Thanks for bringing up the topic. I'm grateful the help is there for those who need it. Unless you've been on your uppers it's really hard to explain to someone who hasn't. Having been there has advantages. I can see both sides. As you said, it's not always a matter of personal choices, but alot of life happening at once.
Abuses do occur. And it is frustrating to have no say in how tax money is spent. A thought, I wonder if our tossing the responsibility of our neighbors onto the federal government, is a big part of the problem. We not only lose personal accountability, but the ability to actually help someone do better, to share in their success. The sheer amount of distance between tax payer and receivee bogs down all efforts. And to be perfectly honest, I'd rather give a gift to someone I know would use the help well, than pay the same in taxes only to see a trickle actually reach them. Not everyone feels that way though, some prefer the distance. Anonymity has advantages on both sides.
I think alot of your insights have to do with the advantage of seeing people who need help as indiviuals, with many different reasons for being in a tight spot. You've been there too. As you noted, people getting tax paid help, aren't all unwed mothers with eighteen kids.
Welcome to CVS shopping! I've become quite the enthusiast. It did take me a while to figure things out, as well as my own personal limits and rules. If you have questions about the ethics of CVS shopping or any points of disagreement, I think you will quickly find out that Crystal is serious about her comments moderation policy, and no dissent is tolerated over there. I'm planning on hosting an ethical discussion at Wise Bread, though, when I have time for a proper post. Personally, I never buy things I can't use at CVS. Giving them to charity is nonsensical. If they are free in the first place, that's not charity, because the person who needs them can also get them for free from the store. Plus, some of the "moneymaker" items are extremely limited in quantity, and often they fly off the shelves as soon as they are put out. I can't imagine buying a blood glucose monitor just to get the extracare bucks, when someone who really has diabetes would probably be very excited to find the same item on sale with such a lucrative promotion attached to it. It's sort of like stealing extra care bucks from the poor, if you think about it.
Nonetheless, I have gotten some pretty great deals based only on items my family actually uses. Last week, I got two jars of hellman's mayonnaise, two boxes of green tea, two canisters of sun maid raisins, a small pack of stayfree pads, and eight tubes of toothpaste for $2.23, with $15 ECB returned to me. Go CVS!
By the way, individual CVS stores vary in their policies. It is not corporate policy as far as I know to restrict the use of manufacturers/store coupons on clearance items, but you may need to buy an additional item with your "overage" or the cashier may need to adjust your coupon amount so that your balance is not less than 0. It has not been my experience that there is any trickery in the system. I have often felt that way about other stores' coupon promotions--squinting at a dizzying array of products and packages trying to find the one item that is on sale, buying the wrong one anyway, waiting in line half an hour at customer service to return it. Ugh. But CVS seems almost idiot proof. They often put prominent signs up in the aisles directing you to ECB deals, and of late there is even special packaging that has the deal promotion printed right on it, and if you do make a mistake, you can check your receipt and fix it later, like Carrie did. I even had one experience where the ECB did not print out for a purchase I made, and the store manager came out and did some fancy stuff on the cash register to make it print. (He actually returned one of my items and then sold it to me again.)
I think part of what stigmatizes welfare programs versus other sorts of government support is the extent to which they're base on need. Farm subsidies to go anyone who owns land and grows (or doesn't grow) the right crops. Some college aid is based on need, but the ceiling is high and some is available even to the wealthy. These sorts of programs don't seem to come with so much stigma attached. (This, of course, is exactly why there has been so much resistence to one option to save social security, which would be to means-test the benefits. Everyone knows that to do that would be to turn it into a welfare program, with all the associated stigma.)
I agree that there shouldn't be a stigma attached to public assistance, and I agree that there are people who are abusing the system. I also think that a lot of times, it's the people who need the assistance the most that struggle the most with the stigma attached. A friend of my sister's is a single mom raising a child and just as she was starting to make ends meet, the cancer she fought as a teenager made a reappearance. She qualifies for food stamps, but is ashamed to use the debit card. She drives to the next town over just to use it, and even then, she mainly uses it for milk for her son. Even though the money is hers to use on food, she still refuses to use it because of the sigma attached. And with her health conditions, she could really benefit from spending the money on balanced nutrition.
She's working hard to make ends meet. She's raising a son on her own with no family help and no help from the child's father. She's fighting cancer (she has state provided insurance - the cancer is the reason she applied for assistance in the first place).
Unfortunately, there are a number of people on the other side of the fence, people who will take everything that is offered to them and still ask for more, people who are taking advantage of the system when they don't need to be. It's those people who give the system a bad name.
