The Shame Game

I was on a radio call-in show in Minneapolis last week, listening to the callers tell their tales of economic woe: An eight-month job search followed by a job at half the person’s former pay, an 18-month search leading to serious depression, a five-year search leading to nothing at all. During a commercial break, my host – the amiable Jack Rice – noted that almost all these stories were told in the third person, usually as something that had happened to a spouse. Were some of the callers just too embarrassed to own their own stories – too crushed by the shame of layoffs and unemployment?

Shame hangs heavy over the economic landscape: the shame of the newly laid-off, the shame of the chronically poor. It’s easy enough for enlightened members of the comfortable classes to insist there’s no reason for shame: You didn’t bring the layoff down on yourself; you didn’t determine that the maximum wage in your line of work would be in the neighborhood of $8 an hour. Snap out of it, I want to say, blame the economy or its corporate chieftains. Just don’t blame yourself!

But shame is a verb as well as a noun. Almost nobody arrives at shame on their own; there are shamers and shamees. Hester Prynne didn’t pin that scarlet A on her own chest. In fact, it may be wiser to think of shame as a relationship rather than just a feeling: a relationship of domination in which the mocking judgments of the dominant are internalized by the dominated.

Shaming can be a more effective means of social control than force. The peasant who stepped out of line could be derided for daring to question his “betters.” The woman who spoke out against patriarchal restrictions could be dismissed as a harridan or even a slut. It doesn’t always work, of course. In 1994, Dan Quayle and rightwing writer Charles Murray launched an initiative to “re-stigmatize” out-of-wedlock births by restoring the old pejorative term “illegitimate.” But somehow the country wasn’t ready to label millions of babies bastards.

Shame was far more effective in the build-up to welfare reform. Consistently stereotyped as lazy, promiscuous parasites, welfare recipients largely failed to rally in their own defense. I remember talking to a young (white) woman who professed great enthusiasm for draconian forms of welfare reform – only to admit that she herself had been raised on welfare by a beloved and plucky single mother. That’s deeply internalized shame.

The ultimate trick is to make people ashamed of the injuries inflicted upon them. In many cultures, rape renders a woman an unmarriageable pariah. In Pakistan today – one of our more embarrassing “allies” – a woman who brings charges of rape can be punished for “adultery.” Even in America, many women’s first response to sexual harassment or assault is to feel soiled and shamed, as if she had brought the unwanted advances on herself.

Something similar goes on in the case of the laid off and unemployed, thanks to the prevailing Calvinist form of Protestantism, according to which productivity and employment are the source of one’s identity as well as one’s income. Not working? Then what are you? And to put the Calvinist message in crude theological terms: go to hell.

In case anyone fails to feel their full measure of shame over unemployment, there is an entire shame industry to whip them into shape: The career coaches, self-help books, motivational speakers and business gurus who preach that whatever happens to you must be a result of your own “attitude.” Laid off and coming up empty on your job search? You must be too “negative,” and hence attracting negative circumstances into your life. To paraphrase one career coach I encountered during my research for Bait and Switch: We’re not here to talk about the economy or the market; we’re here to talk about you.

Shame is a potent weapon, but it should never be used against the already-injured and aggrieved. Instead, let’s turn it against the aggrievers: Shame on Ford and GM for putting all their eggs in the SUV basket and then laying off thousands. Shame on the CEO’s who make eight-figure incomes while their lowest paid employees trudge between food banks. Shame on Congress for leaving us with an unemployment insurance program that covers only a little more than a third of the laid off.

Everyone else should hold their heads up high.

Comments

[Anarcissie]

I would guess that, like most important elements of popular culture, economic shame functions positively for many people, and therefore they reinforce it. For one thing, I think shame is the necessary underside of pride. Economic pride means feeling better than other people because you have more money than they do, get it faster, or use it more cleverly. It looks like a mainspring of capitalist economic activity to me. So the people who suffer shame are among those who labor to lift up the well-named gross national product, which is what we all want, isn't it?

[Jonathan Cohen]

It's interesting - the same thing is at play in the corporate world about salaries.

It's an unspoken rule that one is not supposed to discuss one's salaries with coworkers. But why? The only one who'd be harmed by such a discussion is the employer. It's in their best interests to keep this 'rule' going.

[Carol]

I like the Navajo notion that if you are very rich you should be ashamed because you haven't done enough to help your poor relatives.

Good shame vs bad shame.

[Sharon]

It's the typical dysfunctional family model, where no one talks about the elephant in the room.

Don't talk about salaries, don't talk about legal and economic systems that are tilted toward the "haves." That's "class warfare." Divide and conquer, lest the People get together and organize.

[LSLE]

This has probably been pointed out before, but…people who take complete responsibility for their layoffs/failures/downward mobility are expressing very typical behaviors of abused children. Abused and neglected children usually believe that they deserve their beatings/abuse, and that "if they only work harder/behave better/etc., they will be loved and cared for." An expert in child psychology could probably explain this better, but I believe it has something to do with the fact that the only thing a child can do (or thinks that he/she can do) is change himself/herself.

[Greg]

Along the same lines as LSLE--I read on another blog the reason Democrats won't go near the issue of health care is because of the Clinton Health Care plan fiasco--so now the health care topic is "the bad room" or that bad place where that bad thing happened.

[lc2]

It probably goes without saying, but might bear mention: in union workplaces there are zero secrets in terms of wages and benefits. Does a lot for morale and teamwork to have that out of the way ... and I thought the modern workplace was all about teamwork.

[lc2]

Of course there's an odd shame for many to admit the need for or benefits of advocacy in the form of a union, or any affinity group for that matter. Even the members often don't want to self-identify and/or don't avail themselves of representation when conflicts regarding scheduling or arbitrary discipline, etc. arise ... therefore leaving the impression that unions are only for the troublemakers and freeloaders of the bunch.

I recall working with a young man of limited intellectual capacity whose transportation needs had changed. Instead of approaching his manager about a 1/2 hour schedule change (which he would have been granted without arguement in this workplace) so he could catch the last bus. Which is how I found him walking 5 miles home along a highway -- at midnight -- in January. And that was in a union shop, where we were guaranteed reasonable schedule requests per the contract! Things would've continued in this vein indefinitely had I not intervened on his behalf -- and urged the manager to spare him the shame of discussing the matter. Strange times, indeed.

[Alex]

Dear Barbara,

The nature of a Capitalistic system is that there are "winners" and there are "losers". Maybe the difference between being a winner and being a loser is simply who you know. Cronyism seems to be the main way to guarantee success in today's world. Yet, society will go on. There have been ghettos for over a hundred years, and they will be there for another 100. Communism failed, as you all know, and Socialism in Europe is being dismantled. Some of this is I.Q., whether you like it or not. Most Americans are too uneducated to fully participate in the wonder of Globalization. Do you think lazy Johnny is going to be able to compete for the technological jobs of the future with Krish from IIT (India Institute of Technology), give me a break. America is all about quantity over quality, and America's time in the sun is over. You can argue that it is economic deprivation, bad schools, etc., but at the end of the day, they are many stupid people, especially in America. There is very little intellectual curiosity. The whole culture is infantile. The closest thing to a Utopian society was in Europe in the 80's and 90's, and now Globalization will blow it apart. Being poor in America is horrifying, and it means being surrounded by ignorant, dangerous people. My point is that nothing will change. Bush was elected, remember. He was elected by the ignorant masses, and they voted to stay in their little hovels and live out their obese little lives. Let's not get all emotional hoping for some miracle. Democracy doesn't work if 90% of the people are morons or close to it. Call me cynical, but this is a waste of time, although I agree with the fundamental principles behind your argument, most Americans are operating at a much too primitive level to even understand let alone rock the vote. Human nature is all about "survival of the fittest", and frankly, I don't care one second about the people who suffered during Katrina. Human nature is all about greed and status. Capitalism is simply an outgrowth of human nature. There was no golden time in human history, and there wont be one. With more and more people every year, there simply isn't the money to go around, and I, for one, am not going to give up one bit of my lifestyle to help those ignorant people. Personally, I don't want those now living in the ghettos living near me, ever...Most people think like I do, though they don't dare say it. There is a huge cultural, and educational divide in America and it's there, unfortunately. I don't want my kids growing up with gang bangers and other idiots walking around our neighborhood. Robert Hughes, the author and art critic, wrote recently, "I don't think stupid or ill-read people are as good to be with as wise and fully literate ones. Consequently, most of the human race doesn't matter much to me, outside the normal and necessary frame of courtesy and the obligation to respect human rights. I see no reason to squirm around apologizing for this." Amen.

