PDA

View Full Version : House votes to starve Americans



jagman
20th September 2013, 20:50
The House of Representatives on Thursday approved sweeping reforms to the nation's food stamp program that would cut some $40 billion in nutrition aid over 10 years and deny benefits to millions starting in 2014.


"This bill is designed to give people a hand when they need it most. Most people don't choose to be on food stamps. Most people want a job," said House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) "Most people want to go out and be productive so that they can earn a living, so that they can support a family, so that they can have hope for a more prosperous future. They want what we want."

Those rotten *******s! Sorry about the language.Most people would work if there was
any jobs. These people are evil! Their going to employ Mao and Stallin tactics on us
because we wouldnt support their Warmongering in Syria. I'm sorry for the rant.

Tribe
20th September 2013, 21:10
Don't be sorry , your not ranting , it's wicked behaviour and I pray for a swift end to this lunacy :( xx

BabaRa
20th September 2013, 23:31
And yet they had no problem giving the banksters how many trillion?

Seikou-Kishi
20th September 2013, 23:58
This is very important, thanks for sharing, Jagman.

Frankly, from my outside position, it seems that Americans have a burning hatred of the poor and the needy — on a national level if not on a personal level. There seems to be the idea that the only help should be from charity, as though those in true need have to choose between food and dignity. If somebody is in genuine hardship, America seems to imply that it's their fault. It's like Noam Chomsky says: all-in-it-together socialism for the rich, rugged, on-your-own capitalism for the poor.

In the UK, we are always debating how much is too much in the way of benefits for the poor and needful. Personally, I would rather give too much than too little. I would rather see a hundred shameless leeches playing their games consoles than think of a single old-aged pensioner sitting in their cold, dark room at winter too afraid of their energy bills to turn on the fire or flick on the lights. There is a false opposition being imposed here between the poor and needy and the almost-as-poor workers. The day even relatively rich people realise they have more in common with the person scrabbling together their change to buy bread, the people will be able to rally together in defence of interests which will serve them best, like public accountability and provisions for those in trouble; a worker is one cross word with his boss away from joblessness, a mortgage-payer one overdue payment away from homelessness.

I remember one day long ago I was walking and passed by the edge of town. I went in to the nearest shop (a low-end supermarket) to buy a bottle of water. In the queue ahead of me was an old woman trying to pay for the food she'd bought with the change she had. I was so embarrassed, not for her but for me and my comfort. Ashamed even of the clothes I stood in. It turned out she didn't have enough and she said "Oh, I'll have to put something back" and I could have cried, but they'd have been tears as much of fury as sorrow. I looked at her shopping and it was full of essentials — nothing that could in any sadistic stretch of the imagination be considered a luxury. Most of the items were covered in big, yellow "REDUCED" labels — either damaged or at their sell-by date.

Is this how we treat the people who are in need? With people in these situations, we have to help them but we have to respect their dignity at the same time. I don't think "food stamps" do that because it removes from people their autonomy over their own budget. But that's not really the point though, the point is there isn't enough for those who need them and there'll be even less now. I so wanted to help her but how could I? She was an old woman who seemed only held together by her dignity. It's amazing how devious people can be when their intentions are good. I quickly bobbed down on the floor as though picking something up and thrust a note into her hand, saying "well of course you won't have enough if you go throwing your money about like that! Be a bit more careful, it has the queen's face on it!" (Lol... I know... but she looked like a war-widow so I gambled on a little patriotism/monarchism. I just wanted to say something in a way that she wouldn't automatically consider help, so I was a little direct)

But at the same time, we can't go around hovering around supermarket tills on the look-out for those who might need help. We have to fight the system that lets real-life human beings be put in those positions in the first place. To do that, we need information like that which you present here. So thank you.

(And damn right, BabaRa! all-in-it-together socialism for the rich, rugged, on-your-own capitalism)

Spiral
21st September 2013, 08:46
Maybe if the US didn't spend 52% of its tax on the military it could be like paradise on earth, I mean, correct me if I am wrong, but with the exception of a Sunday school outing that was unlucky enough to choose a spot where a Japanese balloon bomb landed in WW2, what other outside power has detonated a bomb (or similar) on the US mainland in modern history ?