I don't know what the solution is. Better policing? But at what risk? Would fewer people who need the assistance take it for fear of the policing? If so, then it's not worth it.
is that most people abusing the system and using it for a "lifetime" are children of those who were on public assistance (I'm talking welfare and food stamp programs)...they are taking after their parents and many do not know any better or different. I am not familiar myself with how the programs work, but can someone talk about assistance in learning life and job skills and that kind of thing? Do people get trained to stand on their own two feet while in these programs? Or is it easier and does our government enable folks to stay on indefinitely. I have had friends on public assistance when they went thru a rough time in their lives, but they all understood it was temporary and just a helping hand. I look at it this way too, should I need it.
Speaking of social programs...what about Social Security? It wasn't intended as a retirement program..but a supplemental income one...but look how many depend on it for their retirement. Why is that? At least back in the "old days", if you worked hard on your job, you got your gold watch and your pension when you retired, and I guess Social Security wasn't that much of an issue...not these days...pensions have gone the way of the Dodo bird....so if today's workers continue with the mindset of the government taking care of me...the system will eventually collapse, won't it? I have a neighbor who had a VERY modest job with the post office and set aside only $20 a month when he first started there...he is now one of those "closet millionaires"...so if he can do it with just $20 a month...why can't the rest of us do it???!!
I guess it boils down to what kind of government we want to have...do we want a total free market society or a socialist one...or something in between? We don't have either right now, but in light of these latest "tax rebates" and other programs that keep cropping up, we are leaning towards becoming socialist...all fine if that's what we want...but I guess we'd have to be prepared for the govt getting into our lives in other ways too.
I've worked with poor people for most of my career and must say that I don't know the answer. Almost every week, I see a welfare cheat driving a Lexis and parking next to my Honda Civic. Almost every day, I see good people who deserve more, not less help from our government. Many times, its because of an illness or handicap that is not the person's fault. Many times, I see people with limited skills who would still be doing something useful and meaningful if they had been born in a Northern European country.
The Lexis-driving welfare mom tends to get people's attention, but she is the minority. All welfare recipients get a bad rap because we haven't figured out hnow to distinguish between the two groups.
I don't know how the Europeans manage their system, but I know we could learn from them. Americans are to reluctant to learn from other systems that actually work.
i think the mind set difference between welfare and school grants and scholarships is that you EARN most school related things (like pell grants---required GPA to even be eligible) where as welfare usually means you've "failed". i put that in quotes, because obviously there are many many many exceptions to that, but i think, at least subconsciously, thats how many americans (not the moochers of course lol) view it.
I have to admit that I feel a lot of resentment towards the people who talk smack about those of us who have received public assistance. For my part, I am bipolar and categorized as "Seriously Mentally Ill" by the state I live in. That means that I've been hospitalized more times than I can count -- both at public expense and on private insurance -- and have received extensive ECT (electro-convulsive therapy, also known as electroshock). I will be on incredibly expensive medication for the rest of my life in order to remain productive and employed (by "incredibly expensive" I mean about $1500 a month, retail). I didn't choose to have this devastating illness, and I have worked doggedly to get a Ph.D. and remain employed despite it. I have attended countless support groups and a lot of group therapy, and it's undeniable that most mentally ill people -- people who make up a large percentage of the homeless and imprisoned population -- want desperately to acquire the independence, involvement and prestige of working. People who talk about "bad choices" often aren't looking at the full extent of the challenges people face, and their narrowed range of options. In short, I've paid a lot of taxes in my time, and don't feel at all guilty for receiving free medications and psychiatric care during a period in my life when I couldn't work, and therefore was uninsurable.
Don't even get me started on the cruelty of a system that bases insurance on employability, thereby denying it to the sickest and most needy members of society -- those who are too ill to work.
I doubt US banks will follow suit (or should I say, I doubt banks will follow suit in the US).
The fact of the matter is that the recent Bankruptcy reform makes it incredibly difficult for US debtors to walk away from bankruptcy without debt. Banks (or credit card issuers) are not as 'burned' by US defaults as customers in other countries.
I have just finished reading 'Maxed Out' (as well as watching the film). In it, an debt law expert from Harvard disclosed that the 'worst' customers generate the most revenue for credit card companies. Those who emerge from bankruptcy are actually pursued by credit card companies. They tend to be addicted to credit. And with incredibly high interest rates and fees and surfing (paying off old debt with new debt), these debtors are stuck in an endless cycle, with death being the only exit.
IMO, it resembles the days of indentured servants. It's like debtors prison, except without the physical walls.
Regardless of whether you blame debtors or predatory lending, I recommend reading the book or watching the movie. There really are no substantive financial penalties to credit card companies when their customers default, at least in the US. Therefore, I don't see this practice taking hold in the States. It will take federal regulation.