[Jennifer]

I really love this blog, in part because it seems to be finishing up the job that I thought was left undone in Bait and Switch.

I'm a huge Ehrenreich fan, which made my disappointment with Bait and Switch that much keener.

If anyone's interested, I published a review of Bait and Switch, which is available online here: http://www.readerweekly.us/issue/350/Jennifer_Martin-Romme.html

This blog has softened my critical stance towards the book. Now instead of seeing the book as slipshod, I see it more as undercooked with the conversations here finishing the job.

Having read this blog, I have to ask myself if my reaction to Bait and Switch was because I'm part of the professional class myself.

Anyway, I love now having such immediate access to more Ehrenreich pieces!

[Anarcissie]

Alex: 'Personally, I don't want those now living in the ghettos living near me, ever...Most people think like I do, though they don't dare say it. There is a huge cultural, and educational divide in America and it's there, unfortunately. I don't want my kids growing up with gang bangers and other idiots walking around our neighborhood.'

I can understand your feelings. However, it's not only the culture of the slums that is boring and destructive, there is more of the same in the suburbs and among the elites, although it takes a somewhat different form (because the people doing it have more money, mostly).

Unfortunately, the kind of feelings you have are routinely manipulated into systems of oppression. One of the reasons people have to pay so much for real estate and wind up living far from their jobs, constantly burning gas on crowded highways to obtain the most elementary necessities of life, is the conviction that by doing so they can escape from the bad people. (Usually, those who are improperly pigmented.) The enormous consumption of resources that results from this flight in turn feeds the oil war complex and destroys the environment as well. Meanwhile the individuals caught in this trap find themselves strapped to huge mortgages and paying innumerable taxes and fees to institutions which give them very little in return.

My solution has been to get used to the boring, destructive people I already know, rather than seek out new ones. It's worked pretty well, and my way is a lot cheaper. And that means I am freer from the work machine and its violence. Such are the benefits of economic shamelessness!

[Terry Vermeylen]

The biggest impediment towards a just society is the relationship between government and big business. They perpetuate the myth that we are better off working ourselves to the bone and that living on a conveyor belt of consumerism is THE way to go. In fact we should be reducing the work week and thinking about using some of that extra time to improve our communities and spend more time with family and friends. And a supportive community can go a long way to reducing people's shame levels.

[chris]

Barbara wrote:

"Shame is a potent weapon, but it should never be used against the already-injured and aggrieved."

Shame??? You must be kidding. We've entered an age of untter shamelessness. What's left that receives this society's seal of DISAPPROVAL?

Not women who bear "illegitimate" children they can't support(I happen to be one of those kids).

Not criminals (50-cent made a movie romanticizing his criminal life).

Not politicians who tell lies in their sleep (Clinton, Gore, Bush, Cheney take your pick).

Not kids who refuse to learn anything in school (I've taught in Brooklyn public schools).

About the only behavior that still seems taboo is pedophilia. But even pedophiles have a society that supports and lauds their interest. How much longer before pedophilia achives some level of acceptibility?

Barbara wrote:
"Instead, let’s turn it against the aggrievers: Shame on Ford and GM for putting all their eggs in the SUV basket and then laying off thousands."

What total lunacy. First, Ford and GM produce a huge range of vehicles. Big cars, small cars, pick-up trucks, intermediate sized cars. Ford Focus and Chevy Malibu, for two examples.

The most insane assumption inherent in such idiotic statements is that auto manufacturers have acquired omniscience, at least as far as knowing in advance what all car-buyers will want at all times.

Oil prices are falling. Will gas return to $2.00 a gallon? Will larger vehicles regain their appeal?

If car-makers are expected to know which designs will sell and how many units to build, then oil companies should have no trouble forecasting oil prices, which, if known, would affect the buying decisions of car shoppers.

But no one knows exactly when or how consumer tastes will change.

Meanwhile, if you want to end capital spending and R&D spending at car companies, you can pay auto-workers more money for about a year. Then sales will begin to crumble, and they will fall until there are no sales. At that point Toyota and Honda will dominate the US motor vehicle market. Then GM and Ford will face bankruptcy which would probably lead them to merge. But that wouldn't work unless a very large number of workers were layed off.

[James]

Love this Blog. Some very insightful opinions that I have not found elsewhere.

I'm 57 years old and have retrained 3 times during my "career".

The first time was during Ronald Raygun when he busted all the Patco workers and turned "Union" into a dirty word.

(I know, I hear you, Union was a dirty word before Ronnie Raygun, but for the sake of an argument...I hope you give me a moment)

The second time I was forced out onto the street and into competition with kids half my age was during Poppy Bush and his "Thousand-Points-of Light". Remember that one? Oh, those were the days my friend. We all ran out and spent fortunes becoming Computer Repair Techs and System Engineers. We busted our ass...worked long days and went to school at night on our own dime.. but eventually we had to compete with the HB1 Visa nerds from India. Now , those jobs pay a whopping 10 bucks an hour (if you're lucky). And of course, it's all our fault. We just didn't push hard enough or we weren't productive enough.

I recently had to hang up my Gold Century-21 Real Estate jacket. (Size 44 long in case anyone wants to buy it. I also have the magnetic signs that go on the side of your car. A turn-key package that will allow YOU to make a fortune in real Estate). I've traded in my Century-21 accessories for a Dominoe's Pizza sign for the top of my car. Well, it pays the light bill.

I'm now in training for a job in the medical field. But quite honestly, I'm getting tired. I dont know how many more times I can do this. The up-side of the situation is, that at least in the Medical Field, when I'm 79 years old and I collapse, I'll be right there in the hospital... I won't have very far to walk.

I'm watching Elaine Chao on CNBC. You know her. She's that perky little Secretary of Labor who's married to Sen. Mitch McConnel from Kentucky.

She giggles and coos how "Wonderful" the job market is and once again, points out that it is our fault if we fail to grasp this Wonderful-WalMart Opportunity.

The only thing I can say is that there are some truly some ignorant people in this country. I'm afraid the hour is late and the damage done is beyond repair. Sit there and watch your "American Idol" Mr. and Mrs. America.

By the way... last one out grab the flag and close the door....God help us all.

[chris]

James, you wrote:

"The only thing I can say is that there are some truly some ignorant people in this country. I'm afraid the hour is late and the damage done is beyond repair."

Who are these "ignorant people" and exactly what is beyond repair?

It is not possible to control the direction of technology or what employment opportunities it will deliver. Yet you seem to suggest there should be a grand arbiter with the power to halt or restrict changes that might harm someone somewhere in the US economy.

That can't happen. We live in challenging times.