Melidae
21st September 2013, 11:47
This may be just a small part of the elites' agenda for depopulation...to get rid of “useless eaters” (Kissinger), “don't abort; let them starve” (Rockefeller).

In an article dated September 18, 2013 entitled, “David Attenborough: Stop Feeding Third World Nations to Reduce Population” (found here: http://www.storyleak.com/attenborough-stop-feeding-third-world-reduce-population/) begins as follows:

“Top globalist Sir David Attenborough, who last year described humans as a ‘plague on Earth’, has now gone on record in calling for nations of the world to stop sending food aid to starving nations in order to reduce the population of the world.
Speaking with the*Daily Telegraph, the highly decorated psychopath expanded upon his notion that the plague of*humanity must be reduced throughout the world. Reduction that, according to him, really starts with starving poorer nations that have been decimated by first world global powers...”

Think that cannot happen in the U.S....long considered a first world country? Think again. Unemployment much higher than government numbers suggest, homelessness, rising prices on everything needed to sustain life (food, heat, electric)...we're well on our way to becoming a third world country despite those still asleep and believing the fudged numbers and propaganda about 'recovery'.

Another article entitled, “Depopulation Through Planned Governmental Starvation of U. S. Citizens” (found here: http://thecommonsenseshow.com/2012/10/31/depopulation-through-planned-governmental-starvation-of-u-s-citizens/) begins as follows:

“The lessons of history clearly demonstrate that dictatorial regimes, whether they be Socialists, Communists, and Marxists will not hesitate to use food as a weapon against their own people in order to solidify power and impose absolute autocratic control. Food can be withheld from the masses by preventing it from being grown and harvested, by contaminating it and rendering it unfit for human consumption or by simply preventing food from being distributed to a targeted population.”

Sooz
21st September 2013, 11:59
You got that right Melidae, my thoughts exactly when I saw that from Attenborough.

Breeze
21st September 2013, 17:55
....I remember one day long ago I was walking and passed by the edge of town. I went in to the nearest shop (a low-end supermarket) to buy a bottle of water. In the queue ahead of me was an old woman trying to pay for the food she'd bought with the change she had. I was so embarrassed, not for her but for me and my comfort. Ashamed even of the clothes I stood in. It turned out she didn't have enough and she said "Oh, I'll have to put something back" and I could have cried, but they'd have been tears as much of fury as sorrow. I looked at her shopping and it was full of essentials — nothing that could in any sadistic stretch of the imagination be considered a luxury. Most of the items were covered in big, yellow "REDUCED" labels — either damaged or at their sell-by date.

Is this how we treat the people who are in need? With people in these situations, we have to help them but we have to respect their dignity at the same time. I don't think "food stamps" do that because it removes from people their autonomy over their own budget. But that's not really the point though, the point is there isn't enough for those who need them and there'll be even less now. I so wanted to help her but how could I? She was an old woman who seemed only held together by her dignity. It's amazing how devious people can be when their intentions are good. I quickly bobbed down on the floor as though picking something up and thrust a note into her hand, saying "well of course you won't have enough if you go throwing your money about like that! Be a bit more careful, it has the queen's face on it!" (Lol... I know... but she looked like a war-widow so I gambled on a little patriotism/monarchism. I just wanted to say something in a way that she wouldn't automatically consider help, so I was a little direct)



What a beautiful, thoughtful, caring, unconditionally loving conscious act! Reading your story brought tears to my eyes.

jagman
21st September 2013, 18:43
These kind of stories always hit me hard. When I was 9 years old my father left my mother and
she had 3 boys and 1 girl to support. He had a very well paying job at the mines 25 $ an hour.
He refused to pay child support. Back then there wasnt alot of laws on the books enforcing it.
Anyway he was well thought of in the community because he had played baseball for the
Cincinnati Reds AAA organization So my mother could get no help. She went to work has a
waitress at a local restaurant. She made about 150 dollars a week ( Not Much to support 4 kids)
I can recall so many nites my mom made us potato soup or beans or rice for dinner. Just one meal
a day. I would go to bed so hungry. Some nites I would sneak to my mothers door hearing her
crying because she did not have enough food to feed us. She eventually went to school and got
a good job and took very good care of us.

