Welfare Moms - Should we be supporting moms so they can stay at home with their children? - Page 29

[serenbat]

Quote:

Sterilizing

this is being asked of all patients at our hospitable regardless- this is a service and they ask you at intake- same form for everyone, no one special - just like circa

many women do choose it, are only some to be asked?

Quote:

Earlier you suggested you only meant if that woman had the option of a job that would pay for all her bills, plus child care, plus insurance, and she just decided not to work at that job. 

I certainly did not say only. You seem proud not to work and depend- many do not feel this way. They want to be proud to take care of their children, you seem to not see that- clearly not all of the 47%  depend. You must also think all those who are part of the Occupy Movement don't have job either.  

[Cynthia Mosher]

Let's keep this a reasonably polite discussion without making it personal. If you can't, I'll have to restrict your participation in the thread.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by glassesgirlnj 

I'm still confused about what you think should happen to the children whose parents don't follow those rules.

Let's say Igor and Ivanka Irresponsible give birth to Ivan, Inez and Ivetta over an 8-year period. They're collecting public assistance the whole time (for any definition of "public assistance" you want to use). The adults are not going to school, and while Igor works part time, they're careful to keep their income under the minimum needed to keep their benefits.

What do you think should happen to Ivan, Inez and Ivetta? I guess you don't think they should starve (thank God), and it would be "crazy" to give them to a UMC adoptive family (thank God for that too, though I've heard otherwise rational people make that argument...)

Serebat….I highlighted the above question as I think it is a good one.  This is a long thread, so if you have answered it, my apologies.

There are 2 types of poor of people on welfare in N. America (with further subcategories).  Those who are on it temporarily, and those who are "generational poor."  This thread mostly seems to be around those who are generationally poor.  

Generational poverty is really hard to move out of.  

This is from wikipedia, but I like it:

"In economics, the cycle of poverty is the "set of factors or events by which poverty, once started, is likely to continue unless there is outside intervention."^[1]

The cycle of poverty has been defined as a phenomenon were poor families become trapped in poverty for at least three generations,i.e., for enough time that the family includes no surviving ancestors who possess and can transmit the intellectual, social, and cultural capital necessary to stay out of or escape poverty…."

Generational poverty is no way to live.  I do not know how to help people escape it, but if Wiki is to be believed, some of it must come from outside interventions.  Public policy initiatives.

It might be interesting to look at countries that have low generational poverty statistics and see what they are doing right.  

Edited by kathymuggle - 1/31/13 at 6:20am

[rightkindofme]

Apparently me recounting my personal experiences is too "jolting" so I'm going to stop participating in the thread. That's fine. It's pretty clear that this discussion is over anyway.

[kathymuggle]

One more thought: on an individual level, I do think taking responsibility for oneself is the only way to climb out of poverty.  Governments can make policies that support this, or give people a fighting chance, or not. 

[kathymuggle]

To answer the Op:

I think parents (one parent, family choice) should be supported nicely until about age 1.  This allows for a good breastfeeding relationship and optimal health.  There are lots of illnesses kicking around and daycares are breeding grounds. My 2 cents.

After age one or so, I think parents should get  enough money to meet needs of housing and food, but that is about it.  

Minimum wage (which should be a friggin living wage - and in most areas not under 10$ an hour) should be higher than the amount you get on welfare.  Daycare should be subsidized, as well as healthcare.  

Making more money than you would on welfare, while still being able to access some of the benefits of welfare (such as healthcare), would go a long way towards pushing people off of welfare.

OT, a little, but I was looking at healthcare stats the other day…and those on welfare had better access to healthcare than those who were poor but not on welfare.  To move people off of welfare and into working (which is a better lifestyle for most people…and takes less taxes, or at least allows taxes to be distributed more equitably) you need to remove the barriers to getting off welfare.  

[serenbat]

I just heard of someone who was told when they dropped off a bag of items at a local pantry not to bother with certain item because they are not appreciated- they are just taken to be sold and to get cheaper stuff next time - it really does rub you the wrong way. 

When you see personal (and starting to be a lot in our case) more and more examples of use/abuse you tend to have little to no sympathy anymore. This is coming from the class the works and seeing it directly effects perspective. I perfectly well know that corporations are getting massive tax breaks - I also know you can't be turned away at the ER and that is far cheaper than paying for your own health insurance, you see it, it's counts.

[glassesgirlnj]

Originally Posted by rightkindofme 

Apparently me recounting my personal experiences is too "jolting" so I'm going to stop participating in the thread. That's fine. It's pretty clear that this discussion is over anyway.

Wow, I'm really sorry to hear that! You are one of the people on this thread who's actually talked about your experiences being on public assistance - and so, I would think, your opinions would be invaluable.

[glassesgirlnj]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

I just heard of someone who was told when they dropped off a bag of items at a local pantry not to bother with certain item because they are not appreciated- they are just taken to be sold and to get cheaper stuff next time - it really does rub you the wrong way.

TBH, I could "hear of someone who was told" a lot of things... but the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", as I'm sure you know.