[eternalsquire]

Barbara said:

... thanks to the prevailing Calvinist form of Protestantism, according to which productivity and employment are the source of one’s identity as well as one’s income. Not working? Then what are you? And to put the Calvinist message in crude theological terms: go to hell....

And the main theological defect of Calvinism is therefore that the worth of a person is directly related to how much other
use to others that person is.

Although I was raised Jewish and converted to Christianity by way of the Protestant traditions, I have a great deal of sympathy for some of the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

Chief among these is the assertion that all human life is of equally infinite value in comparison.

Calvinism is therefore defective in that it lacks a certain quality of mercy, that demands that all people from all walks of life exist with some degree of dignity.

In modern times, this translates out to that minimal standard of living required to feed, clothe, house, and educate every human being born, or yet to be born, and that this minimum should not depend on the ability to work.

Alex said:

... With more and more people every year, there simply isn't the money to go around...

Absolute bushwa. Money is a numerical abstraction meant to represent the relative worth of a good or service. With more people comes a greater opportunity to obtain services from human labor, or to create more goods using human labor to transform raw material into a finished product.

In no case does the world suffer a lack of food, energy, water, or any of the other resources needed to sustain all.

What the world does lack are the number of people allowed to partake of the world's bounty. As a corallary to the teachings of John Paul II's "seamless garment", we need to extend that permission, at least to a small extent, unconditionally to all in need.

Chris said:

Yet you seem to suggest there should be a grand arbiter with the power to halt or restrict changes that might harm someone somewhere in the US economy.

Sure there is! He's there waiting for you to repent your sins and accept His mercy in your heart. He will then act through you for the betterment of humankind.

[Anarcissie]

Terry Vermeylen- 'The biggest impediment towards a just society is the relationship between government and big business. They perpetuate the myth that we are better off working ourselves to the bone and that living on a conveyor belt of consumerism is THE way to go.'

But is that just the corps and the government? It seems to me that idea is widespread throughout the population. Of course, the corps and the government feed it, being directed by winners and alpha males and such. But we -- a lot of us -- feed _them_, too.

People are enslaved to stuff and to social status. How can we break the spell?

[eternalsquire]

Anarcissie: "People are enslaved to stuff and to social status. How can we break the spell?"

The question is spot on.

The spell is cast by the darker powers to blind us from being able to see the power from heaven.

We need to distinguish that which is absolutely necessary to living a life of charity, mercy, and justice, against that which is not.

The implementation is left as an exercise for the student.

[lc2]

Alex should get credit for being honest, I guess. Maybe I'm a closet Christian. WWJD? Probably not endorse the comments of Hughes, who does not seem to have been enlightened by the humanity he must've benefited from following the debilitating accident he had some years back. What are the chances he had one of those ill-read types wiping his hiney after his car wreck? It's funny how during the crises of life when one is useless to others --when kindness really counts -- one tends to run into people who've chosen imparting compassion over other pursuits -- and are usually changed forever for the experience. You also find that intelligence and insight doesn't always come packaged in degrees, King's English, or the like. But then I guess it would require intelligence and insight to ferret it out.

I also think it's just plain gross when people don't like to share. There's more window dressing when it's adults talking about their tax dollars (mostly being spent in Iraq and developing weapons for future fruitless endeavors -- Iran? -- make no mistake) but it's ultimately no less distasteful than hearing a five-year old shriek: "That's MINE!"

[JP Merzetti]

James - I hear ya!
I think we just must suppose that a lot of stats go unrecorded and unreported (unless some enterprising entrepreneur digs them up and whips them into a bestseller)
-and that's no dig intended at B.E.
I suspect a thousand good authors couldn't tell the entire story...(I've only worked my way through a couple of hundred.)
Your story -
unfolds throughout the land like the western explansion in days of yore.
For a bit of illumination, I suggest to naysayers - go hang out with Dale Maharidge's adventures on the road, way back there in 1985. Have a good look at the pictures in his book.
Look long and deep into the faces of America.
That was then.
It's much worse now.
Perhaps what makes it so hideous, really - is the giant infotainment and propaganda machine that does such a good job convincing us we're really somewhere else.
Out there in the real world, you can't airbrush away the zits. You can manipulate a medium to death, but unless you can work miracles with loaves and fishes, it takes real money to pay the grocery bill.
What would a Kerouac find out on the road today?
Cries and whispers move throughout the land.
Many hearts are in the right place, but lack leadership, direction, and any real and profound hope.
Um, we're still only human, after all.

[Holly Redmond]

I hate to say it, but on this one, I have to agree with several of Chris' points.
Haveing said that, I'm a little at odds with how to express why.
Every six months, we go in and re-apply for government assistance, the food stamps, the medical insurance for my kids, that stuff.
Everytime WE do it, it always feels like we've failed -again-.
Each time, we get a little closer to not having to do it, so, it's getting better, but- see, here's the thing.
Every time we go in, you see a mixed bag of people. Race, age, whatever, it really holds no bearing- there are all kinds.
I'd say of the maybe ten, twenty people you'll see in the waiting room, maybe ONe other family has the same kind of 'guilty' expression- the rest seem like, "oh ho, hum, why do I have to waaait.." or worse, last time, I sat next to a young mother with five kids, pretty obviously pregnant with her sixth, who was complaining as loudly as she could that she wasn't receiving more benefits.
She had perfectly manicured nails, was complaining into a cell phone, and her kids were running around in name brand clothes. In the next breath, she complained that two of the kids' fathers were late with paying her rent.
This is not an uncommon occurance, at all.
It's no wonder people lump welfare recipiants into catagories- look how the bulk of them are.
I know this will probably make alot of people angry with me, but honestly, it really upsets me. I mean, my fiance works hard to support us, we're extremely responsible about NOT having any more children, and it seems as though our responsibility is being hindered by the system, not helped.
And then, we get called 'lazy' because so many people have seen these welfare moms, just like the ones I see in there, all the time- and they think that's us, too.
Chris has said I have 'entitlement' issues- and maybe I do. I don't feel the government owes me anything- however, I DO think it needs some restructuring. It's not right that if you work hard, and you really strive to be more responsible, you get less help than one who will not.
It's not right that we're all lumped into one catagory- and wagging your finger at people who look down thier noses at the poor, well, that's incredibly one-sided.
If it were a case of one bad apple, I'd see that point, but it isn't.
It's more a case of many bad apples and few good.
And, also, I agree with him disagreeing about the 'irrepairable' nature of things.
Maybe I am ignorantly optimistic, but I don't think we're in the shitter, just yet. I also don't think that people saying that does any good- because if more people realised that things CAN change and worked to make them change, they would.

[Sharon]

James, you're certainly not alone. I was a software engineer most of my life. I was laid off from my job that was 10 minutes from home, and spent most of last year commuting 140+ miles a day. Finally I quit to go back to grad school to become a librarian. In hindsight it was probably the best thing that ever happened to me, but I can say that because I don't have a family to support. There are other people in that position who don't have the choices I have.

All this talk about the glories of Globalization contains a lot of assumptions. It's not only oil that we are dependent on other countries for. We've also "outsourced" the majority of our manufacturing know-how, and a lot of our food production. What food we do still produce is produced on factory farms that are heavily dependent on petroleum products. We've squandered our resources for the past 50+ years on single family housing on what used to be good farm land, and on the highways and other infrastructure required to support them. Someday soon we're going to come to regret that as a foolish and short-sighted waste of valuable resources. And we're especially going to regret the loss of skills of all those people whom globalization deemed to be no longer "useful."