GCS1103
21st September 2013, 21:36
These kind of stories always hit me hard. When I was 9 years old my father left my mother and
she had 3 boys and 1 girl to support. He had a very well paying job at the mines 25 $ an hour.
He refused to pay child support. Back then there wasnt alot of laws on the books enforcing it.
Anyway he was well thought of in the community because he had played baseball for the
Cincinnati Reds AAA organization So my mother could get no help. She went to work has a
waitress at a local restaurant. She made about 150 dollars a week ( Not Much to support 4 kids)
I can recall so many nites my mom made us potato soup or beans or rice for dinner. Just one meal
a day. I would go to bed so hungry. Some nites I would sneak to my mothers door hearing her
crying because she did not have enough food to feed us. She eventually went to school and got
a good job and took very good care of us.

Your story is similar to mine, Jagman. My parents separated when I was 8 and my sister was 4. My mom supported us on $45.00 a week with the child support that my father gave her. My mother wanted to be there for us when we got home from school, so she didn't work for several years. Many nights we had no dinner and never could buy clothes, toys or things that kids like. We lived in a run-down apartment in the Bronx (N.Y.) and when people ask me what my childhood was like, I always say "horrible." When you're a child, you have no control over your life and your circumstances.

However, as we become adults we do have options, so I'm kind of on the fence with certain entitlement programs. I see so many abuses with people taking money (or food stamps) that they are not entitled to. There are many people who absolutely need assistance and I'm all for that. Then there are people that drive up in luxury cars, pick up their welfare checks and food stamp credit card, and I feel that they're stealing from those who really need the help. This country has so many scams perpetrated by undeserving people that those who are in critical need are being denied benefits. If you walk into a social security office here, you would expect to see people over 62 there, to discuss a problem or a question with one of the workers. What you would see is a group of people in their 30's-40's who are not citizens, collecting disability under fake social security numbers. That affects the seniors here who worked all their lives and rely on their social security benefits. This is a major problem in this country - the depletion of funding because of the massive fraud going on.

My response to my childhood poverty was to put myself through college and professional school with student loans and grants. I paid back my loans, went into practice, bought my mother and sister a home to live in and enjoyed a very nice life. I could have just as easily sat back and felt sorry for myself. So that's why I'm ambivelant about some of the entitlement programs that promote a "lifestyle" instead of being temporary assistance, which was the original purpose. I do agree with you about Food Stamps, having been on them myself, a long time ago. That program is critical to many people who cannot afford to buy food and there are more of those people, every day. Our Senators and Congressmen are too busy working on their next campaign, how they will enrich themselves through new legislation and insider knowledge (perfectly legal, in Congress- just not anywhere else) and jockeying for more power. They live in a protective cocoon in Washington, D.C.

Seikou-Kishi
21st September 2013, 21:43
These kind of stories always hit me hard. When I was 9 years old my father left my mother and
she had 3 boys and 1 girl to support. He had a very well paying job at the mines 25 $ an hour.
He refused to pay child support. Back then there wasnt alot of laws on the books enforcing it.
Anyway he was well thought of in the community because he had played baseball for the
Cincinnati Reds AAA organization So my mother could get no help. She went to work has a
waitress at a local restaurant. She made about 150 dollars a week ( Not Much to support 4 kids)
I can recall so many nites my mom made us potato soup or beans or rice for dinner. Just one meal
a day. I would go to bed so hungry. Some nites I would sneak to my mothers door hearing her
crying because she did not have enough food to feed us. She eventually went to school and got
a good job and took very good care of us.

