| reply to pnh102
Re: What Credibility? said by pnh102:said by FiL:its poor people getting welfare, and theres LOTS of them in the richest country in the world. "Poor" people in the USA have a much better standard of living than most people in the rest of the world. We have no truly "poor" people here... All it takes is one trip to a third world country to see true poverty. You must have really lived a charmed existance to be so ignorant that there are truly poor people in the US.
We aren't talking about poor in the sense that they cannot afford the next game system. We are talking about poor in the sense that they don't know if they can afford their next meal.
You don't see them, because you grew up sheltered and safe. A study into rural Appalachia will set you straight. |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by thevorpal:We aren't talking about poor in the sense that they cannot afford the next game system. We are talking about poor in the sense that they don't know if they can afford their next meal. Please. The USA is the only country where people of lesser means are more likely to have obesity-related health problems than to die of starvation.
Where are all these people dying of starvation in the USA because they cannot afford their next meal? If there are so many, surely we'd be hearing about it.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
thumbs down from:
cdigioia 
| said by pnh102:Please. The USA is the only country where people of lesser means are more likely to have obesity-related health problems than to die of starvation. Ignorance of the reasons why that is the case is clear on your part... Before you use that as a reason as to why the poor in America are so good off, perhaps you should understand why that is a case.
The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all and you would know that if you had a clue why it is that way instead of just blithely using an argument posed by talk show radio blow hards who don't have a clue. |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by FactChecker :
The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all ... Hello?
If you are obese, then there is a 99.999999999999999% chance you are not starving.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to FactChecker
said by FactChecker :said by pnh102:Please. The USA is the only country where people of lesser means are more likely to have obesity-related health problems than to die of starvation. Ignorance of the reasons why that is the case is clear on your part... Before you use that as a reason as to why the poor in America are so good off, perhaps you should understand why that is a case. The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all and you would know that if you had a clue why it is that way instead of just blithely using an argument posed by talk show radio blow hards who don't have a clue. This is way off topic but we're so far from talking about corporate welfare (which is what I was talking about), what the hell....
I'm not a doctor so will someone who is please chime in? Can a person who is obese, provided their intestinal tract is normal, starve to death? Granted, if they go without food they may have a lot of problems from chemical imbalances since burning fat isn't very healthy but can we call this starving?
Lack of jobs or lack of government programs is not why there are a lot of homeless. Through no fault of their own I believe they create their own situation because of mental issues. Their mental state keeps them just unstable enough to fall through the cracks. Some of these issues might be fixable with various mental health medication. Other issues, whether due to life-long developmental challenges or self-inflicted drug addiction damage, cannot and will never be solved. The best we can do is institutionalize them. |
|
| reply to pnh102
Years ago, we were that poor. My wife and I worked shoveling out horse stalls. With no advanced education, our employment opportunities were limited. We had 2 small children, which we had to pay daycare for. I remember lots of meals of powdered eggs, gov't cheese, rice, things like that. We never had enough money to buy lunch, and often we'd feed the kids and go to bed hungry ourselves.
The poor exist in this country. You may not want to admit it, but they do. I saw on the news today a report of a couple and their grandmother starving twin boys. Accompanying that piece was a report of hunger in the U.S. This was on Fox News. They said that 16% of American children don't get enough to eat. You say "If there are so many, surely we'd be hearing about it." Well today, anyone watching Fox News heard about it.
--
In 2000, CEO pay was statistically 300:1 to minimum wage. In 2005, it's 431:1. If minimum wage matched growth rate with CEO pay from 1990 to 2005, it would now be $19.00/hr.
Is Ann Coulter a transexual? What's with that adams apple? |
|
FAQFixerPremium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA
kudos:1 | Why did you have kids if you were knowningly not able to responsibly care for them? Please don't tell me that was Verizon's fault...or anyone other than yours. |
|
| reply to pnh102
Are you familiar with what these people have to eat? Subsidized food from the government is often all they have. Our government takes care of them, and that is the only reason they aren't starving to death.
You can quickly become obese from eating the food available to the truly destitute in America. It is well known that the food these people receive from support groups is often little more than pure carbohydrates with little to no nutritional value.
