When my husband was not permitted to work yet, and we were surviving on my disability benefits, we had to use the food bank. We used the government-operated food bank, and once had used the church's food bank. The contrast was dramatic.
The church's benefits were in the form of a voucher, where we could get whatever necessities we wanted from a small store owned by a member of the parish. The prices were half again that which I could find at a larger chain, but at least we could choose our own. The cashiers sneered at us while we made our purchases - an interesting reaction, considering the source of the voucher.
The government-operated food bank provided more food, in general. While they attempted to help us with our food allergies, there was still a grocery bag of food from every month's box that we couldn't use. The food bank also provided recipes so we could make the most of the foods we had, counseling was available, and the people who gave us our food looked tired - not condescending.
We're doing much better now, and I strive to buy 3 cans of food a week for the food bank, year round. I'm pretty sure we've given back more than we'd needed, and I hope that someone else is able to use what we've given to find their footing again.
on any society who allows children to suffer for the choices of their parents.
I started working for 25 cents an hour at age ten. That money was used to pay for my school lunches and school supplies. My parents were too proud for gov't assistance. By age 16 I was living on my own. Though my parents were loving and working. At age 17 my job involved checking on a men's urinal in an establishment where men thought they had a right to touch me. All this was to shelter me from the shame of public assistance? For shame on a country that would punish children like that.
I've been self-sufficient since early on, but last year my job was downsized to no longer include health insurance (or retirement). Before reading these responses, I got the feeling that people look down on me for paying $120 a month for state insurance premiums rather than the triple or worse of that for private pay. I do not personally see the doctor because of the reaction I get when I say I have state insurance. I try my best to shield my children from that reaction when they go in for immunizations, but I'm sure they see the pitiful looks. I guess my feeling that some people see me as a societal and economic drag is absolutely true, and I accept that, but would you please spare my children?
I get the discussion is about the stigma of assistance and not the source for it. It's just as shameful for some of us to get help at the church as it is at the state. It's not where the help comes from, but why we look down on people who need it (temporarily or permanently).
There is a CVS very close to my place, so I should be able to play the CVS game very well but I haven't been on the ball about it. Even so, I've had substantial savings over the years and I've been able to keep all my supplies restocked at discount prices using ECBs and CVS coupons. In addition to coupons that they print out at the cash register, they also send out email coupons, which is good for the not-so-frequent shopper.
You both feel that the government should not be involved, yet the animosity towards those who are perceived (note the very important "perceived" qualifier!) as abusing it or not deserving it, is the reason that an organization that is essentially agnostic towards recipient needs to manage the program. I agree that "big government" doesn't do it perfectly, but I'm not sure that NGO's and non-profits would necessarily do a better job.
There is an inherent prejudice in how we dole out assistance. I'm white, middle-class, and live in the suburbs, and if I had to choose between giving assistance to someone who looks like me and has a similar background, and someone who I find somewhat repellant (who still needs the help), I will probably unconsciously choose the one who makes me feel like I'm helping out a person who could be me. We all saw the biases in the Katrina photos--black people carrying boxes of food from swamped grocery stores were captioned as "looters", while whites were "foraging".
I am concerned that a faith-based or community-based group, much as it would try to blind itself to appearances or differences in culture, might inadvertantly make choices as to who "qualifies" for assistance based on sameness. Much as I love my church and the people who make up the congregation, some of them have said some very un-Christian things about inner-city people, Muslims, and the mentally disabled, and I sure wouldn't want these same folks making decisions about who gets help.
And I do think that Americans are kind and generous, but they mostly respond in crises, not on a day-to-day basis of helping. It's just life--how many of us still think about sending help to Ethiopia, like we all did in the 1980's (well, those of us old people who remember LiveAid :)? Or FarmAid? Remember that series of fundraisers? Those folks still suffer, but because they are yesterday's headlines, giving has dwindled. It's not that people have lost sympathy for those needy causes, just that we have rotated on to the next big thing.
Matthew, I'd be interested in knowing how your Church manages to keep the supply of funding steady. Is tithing compulsory (it is in some protestant denominations, but not in the Evangelical Lutheran Church, to which we belong)? If so, that counts as a mandate, albeit not a government-with-a-capital-G mandate. Please provide more information! I love learning about successful programs.