[lc2]

I don't know, Holly, I've heard almost identical versions of your story too many times to think it's unique. Namely, my mother in law and her mother both insist that the welfare they received in the late 60s-early 70s is qualitatively different than that offered today -- now they are married, productive members of society. To which I replied, "You're right. Now, there is a work requirement, whereas you had no such obligation." The real difference? They were rescused via marriage, after being abandoned by alcoholic first husbands. Of course my mil was forced to leave high school, since those were the good old days when teenage motherhood was too shameful for public view (and she was married!), so supporting herself and the kids on her secretary's job was pretty much a non-option. The irony that she went on to work for 30 years in a clerical position for the school system that rejected her and all her early academic promise, is lost on her.

Or I could tell you stories about a friend who now makes $70K/yr as an RN but who was heckled for using food stamps in the grocery store while in nursing school, because she had so many kids with her (she was doing child care in her spare time). Something along the lines of not being woman enough to hang on to the father (she'd been married for 18 years when he decided to abuse then abandon her).

Don't kid yourself, you are a member of many untouchable categories because you aren't married, even if you intend to be. The question is: who decides the criteria for a worthy social investment?

[chris]

lc2 wrote:

"Or I could tell you stories about a friend who now makes $70K/yr as an RN but who was heckled for using food stamps in the grocery store while in nursing school, because she had so many kids with her (she was doing child care in her spare time)."

I doubt the accuracy of this anecdote.

I've lived in several cities and neighborhoods where food stamps are common currency and I have never witnessed "heckling" of someone who paid for groceries with federal scrip.

The only situation I found myself disapproving of occurred when store owners would ring up ineligible items like beer as approved items.

[chris]

Holly Redmond wrote:

"And then, we get called 'lazy' because so many people have seen these welfare moms, just like the ones I see in there, all the time- and they think that's us, too."

Who calls welfare recipients lazy? Who are these people you are thinking about?

I think you've created your own boogie men.

There is certainly disdain for the CONCEPTUAL welfare recipient who aims to milk the system. That's no different than the disdain for other low-level miscreants.

No thinking person denies there are times when a government handout is needed and appropriate. But there is also no doubt there are generations of people who have subsisted on welfare since Lyndon Johnson delivered the Great Society to America.

[Antigone]

What I want to know is why getting a "handout" from the government is shameful, but if your mommy and daddy can pay your way through college and hook you up with a job, that's not a "handout". Why is it so much worse to not be born privelleges? Why is it so shameful?

[gaby]

There are so many people milking the government, most of them quite well off. They do this in form of tax shelters, loopholes, off-shore banking. There is dealmaking going on in the billions (remember the nightly news segment "Fleecing of America"?, yet some people only scream when someone gets $100 in foodstamps every month. If we total the amounts all those "lazy" welfare people receive, it will only be a tiny fraction of what the wealthy grab for themselves, without rightly earning it.

[Ryan M. Powell]

Hey Barbara,

Put your money where your mouth is. Aimless needs sponsors and prospective sponsors need the exposure Aimless can provide.

Ryan M. Powell
http://www.aimlessmovie.com
http://www.blog.aimlessmovie.com

[lc2]

chris, you can believe what you want, but take it from someone who worked in grocery retail and whose spouse does currently, food stamp-customer harassment is more common than you think. It's acknowledged as a problem and addressed directly in mgt. training. I don't know where you lived in Bklyn, but perhaps it is more common in a mixed-income area, versus a predominantly low-income one.

The incident I mentioned also happened ten years ago when public debate over welfare-to-work, IRS pursuit of deadbeat dads, etc. was at its peak. In the midst of 3% unemployment figures, we could afford to perceive gov't assistance as legitimized slackerdom. Funny how the public rhetoric is gentler when massive layoffs, outsourcing, doubling of gas and heating oil prices, etc. is the norm. Then all of a sudden, everyone has a sister, cousin, father, etc. dealing with economic hardship. Then there are all kinds of "exceptions." Then, anybody might need a little help for a spell. Of course, if we only hear about the experience from the exceptional few who use welfare, etc. as a temporary crutch, how are we to ever understand the motivations of the legendary career welfare recipients, or the food stamp users who trade in cash for Winstons? Why are their voices not heard?

No doubt to chris's relief, it seems that something is still worthy of shame in our society -- poverty, no matter how fleeting. To tie in with the food stamp-shaming incident, recently my husband witnessed a (min-wage) employee bray loudly on the sales floor that "[he] should quit [his] job and go on welfare like all the Puerto Ricans around here." Imagine my husband's dismay at the sight of a Puerto Rican woman well within earshot. She came to him (mgr in charge) in tears at the end of her shopping trip, with a story almost identical to that of my friend. Abandoned after over a decade of marriage, got through nursing school courtesy of welfare and student loans, etc., now an rn and productive member of society. So doubt those stories if you want to, but in the real world, they happened.

The really crappy part of this story? The employee got to keep his job because he was on his break and was not addressing the customer directly. One of those times when the union rep. really didn't want to show at the meeting, I'm sure. But I guess it's important for all of us to feel that we're better than someone!

It almost makes one pine for the sassy belligerence described by Holly. It would've been nice to have heard about that customer ripping the moron a new a##hole. I guarantee you my husband wouldn't have sided with the employee if it came to that. Same with my (white) friend who withstood the verbal abuse of the heckler then reported the story to me pensively, without the righteous indignation I thought she should've felt. After all, my parents used food stamps when they were in college, too. Why not? My dad worked three jobs, my mother worked full-time, they bartered services and still couldn't eat healthfully on their income. More exceptions, I guess.

OK, for the other kind of food stamp abuse (chris will be salivating over this one) -- customers can return food stamp-purchased groceries for cash, then immediately purchase cigarettes and lottery tix. I think it's within a $10 limit, but still. Am I troubled by this? Sure. I personally would like to see all food stamps converted to WIC-type vouchers. I really can't stand watching anyone purchase windex-appearing soda or cheese doodles with cash, credit cards, or food stamps. So never let it be said I don't have complaints about the system, chris!

[Ann Bartow]

OT, but if you haven't read this yet, you should: http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/09/19/crunch-for-the-cure/

[Deborah]

I sat next to a young mother with five kids, pretty obviously pregnant with her sixth, who was complaining as loudly as she could that she wasn't receiving more benefits.

OK. And she just might be right.

The government could fund her some birth control but our "Culture of Life" society allows even the lowliest of pharmacy workers and store owners to deny young women that. They could have put more money into sex education and tutoring, training, mentoring while she was still in high school but I'd guarantee you that money was spent on some big building or stadium in her city.

Why should she look downtrodden or only have an attitude of gratitude for a system that at best provides her probably subsistance. Maybe she has a sister who does her nails. Maybe her cell phone is her only phone because it's often cheaper than landline service.

There are just so many scenarios and you or I can't possibly know them all.

The difference between you and me is that I'm willing at least, to give her and others like her, the benefit of the doubt and Ialso see where society has already failed this woman in more ways than one.

[Bobby Decker]

I live on the Louisville metro border and turned the TV news to watch the the anouncement From ford the very day Before I read in the Business section of the Louisville Courier Journel the CEO drives a Lexus I wanted to go to every one of the Ford workers homes and place a yard sign out front featuring the news story with the capation{AND YOU PEOPLE WONDER WHY YOUR JOBS ARE GOING STRAIGHT THE HELL DOWN THE TOILET}

[realpc]

It isn't shameful to be a poor single mother, but it is a mistake or a misfortune. It is something to be avoided if possible.

It isn't shameful to be unemployed or under-employed, but we should try to avoid it. Almost anyone would feel bad about being on welfare or out of work, and having to depend on others.

Since you used the Navajo as an example -- don't you think they expected everyone to work, to contribute in some way? Maybe they thought being too rich was shameful, but you can bet they also thought idleness was shameful.