This was in the Philly suburbs, right? Care to let us know who "someone" was? Or what pantry this was? Or what worker at the pantry would say such a thing? (I wonder if the people running the nonprofit would be interested in finding out what's being said to their donors...)

[meemee]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

I just heard of someone who was told when they dropped off a bag of items at a local pantry not to bother with certain item because they are not appreciated- they are just taken to be sold and to get cheaper stuff next time - it really does rub you the wrong way. 

just because you give doesnt mean it has to be appreciated. remember most of the food might be wierd to them. our local farm not only donates extra produce to the local pantry, but they also teach cooking classes to show them how to eat it. when you are used to the white crap from teh pantry - if you get artichoke hearts you would have no idea what to do with it. 

When you see personal (and starting to be a lot in our case) more and more examples of use/abuse you tend to have little to no sympathy anymore. This is coming from the class the works and seeing it directly effects perspective. I perfectly well know that corporations are getting massive tax breaks - I also know you can't be turned away at the ER and that is far cheaper than paying for your own health insurance, you see it, it's counts.

serenbat i sympathise with you. i understand what its like to see the abuse going on. esp when you are in the cusp of being in between - too rich to qualify but not rich enough to pay for it yourself. but remember dont throw teh baby out with the bathwater. abuse is not the major part of the welfare system. it IS helping many, many people out. just coz there are a few bad apples doesnt mean the whole basket is trash. it is not the best system. but at least it is a system. and you feel it more because it reflects your own personal situation. gosh esp. your kids. so i can see why it hurts and frustrates you so much. 

insurance. how can you pay for insurance when you cant even put food on the table?!! that's one thing. the other thing do you know how many families are sick? how many homeless are sick - chronic conditions, because they get seen perhaps at the ER (i wonder if they go there, coz i have never seen a homeless person at teh ER but at a clinic i have - the free clinics around me - people line up at 4 am for them to open at 8 am in the cold and then they take maybe 1 or 2 new patients and the rest returning) does not mean they get taken care of because there is no way of getting continuous care for their chronic condition. 

if my dd was to get cancer - she is on Medi-cal - and if it is pretty aggressive i know she will probably die - because they just dont move fast enough. i've seen it happen too many times - for both babies and adults. two people get breast cancer at teh same time. one gets seen almost immediately. the other has to wait a month. and then wait again. guess who doesnt make it. i try to get out of that poverty to make sure we have good health insurance but i just dont get those jobs. either i am over qualified or not qualified enough. so people do try. 

kathy i think welfare factors housing and food needs when they assign food stamps and TANF. 

see how much pressure Universal healthcare would take off of all our shoulders. how much healtheir people would be just never having to worry about health conditions and would have a choice of jobs they want to work in. 

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by glassesgirlnj 

Wow, I'm really sorry to hear that! You are one of the people on this thread who's actually talked about your experiences being on public assistance - and so, I would think, your opinions would be invaluable.

Originally Posted by glassesgirlnj 

TBH, I could "hear of someone who was told" a lot of things... but the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", as I'm sure you know.

This was in the Philly suburbs, right? Care to let us know who "someone" was? Or what pantry this was? Or what worker at the pantry would say such a thing? (I wonder if the people running the nonprofit would be interested in finding out what's being said to their donors...)

You said the top to rightkindofme on her btdt (which are personal stories (anecdotes))…which I totally agree with.

Then you said the bottom, which was snarky and dismissive of anecdotes (while you had previously been okay with rightkindofme's anecdotes….).

 

I get Serenbats post was on things she heard or impressions she has…while rightkindofme was stuff that happened to her, but none-the-less, applauding anecdotes on one hand and snarking it on the other is a little odd.  

[mamazee]

I think it's very possible someone was told that some foods are more in demand at a food pantry than others. I've always been told that. The food pantry here hands out a list of most desired items. I don't think they'd turn any food away, but there are some foods they need particularly, and some foods that might be unfamiliar or more difficult to cook, or that might require condiments (that cost more money) or other ingredients that cost money, that aren't very useful at a food pantry. I don't see anything unusual about that at all.

[glassesgirlnj]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

You have a very good point! :)

I should have been clearer that I was interested in hearing people's *direct experiences* of being on public assistance (which rightkindofme, and I think mammal_mama, and some others here, have been very helpful in providing.)

I'm not so much interested in hearing what was told to someone's sister's petsitter's friend, by an anonymous worker at an anonymous nonprofit. Hence my (serious, not snarky) questions to Serenbat as to what pantry this was, and what representative of that pantry was saying such things.

For my own direct experience, I've donated a variety of "fancy" things to food pantries - chai, imported biscuits, organic beef broth, et al- because I think people using food pantries deserve to have some small luxuries in their lives too. And never has anyone told me not to bother, or to bring Spaghetti-O's next time, or anything even close to that.

So if this is happening at other food pantries in the NJ/PA area (where both Serenbat and I live), I'd like to hear more. Does that make a bit more sense now?

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

I just heard of someone who was told when they dropped off a bag of items at a local pantry not to bother with certain item because they are not appreciated- they are just taken to be sold and to get cheaper stuff next time - it really does rub you the wrong way. 