I'm sure women's shelters are glad to have donations, but I am thinking more of the working poor or the elderly on a limited, fixed income, or disabled people like my mother. When you have to plan not only your shopping trip, but change buses three times just to get to CVS, it's got to be disappointing to find that a much-needed health care item has been snatched up by bargain shoppers who are planning to donate the item to a random shelter or something. In my opinion, this is not in the spirit of charity, since if your true cost for an item is -$30, and you give it to a charity for free, you are actually acting as a middle man and taking that $30 difference as profit. The glucose monitor deals are the most egregious example, but to some extent you could apply the same logic to smaller items such as toothpaste. If they cost me -$.50 to buy, and I donate them, I'm not being terribly charitable, am I? That's why my personal rule is "nothing I don't need," with an occasional exception if I spot a good deal on something and I personally know someone who needs it. (I may do some CVS shopping for my mother, since it would truly benefit us both.)
Diva Jean--I think some people do collect a lot of stuff, although I have limited storage space so I dn't. Since I started CVS shopping I have acquired plenty of shampoo, cold medicine, cough drops, and pain relief medicines--and this week stocked up on toothpaste. I won't buy more of these items until I need them. Toothpaste does't spoil, and I was glad to see that particular sale because we use a gel-type toothpaste and they are a little harder to find on sale.
Guest -- Wow, I'm blushing over being wrong about "penny-enny." One of those things that I guess I always thought was the correct phrase, but I'm sure you are right. Then again, maybe it's a regionalism because I swear I have heard people say it to me just that way.
Catherine -- You certainly have fertile grounds for an ethical discussion there. Oh my, yes. Off the top of my head, I would argue that a resident of my local women's shelter is not going to be plotting over the weekly CVS ad, coupons and ExtraCare card in hand, and the volunteers or staff at the shelter aren't going to either. It's kind of like saying it doesn't make sense to donate your home-grown produce to a food bank, because after all poor people could plant their own vegetables. Then again, if my goal is to procure some products for charity, then yeah, there are certainly more efficient ways of going about it such as asking local businesses for bulk donations.
DivaJean -- You are right that you have to think about what purchases make sense for you. Personally when I belonged to Costco I bought multipacks of toothpaste all the time and then enjoyed not having to think about it for the rest of the year. But unless it was a total money-making offer, I would not buy toothpaste again for quite awhile.
for most families to receive food stamps is less than 2 years . Over half of participants use them for 9 months of less. Usually when you receive benefits, you are eligible for a minimum of a 6 months period.
No one should feel shamed when getting some help back on their feet. However, the government programs like Food Stamps, Welfare, and Social Security are forced redistribution of wealth run by a bureaucracy, which is inefficient at best.
This should all be handled privately. Anything the government does is done worse than the private sector can do.
I belong to the LDS church (mormons) and there is an entire food assistance program along with monetary relief for those in need. My wife is currently serving as the person who administer the food assistance program, and it is quick, efficient, and discrete. People need food, they make a phone call and they go to local warehouse where they collect shopping carts of food. All authorized by a local non-paid pastor (bishop) who serves for a period of 3-5 years. The program never runs out of food or funds as all of the church members donate regularly around the entire world.
The American people are kind and generous and can take care of the needy without government mandates.
I think the a difference between the group of people who are constantly on these programs (and who may have what many consider to be unnecessary luxuries) and the group of people who use these programs when times are tough and to get back on their feet.
When I was a child my parents used for food stamps for a period of time (less than a year). My father had just been laid off, they had a newborn, and a ton of medical bills due to an extend hospital stay. My mother says food stamps were the only way she was able to maintain good nutrition for my sister and I during that time.
The programs do have a purpose, and I'm more than happy to contribute some of my tax dollars to the cause. I remind my congressmen that I'm willing to do so every time I get in a voters booth and vote for someone who supports these values.
For those of you that don't support these programs I respectfully disagree and encourage you to vote for someone who agrees with you.
Back in the early 1980's I worked in the local grocery store in my small (5000 person) town. My personal background was that my father was being squeezed out of farming by corporation take-overs and my mother went back to work earning not much over minimum wage. I was at minimum wage at the grocery. Now, I saw almost everyone come through the lanes with their purchases and their monies. What really surprised me, was some of the folks who got food stamps. Some of these people appeared so well-to-do! New cars, fancy coats and jewelry...how could they do it???? I had no idea. My parents, on my encouragement, actually applied for and were denied these benefits. We did, however, qualify for the half-price lunch program at the high school I attended. (Big WHOOP!) After working at the store and see what I did see, I figure there has got to be an angle and a way to work the system. I guess I/my family just don't/doesn't have the brain for it. After watching all these people take advantage, I have no qualms, yet I don't have the savvy. Truly, I don't think these programs are great for they seem to breed a dependence and sense of twisted entitlement but, who am I to say? Just another taxpayer!