Debt and human addiction to taking on debt has existed for a long long time. When it comes to debt, I do believe that people do need to be saved from themselves.
and I agree that bells and whistles should never come before food.
Having worked in the social services, arena, however, I felt that there was more than enough shame to go around in many instances, without feeling like people needed extra. Alot of the people receiving assistance weren't the classic "baby's mamma" or deadbeat from down the street. They were the foster kid that aged out of the system at age 19 with no jobs skills or self esteem. They were the widow of the soldier killed in Iraq... the mother of 5 with an inoperable brain tumor and a husband that was laid off when his job got sent to another country for cheaper labor... the retiree who just found out that her dead husband's pension package disappeared when the company he worked 40 years for went belly-up.
These folks weren't suffering "consequences" or their poor decisions. They just got stuck with a whole lot of life at one time. Many of them would have been able to get more help sooner if they hadn't have been made to feel ashamed. Most of them stayed on assistance for a season or two and moved on, grateful that all the tax money they pumped into the system for all those working years finally gave back to them in their time of need.
I WILL agree that there are too many people abusing the system. I also am all for accountability. Our current system doesn't do alot of that, and it can be easy to cheat the system. I did see that from time to time.
I would like to see more good people who are struggling see options for what they are, however. And I would like for people to be able to examine what is truly a "hand-out" and what could be a way out.
I respectfully disagree, Lindsay. I think a healthy dose of humility is in order when one makes life decisions that lead to requiring government hand-outs. I say that as the child of a single mother of three children who put herself through college on various forms of welfare and food stamps. There really is no denying that it was her own decisions that had her needing those handouts to begin with.
Don't get me wrong, I admire my mother for getting the education that she got, but I don't think it should be EASIER for people to make poor life choices. I don't think accountability is a bad thing. I am ok with transitional assistance, but I do see it being abused a LOT. Anecdotally, my own husband was a cable technician for several years while completing his degree. As rule, most homes in the poorest areas had cable packages with all the bells and whistles ($150 a month, easily), not to mention two cars, dishwashers, etc. I hate to sound heartless, and I am the first one to help someone when I can, but I just think more accountability would be a good thing for EVERYONE.
That food stamps and other helps should be a transitional tool, not an intentional way of life. I would like to point out a few things about the food program specifically:
The government does NOT consider the food and nutrition program (food stamps) to be welfare. (See this link) . Additionally, the government encourages participation in the food stamp program because, while it costs tax dollars to do so, it is in their best interest to keep our poor from going hungry. The last thing we need is a poor and elderly population in bad health due to malnutrition. This is far more costly to us as a nation than the cost of food stamps (both in medical care and loss of resource.) Also, single elderly households make up a large majority of the food stamp population, so keep in mind that these are often folks living on a fixed social-security income.
Here is a VERY interesting article on the state of welfare today compared with its origins, for those of you wishing to look at the cash welfare system (which I didn't examine specifically in my article.)
I see the need for assistance programs, but I also think that they should be a temporary fix not a lifestlye as they have become for many people in our nation.
After hurricane Katrina, I stood in the food stamp line, drove through the lines to get ice, and MRE's. I also got a FEMA check and unemployment assistance while I was out of work. After a couple of months, we were able to get back on our feet, so we called the unemployment office and stopped the benefits that I was receiving. There were thousands of people in our situation; many still are struggling to rebuild their lives 2 and a half years later.
Then there are those people who were living off of the government before the storm and who were rioting at the New Orleans City Hall when the city council was deciding if the flooded housing projects should be torn down. Many of those families had lived in the projects since they were built in the 1940's. They were 3rd generation tenants. They receive food stamps, utility assistance, housing assistance, free education assistance and free childcare. They scream that free public housing is their right. I have a serious problem with that.
There must be limits on assistance. People should not expect to be taken care of by the government. It has to be a hand up not a hand out.
I also buy very little that is sold at CVS. I've decided to check the flyers regularly in case the things I do buy go on special.
I do feel like they do everything they can to trick you. If there is ever more than one interpretation, the one that is less favorable is probably the one they have. Except they let you use regular coupons and store coupons and CVS Extra Care Bucks. But if anything you're buying is on clearance (and they often have very nice clearance prices), only regular coupons can be used. Also, always closely check the expiration dates of things on clearance.
My best deals have been when they have a store-brand of a product I use and it goes on clearance. I think sometimes the major brands make a change, and then the store brand has to make the same change to keep up. That's happened twice on stuff I use. They have store brands of lots of things that are good deals even at full price.
To your opinion of course. And while a respectful discussion is preferable to a sordid display of name-calling and defensive generalization, you most certainly don't have to agree with me.