Once upon a time (alert: anecdote! ) I gave a burger to a homeless teen who was asking for money.  He was with other homeless teens.  He took a bite and then proceded to throw it on the floor!  I was embarrassed and felt unappreciated.  I realise now he was just showing off for his friends, but still. I have also had numerous positive experiences giving out food.  Some people are unappreciative a$$holes, and some are not…and poverty does not change that. 

The pantry thing is odd.  It was odd on the part of the pantry.  While I imagine they really do have food items that are more in demand/more popular than others (and a handout on items in demand would be a good idea), it is pretty rude to say not to bother with items as they are unappreciated.  It does not encourage donations, you know?  I don't have any trouble with people selling more expensive stuff to get cheaper stuff - the cheaper stuff may last them longer or be stuff they will eat.  It seems pretty smart to me, actually.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by glassesgirlnj 

So if this is happening at other food pantries in the NJ/PA area (where both Serenbat and I live), I'd like to hear more. Does that make a bit more sense now?

It does, thanks.  It is a volatile thread, and I am sensitive for anything that smacks of dogpiling, so I might have jumped to "snarky."  Thanks for clarifying.

[serenbat]

Quote:

The pantry thing is odd.  It was odd on the part of the pantry.  While I imagine they really do have food items that are more in demand/more popular than others (and a handout on items in demand would be a good idea), it is pretty rude to say not to bother with items as they are unappreciated.  It does not encourage donations, you know?  I don't have any trouble with people selling more expensive stuff to get cheaper stuff - the cheaper stuff may last them longer or be stuff they will eat.  It seems pretty smart to me, actually.

It was personal care items- shampoo, body wash, razors - better brands- they said they wanted cheaper brands-generic or Vo5 - cheaper priced items

This place does wants personal care items because they do not get those in donation- it's a church and they get food (as a donation from a large food bank) and they also take bags of food too. They seek out things not coved by SNAP- they also said they want cheap brand TP and paper towels, and not to get better ones.

[mamazee]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

Once upon a time (alert: anecdote!  ) I gave a burger to a homeless teen who was asking for money.  He was with other homeless teens.  He took a bite and then proceded to throw it on the floor!  I was embarrassed and felt unappreciated.  I realise now he was just showing off for his friends, but still. I have also had numerous positive experiences giving out food.  Some people are unappreciative a$$holes, and some are not…and poverty does not change that. 

The pantry thing is odd.  It was odd on the part of the pantry.  While I imagine they really do have food items that are more in demand/more popular than others (and a handout on items in demand would be a good idea), it is pretty rude to say not to bother with items as they are unappreciated.  It does not encourage donations, you know?  I don't have any trouble with people selling more expensive stuff to get cheaper stuff - the cheaper stuff may last them longer or be stuff they will eat.  It seems pretty smart to me, actually.

The pantry thing does sound odd, but I can understand the reasoning behind it, and maybe the volunteer at the pantry just didn't have good people skills and wasn't able to explain the reasoning well. Also, if you went in not expecting that and were told some things weren't as useful and being given suggestions about what might be a better choice to donate in the future, I can see feeling put out and a bit disappointed after you were trying to do a good deed. I can also imagine someone being upset and telling others about the experience in a negative tone due to the disappointment.

This doesn't mean that the food pantry volunteers, or certainly the people who rely on the food pantry, aren't appreciative of donations.

[mamazee]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

It was personal care items- shampoo, body wash, razors - better brands- they said they wanted cheaper brands-generic or Vo5 - cheaper priced items

This place does wants personal care items because they do not get those in donation- it's a church and they get food (as a donation from a large food bank) and they also take bags of food too. The seek out things not coved by SNAP- they also said they want cheap brand TP and paper towels, and not to get better ones.

I can see a few reasons for this too. It might be easier to have one general quality level so that people know what to expect when they come in and don't ask for other, nicer, brands. Also, if people are buying stuff and donating it, they could be saying, "You could donate twice as much stuff if you bought stuff that costs half as much" but in a clumsy way.

[kathymuggle]

dbl post

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by glassesgirlnj 

I should have been clearer that I was interested in hearing people's *direct experiences* of being on public assistance (which rightkindofme, and I think mammal_mama, and some others here, have been very helpful in providing.)

Well, I was on welfare as a child.  More situational than generational, however.  

The biggest hardship to me were:

1.  My clothes sucked compared to everyone else.  I was shy, and somewhat teased over it, which just made me go into my shell more and dislike school more.

2.  My house was shack-like compared to everyone else.  I almost never invited people over, although my parents were welcoming and kind people.  This further isolated me.  I could see how this could lead to lack of choice in friends - if the only people you felt comfortable inviting over or who could even "get you" were those in the same economic circumstances as you.

I had several things going for me.  We never had food issues as our house was quite cheap,we had universal health care,  and my mother was well educated  - I never had academic trouble at school. 

I was on welfare about 17 years ago (I was 23).  I was able to get off due to the fact that there was lots of real support for moving people from welfare to work at the time, where I then lived (British Columbia).  Some of that help was tightening up as we left - and that is unfortunate, because I think we would have ultimately been on welfare for longer if the system was more focused on its short term budget than on moving people into the work world.