I don't know if I just got lucky with this but over the summer CVS did an extrabucks deal where you buy like $15 in Neutrogena makeup and get $5 Extrabucks and one where you buy $20 in Nexxus haircare products and get $10. I did both and got my $15 in extrabucks but then realized i had bought the wrong stuff, so i returned it but still got to keep my extrabucks! It took 2 trips but for $15 I think it was worth it!
I am confused as to why they would cancel a cc simply because you paid the bill. Most CC companies make their real money off the business you charge with. Charging as much as 3 to 4% of each transaction. That is why companies like American Express can offer rolling credit without interest.
Thanks for bringing this up, Catherine! I am familiar with the program, and it is wonderful! I have yet to check it out personally, but I have heard very good things. It is open to anyone, and check out this month's menu!
1.25 lb.
Bacon Wrapped Beef Filets (5 x 4 oz)
4 lb.
Individually Frozen Chicken Leg Quarters
2 lb.
Lean Hamburger Steaks (4 x 8oz.)
1.5 lb.
Boneless Pork Roast
1.25 lb.
Meaty Beef Short Ribs
20 oz.
Supreme Pizza
10 oz.
Deli Sliced Turkey Breast
3 lb.
Fresh Apples
35 oz.
Crinkle Cut French Fries
16 oz.
Frozen Green Beans
16 oz.
Onion Rings
14 oz.
Fancy Ketchup
26 oz.
Pasta Sauce
16 oz.
Pasta
16 oz.
Pinto Beans
7.5 oz.
Macaroni and Cheese
Dessert Item
It's pretty cool that people can get all this food for just $30!
To date, I have yet to use a college loan program, school lunch assistance program, or social security. I'm not saying these programs shouldn't exist, but they definitely shouldn't exist in the control of big government. These "social programs" need to be run by churches, non-profit groups, and charitable organizations. How can the government be so audacious so as to take my money and redistribute it to whoever decides not to work or just stay on welfare because they can't hack it. It's my money to begin with, and I should be able to and do decide who it goes to by donating to charities rather than big government.
It is exciting to read about so many of us that have been touched either positively or negatively by government assistance programs! Thanks so much for sharing what seems to be some very personal experiences.
I would like to point out to Music for Cats that your point is very valid. Let me be the first to say that I'm glad our government was and continues to be there for you in your times of need. We are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, so even though I don't know you personally, it's nice to know that tax money is going towards what it was meant for, no matter how long you need it for.
Also, I think it very interesting that as the price of groceries rise, and jobs become scarce in some areas, food stamps are a great way for the government to pump money into the economy. In our small town, the cost for food is roughly 120% of the groceries in the next town. We could save alot by driving over and getting more food for less money. This would, of course, kill our local economy. The food stamp program guarantees that our small grocer stays in businesses, as many of the food stamp population are elderly folks that don't drive or other recipients that find the convenience of shopping in town a major benefit. The food stamp program has undoubtly saved our town from extinction, and I see it personally helping many farm families during times of need.
...where I would fall in the grand scheme of it? I am not "in debt" but I carry my Xmas bills over maybe 2 or 3 months, I am not a credit card "deadbeat" either. They make a little off me, but not much, since my rates are still good.
It's scary because I too think that credit should be there for tough times; but I do have my emergency savings too.
I also forgot to add to my earlier post about how the Welfare Queen is really a red herring of sorts that the government brings out when convenient. Yeah, there may be a few who live this way- I won't argue that.
But look at the bigger picture of what government wastes money on. The costs of welfare, food stamps, WIC, etc are but a drop in the bucket compared to the millions flying out every minute in Iraq- a war the majority does not support. And in wars past, there was an economic war "boom"- not so now, when Washington cronies are there to suck up the profits for themselves (read Halliburton, Blackwater, etc into this comment) as manufacturing for the military has even been outsourced to other countries!
What I don't get about the CVS bug is the sheer amount of stuff. You buy 8 tubes of toothpaste one week- then next week? I mean really! My family of six goes thru two tubes a month- and it seems every week there is some sort of theorem for savings involving toothpaste. If I had done the 8 tubes thing, I'm four months ahead of my family's needs. Where do I draw the line in the sand as to how much clutter to save up?