It is a sad state of affairs that they are provided plenty of 'food' but are still actually starving. |
|
|
|
 marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:said by FactChecker :
The fact that the poor are obese doesn't actually support your case at all ... Hello? If you are obese, then there is a 99.999999999999999% chance you are not starving. But there is a pretty high chance that you are malnourished, which will kill you just as readily as starvation.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher |
|
marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to rradina
said by rradina:I'm not a doctor so will someone who is please chime in? Can a person who is obese, provided their intestinal tract is normal, starve to death? Granted, if they go without food they may have a lot of problems from chemical imbalances since burning fat isn't very healthy but can we call this starving? They can die of malnutrition, in particular protein energy malnutrition. In one form (more likely in the U.S.) a child receives normal caloric intake but insufficient protein intake. There are also issues with deficiencies in iron, zinc, and vitamins C, D, and B vitamins (A and iodine deficiencies are not very likely in the U.S.).
The malnutrition results in immune suppression and eventually an immune deficiency syndrome that leads to chronic infections and chronic diarrhea that can kill the child.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | But this is because they eat the wrong food over a long time period, not because they have no food. I look at this like the leading a horse to water situation. No government program is going to fix the fact that someone ends up eating food that makes them fat rather than food that keeps them alive. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to bored_in_nh
But how did you get that poor? Why did you increase your burden by having children if you were that poor? Did you lose your job(s) as a result of a business closing or relocating? Where is your family? Mother? Father? Sister? Brother?
If anyone in my extended family were in need, my door would be open. Food, clothes, shelter -- anything they need for as long as they need it. I'm by no means rich but I spend (waste) a lot of "disposable" income and that could be diverted to help family in need.
The difference is I choose to help rather than have socialists take it from me because I happen to be, as they put it, a winner in life's lottery. And I'm not just talking about social welfare but corporate welfare. It's ridiculous that I pay fees on my phone service to fund wires running in Timbuktu. Funding broadband deployment in this same manner is just a different shade of gray.
If we think it's such a good policy, why don't the people in these areas pass a property tax or sales tax and give it to mega-corporation X to bring service to their area? I'll tell you why this isn't done. Lots of small piles of money disperses power. If a central government body can collect billions, they have a lot of control. With control comes power -- what every human from the bottom-feeder cops (not all but too many) who revel in beating the shit out of someone because of the power trip to high-profile politicians who treat us like they own us.
Regarding your signature, it disappoints me when people point out CEO pay without also considering professional athletes and entertainers. It's like crying about social welfare without considering corporate welfare.
I don't disagree that CEO pay is ridiculous, especially when a lot of them are paid millions to leave after they make the company worse. However, entertainers, pro athletes and just about any celebrity all have exorbitant salaries with astronomical growth well beyond that which they deserve. It's not just CEOs making a money grab. |
|
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:Hello? If you are obese, then there is a 99.999999999999999% chance you are not starving. You have missed the point and further illustrated a lack of knowledge on the topic of why under-priviledged people have a higher incidence of obesity.
When you have a clue about the how and why of obesity among the poor, you can talk about it. |
|
| reply to rradina
said by rradina:No government program is going to fix the fact that someone ends up eating food that makes them fat rather than food that keeps them alive. The problem is that they aren't choosing food the same way person with more money would. Think cheap... Think fast - need to work more.
What is cheap and fast ? Food that typically is not good for you - McDonald's, Burger King, etc. This is why poorer people are obese. |
|
 Rogue WolfAte Your Homework, And Framed The Dog
join:2003-08-12
Troy, NY | reply to FAQFixer
said by FAQFixer:Why did you have kids if you were knowningly not able to responsibly care for them? Please don't tell me that was Verizon's fault...or anyone other than yours. Because nobody has ever lost a job, had a life-changing accident, etc. etc. after having children, right?
--
I have learned to ignore such naysayers, when... quelling... them... hm?... was out of the question. |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to factchecker
I'm throwing a red flag. If McDonald's is in play, even Bill Clinton, messiah of all liberals, thought it was good food. Plus, all of the fast food restaurants have healthier alternatives. You can get a grilled chicken sandwich instead of fried. You can get yogurt, cereal and fruit instead of eggs and bacon. You can get salads instead of hamburgers.
These folks are making a life choice and unless you are a total socialist who wants the government running our lives from every angle, we should leave this alone.
Of course the socialist's problem comes with health care. If we're to take care of these people with public funds and improper eating makes costs go up, it's only natural that we should dictate to them what they can eat.
Again, I'll throw a red flag. Guaranteed health care and government-run vegan food bars aren't the answer. The entire health care "crisis" is a case of incomplete statistics. I don't doubt there are some folks that aren't getting the care they need but I'm so tired of statistics. My college statistics professor used to say, in order, there are liars. There are damn liars and then there are statisticians.