It is not shameful to fail because of circumstances you don't control. But you're trying to re-frame life to make it seem that failure and success are exactly the same.

[lc2]

It just occurred to me that the min-wage employee I mentioned going on a rant about welfare cases is fairly analogous to the gift the current administration received in the form of 80%+ of Fox News viewers believing that Sadaam Hussein was personally responsible for 9/11.

For the powers that be, like those who claim raising min. wage will bankrupt employers across America, it certainly can't get much better than having a politicized min.wage earner believe that the even less monied in our midst are his enemy. Throw in some divisions along racial lines and it's a situation made in heaven. Talk about having someone buy in to the system...

[chris]

lc2, you wrote:

"...food stamp-customer harassment is more common than you think."

I believe it's a minor problem, at worst.

You wrote:
"I don't know where you lived in Bklyn, but perhaps it is more common in a mixed-income area, versus a predominantly low-income one."

I live in the southwest corner of Flatbush, Brooklyn, in a small neighborhood known as West Midwood. All single-family houses, mostly food stamp-customer harassment is more common than you think. It's acknowledged as a problem and addressed directly in mgt. training. I don't know where you lived in Bklyn, but perhaps it is more common in a mixed-income area, versus a predominantly low-income one.

I live in the southwest corner of Flatbush, Brooklyn in a neighborhood known as West Midwood. The neighborhood has a website. It's a neighborhood of single-family homes, mostly Victorian design. I doubt any house in the neighborhood would sell for less than $800,000.

But like all neighborhoods in Brooklyn, it is set between others where crime is high. There was a murder on my street a year ago.

Grocery shopping brings everybody together. Whites, blacks, asians, hispanics, muslims, Jews, poor, well-off. All food stores around here accept food stamps, WIC and any other subsidies.

I've lived in NYC for many years and I have seen countless individual acts of stupidity and rudeness. But I have never seen or heard one customer verbally abuse another over the use of food stamps.

And yes, I know all the games played to convert food stamps into cash for ineligible goods.

Meanwhile, shame comes from within. Shame is the internal response one has to the thoughts and feelings held by others.

Moreover, the act of shaming -- with respect to people acquiring food with food stamps -- reveals far more about the juvenile character of the shamer than the person benefiting from a federal program.

Frankly, I support an expansion of food programs for legal residents.

[Marlene]

I've been documenting my job search on my blog, including some of the more bizarre stories. It's so true. If you even dare to acknowledge the financial, corporate or societal structures that make being smart, creative interesting and literate into an obstacle to your success- then you're passing the buck and blaming someone else. And I'm a 'communications professional'. I've observed that as literacy declines in importance, companies and even journalistic enterprises (which is why i got out of journalism and into job-search purgatory) are more accepting of it and seem to think, well, we don't really need to spell. No one else will notice! Hence, less demand for PR- they just figure they can do it on their own.

The weirdest was when I reconnected with an old acquaintance from high school who had worked in PR and fundraising and now worked for a talent agency. She professed to 'know everybody' which she did. She helped me get a job at the talent agency where she worked. Lo and behold- she also had a personality/mood disorder and in a month, turned around and fired me for 'stabbing her in the back' and for 'being a snob'.

That was my last 'real' job. BEfore that, I had an office job for one month in the summer of 2005- where i was fired for being a lousy bookkeeper. My job counselor asked, "why did you take that job?" Because if I hadn't everyone would have asked why I didn't...and i needed the money. I actually ended up deeper in the hole.

[gubka]

Hi, People. I really like it site! Good job, nice logo... wealth of information on site and a nice design.
I make site too http://luminox-watch.4x1s1.com
GOOD LUCK ;)

[Ben Merc]

All the shame in the world, or food programs or rescinding of CEO wages are not going to solve our problems. Not until our "system" or what ever nomenclature/description you may assign it, learns how to generate economy with out war, we as a nation, as a species are on thin ice.

"Both" (are there two?) of our political parties have chosen to ignore this reality even as the negative impact of war generated economy pulls our society into the tar pit of failed civilizations. Years of warnings and generations of data seem irrelevant to the contemporary machine of governance, they do not want to confront these issues for the simple fact of finance and political survival. For decades people have applied efforts to remove big money from politics, the ability to move past the lure of corruption and spell of greed seems beyond the average mans capabilities.

Your typical war-mongering profiteer will vehemently tell you it is practically written in our Constitution to pursue one's business goals through politics, as: “The business of this country is business”

To those like minded corporatists I leave a concise thought from a founding father, which I heard recently quoted in a Gore Vidal interview:

"Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies. From these proceed debts and taxes. And armies, debts and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.".... James Madison

Our greatest shame is we have ignored so many of the lessons and warnings from many of the great minds of our foundation. Even your average “conservative” should get this, one would think.

[Jack Shallist]

Chris said: What's left that receives this society's seal of DISAPPROVAL? Not women who bear "illegitimate" children they can't support (I happen to be one of those kids).

Have you shamed your mother lately, Chris?

Chris said: Meanwhile, if you want to end capital spending and R&D spending at car companies, you can pay auto-workers more money for about a year. Then sales will begin to crumble, and they will fall until there are no sales. At that point Toyota and Honda will dominate the US motor vehicle market... The most insane assumption inherent in such idiotic statements is that auto manufacturers have acquired omniscience…

As far as I know, no, they haven’t acquired omniscience. But what they long ago acquired was the ability to read and forecast trends, both in the preferences of the consumer market and…well… oil prices… Instead of building huge, expensive, emissions-standards-dodging monstrosities and spending hundreds of millions convincing us they were a good idea, maybe the Big Three could have looked at the cars most people who think with their brains instead of their balls buy: compact, fuel-efficient vehicles… which manufacturers like… ohhhhh, say… Toyota and Honda?... are producing in spades. Yeah; sensible cars. “No Omniscience Required.”

Chris said: Oil prices are falling.

Yes, of course… and history shows clearly they could never, ever possibly rise again. Look! Prices are coming down! Fill your boots! Go out and buy six Hummers because soon gas will be 25¢ a metric ton, and will never ever go up again!

Chris: But no one knows exactly when or how consumer tastes will change.

Yes, they do, Chris. This may come as a shock to you, but they changed in the 1970s during the first oil crisis. That’s when Volkswagen, Honda, et al. really started eating the Big Three’s lunch in a big way -- by producing cars that didn’t burn three gallons of gas just pulling out of the driveway. If gas prices in the US weren’t kept artificially low due to the fact that dollar hegemony in the petroleum industry cushions the American public from the extremes of price fluctuations, there’s no way the strategy of the Big Three to keep on building behemoths and convincing us to buy them could possibly have worked into the 21st century.

Eternalsquire said: Sure there is! He's there waiting for you to repent your sins and accept His mercy in your heart. He will then act through you for the betterment of humankind.

…President Bush?

[Anarcissie]

Antigone: 'What I want to know is why getting a "handout" from the government is shameful, but if your mommy and daddy can pay your way through college and hook you up with a job, that's not a "handout". Why is it so much worse to not be born privelleges? Why is it so shameful?'

Because getting a handout from the government shows that you and yours are less powerful than are those who get and give personal handouts. Passing judgement is generally an act of gratuitous hostility which is better practiced upon the powerless than upon the powerful.