We had both our kids while we were in our doctoral programs (I was writing the dissertation the year the younger one was born). My advisor ran out of funds, and we ended up taking assistance from the state in the form of a "gap" medical assistance (our insurance paid 80% of medical costs, the 20% gap was filled by the Med Assistance, for me and the two kids), and Women, Infants and Children (WIC), a great program that provided dairy products, cereal, juice, and (since I nursed the baby for a year), tuna and carrots. It wasn't "exactly" food stamps, but you can bet we got a lot of stares and not-so-quiet comments in the grocery line, usually from elderly people who were drawing social security. They usually shut up when I politely mentioned it, but it was very stressful. Still, we appreciated the assistance, and were thankful for the support during the one year that we took it. I was able to finish my degree, go to work (allowing my husband to finish his PhD) and we have been contributing tax payers for many years now. I consider the year's investment in our lives to have been a good return for the country :)
Our younger daughter is autistic (now 12-1/2 years old), a condition that requires a LOT of therapies, medical procedures (EEGs to check for seizure activity, which we've avoided), medications to control behavior, sleep problems, etc. In our state, there is a Medicaid waiver for autism, so that we are covered (much like the medical assistance (MA) program described above) for the portion of the bill that our very good insurance (which costs a lot anyway, but ya gotta have it) doesn't cover is taken care of by the MA. I'm sure lots of fiscal conservatives also would balk at this, but she didn't ask for this condition (neither did we--it is a life-wrecker in many ways, ask any parent with an autistic child), and having assistance helps us to remain employed and able to contribute to the tax base.
I do worry that the cliche of the Welfare Queen (Lexus-driving, bon-bon eating, with 12 kids by 12 different guys) has hardened the populace against people who might need different levels of support at various points in their lives. The concept of public assistance is to help people get on their feet, either for the first time, or after a setback. It has been abused in some cases, but as our story (and that of the poster living with bipolar disorder--my thoughts are with you!) demonstrates, it does work.
Fantastic Plastic may be appealing to some, but I prefer saving and paying cash. I used Paypal to pay for something on the internet. After several attempts to contact the company I made the purchase from, by phone and emails, I finally resorted to Paypal. They investigated, found in my favor, and then "regretted" to inform me that they were unable to obtain my refund. That makes me a lot skeptical about dealing with them to pay for things. Since then, I have sent unanswered emails again to the company I bought the software from and, to date, have still not had a reply. Where does one turn to now. It seems like a futile effort to keep trying to get my money back. It was less than a $50 purchase.
I'm sure there are some posters here who would see my family as some sort of deadbeat burden on society, since my children are all foster kids we've adopted. We get a monthly stipend on 3 of the 4 until they turn 18. It is nowhere near enough to raise a kid on- for us it only augments their lives. It is money we save for their college or rarely dip into for extras like karate class or summer camp. This is not entitlement- these kids came from extreme disadvantage and the stipend only helps a little. For all the needs our children have, my partner is a stay at home parent with no added income. I see the stipend on some level as payment from the government for tackling the special needs our kids have.
The kids are also elgible for food stamps until they are 5- if you think food stamps means all your food needs are met, you are all sorely mistaken. The food stamps are for specific items, chiefly, milk, cereal, peanut butter, juice and sometimes cheese. It merely augments the needs of a growing kid- it is not the be all and end all some here think it is.
And don't think that just because we get these so-called entitlements we aren't paying taxes. I would imagine that as a family, we end up paying more- since the government doesn't even see my partner and I as a couple.
What an unexpectedly lively discussion this has generated. I thought I would have nothing to add, but I think I do. When I was a child, my family was on food stamps and welfare for a period of time, and I am not ashamed at all. Whether my parents made poor life choices or not, they did the right thing in getting help for themselves and their children, and it was indeed a transitional phase, as is the case for almost everyone who uses such programs.
This is a very important subject to bring up. Here in the state of Michigan, we are deep in recession. The state has lost hundreds of thousands of jobs, and we are beginning to see a dramatic rise in poverty-related social problems including, sadly, many more children entering foster care due to addiction and other emotional problems directly triggered by poverty. Many people are experiencing poverty for the first time in their lives, and are unfamiliar with the social welfare system. I think there is little doubt that in the state of Michigan, many people are unemployed through no fault of their own. (This may be a look into the future for the rest of the country.) At the same time, the price of groceries has risen starkly. People should definitely take advantage of government food assistance as well as any help they can find through private charities, local food pantries, etc. to get through these tough times. I have heard great things about Angel Food Ministries (www.angelfoodministries.com), which is one of those "faith based initiatives" sponsored by the Bush Administration. It sounds like a huge success, as any person can receive a large package of food for just $30. It is in the best interests of the government and society as a whole that the population be well nourished, and even though food costs are rising, there is still plenty to go around. You can't look for a better job, or go back to school, if you are not getting enough to eat. First things first.