I'm so sorry Jagman. When I was younger, it was very hard to imagine how people could be in such bad circumstances. We had a single video of cartoons (because our parents didn't like us thinking of a television as a commonplace thing unless we were watching documentaries; this was before they loosened up and let us get Disney films) — anyway one of the cartoons depicted two children sitting at a table. They were hungry and all the mother had for them was stale bread and they softened the stale bread in water to make it edible. The little boy asked his mother for more and the mother cried. When I think of it, it wasn't a very nice cartoon, but we were so unaccustomed to these sorts of things that we thought the little boy and girl were eating cake and dipping it in milk. We didn't really know why the mother cried, but assumed it was because they ate with their hands (lol... talk about naive)

As I got older, I was lucky enough to meet people from all social and economic backgrounds and one day a friend and I watched the video together (he'd seen the handful of Disney films we had and wasn't interested in the documentaries lol). He told me what was actually happening in the cartoon. His mother's family and background sounded a lot like yours. Her family was relatively secure until alcoholism overwhelmed her father. Her father eventually became unable to run his business but, being booze-addled, he was not sensible enough to leave it to a manager and so he ran his business into the ground. He died eventually but not before he'd driven his family to ruin.

Anyway, he said sometimes they were so poor the children (his mother and her siblings) would share a few boiled potatoes with salt. He said his grandmother pretended she didn't like eating in front of other people so the kids wouldn't ask why she wasn't eating, when really there just wasn't enough food (God, that gets me. Such an awesome mother). He said one year they were so hungry at Christmas that they took the ancient decorations off their ancient Christmas tree and ate them (those ones made of chocolate covered in foil). This was when his mother was young, so many years ago. There was next to nothing in the way of a safety-net for people in those days, especially not when the cause of all the trouble was something done by "choice" like alcoholism (as the judgement or public opinion was in those days).

It was also unheard of in those days for a woman to work if she had a family to look after, so his grandmother wasn't able to take up work to feed her children. As soon as her children were old enough that even the youngest was at school most of the day, she was able to take up day-time work. He said how his mother used to work week-end jobs between school weeks to pay for food for her younger siblings. Anyway, my friend's mother was able to provide him in his youth with things she'd never had.

I met my friend when we were both doing voluntary work as young teenagers. He volunteered because he knew (if only vicariously) what poverty could do to people. I was just a presumptuous kid with ideas of things I'd never even remotely encountered. Charity had never before seemed so arrogant. I knew there were poor people in the world, but it was never really fleshed out with detail until I met people who could supply those details. I'd always had great empathy for people in bad circumstances, but that empathy wasn't matched on a rational level with information. I remember being a child, no older than five years old, and I would cry at night for poor children in the world who didn't have paper to draw on... lol it's that naivety again. It's like I knew that some people were poor but not how. I am grateful that I met my friend and he was able to bridge the gaps between feelings and facts. I imagine without him, I could have made some insulting assumptions.

That's what I think of as a large part of the problem. Many people who have never known real poverty just cannot imagine what poverty is actually like. I don't suppose I've ever been as hungry as you have been in your life, but I use the word "hungry" as though I know what it means, what it feels like. And you know, maybe that lack of knowledge is not their fault, but at the same time anybody who cannot understand the problem shouldn't be in charge of the solution. That's preliminary logic. At the same time, they think of dignity as a privilege of the rich, but it's not. It's a fundamental human right. If we cannot help people and protect and respect their dignity at the same time, we should just butt out.

BabaRa
21st September 2013, 23:19
There are many sad stories out there - and I realize there are also those who abuse the system. The sad thing is that many who deserve to get assistance, don't have the means to apply. When you don't have a phone and you don't have a vehicle, etc., it can be a challenge to make contact with the proper office.

But and to me this is a BIG BUT - whatever the costs of individual welfare (including those who scam the system) - it pales in comparison to Corporate Welfare - however, you rarely here anyone complaining about it. We are so programmed, it's quite sad.

