be anonymous?"

"I wish to be left alone," said Scrooge. "Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned -- they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there."

"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."

"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides -- excuse me -- I don't know that."

"But you might know it," observed the gentleman.

"It's not my business," Scrooge returned. "It's enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people's. Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!"


sIx

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 04:40 PM

Ebbie,

The more time I spend on this thread, the wiser your one comment seems:>)

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 04:15 PM

200?!

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 04:14 PM

Can't resist.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 04:10 PM

To the contrary, G, I very specifically acknowledged that education and training must be a piece of the picture. Why will you not acknowledge that it is only one piece?

And if the drop out rate in inner city schools if 50%, that strongly suggests that there a societal failure. Or do you think that 50% of kids in cities are just screwing up for the heck of it?

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,G
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 03:56 PM

Greg, Greg, Greg! You have such a way with words - lets' address the problem which is a lack of education and direction. I thought someone would comment on the 50% dropout rate in the inner city schools. Do you not think that might contribute to the welfare rolls?

Guest, we have some socialism now, what good is it doing? The USSR thought that was a good idea for a while.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 03:55 PM

Real situation with some demographics changed. Not an atypical one in psychiatric populations.

48 year old divorced female. Trained and then worked for a number of of years as an X-ray technician. Mild symptoms starting in her 20's of what gradually developed into a full Bipolar disorder. Both manic and depressed episodes, base-line agitated depression (or mixed episode,) that includes anxiety, social phobia and panic disorder with agoraphobia. When fully compliant with medications and supportive therapy, still has significant symptoms. Symptoms and her level of functioning gradually worsened until by her mid 30's she could no longer work, and finally was diagnosed with Bipolar I Disorder. 3 years and one bankruptcy later, she was finally awarded Social Security Disability. She got medicaid for a year while appealing her social security. When she finally got the social security, the $830 per month made her financially ineligible for medicaid. It was another year before she qualified for Medicare. During that year, we were able to provide her with mental health services on a sliding scale fee. It was tough for her to come up with the $5.00 per visit, but she did it. I was able to get her medications through Patient Assistance programs run by the drug manufacturers.

During relatively brief periods over the past several years, the symptoms have improved just enough for her to attend 1 to 3 classes a semester at a community college. When she is doing well, she can sit in class as long as she gets there before anyone else so she can sit in the very front of the room. That way she can not see her classmates who may look at her, leading to severe panic and fleeing the class room.   Sometimes she actually will finish a semester. More often than not, she enters another more severe cycle where she can not leave her house, even to sit on the porch, and has to drop out of school.

When she became eligible for Medicare, state and insurance regulations no longer allowed us to base her fee on a sliding scale. Medicare payed about 50% of the charges and she became responsible for the other 50%. We were not allowed to write off her balance. She withdraws from treatment periodically because of her inability to pay her co-pay. I have urged her to continue in treatment anyway as I doubt my agency would ever turn it over for collection. But she believes in paying her bills. I will not go into the gory details of what happens in her life when she stops treatment. She is no longer eligible for patient assistance through the drug companies because of the new Part D Medicare. I have not yet found a medicare D drug formulary that includes all the necessary medicines in the monthly quantities she needs.

G--If you really have a plan for this woman to get a Christmas bonus that does not involve a tax supported, probably government administered social program, I want to hear about it.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 02:37 PM

And what, exactly, would be wrong with a little socialism?

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 02:17 PM

And yours smacks of solecism.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: GUEST,G
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 02:13 PM

Auto, a prime example of you not understanding the problem. What do Christmas bonuses have to do with being poor?

The concept is getting the poor in a position to also receive a bonus, rather than just squeaking by. Your statement smacks of socialism.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: autolycus
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 01:32 PM

We've heard a fundamental conservative position - it all starts in the final analysis with the individual.

In the final analysis, yes and no.

On the one hand, the sooner i take MY responsibility the better. And most of us resist doing that, hence blaming.

On the other hand, are the conservatives really saying that the Great Depression of 1929 happened because millions of people suddenly came ober all lazy, and if that wasn't the reason, why do they think it did, and where does that leave their good-for-nothing theory of the poor?

And WHEN are our conservatives going to directly respond to stuff like the BILLIONS in Christmas bonuses that Wall Streeters get, while others in the U.S. are starving or struggling, WHEN? ABSOLUTELY DIRECTLY? WHEN?       EVER?

Auto.

Subject: RE: BS: More Insult to the Poor
From: Janie
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 06:23 AM

And the people say....

AMEN!

J