When my husband was not permitted to work yet, and we were surviving on my disability benefits, we had to use the food bank. We used the government-operated food bank, and once had used the church's food bank. The contrast was dramatic.
The church's benefits were in the form of a voucher, where we could get whatever necessities we wanted from a small store owned by a member of the parish. The prices were half again that which I could find at a larger chain, but at least we could choose our own. The cashiers sneered at us while we made our purchases - an interesting reaction, considering the source of the voucher.
The government-operated food bank provided more food, in general. While they attempted to help us with our food allergies, there was still a grocery bag of food from every month's box that we couldn't use. The food bank also provided recipes so we could make the most of the foods we had, counseling was available, and the people who gave us our food looked tired - not condescending.
We're doing much better now, and I strive to buy 3 cans of food a week for the food bank, year round. I'm pretty sure we've given back more than we'd needed, and I hope that someone else is able to use what we've given to find their footing again.
on any society who allows children to suffer for the choices of their parents.
I started working for 25 cents an hour at age ten. That money was used to pay for my school lunches and school supplies. My parents were too proud for gov't assistance. By age 16 I was living on my own. Though my parents were loving and working. At age 17 my job involved checking on a men's urinal in an establishment where men thought they had a right to touch me. All this was to shelter me from the shame of public assistance? For shame on a country that would punish children like that.
I've been self-sufficient since early on, but last year my job was downsized to no longer include health insurance (or retirement). Before reading these responses, I got the feeling that people look down on me for paying $120 a month for state insurance premiums rather than the triple or worse of that for private pay. I do not personally see the doctor because of the reaction I get when I say I have state insurance. I try my best to shield my children from that reaction when they go in for immunizations, but I'm sure they see the pitiful looks. I guess my feeling that some people see me as a societal and economic drag is absolutely true, and I accept that, but would you please spare my children?
I get the discussion is about the stigma of assistance and not the source for it. It's just as shameful for some of us to get help at the church as it is at the state. It's not where the help comes from, but why we look down on people who need it (temporarily or permanently).
There is a CVS very close to my place, so I should be able to play the CVS game very well but I haven't been on the ball about it. Even so, I've had substantial savings over the years and I've been able to keep all my supplies restocked at discount prices using ECBs and CVS coupons. In addition to coupons that they print out at the cash register, they also send out email coupons, which is good for the not-so-frequent shopper.
You both feel that the government should not be involved, yet the animosity towards those who are perceived (note the very important "perceived" qualifier!) as abusing it or not deserving it, is the reason that an organization that is essentially agnostic towards recipient needs to manage the program. I agree that "big government" doesn't do it perfectly, but I'm not sure that NGO's and non-profits would necessarily do a better job.
There is an inherent prejudice in how we dole out assistance. I'm white, middle-class, and live in the suburbs, and if I had to choose between giving assistance to someone who looks like me and has a similar background, and someone who I find somewhat repellant (who still needs the help), I will probably unconsciously choose the one who makes me feel like I'm helping out a person who could be me. We all saw the biases in the Katrina photos--black people carrying boxes of food from swamped grocery stores were captioned as "looters", while whites were "foraging".
I am concerned that a faith-based or community-based group, much as it would try to blind itself to appearances or differences in culture, might inadvertantly make choices as to who "qualifies" for assistance based on sameness. Much as I love my church and the people who make up the congregation, some of them have said some very un-Christian things about inner-city people, Muslims, and the mentally disabled, and I sure wouldn't want these same folks making decisions about who gets help.
And I do think that Americans are kind and generous, but they mostly respond in crises, not on a day-to-day basis of helping. It's just life--how many of us still think about sending help to Ethiopia, like we all did in the 1980's (well, those of us old people who remember LiveAid :)? Or FarmAid? Remember that series of fundraisers? Those folks still suffer, but because they are yesterday's headlines, giving has dwindled. It's not that people have lost sympathy for those needy causes, just that we have rotated on to the next big thing.
Matthew, I'd be interested in knowing how your Church manages to keep the supply of funding steady. Is tithing compulsory (it is in some protestant denominations, but not in the Evangelical Lutheran Church, to which we belong)? If so, that counts as a mandate, albeit not a government-with-a-capital-G mandate. Please provide more information! I love learning about successful programs.
Cheers!