BabaRa
21st September 2013, 23:40
Here is a homeless shelter that we recently were able to set up (after 2 years of fighting with our City fathers). While a far cry from what we should offer, at least it's a step in the right direction. There are portapotties, portable showers(they are only allowed 1 shower/week) and washer and dryers for laundry (again only 1 load/week per person). I volunteer there 1/2 day each week. Such sad stories. Just recently a mother with her 14yr old son arrived. Since children are not allowed in the shelter, the boy was taken to New Morning which is a facility for teenagers. So sad to me that they need be separated, but I understand the liability issues to have children at the camp. They are given free medical and dental and food is available thru the Catholic Church who runs the Upper Room which is right next door to the camp. I also volunteer there one evening a week where a hot meal is provided to anyone who shows up and often we are able to give them a box lunch for the next day. We are now serving over 200 meals a night and growing. Many single parents with young children come.

By the way, just so you don't freak out when you read Hangtown Haven: Placerville, the city where this is located was originally named Hangtown during the gold rush days, as it was the County seat where all the Hangings (preferred form of punishment in those days) took place. Many still use that name in their businesses (Hangtown Parmacy, Hangtown Eatery, etc., and while many feel it is offensive and want to try to erase or at least put aside that part of history, many others take pride in it and periodically a measure is brought up to change the name back to Hangtown.

At the Hangtown Haven homeless encampment in Placerville, residents wanting a stiff drink will have to consume it in the confines of their tent. And a camp committee will write them up if they don't clean their tents, pick up litter or if they act up in the coffee line or during nighttime moving watching. Beneath the woods just north of this Gold Rush town, the city and community groups are continuing a novel experiment - a self governing homeless encampment. Many local residents have protested the 38-tent colony near Placerville's Broadway Road and Airport Drive. The city had granted it a 90-day operating permit as a remedy to homeless people camping in the parks and around dangerous campfires in the hills above. The City Council on Tuesday night was expected to grant the camp a one year reprieve - over a staff plan to shut the encampment down Nov. 5.

There is a little video on this website: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/27/4942999/hangtown-haven-for-placervilles.html

Seikou-Kishi
22nd September 2013, 02:10
There are many sad stories out there - and I realize there are also those who abuse the system. The sad thing is that many who deserve to get assistance, don't have the means to apply. When you don't have a phone and you don't have a vehicle, etc., it can be a challenge to make contact with the proper office.

But and to me this is a BIG BUT - whatever the costs of individual welfare (including those who scam the system) - it pales in comparison to Corporate Welfare - however, you rarely here anyone complaining about it. We are so programmed, it's quite sad.

I can only talk from what I know but those who scam the welfare system, at least in the UK, are a much, much smaller percentage than is commonly believed. A government which wishes to slash benefits spending will be the natural beneficiary of a grossly exaggerated representation of benefits frauds. In fact, in all of the United Kingdom, benefits frauds cost a grand total of £5.2bn annually. That sounds like a lot, but as the annual benefits budget for last year was £166.98bn, that figure represents just 3.11% of the budget — and bear in mind that this total cost includes not just benefits frauds themselves, it also includes the cost to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) of investigating suspected benefits cheats (who are more than likely innocent, by the DWP's own statistics) and the cost of prosecuting those who in the DWP's determination are in fact guilty. So what people take without entitlement is very small.

At the same time, the UK's equivalent of the American IRS ("Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs" (HMRC)) says that every year an average £70bn is lost to big businesses which do not pay the tax that the law requires of them. This is a conservative estimate, because it only takes into account those whose tax-avoidance is known because of international corporate juggling systems, like those employed by Amazon and Starbucks. It includes those situations like we had recently in which officials from HMRC went to dinner with the CEOs of Vodafone and quietly decided together that Vodafone didn't need to pay the tax which it legally had to pay. The bill for such underhanded cronyism, this £70bn figure, would pay more than ten times over for those people who abuse the benefits system or are merely suspected of it. The difference between benefits cheats and tax evaders like Vodafone is that one is a small time crook and the other is big enough to bribe their way out of trouble.