Unless you can tell me that you have never used (or will use) a government assistance program (college grants, school lunch subsidies, social security, etc.) then you are mistaken, and have grossly misunderstood the point of my article. I am simply facilitating an adult discussion on the differences between government-funded programs and the social views associated with them.
Just because the government encourages it doesn't mean it is correct. Welfare and government assistance programs are used by leeches that mooch off the hard work of others. It is simply redistribution of wealth. Men need to man up and provide for their families. If this means quitting a college education, no cellphones, no satellite TV, or having to drive a clunker, so be it! If one makes decisions in life, he/she has to be prepared to accept the consequences - good or bad. Heaven forbid of unwed mothers and deadbeat fathers exercised self control and abstinence in order to reduce the need for government handouts.
I love CVS deals. I used to do Walgreens EasySaver rebates a lot, but the CVS deals are better for several reasons, including:
1. You get the "rebate" instantly in the form of the ECB coupon, instead of having to wait a month or more for a rebate processor to send you your rebate from a mail-in form.
2. CVS puts out tons of store coupons that can make the deals even better, unlike Walgreens that only puts out a decent store coupon once in a blue moon.
3. CVS deals are often limit 2 or 5 and not just one. Plus that limit is per card, and you can have a card for each person in your household.
4. There are just more things included in the CVS deals than in the Walgreens EasySaver.
I have so much free stuff from CVS from these promotions! I don't know what I'll do if they ever stop this and I have to actually pay for toothpaste, deodorant, or shampoo again.
I just trekked back down to the CVS in the driving snow because 1) The coupon I had expired today, 2) I knew it would be totally dead during the Super Bowl AND a snowstorm and 3) I am a total freak.
My out-of-pocket "investment" in CVS-ing is now $18, and I exit the weekend with $10 in ECBs, as the pros call those Extra Bucks or Extra Care Bucks. We can use everything I bought:
4 tubes of Colgate ($6.75 after coupons, PLUS 5 ECBs)
2 tubes of Norwegian Formula Neutrogena lotion ($6.45 after coupon and sale, plus half of a 5 ECB bonus)
2 6-packs of TheraFlu, one nighttime, one daytime ($12.20 after coupon PLUS 10 ECBs)
8 cans of Campbell's soup ($4 after manufacturers coupons)
1 Milk Chug to get us through coffee in the morning before I go to grocery store ($1)
That adds up to just over $30, before the $7 in CVS coupons and $5 ECBs I used. (I'm not counting what I spent on my photos because I was going to get those printed anyway today.)
That's a lot of stuff for $18 -- or $8, if you count the $10 "bill" I came home with!
Had that when I was overseas in Iraq. The canned cheese is surprisingly good. IF you like that spreadable Brie cheese stuff, it should be right up your alley.
I have to second Looby's point - as someone who never carries a balance, the amount of people contacting the BBC about being cancelled with good credit is a bit unnerving. I hope they just stick to canning people who aren't paying them back properly, not those who use credit responsibly.
I found MSM about the same time I found WiseBread, In November of 2007. Ever since, I've found it easy to save coupons and acquire more. I keep them paper-clipped by week in a grocery bag. I ask friends, family, and co-workers to save theirs for me, and have at least 4 inserts a week not including my own, coming to me. There's resources online to search for specific coupons and which insert they are in. Very easy. Since doing this in November, my CVS receipt as of today reads: Year to date savings (starting in 2008): $559.16, Winter 2008 Spending (Starting in December, I think): $199.34. This doesn't include today's transaction in which I bought over $100 in items I use for $5.70 out-of-pocket, using $29.50 in prior EBs, and receiving $45.46 EBs back!! Thanks to MSM, I am able to get housewares, cosmetics, and personal products pretty much free, or I make money off of them! =) Great article.
First, I just want to say that Crystal is awesome and she does such a great job of documenting and sharing how she saves money at the stores. She is an inspiration to a lot of women.
I do the CVS program, but only in spurts. I don't have a lot of time to really follow it and I have forgotten a few times when I should have had a big pay out. That was disappointing. I do have a medicine cabinet full of goodies that were bought for free or really cheap to prove that it does work though, it just takes more effort than I am able to put in at times :)
At first I thought, how CRUDE! But we have to consider that the banks have to protect their best interests. I don't think this is about saving customers from themselves so much as it is about the banks making sure they stop the hemorrhaging of credit as it stands now with customers making more late payments.
Thanks for bringing up the topic. I'm grateful the help is there for those who need it. Unless you've been on your uppers it's really hard to explain to someone who hasn't. Having been there has advantages. I can see both sides. As you said, it's not always a matter of personal choices, but alot of life happening at once.