[Dieter]

Everyone should read "Dark Ages America" by Morris Berman and try your best to cling to the vanishing middle class. If you want to see America in 20 years, go rent "Blade Runner". Leave it to a German to tell you silly people how it is. Remember, Germany lost the war because of quantity over quality. America is masterful at making lots of cheap crap, and is unable to compete in quality goods. What does America have that the rest of the world can't produce better? America has Walmart and Mc"Dreck". Most Americans are almost infantile in their ignorance. Schools are good in "rich" areas, and crap in "poor" areas. Any country treats their children like throw away trash deserves its destiny. Most cities in America are strip mall hell with no walking, filled with loud, obese imbeciles. Everyone came to America to "make money". What a lofty goal for a civilization! Now, Germany's beloved Social Market Economy is being gutted in competition with your illegal "slaves" and stupid Americans who agree to work all year with no life at all. It is pathetic. It is the triumph of garbage. Think about it fatsos! It isn't even fun to people watch here when women over the age of 14 are invariably obese.

[Ben Merc]

That was a real progressive and enlightening diatrib. And I am aware that this is not a stone throwing venue, but...

Dieter,
You obviously have issues with your own past. Until you have really lived and studied America and American culture, I would keep my ignorance harbored if I were you. Let’s face it, you people do not exactly have a stellar reputation when it comes to civilization building. If all you have to offer is insult and counter productive analysis, why bother commenting at all?

Screw Morris Berman, you need to go back and read some Jung, and chill out dude.

[lc2]

Don't beat up on Dieter. Alex -- who seems to be American -- said earlier in this forum he "doesn't care two seconds about people who suffered through Hurricane Katrina." With fellow citizens like these, who needs al-Quaeda? I'd personally rather be bombed to f*ck by people who are too stupid and pathetic to know better than to not kill themselves in the process, than be done in by a fellow citizen who doesn't care about the fate of humans unless they're members of his chosen circle, then defend it through some quasi-Darwinist theory. All the education and slimness in the world won't make up for this kind of darkness, Dieter, but then I guess since you're German I don't need to tell you that.

[Buffy]

Read and appreciated, but most commenters are responding from a distance.

I am living it. Wrongfully discharged, blackballed, and now about to be homeless. Have not had $$ for food or any essentials and will not beg. The only shame has been in other people who know of the situation and look the other way to try to distance themselves from acknowledging it and intervening.

My only realistic goal: a quick death.

Until you experience the wholesale disregard for human life and dignity, you cannot understand it, in my very humble opinion.

[Holly Redmond]

Deb: Yes, and just like I may not know her full story, neither do you- you were not there. Not only that, this is a rather small town, so, yes, I do know what was going on.
I, myself, do not look 'downtrodden', but I also know where our local Planned Parenthood is, and they do have a sliding scale. As does the local free clinic.
As to furthering sex ed- I totally agree with you.
But, having said that, I didn't even go to high school and I know how to use a rubber and pop a daily pill.
While I certainly agree that there is a problem with sex ed (or the lack thereof) I think you are 'dumbing down' young women far too much.
Chris, actually, it's a pretty bad problem in smaller areas and suburbia- probably not where it's more left leaning or where poverty is prevalant, but here, in small town middle America? Oh yes. I have been heckled more than once.
I wish I could say I've evolved above getting angry when it happens, I have, to an extent, but I still do- mostly, I just grit my teeth and work harder to ensure this isn't a permanant thing.

[lc2]

But Holly, don't you know that people who've always been able to turn to their families for financial support or who've had the resources to erase their mistakes, are able to rip your story apart and have no sympathy for your situation, however temporary? Make one misstep, have one unforseen circumstance or have a birth control failure (they happen!), and you will be living proof of having never deserved their support or confidence in the first place. Most people who think that way are like me in that they can't fathom not having extended family who can help out in a pinch. They do not know what it's like to have no one to turn to when sh#t happens -- and don't we all know that when it rains, it pours, no matter how well-prepared we think we are?

The only notable women left above reproach in this society are pretty much Barbara Bush (Sr.) and Laura Bush and well, I can't think of another, can you? Maybe Richard Nixon's daughers. And we all know what Barbara Bush had to say about Hurricane Katrina evacuees.

The judgmental conservative's line goes: you didn't go to high school = don't complain to us that you can't make it on min. wage (my uncle attributes his success to the fact that he worked extra-hard in jr. high math). That's the bed you made, now lie in it. The fact that there is a growing number of $10K/mo (yes you read that right) boarding schools to set straight the wayward children of the rich i.e. flunkouts of more prestigius boarding schools would be lost on such critics. Lots of teenagers make stupid choices -- it's part of job description. For some though, they don't constitute life sentences.

And if you can't make it on min. wage, you shouldn't have kept the child you couldn't afford, but should've given it up to people (read: Christian careerists like Supreme Court Justice John Roberts and wife) who could give it the loving home it deserves (because we all know it takes $$ to love). Ever read "The Handmaid's Tale"?

Not to sound harsh, but these are the judgments others are making about you. Doesn't it make you want to think twice about making judgments about others? I mean, the reality is that no matter how much the pregnant women you describe complains, the case worker is not going to whip out her checkbook and throw her $1000 extra. She will not get rich, or even out of financial peril, on welfare. Meanwhile, the 400+ _billionnaires_ in our country are just robbing the U.S. treasury blind in tax cuts, and we're borrowing trillion$ from China to make up the difference. Money these probably perfectly nice billionaires would never miss, could never spend in a lifetime even if they tried, that used to go to things like infrastructure (don't get me started on the state of roads and bridges in my area) and public education (no art or music instruction in the local schools here) including alternative high schools for bright kids like you who are very capable but chafe at the traditional structure. Where are the jobs that returning this money to its rightful owners was supposed to create?

And meanwhile down here on Earth, people are getting heckled for using food stamps and resented for having acrylic nails and cell phones. Isn't it time to let go of our need to have pure victims and villians and see the situation for what it really is? As troubling as it is for someone to lack a strong work ethic (either in or out of the workforce) or to blow taxpayer $ on pepsi or cigarettes (or for that matter to ask for taxpayer-funded gastric bypass operations and lung transplants) it is such incredibly small change, it's barely worth acknowledging. It doesn't mean I'm interested in making the pregnant woman in question out to be some kind of victim, but I'm not going to shed any tears for the people who were paying $100K's a year more in taxes before Bush, either. And I'm a hell of a lot more understanding of the need to put food on the table and have a few cheap distractions along the way, than I am of the need for people to amass -- no, hoarde -- unseemly amounts of cash for no good reason. It's just a lot prettier when it takes place in a mahogany-paneled brokerage firm than a plastic-seat-lined welfare office.

I saw an article in Friday's NYT about the newly rich in China who are buying their kids all kinds of finishing school lessons and services in hopes that others will not perceive them as unethical and vulgar, just because they're rich. Apparently in China being rich is considered a blight on one's character.

[Anarcissie]

There's always a reason to hoard cash. Cash gives you freedom, including the freedom to help other people. If you don't hoard it, if you're living on the edge of your paycheck every week, you can't even help yourself.

You don't have to get in a mahogany-paneled office to hoard it, either. You can hoard it on a plastic chair or a streetcorner.

Saving money and living frugally are profoundly revolutionary acts.

[eternalsquire]

Buffy,

You had better RUN, not just simply walk, to a Catholic Worker house or community farm somewhere in the US. The list is located in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Worker_Movement. The community farm especially is a shared subsistence living culture. You will be able to survive there in a dignified manner.

The Eternal Squire

[Jean]

Your comments about employees at the Big 3
isn't the whole story. Every employee with the Big 3 has an impact on 9
other jobs. Yes, I said 9 other jobs. That would be the bakery, dentist, doctor,mechanic etc. The suppliers to the Big 3 don't have the perks that
the Big 3 have. So my sympathy goes to the suppliers and everyone else impacted. Working for
the Big 3 is a gravy train.