We'd only have to recover 7.44% of that tax bill to completely pay for those who abuse the welfare system. It has been shown that those cheating the welfare system claim inordinately more than those using the system as it is intended, and so we cannot say that 3.11% of all claimants are fraudulent even if it were true that that 3.11% budget loss was lost solely to fraudsters and not the administratives costs of dealing with suspected fraudsters. For that reason, the number of people actually defrauding the welfare system in the UK is many times less than 3.11% of claimants. But if we were to make the assumption that all claimants claimed equally, and if we round up the 3.11% figure as a proportion of the benefits budget, it would be the case that in every hundred people claiming welfare, four of those were claiming fradulently (and that fourth one, responsible for the .11%, wouldn't be doing much lol)... I think we would have to be very heartless people to punish the ninety-six good claimants just to make sure we got the four bad ones. We would not incarcerate a room of a hundred people just because we knew that four were guilty of something.

Just think about that — if it were a court-room, for every guilty person convicted and incarcerated, we would have to convict and incarcerate 24 innocent people to match the public perception on the welfare budget.

When businesses can avoid paying tax for years and then take HMRC officials out to dinner, the cost of bribing the officials is much less than the amount of tax they'd have to pay, and thus deciding not to pay tax is just a profit-motivated venture with costs so small that they are more than offset by the gains. companies like Vodafone essentially buy off HMRC officials with a tiny fraction of their tax bill and keep the rest for themselves. That's like a drug-baron paying his way through court with his ill-gotten gains.

The worst thing about people calling to cut the benefits bill and using benefits cheats as their justification is that whether the benefits bill is a pittance or the largest area of government expenditure, it will still be open to abuse. It's like saying we should abolish law because there are too many criminals. The best way to cut the benefits bill would be to prohibit the DWP from subcontracting. If it requires new equipment and more staff to process benefits claims because of changes in the benefits system, the government should provide these "in house" rather than subcontracting those operations out to private companies. How in the world people can think hiring private companies on the public pay roll will result in financial efficiency eludes me: companies like ATOS in the UK, which manages benefits claims relating to illness and incapacity, will want to charge profit on top of the bare overheads of their operation and where else will this profit come from?

My solution would be first to realise how little is actually lost to benefits fraud (3.11% of the benefits budget). The second step would be to realise that the government willfully gives away more than elven times this amount to big corporations before we even talk about direct corporate bailouts. The third step would be to prevent government agencies responsible for welfare from subcontracting to commercial operations*. Frankly, I think we should have the same prohibition on all government agencies; if governments were required to supply their militaries with arms made in government-owned and -operated arms factories and shipyards, and so on, we would not have defence contractors, an entire industry, with a vested interest in war and there would be no military industrial complex at all. The initial cost would, of course, be more, but it would not be a continual drain on resources the way continual war is; private, commercial operations suckling at the public nipple will ensure we're always bleeding public wealth into private coffers.

* If we think of the benefits system as giving food to hungry mouths, commercial operations operating "for" the benefits agencies are the biggest mouths with the loudest voices and they'll strangle out the little mouths with the little voices if it means they get a bigger share of the food.

Tribe
22nd September 2013, 02:40
It's like everything is in reverse , people are finding it hard to feed their families , well then let's strangle them some more and increase taxes and punish them some more .
People are homeless , well let's move them out of the posh areas where there are plenty of properties owned by second home owners . (We don't want that sort here ) :(
The supermarkets have too much food and need to get rid of it as it's nearing it's sell by date , well let's chuck it into a skip and pour bleach on it , better still let's arrest people for trying to get at this surplus food .

Somone has a food addiction well let's fix their stomach , we will leave the cause there, let's not bother looking into the root cause of the behaviour
Somone has a heroine addiction , well let's give them our addictive poison , methodone and again leave the cause there.