Just this morning I heard 40 million Americans don't get the health care they need. My sister is one of them. She's 50 years old, smokes like a chimney and she has not had health care in 10 years. Why? When she and her husband ran their own business, they didn't want to pay for it. Guess what? That's not the only thing they didn't do. They didn't pay taxes either. I guess they thought running their own construction company meant they could do whatever they want. The IRS caught up with them. They divorced, sold the house and most of the proceeds will pay their back taxes, penalties and lawyer fees.
She and her ex husband are NOT poor yet they are part of the statistics used to justify why the socialists in this country think they can take MY MONEY and use it to insure someone else who WON'T provide for themselves because they CHOOSE not to.
YTD I've paid $46,464.41 in state and federal taxes. And this doesn't include real estate taxes, personal property taxes, sales tax and the myriad of other fees tied to various pet political projects. Don't I pay enough? I'm not rich. I'm the sole income provider for five people. I have two cars, a two story house, three kids and a wife. My wife doesn't have expensive clothes or jewelry. We don't have new cars. Our kids don't have their own cell phones. I choose to put as much money in 401K as they will let me. I choose to have as much life insurance as I can get. I choose to put money in college funds. I choose to pay for my credit card bills every month and we don't buy what we cannot afford.
Now tell me why I should pay EVEN more for folks that make different choices? (Don't even get me started on real estate bailouts! Can you believe that? Folks have their hand out toward me because they bought a house they couldn't afford and now they are going to lose it.)
And to get back on topic, Verizon, AT&T and all the others deserve PC World's ranking because they are corporate welfare prostitutes. They'll do anything to turn a trick and get more government funds so the Ed Whitaker types can fly above me, the little man, with big fat multi-million dollar private jets. |
|
FAQFixerPremium
join:2004-06-28
Powder Springs, GA
kudos:1 | reply to Rogue Wolf
said by Rogue Wolf:said by FAQFixer:Why did you have kids if you were knowningly not able to responsibly care for them? Please don't tell me that was Verizon's fault...or anyone other than yours. Because nobody has ever lost a job, had a life-changing accident, etc. etc. after having children, right? No, he specifically said, "With no advanced education, our employment opportunities were limited." He did not lose his job or have an accident...he and his wife did not seek an education or skills to get a decent job yet they choose to have kids. |
|
marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | reply to rradina
said by rradina:Just this morning I heard 40 million Americans don't get the health care they need. My sister is one of them. She's 50 years old, smokes like a chimney and she has not had health care in 10 years. Why? When she and her husband ran their own business, they didn't want to pay for it. She and her ex husband are NOT poor yet they are part of the statistics used to justify why the socialists in this country think they can take MY MONEY and use it to insure someone else who WON'T provide for themselves because they CHOOSE not to. She wouldn't be part of that statistic. She believed she was getting adequate health care.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher |
|
 cdigioiaPremium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub | reply to factchecker
said by factchecker :
When you have a clue about the how and why of obesity among the poor, you can talk about it.
Since you apparently have a clue, why not enlighten us all? All you're saying is "Nu-uh you're wrong!!", albeit more eloquently. |
|
cdigioiaPremium
join:2005-06-08
korea, repub
4 edits | reply to factchecker
said by factchecker :
The problem is that they aren't choosing food the same way person with more money would. Think cheap... Think fast - need to work more.
What is cheap and fast ? Food that typically is not good for you - McDonald's, Burger King, etc. This is why poorer people are obese.
Cheap and fast...hm...since I put myself completely through college + all personal expenses, let me answer that one for you
Pasta
oatmeal
milk
tuna
chicken
bananas
raisins
some other in-season fruits
frozen vegetables
celery
carrots
peanuts/peanut butter
eggs
yogurt
bread
rice
fruit juice (fresh kinda sorta, frozen most definitely)
Actually, the $6 meals at fast food aren't very economical. Though one could argue the dollar menus are fairly so. And of course, no-name packaged foods @ Wal*Mart are too.
The fact is, there are many fast/economical foods that are also healthy. Eating cheaply doesn't have to mean being a lard ass. That's just being a lazy ass.
As to "fast, need to work more" - From what I can tell, college educated people, who work on salary, work more. Hourly people are generally capped at 40 hours/week, those on salary aren't paid overtime, so they aren't so capped. I know there are examples of people working multiple hourly jobs, but that is not common at all.
I have not recently researched statistics to back this up though - do you have any for your viewpoint? Or any reasoning at all outside of pathos?
Seriously, stop being a whiny sympathizer. Sympathy is near useless if one doesn't understand the situation. I've traveled a bit of the world, and seen the statistics we have it easy here compared to the developing world.
edit: Haha, we appear to have gotten slightly off topic :P |
|