Abuses do occur. And it is frustrating to have no say in how tax money is spent. A thought, I wonder if our tossing the responsibility of our neighbors onto the federal government, is a big part of the problem. We not only lose personal accountability, but the ability to actually help someone do better, to share in their success. The sheer amount of distance between tax payer and receivee bogs down all efforts. And to be perfectly honest, I'd rather give a gift to someone I know would use the help well, than pay the same in taxes only to see a trickle actually reach them. Not everyone feels that way though, some prefer the distance. Anonymity has advantages on both sides.
I think alot of your insights have to do with the advantage of seeing people who need help as indiviuals, with many different reasons for being in a tight spot. You've been there too. As you noted, people getting tax paid help, aren't all unwed mothers with eighteen kids.
Welcome to CVS shopping! I've become quite the enthusiast. It did take me a while to figure things out, as well as my own personal limits and rules. If you have questions about the ethics of CVS shopping or any points of disagreement, I think you will quickly find out that Crystal is serious about her comments moderation policy, and no dissent is tolerated over there. I'm planning on hosting an ethical discussion at Wise Bread, though, when I have time for a proper post. Personally, I never buy things I can't use at CVS. Giving them to charity is nonsensical. If they are free in the first place, that's not charity, because the person who needs them can also get them for free from the store. Plus, some of the "moneymaker" items are extremely limited in quantity, and often they fly off the shelves as soon as they are put out. I can't imagine buying a blood glucose monitor just to get the extracare bucks, when someone who really has diabetes would probably be very excited to find the same item on sale with such a lucrative promotion attached to it. It's sort of like stealing extra care bucks from the poor, if you think about it.
Nonetheless, I have gotten some pretty great deals based only on items my family actually uses. Last week, I got two jars of hellman's mayonnaise, two boxes of green tea, two canisters of sun maid raisins, a small pack of stayfree pads, and eight tubes of toothpaste for $2.23, with $15 ECB returned to me. Go CVS!
By the way, individual CVS stores vary in their policies. It is not corporate policy as far as I know to restrict the use of manufacturers/store coupons on clearance items, but you may need to buy an additional item with your "overage" or the cashier may need to adjust your coupon amount so that your balance is not less than 0. It has not been my experience that there is any trickery in the system. I have often felt that way about other stores' coupon promotions--squinting at a dizzying array of products and packages trying to find the one item that is on sale, buying the wrong one anyway, waiting in line half an hour at customer service to return it. Ugh. But CVS seems almost idiot proof. They often put prominent signs up in the aisles directing you to ECB deals, and of late there is even special packaging that has the deal promotion printed right on it, and if you do make a mistake, you can check your receipt and fix it later, like Carrie did. I even had one experience where the ECB did not print out for a purchase I made, and the store manager came out and did some fancy stuff on the cash register to make it print. (He actually returned one of my items and then sold it to me again.)
Catherine Shaffer
Wise Bread Contributor
I think part of what stigmatizes welfare programs versus other sorts of government support is the extent to which they're base on need. Farm subsidies to go anyone who owns land and grows (or doesn't grow) the right crops. Some college aid is based on need, but the ceiling is high and some is available even to the wealthy. These sorts of programs don't seem to come with so much stigma attached. (This, of course, is exactly why there has been so much resistence to one option to save social security, which would be to means-test the benefits. Everyone knows that to do that would be to turn it into a welfare program, with all the associated stigma.)
I agree that there shouldn't be a stigma attached to public assistance, and I agree that there are people who are abusing the system. I also think that a lot of times, it's the people who need the assistance the most that struggle the most with the stigma attached. A friend of my sister's is a single mom raising a child and just as she was starting to make ends meet, the cancer she fought as a teenager made a reappearance. She qualifies for food stamps, but is ashamed to use the debit card. She drives to the next town over just to use it, and even then, she mainly uses it for milk for her son. Even though the money is hers to use on food, she still refuses to use it because of the sigma attached. And with her health conditions, she could really benefit from spending the money on balanced nutrition.
She's working hard to make ends meet. She's raising a son on her own with no family help and no help from the child's father. She's fighting cancer (she has state provided insurance - the cancer is the reason she applied for assistance in the first place).
Unfortunately, there are a number of people on the other side of the fence, people who will take everything that is offered to them and still ask for more, people who are taking advantage of the system when they don't need to be. It's those people who give the system a bad name.