I loved the Duct Tape Roses. I made a dozen of those in multiple colors for my friend last year and she loved them!
I'm sure women's shelters are glad to have donations, but I am thinking more of the working poor or the elderly on a limited, fixed income, or disabled people like my mother. When you have to plan not only your shopping trip, but change buses three times just to get to CVS, it's got to be disappointing to find that a much-needed health care item has been snatched up by bargain shoppers who are planning to donate the item to a random shelter or something. In my opinion, this is not in the spirit of charity, since if your true cost for an item is -$30, and you give it to a charity for free, you are actually acting as a middle man and taking that $30 difference as profit. The glucose monitor deals are the most egregious example, but to some extent you could apply the same logic to smaller items such as toothpaste. If they cost me -$.50 to buy, and I donate them, I'm not being terribly charitable, am I? That's why my personal rule is "nothing I don't need," with an occasional exception if I spot a good deal on something and I personally know someone who needs it. (I may do some CVS shopping for my mother, since it would truly benefit us both.)
Catherine Shaffer
Wise Bread Contributor
Diva Jean--I think some people do collect a lot of stuff, although I have limited storage space so I dn't. Since I started CVS shopping I have acquired plenty of shampoo, cold medicine, cough drops, and pain relief medicines--and this week stocked up on toothpaste. I won't buy more of these items until I need them. Toothpaste does't spoil, and I was glad to see that particular sale because we use a gel-type toothpaste and they are a little harder to find on sale.
Catherine Shaffer
Wise Bread Contributor
Guest -- Wow, I'm blushing over being wrong about "penny-enny." One of those things that I guess I always thought was the correct phrase, but I'm sure you are right. Then again, maybe it's a regionalism because I swear I have heard people say it to me just that way.
Catherine -- You certainly have fertile grounds for an ethical discussion there. Oh my, yes. Off the top of my head, I would argue that a resident of my local women's shelter is not going to be plotting over the weekly CVS ad, coupons and ExtraCare card in hand, and the volunteers or staff at the shelter aren't going to either. It's kind of like saying it doesn't make sense to donate your home-grown produce to a food bank, because after all poor people could plant their own vegetables. Then again, if my goal is to procure some products for charity, then yeah, there are certainly more efficient ways of going about it such as asking local businesses for bulk donations.
DivaJean -- You are right that you have to think about what purchases make sense for you. Personally when I belonged to Costco I bought multipacks of toothpaste all the time and then enjoyed not having to think about it for the rest of the year. But unless it was a total money-making offer, I would not buy toothpaste again for quite awhile.
for most families to receive food stamps is less than 2 years . Over half of participants use them for 9 months of less. Usually when you receive benefits, you are eligible for a minimum of a 6 months period.
No one should feel shamed when getting some help back on their feet. However, the government programs like Food Stamps, Welfare, and Social Security are forced redistribution of wealth run by a bureaucracy, which is inefficient at best.
This should all be handled privately. Anything the government does is done worse than the private sector can do.
I belong to the LDS church (mormons) and there is an entire food assistance program along with monetary relief for those in need. My wife is currently serving as the person who administer the food assistance program, and it is quick, efficient, and discrete. People need food, they make a phone call and they go to local warehouse where they collect shopping carts of food. All authorized by a local non-paid pastor (bishop) who serves for a period of 3-5 years. The program never runs out of food or funds as all of the church members donate regularly around the entire world.
The American people are kind and generous and can take care of the needy without government mandates.
I think the a difference between the group of people who are constantly on these programs (and who may have what many consider to be unnecessary luxuries) and the group of people who use these programs when times are tough and to get back on their feet.
When I was a child my parents used for food stamps for a period of time (less than a year). My father had just been laid off, they had a newborn, and a ton of medical bills due to an extend hospital stay. My mother says food stamps were the only way she was able to maintain good nutrition for my sister and I during that time.
The programs do have a purpose, and I'm more than happy to contribute some of my tax dollars to the cause. I remind my congressmen that I'm willing to do so every time I get in a voters booth and vote for someone who supports these values.
For those of you that don't support these programs I respectfully disagree and encourage you to vote for someone who agrees with you.