All these things could be solved by a simple act of love and compassion , allowing people to keep their dignity SK is a huge part of that , teach people how to grow their own veg , how to cook good meals with little . Support people in their journey to become free from the programming of bad parenting and learn to love themselves enough to free themselves of the addictions that they have held onto for dear life .
With good nutrition and good mental health comes vitality and energy and want to go out and do something good in life be that paid work or volunteering , it makes for more opportunitys etc

I feel like I am going insane when I see how agency's remedy things , they don't get to the root cause and they support the systems that created them in the first place .

Anyways I derailed a little their sorry , I think I was trying to make a passionate plea that the way people are treated be taken in the right direction .


And I understand that all is say is very well and good but are there jobs out there at the moment for them to strive towards ?
It's all so so sad :(

Tribe
22nd September 2013, 02:57
Sorry one more thing, the Maasai warriors came to Britain in 2008 and couldn't understand why there were people sleeping on the streets , when they were told "well these are homeless people " one of the Maassai responded "well why don't you make them one ?" .

It really doesn't have to be soo hard does it ?

GCS1103
22nd September 2013, 04:00
It's like everything is in reverse , people are finding it hard to feed their families , well then let's strangle them some more and increase taxes and punish them some more .
People are homeless , well let's move them out of the posh areas where there are plenty of properties owned by second home owners . (We don't want that sort here ) :(
The supermarkets have too much food and need to get rid of it as it's nearing it's sell by date , well let's chuck it into a skip and pour bleach on it , better still let's arrest people for trying to get at this surplus food .

Somone has a food addiction well let's fix their stomach , we will leave the cause there, let's not bother looking into the root cause of the behaviour
Somone has a heroine addiction , well let's give them our addictive poison , methodone and again leave the cause there.

All these things could be solved by a simple act of love and compassion , allowing people to keep their dignity SK is a huge part of that , teach people how to grow their own veg , how to cook good meals with little . Support people in their journey to become free from the programming of bad parenting and learn to love themselves enough to free themselves of the addictions that they have held onto for dear life .
With good nutrition and good mental health comes vitality and energy and want to go out and do something good in life be that paid work or volunteering , it makes for more opportunitys etc

I feel like I am going insane when I see how agency's remedy things , they don't get to the root cause and they support the systems that created them in the first place .

Anyways I derailed a little their sorry , I think I was trying to make a passionate plea that the way people are treated be taken in the right direction .


And I understand that all is say is very well and good but are there jobs out there at the moment for them to strive towards ?
It's all so so sad :(

I agree with your thoughts and the way you have explained them. I can only tell you what we are experiencing here in the U. S. (the East Coast, specifically). We have reached a point where the middle class is being strangled with taxes. Not rich people, middle class people. Yes, too much of our money goes to the military and yes, I feel the same way about "big business" that everyone else here does. But we have fostered a terrible way of life on people who rely upon the government to support them. We have created a group of people who are not provided with the know-how to get a job or how to care for themselves and be self-reliant. I blame that totally on the government. It's so much easier to control people if they rely upon you for every piece of toilet paper and glass of soda they drink. It's demeaning to them and frustrating for the people who work their butts off only to find that more of their taxes are being taken out because politicians are pandering to their constituents.

There will come a point, and I think it's very near, where taxpayers can no longer ante up. What happens when the middle class can no longer support the demands of the government to provide more money? It's simple economics; the supply is not catching up to the demand. The government has no interest in making a better life for the people that receive welfare, etc. There are no programs to teach them how to eat healthier, learn a skill for a job or grow their own food. It's all about: "here's a check, now vote for me." There's no dignity in that. I've been on that side of the fence, myself, and talk from experience.

We are about to "celebrate" the 50th year of the Great Society's War on Poverty (under President Lyndon Johnson), with untold billions of taxpayer dollars being spent, supposedly to fight poverty. The poverty rate is higher than it's ever een. Government programs are not the only answer, in my opinion. I agree that we all need to spend some time volunteering and doing our personal share of helping others. It has, and always will, begin with local communities helping out their own. The people in Washington don't care about anything or anyone outside of D.C.