I don't know what the solution is. Better policing? But at what risk? Would fewer people who need the assistance take it for fear of the policing? If so, then it's not worth it.
is that most people abusing the system and using it for a "lifetime" are children of those who were on public assistance (I'm talking welfare and food stamp programs)...they are taking after their parents and many do not know any better or different. I am not familiar myself with how the programs work, but can someone talk about assistance in learning life and job skills and that kind of thing? Do people get trained to stand on their own two feet while in these programs? Or is it easier and does our government enable folks to stay on indefinitely. I have had friends on public assistance when they went thru a rough time in their lives, but they all understood it was temporary and just a helping hand. I look at it this way too, should I need it.
Speaking of social programs...what about Social Security? It wasn't intended as a retirement program..but a supplemental income one...but look how many depend on it for their retirement. Why is that? At least back in the "old days", if you worked hard on your job, you got your gold watch and your pension when you retired, and I guess Social Security wasn't that much of an issue...not these days...pensions have gone the way of the Dodo bird....so if today's workers continue with the mindset of the government taking care of me...the system will eventually collapse, won't it? I have a neighbor who had a VERY modest job with the post office and set aside only $20 a month when he first started there...he is now one of those "closet millionaires"...so if he can do it with just $20 a month...why can't the rest of us do it???!!
I guess it boils down to what kind of government we want to have...do we want a total free market society or a socialist one...or something in between? We don't have either right now, but in light of these latest "tax rebates" and other programs that keep cropping up, we are leaning towards becoming socialist...all fine if that's what we want...but I guess we'd have to be prepared for the govt getting into our lives in other ways too.
I've worked with poor people for most of my career and must say that I don't know the answer. Almost every week, I see a welfare cheat driving a Lexis and parking next to my Honda Civic. Almost every day, I see good people who deserve more, not less help from our government. Many times, its because of an illness or handicap that is not the person's fault. Many times, I see people with limited skills who would still be doing something useful and meaningful if they had been born in a Northern European country.
The Lexis-driving welfare mom tends to get people's attention, but she is the minority. All welfare recipients get a bad rap because we haven't figured out hnow to distinguish between the two groups.
I don't know how the Europeans manage their system, but I know we could learn from them. Americans are to reluctant to learn from other systems that actually work.
i think the mind set difference between welfare and school grants and scholarships is that you EARN most school related things (like pell grants---required GPA to even be eligible) where as welfare usually means you've "failed". i put that in quotes, because obviously there are many many many exceptions to that, but i think, at least subconsciously, thats how many americans (not the moochers of course lol) view it.
This is really a hot discussion, Linsey. I'll be interested to see how it unfolds, as I can certainly see points from both sides of the aisle.
I have to admit that I feel a lot of resentment towards the people who talk smack about those of us who have received public assistance. For my part, I am bipolar and categorized as "Seriously Mentally Ill" by the state I live in. That means that I've been hospitalized more times than I can count -- both at public expense and on private insurance -- and have received extensive ECT (electro-convulsive therapy, also known as electroshock). I will be on incredibly expensive medication for the rest of my life in order to remain productive and employed (by "incredibly expensive" I mean about $1500 a month, retail). I didn't choose to have this devastating illness, and I have worked doggedly to get a Ph.D. and remain employed despite it. I have attended countless support groups and a lot of group therapy, and it's undeniable that most mentally ill people -- people who make up a large percentage of the homeless and imprisoned population -- want desperately to acquire the independence, involvement and prestige of working. People who talk about "bad choices" often aren't looking at the full extent of the challenges people face, and their narrowed range of options. In short, I've paid a lot of taxes in my time, and don't feel at all guilty for receiving free medications and psychiatric care during a period in my life when I couldn't work, and therefore was uninsurable.
Don't even get me started on the cruelty of a system that bases insurance on employability, thereby denying it to the sickest and most needy members of society -- those who are too ill to work.
I doubt US banks will follow suit (or should I say, I doubt banks will follow suit in the US).
The fact of the matter is that the recent Bankruptcy reform makes it incredibly difficult for US debtors to walk away from bankruptcy without debt. Banks (or credit card issuers) are not as 'burned' by US defaults as customers in other countries.
I have just finished reading 'Maxed Out' (as well as watching the film). In it, an debt law expert from Harvard disclosed that the 'worst' customers generate the most revenue for credit card companies. Those who emerge from bankruptcy are actually pursued by credit card companies. They tend to be addicted to credit. And with incredibly high interest rates and fees and surfing (paying off old debt with new debt), these debtors are stuck in an endless cycle, with death being the only exit.
IMO, it resembles the days of indentured servants. It's like debtors prison, except without the physical walls.
Regardless of whether you blame debtors or predatory lending, I recommend reading the book or watching the movie. There really are no substantive financial penalties to credit card companies when their customers default, at least in the US. Therefore, I don't see this practice taking hold in the States. It will take federal regulation.