Back in the early 1980's I worked in the local grocery store in my small (5000 person) town. My personal background was that my father was being squeezed out of farming by corporation take-overs and my mother went back to work earning not much over minimum wage. I was at minimum wage at the grocery. Now, I saw almost everyone come through the lanes with their purchases and their monies. What really surprised me, was some of the folks who got food stamps. Some of these people appeared so well-to-do! New cars, fancy coats and jewelry...how could they do it???? I had no idea. My parents, on my encouragement, actually applied for and were denied these benefits. We did, however, qualify for the half-price lunch program at the high school I attended. (Big WHOOP!) After working at the store and see what I did see, I figure there has got to be an angle and a way to work the system. I guess I/my family just don't/doesn't have the brain for it. After watching all these people take advantage, I have no qualms, yet I don't have the savvy. Truly, I don't think these programs are great for they seem to breed a dependence and sense of twisted entitlement but, who am I to say? Just another taxpayer!
I don't know if I just got lucky with this but over the summer CVS did an extrabucks deal where you buy like $15 in Neutrogena makeup and get $5 Extrabucks and one where you buy $20 in Nexxus haircare products and get $10. I did both and got my $15 in extrabucks but then realized i had bought the wrong stuff, so i returned it but still got to keep my extrabucks! It took 2 trips but for $15 I think it was worth it!
I am confused as to why they would cancel a cc simply because you paid the bill. Most CC companies make their real money off the business you charge with. Charging as much as 3 to 4% of each transaction. That is why companies like American Express can offer rolling credit without interest.
Thanks for bringing this up, Catherine! I am familiar with the program, and it is wonderful! I have yet to check it out personally, but I have heard very good things. It is open to anyone, and check out this month's menu!
It's pretty cool that people can get all this food for just $30!
To date, I have yet to use a college loan program, school lunch assistance program, or social security. I'm not saying these programs shouldn't exist, but they definitely shouldn't exist in the control of big government. These "social programs" need to be run by churches, non-profit groups, and charitable organizations. How can the government be so audacious so as to take my money and redistribute it to whoever decides not to work or just stay on welfare because they can't hack it. It's my money to begin with, and I should be able to and do decide who it goes to by donating to charities rather than big government.
Do you mean penny-ante? I believe that is the expression.
It is exciting to read about so many of us that have been touched either positively or negatively by government assistance programs! Thanks so much for sharing what seems to be some very personal experiences.
I would like to point out to Music for Cats that your point is very valid. Let me be the first to say that I'm glad our government was and continues to be there for you in your times of need. We are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, so even though I don't know you personally, it's nice to know that tax money is going towards what it was meant for, no matter how long you need it for.
Also, I think it very interesting that as the price of groceries rise, and jobs become scarce in some areas, food stamps are a great way for the government to pump money into the economy. In our small town, the cost for food is roughly 120% of the groceries in the next town. We could save alot by driving over and getting more food for less money. This would, of course, kill our local economy. The food stamp program guarantees that our small grocer stays in businesses, as many of the food stamp population are elderly folks that don't drive or other recipients that find the convenience of shopping in town a major benefit. The food stamp program has undoubtly saved our town from extinction, and I see it personally helping many farm families during times of need.
...where I would fall in the grand scheme of it? I am not "in debt" but I carry my Xmas bills over maybe 2 or 3 months, I am not a credit card "deadbeat" either. They make a little off me, but not much, since my rates are still good.
It's scary because I too think that credit should be there for tough times; but I do have my emergency savings too.
I also forgot to add to my earlier post about how the Welfare Queen is really a red herring of sorts that the government brings out when convenient. Yeah, there may be a few who live this way- I won't argue that.
But look at the bigger picture of what government wastes money on. The costs of welfare, food stamps, WIC, etc are but a drop in the bucket compared to the millions flying out every minute in Iraq- a war the majority does not support. And in wars past, there was an economic war "boom"- not so now, when Washington cronies are there to suck up the profits for themselves (read Halliburton, Blackwater, etc into this comment) as manufacturing for the military has even been outsourced to other countries!
What I don't get about the CVS bug is the sheer amount of stuff. You buy 8 tubes of toothpaste one week- then next week? I mean really! My family of six goes thru two tubes a month- and it seems every week there is some sort of theorem for savings involving toothpaste. If I had done the 8 tubes thing, I'm four months ahead of my family's needs. Where do I draw the line in the sand as to how much clutter to save up?