[Anarcissie]

The Wikipedia entry for the Catholic Worker Movement is a bit confusing. You have to search for "catholic worker"; if you look for "catholic worker movement" it can't find it, for some reason.

It might be best to just go to the Catholic Worker site. Here's the page of known CW communities:

http://www.catholicworker.org/communities/commlistall.cfm

[chris]

Jack Shallist copied and wrote:

"Chris said: What's left that receives this society's seal of DISAPPROVAL? Not women who bear "illegitimate" children they can't support (I happen to be one of those kids).

Have you shamed your mother lately, Chris?"

Jack, you are a moron. First, my biological mother is dead. Second, she sacrificed her future for me. That's heroic. Not shameful.

She walked a tough road by having me and placing me for adoption. Her story wasn't typical of women relinquishing babies. She wasn't a high school girl who suddenly found herself "in trouble". She was 27, a graduate of Northwestern University and working as a journalist in New York City.

Abortion was an available option despite the fact that I was born many years before Roe v. Wade.

Nevertheless, she chose to give birth and surrender me for adoption, which was an extraordinarily brave act that haunted her for the remainder of her life.

You wrote:

"As far as I know, no, they (motor vehicle manufacturers) haven’t acquired omniscience. But what they long ago acquired was the ability to read and forecast trends, both in the preferences of the consumer market and…well… oil prices… Instead of building huge, expensive, emissions-standards-dodging monstrosities and spending hundreds of millions convincing us they were a good idea, maybe the Big Three could have looked at the cars most people who think with their brains instead of their balls buy: compact, fuel-efficient vehicles… which manufacturers like… ohhhhh, say… Toyota and Honda?... are producing in spades. Yeah; sensible cars. “No Omniscience Required.”

GM, despite its problems, still sells more cars than any other car company in the world. Thus, your claim that GM builds the wrong cars is ridiculous. The company has simply concentrated on building cars that are most likely to yield the highest profitability.

If GM were to have followed your advice and built the low-margin vehicles you think "every" car-buyer wants, the company would have seen its bottom line turn red years earlier.

It might have already entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy if you were in charge. Chapter 11 is aimed at saving the company, but that life-saving is accomplished by firing lots of people and dismantling labor contracts.

You wrote:

"Chris said: Oil prices are falling...

...Yes, of course… and history shows clearly they could never, ever possibly rise again."

Oil prices fell to almost $10 a barrel twice during the 1990s. No one knows where they are headed or how long they will stay at any level. Period.

You wrote:

"Look! Prices are coming down! Fill your boots! Go out and buy six Hummers because soon gas will be 25¢ a metric ton, and will never ever go up again!"

American buyers purchase about 15 million vehicles a year. A literal handful of those vehicles are Hummers. The Hummer fleet is so small its gas consumption is no more than a rounding error compared with total US petroleum use.

You copied and wrote:

"Chris: But no one knows exactly when or how consumer tastes will change...."

"...Yes, they do, Chris. This may come as a shock to you, but they changed in the 1970s during the first oil crisis. That’s when Volkswagen, Honda, et al. really started eating the Big Three’s lunch in a big way -- by producing cars that didn’t burn three gallons of gas just pulling out of the driveway. If gas prices in the US weren’t kept artificially low due to the fact that dollar hegemony in the petroleum industry cushions the American public from the extremes of price fluctuations, there’s no way the strategy of the Big Three to keep on building behemoths and convincing us to buy them could possibly have worked into the 21st century."

You live in an alternate reality. All US car-builders offer high-mileage vehicles. They quickly began building more of them in the 1970s.

Prior to the 1970s, there was the Ford Falcon, the Plymouth Valiant, the Chevy Two, to name one from each manufacturer. But each car-maker offered others in addition. American Motors (Rambler) was a maker of good mileage vehicles too.

Meanwhile, those Volkswagen Beetles were death traps in those days, as were the Japanese cars starting to appear in the US. The early Hondas -- the Civics -- were crappy tin cans.

Moreover, Japanese car-makers weren't very profitable in those days. Datsun, you might recall, failed and was reborn as Nissan.

[chris]

Dieter, you wrote:

"Leave it to a German to tell you silly people how it is. Remember, Germany lost the war because of quantity over quality. America is masterful at making lots of cheap crap, and is unable to compete in quality goods."

Really. You seem rather out of touch. Germany sells a handful of cars in the US market. The German auto production is a fraction of US output. Meanwhile, US cars run rather well.

If your statement were true, no one would buy a car made by an American company. On the other hand, Chrysler is now a German/American hybrid. Therefore, either the Chrysler half must improve, or the German half must decline. Which is it?

The US makes great airplanes. Great computers. And many, many more great products.

You asked:
"What does America have that the rest of the world can't produce better?"

Since imports account for only a portion of our annual expenditures, it's pretty clear consumers choose US products over imports. That pretty much wipes out your argument.

You wrote:
"America has Walmart and Mc"Dreck"."

WalMart sells value. It prices products low while maintaining quality. But shoppers are free to pay more for the same products at other venues.

McDonalds, well, if that's your taste, that's your taste. I think McDonalds does well in Germany too.

You wrote:
"Most Americans are almost infantile in their ignorance. Schools are good in "rich" areas, and crap in "poor" areas."

This statement is entirely false. Major problems exist. But the problems reflect deep social and cultural realities. They have nothing to do with the schools themselves.

You wrote:
"Any country treats their children like throw away trash deserves its destiny."

Have a talk with their parents. The "country" doesn't throw away kids. But many morons who become parents do.

You wrote:
"Most cities in America are strip mall hell with no walking, filled with loud, obese imbeciles."

I think you've forgotten that it took the US to straighten out Germany. I guess US dominance over Germany has gotten under your skin.

You wrote:
"Everyone came to America to "make money". What a lofty goal for a civilization!"

Actually, people have streamed here for hundreds of years in search of a "better life." For some that means money, for others, the rewards are more esoteric. However, you slice it, the US is still the land of opportunity.

You wrote:
"Now, Germany's beloved Social Market Economy is being gutted in competition with your illegal "slaves" and stupid Americans who agree to work all year with no life at all. It is pathetic. It is the triumph of garbage. Think about it fatsos! It isn't even fun to people watch here when women over the age of 14 are invariably obese."

Too bad for you. Meanwhile, you must live over a McDonalds if you think everyone in America is obese. You should get out a little. The gym and workout culture is very strong here.

[Dylboz]

Antigone: 'What I want to know is why getting a "handout" from the government is shameful, but if your mommy and daddy can pay your way through college and hook you up with a job, that's not a "handout". Why is it so much worse to not be born privelleges? Why is it so shameful?'

Because getting a handout from the government shows that you and yours are less powerful than are those who get and give personal handouts. Passing judgement is generally an act of gratuitous hostility which is better practiced upon the powerless than upon the powerful.

No...It's shameful because whether people want to admit it or not, with every government program, people are aware of the GUN IN THE ROOM! The money that one's parents give was actually EARNED, and it comes from what is left after the government steals their money at gunpoint (and if you don't think it's by force, just try not paying your taxes for a while). Living like a parasite on money taken from others is and always should be shameful.

What I want to know is why you think you have some legitimate claim to other people's money? My mother got to this country with 2 kids and started out as seceratary, went to school at night, eventualy earning a masters and after years reached the upper executive level of a few major American manufacturers.

Now, with her accumulated wealth and experience, she is part owner of her own manufacturing company. In 20 years she went from nothing to putting me and my sister through college and giving me a BMW.