Debt and human addiction to taking on debt has existed for a long long time. When it comes to debt, I do believe that people do need to be saved from themselves.
and I agree that bells and whistles should never come before food.
Having worked in the social services, arena, however, I felt that there was more than enough shame to go around in many instances, without feeling like people needed extra. Alot of the people receiving assistance weren't the classic "baby's mamma" or deadbeat from down the street. They were the foster kid that aged out of the system at age 19 with no jobs skills or self esteem. They were the widow of the soldier killed in Iraq... the mother of 5 with an inoperable brain tumor and a husband that was laid off when his job got sent to another country for cheaper labor... the retiree who just found out that her dead husband's pension package disappeared when the company he worked 40 years for went belly-up.
These folks weren't suffering "consequences" or their poor decisions. They just got stuck with a whole lot of life at one time. Many of them would have been able to get more help sooner if they hadn't have been made to feel ashamed. Most of them stayed on assistance for a season or two and moved on, grateful that all the tax money they pumped into the system for all those working years finally gave back to them in their time of need.
I WILL agree that there are too many people abusing the system. I also am all for accountability. Our current system doesn't do alot of that, and it can be easy to cheat the system. I did see that from time to time.
I would like to see more good people who are struggling see options for what they are, however. And I would like for people to be able to examine what is truly a "hand-out" and what could be a way out.
Thanks again for the discussion!
I respectfully disagree, Lindsay. I think a healthy dose of humility is in order when one makes life decisions that lead to requiring government hand-outs. I say that as the child of a single mother of three children who put herself through college on various forms of welfare and food stamps. There really is no denying that it was her own decisions that had her needing those handouts to begin with.
Don't get me wrong, I admire my mother for getting the education that she got, but I don't think it should be EASIER for people to make poor life choices. I don't think accountability is a bad thing. I am ok with transitional assistance, but I do see it being abused a LOT. Anecdotally, my own husband was a cable technician for several years while completing his degree. As rule, most homes in the poorest areas had cable packages with all the bells and whistles ($150 a month, easily), not to mention two cars, dishwashers, etc. I hate to sound heartless, and I am the first one to help someone when I can, but I just think more accountability would be a good thing for EVERYONE.
That food stamps and other helps should be a transitional tool, not an intentional way of life. I would like to point out a few things about the food program specifically:
The government does NOT consider the food and nutrition program (food stamps) to be welfare. (See this link) . Additionally, the government encourages participation in the food stamp program because, while it costs tax dollars to do so, it is in their best interest to keep our poor from going hungry. The last thing we need is a poor and elderly population in bad health due to malnutrition. This is far more costly to us as a nation than the cost of food stamps (both in medical care and loss of resource.) Also, single elderly households make up a large majority of the food stamp population, so keep in mind that these are often folks living on a fixed social-security income.
Here is a VERY interesting article on the state of welfare today compared with its origins, for those of you wishing to look at the cash welfare system (which I didn't examine specifically in my article.)
Just a few thoughts. Thanks for the comments!
Linsey Knerl
I see the need for assistance programs, but I also think that they should be a temporary fix not a lifestlye as they have become for many people in our nation.
After hurricane Katrina, I stood in the food stamp line, drove through the lines to get ice, and MRE's. I also got a FEMA check and unemployment assistance while I was out of work. After a couple of months, we were able to get back on our feet, so we called the unemployment office and stopped the benefits that I was receiving. There were thousands of people in our situation; many still are struggling to rebuild their lives 2 and a half years later.
Then there are those people who were living off of the government before the storm and who were rioting at the New Orleans City Hall when the city council was deciding if the flooded housing projects should be torn down. Many of those families had lived in the projects since they were built in the 1940's. They were 3rd generation tenants. They receive food stamps, utility assistance, housing assistance, free education assistance and free childcare. They scream that free public housing is their right. I have a serious problem with that.
There must be limits on assistance. People should not expect to be taken care of by the government. It has to be a hand up not a hand out.
haha :p you gotta melt it first
I also buy very little that is sold at CVS. I've decided to check the flyers regularly in case the things I do buy go on special.
I do feel like they do everything they can to trick you. If there is ever more than one interpretation, the one that is less favorable is probably the one they have. Except they let you use regular coupons and store coupons and CVS Extra Care Bucks. But if anything you're buying is on clearance (and they often have very nice clearance prices), only regular coupons can be used. Also, always closely check the expiration dates of things on clearance.
My best deals have been when they have a store-brand of a product I use and it goes on clearance. I think sometimes the major brands make a change, and then the store brand has to make the same change to keep up. That's happened twice on stuff I use. They have store brands of lots of things that are good deals even at full price.