We had both our kids while we were in our doctoral programs (I was writing the dissertation the year the younger one was born). My advisor ran out of funds, and we ended up taking assistance from the state in the form of a "gap" medical assistance (our insurance paid 80% of medical costs, the 20% gap was filled by the Med Assistance, for me and the two kids), and Women, Infants and Children (WIC), a great program that provided dairy products, cereal, juice, and (since I nursed the baby for a year), tuna and carrots. It wasn't "exactly" food stamps, but you can bet we got a lot of stares and not-so-quiet comments in the grocery line, usually from elderly people who were drawing social security. They usually shut up when I politely mentioned it, but it was very stressful. Still, we appreciated the assistance, and were thankful for the support during the one year that we took it. I was able to finish my degree, go to work (allowing my husband to finish his PhD) and we have been contributing tax payers for many years now. I consider the year's investment in our lives to have been a good return for the country :)
Our younger daughter is autistic (now 12-1/2 years old), a condition that requires a LOT of therapies, medical procedures (EEGs to check for seizure activity, which we've avoided), medications to control behavior, sleep problems, etc. In our state, there is a Medicaid waiver for autism, so that we are covered (much like the medical assistance (MA) program described above) for the portion of the bill that our very good insurance (which costs a lot anyway, but ya gotta have it) doesn't cover is taken care of by the MA. I'm sure lots of fiscal conservatives also would balk at this, but she didn't ask for this condition (neither did we--it is a life-wrecker in many ways, ask any parent with an autistic child), and having assistance helps us to remain employed and able to contribute to the tax base.
I do worry that the cliche of the Welfare Queen (Lexus-driving, bon-bon eating, with 12 kids by 12 different guys) has hardened the populace against people who might need different levels of support at various points in their lives. The concept of public assistance is to help people get on their feet, either for the first time, or after a setback. It has been abused in some cases, but as our story (and that of the poster living with bipolar disorder--my thoughts are with you!) demonstrates, it does work.
Fantastic Plastic may be appealing to some, but I prefer saving and paying cash. I used Paypal to pay for something on the internet. After several attempts to contact the company I made the purchase from, by phone and emails, I finally resorted to Paypal. They investigated, found in my favor, and then "regretted" to inform me that they were unable to obtain my refund. That makes me a lot skeptical about dealing with them to pay for things. Since then, I have sent unanswered emails again to the company I bought the software from and, to date, have still not had a reply. Where does one turn to now. It seems like a futile effort to keep trying to get my money back. It was less than a $50 purchase.
I'm sure there are some posters here who would see my family as some sort of deadbeat burden on society, since my children are all foster kids we've adopted. We get a monthly stipend on 3 of the 4 until they turn 18. It is nowhere near enough to raise a kid on- for us it only augments their lives. It is money we save for their college or rarely dip into for extras like karate class or summer camp. This is not entitlement- these kids came from extreme disadvantage and the stipend only helps a little. For all the needs our children have, my partner is a stay at home parent with no added income. I see the stipend on some level as payment from the government for tackling the special needs our kids have.
The kids are also elgible for food stamps until they are 5- if you think food stamps means all your food needs are met, you are all sorely mistaken. The food stamps are for specific items, chiefly, milk, cereal, peanut butter, juice and sometimes cheese. It merely augments the needs of a growing kid- it is not the be all and end all some here think it is.
And don't think that just because we get these so-called entitlements we aren't paying taxes. I would imagine that as a family, we end up paying more- since the government doesn't even see my partner and I as a couple.
What an unexpectedly lively discussion this has generated. I thought I would have nothing to add, but I think I do. When I was a child, my family was on food stamps and welfare for a period of time, and I am not ashamed at all. Whether my parents made poor life choices or not, they did the right thing in getting help for themselves and their children, and it was indeed a transitional phase, as is the case for almost everyone who uses such programs.
This is a very important subject to bring up. Here in the state of Michigan, we are deep in recession. The state has lost hundreds of thousands of jobs, and we are beginning to see a dramatic rise in poverty-related social problems including, sadly, many more children entering foster care due to addiction and other emotional problems directly triggered by poverty. Many people are experiencing poverty for the first time in their lives, and are unfamiliar with the social welfare system. I think there is little doubt that in the state of Michigan, many people are unemployed through no fault of their own. (This may be a look into the future for the rest of the country.) At the same time, the price of groceries has risen starkly. People should definitely take advantage of government food assistance as well as any help they can find through private charities, local food pantries, etc. to get through these tough times. I have heard great things about Angel Food Ministries (www.angelfoodministries.com), which is one of those "faith based initiatives" sponsored by the Bush Administration. It sounds like a huge success, as any person can receive a large package of food for just $30. It is in the best interests of the government and society as a whole that the population be well nourished, and even though food costs are rising, there is still plenty to go around. You can't look for a better job, or go back to school, if you are not getting enough to eat. First things first.
Catherine Shaffer
Wise Bread Contributor