To your opinion of course. And while a respectful discussion is preferable to a sordid display of name-calling and defensive generalization, you most certainly don't have to agree with me.
Unless you can tell me that you have never used (or will use) a government assistance program (college grants, school lunch subsidies, social security, etc.) then you are mistaken, and have grossly misunderstood the point of my article. I am simply facilitating an adult discussion on the differences between government-funded programs and the social views associated with them.
You have, in responding, proven my point.
Just because the government encourages it doesn't mean it is correct. Welfare and government assistance programs are used by leeches that mooch off the hard work of others. It is simply redistribution of wealth. Men need to man up and provide for their families. If this means quitting a college education, no cellphones, no satellite TV, or having to drive a clunker, so be it! If one makes decisions in life, he/she has to be prepared to accept the consequences - good or bad. Heaven forbid of unwed mothers and deadbeat fathers exercised self control and abstinence in order to reduce the need for government handouts.
I love CVS deals. I used to do Walgreens EasySaver rebates a lot, but the CVS deals are better for several reasons, including:
1. You get the "rebate" instantly in the form of the ECB coupon, instead of having to wait a month or more for a rebate processor to send you your rebate from a mail-in form.
2. CVS puts out tons of store coupons that can make the deals even better, unlike Walgreens that only puts out a decent store coupon once in a blue moon.
3. CVS deals are often limit 2 or 5 and not just one. Plus that limit is per card, and you can have a card for each person in your household.
4. There are just more things included in the CVS deals than in the Walgreens EasySaver.
I have so much free stuff from CVS from these promotions! I don't know what I'll do if they ever stop this and I have to actually pay for toothpaste, deodorant, or shampoo again.
I just trekked back down to the CVS in the driving snow because 1) The coupon I had expired today, 2) I knew it would be totally dead during the Super Bowl AND a snowstorm and 3) I am a total freak.
My out-of-pocket "investment" in CVS-ing is now $18, and I exit the weekend with $10 in ECBs, as the pros call those Extra Bucks or Extra Care Bucks. We can use everything I bought:
4 tubes of Colgate ($6.75 after coupons, PLUS 5 ECBs)
2 tubes of Norwegian Formula Neutrogena lotion ($6.45 after coupon and sale, plus half of a 5 ECB bonus)
2 6-packs of TheraFlu, one nighttime, one daytime ($12.20 after coupon PLUS 10 ECBs)
8 cans of Campbell's soup ($4 after manufacturers coupons)
1 Milk Chug to get us through coffee in the morning before I go to grocery store ($1)
That adds up to just over $30, before the $7 in CVS coupons and $5 ECBs I used. (I'm not counting what I spent on my photos because I was going to get those printed anyway today.)
That's a lot of stuff for $18 -- or $8, if you count the $10 "bill" I came home with!
Had that when I was overseas in Iraq. The canned cheese is surprisingly good. IF you like that spreadable Brie cheese stuff, it should be right up your alley.
I have to second Looby's point - as someone who never carries a balance, the amount of people contacting the BBC about being cancelled with good credit is a bit unnerving. I hope they just stick to canning people who aren't paying them back properly, not those who use credit responsibly.
I found MSM about the same time I found WiseBread, In November of 2007. Ever since, I've found it easy to save coupons and acquire more. I keep them paper-clipped by week in a grocery bag. I ask friends, family, and co-workers to save theirs for me, and have at least 4 inserts a week not including my own, coming to me. There's resources online to search for specific coupons and which insert they are in. Very easy. Since doing this in November, my CVS receipt as of today reads: Year to date savings (starting in 2008): $559.16, Winter 2008 Spending (Starting in December, I think): $199.34. This doesn't include today's transaction in which I bought over $100 in items I use for $5.70 out-of-pocket, using $29.50 in prior EBs, and receiving $45.46 EBs back!! Thanks to MSM, I am able to get housewares, cosmetics, and personal products pretty much free, or I make money off of them! =) Great article.
First, I just want to say that Crystal is awesome and she does such a great job of documenting and sharing how she saves money at the stores. She is an inspiration to a lot of women.
I do the CVS program, but only in spurts. I don't have a lot of time to really follow it and I have forgotten a few times when I should have had a big pay out. That was disappointing. I do have a medicine cabinet full of goodies that were bought for free or really cheap to prove that it does work though, it just takes more effort than I am able to put in at times :)
Great post!
At first I thought, how CRUDE! But we have to consider that the banks have to protect their best interests. I don't think this is about saving customers from themselves so much as it is about the banks making sure they stop the hemorrhaging of credit as it stands now with customers making more late payments.