So, now you think because she worked so hard to become successful and VOLUNTARILY shared her wealth with her own kids, she should be FORCED to put everyone else's kids through too? The government should tax her even more because some people can't find jobs? Where do you get off making claims on other people's lives? After all, money earned is in exchange for time and energy, essentially, one's life. That life could be spent doing other things, so when you make a claim on someone's earnings, you are seeking to dispose of a portion of their life, in a manner of your own choosing and if you use the government to enforce the claim, you do so with implicit violence.

And anyway, Antigone, your condescending use of "mommy and daddy" bespeaks a certain jealousy. Maybe when you have kids, you'll understand the parental impulse to provide for your children the best life possible, including sending them to college and doing whatever you can to help them get a great job.

I'm lucky my mother set an example of hard work and self reliance instead of teaching me to blame "the system" for my failings. I learned by watching her that life is not a zero sum game where one person's success is another's loss, there is more than enough for us all, but you can't claim it if you don't earn it.

She also taught me charity through her own generosity (not just to me and my sister, she was twice United Way Woman of the Year), but it was again, VOLUNTARY, and not backed by state sponsored violence like welfare. It's that violence, that gun in the room, that makes government handouts shameful.

[Holly Redmond]

lc2, honestly, you'd have had to seen her. It's hard to explain the entire thing, but while what you and the other lady who disagreed with my take on her is saying is pretty well true. "hating" on her, really doesn't do me any good.
I don't care really, what she buys with her food stamps or any of the other petty people who flip out about someone buying Pepsi- I just know we have to budget things a bit better than that. :-)
It's kind of good, in a way, though, I've learned to make some pretty incredible things that my Grandmother, who used to say I'd never learn to cook cause I didn't want to be a 'girly girl'.
Take the good and the bad. A part of me feels really sorry for her, though, because even at the low level of the welfare program we are in, it's hard to get out. I can't imagine what it's like to be that heavily dependant on it.
Dylboz, while I disagree with most of what you said- I do agree with this statement:"And anyway, Antigone, your condescending use of "mommy and daddy" bespeaks a certain jealousy. Maybe when you have kids, you'll understand the parental impulse to provide for your children the best life possible, including sending them to college and doing whatever you can to help them get a great job."
That's exactly why we fight as hard as we do, as opposed to rolling over and possibly causing our kids to be the next generation welfare recipiants.
I know, if when the day comes for my kids to go to school, I have the money to put them through it, I will- hopefully with a car to get 'em through it.
I really hope that people don't shake their heads at us and say that we've 'forgotten where we came from' when that day comes.
For me to be bitter at someone else's fortune, well, that's pretty dumb.

[lc2]

I don't think it's a matter of being bitter...just a recognition that sharing is always preferable to hoarding. We should all save, but there comes a point where there's enough excess in all but the most meager incomes when it makes sense to wonder, "Does someone else need this more than I do? Is a little inconvenience on my part worth the enormous relief (economic or otherwise) this will provide for someone else who's really struggling right now?"

It's all a matter of degree, but isn't that why Mother Teresa is slated for sainthood while Ken Lay didn't die a hero? I mean, no one is saying that people who've earned their fortune shouldn't have plenty of padding, but it reaches a point where it's absolutely ridiculous. It really is ridiculous for people to have five or six 10,000 sq. ft. houses when there are homeless kids in my school bouncing from house to house. That's all I'm saying. And we're blind if we don't see what the rest of the world sees in America -- a gluttonous society whose insatiable demands for more stuff, more shopping sprees, ever more things, has spun out of control for decades now. It is an absolute embarassment of riches, particularly when the people whose labor makes these goods accessible live so close to edge.

There is a ludicrous amount of personal hoarding with all the suffering in this world.

That old saying "You can't take it with you"...what happened to that? I remember reading some years ago in People magazine of all places about a family in the suburban DC area that gave 50% of its income to charity -- with six kids. It meant the (very high achieving) kids attended state colleges and the family got its clothes at Goodwill, but the kids spoke lovingly and eloquently about why they supported their parents' choice. Can we at least agree that, while extreme in their approach, this family sets an example we'd all be better off cultivating in our own lives? Our lives as human animals are made more meaningful by generosity even when anonymous, as has been proven through centuries of human experience. Otherwise, what's it all about? And who ever said you can't have compassion and capitalism? Who made those rules? Surely not the people who have to look themselves in the mirror every morning.

[Anarcissie]

I am not sure what the example is. Having six children in a world already populated well beyond its carrying capacity bespeaks considerable egotism, which may also explain the athleticism in charity.

[Anarcissie]

dylboz: "No...It's shameful because whether people want to admit it or not, with every government program, people are aware of the GUN IN THE ROOM! The money that one's parents give was actually EARNED, and it comes from what is left after the government steals their money at gunpoint...."

The point is, though, that the _beneficiaries_ didn't earn it.

Anyway, people don't mind the gun in the room: they elected a government that blew off three or four hundred billion dollars in Iraq to make the world a more dangeerous place through gratuitous war crimes. That's a big gun! They resent _Welfare_ because the recipients have low status. By and large, you won't see them complaining about defense contractors, subsidized agribusiness, or other high-status leeches, although these take much bigger cuts of the pie than the poor welfarados. If only they understood that the Welfare money _also_ goes to high-status people like landlords and bureaucrats!

Happiness is a warm gun....

[lc2]

Well, the point wasn't to portray this family as perfect, but to illustrate that all the assumed obstacles to charitable giving are for naught if the will is there. In other words, budgets represent moral choices, not just economic ones. And I'm not sure that the children are even the couple's biologically, perhaps they are adopted.

What is with the strain of judgment running through this thread? Why do we have the need to see people as pure victims or villians?

[Dylboz]

lc2 said: "Our lives as human animals are made more meaningful by generosity even when anonymous, as has been proven through centuries of human experience. Otherwise, what's it all about? And who ever said you can't have compassion and capitalism? Who made those rules? Surely not the people who have to look themselves in the mirror every morning"

Absolutely correct. The whole point of my post was an objection to the use of the force implicit in government (the gun in the room) as a means to achieve the ends of compassion!

The values of compassion, generosity and love for your fellow human being are profoundly important, far too important to be left to the auspices of some state agency, it's not enough to vote for the politician who will raise taxes and expand the WIC program. That doesn't cut it. If it is to mean anything, it needs to be a choice you make, to do with your own time and money what your conscience demands.

I brought up my mother's example of charity to show that her success had actually allowed her to be more generous, whereas, when we were struggling to make ends meet, there was no time (or money) for United Way or anyone else.

I don't see that government can ever achieve social justice by employing violence as a tool in furtherence of egalitarianism (nor do I see absolute equality as a reasonable or just goal). Stealing, initiation of force, up to and including murder do not become virtuous by simply wearing a uniform and a badge. It doesn't matter if a theif will spend your money on diapers for his kids or his next hit of crack, the theft is still morally wrong. It is no different when the government takes money from you on pain of imprisonment and loss of property. It is no solace that those proceeds will go to those less fortunate, nor is it any justification that the victim can withstand the loss financially. Additionaly, a government doing what it prosecutes it's citizens for (extortion, in the case of taxes) is just as hypocritical as a parent beating their child for fighting, as in "do as I say, not as I do." What's wrong is always wrong.

The answer to the question of justice is to return to a completely voluntary society that respects the soveriegnty of the individual, and does not confer on a mob the power to violate individual rights on the basis of majority vote. After all, no one wants to be the sheep when it comes time for the wolves to vote on supper. I anticipate that some might object, saying that to rely on strictly voluntary charity would be insufficient to meet the great need that exists, and while I doubt that to be true, I would counter that at least the sad fact of poverty would not be compounded by the immorality of the State's violent and forcible redistribution.

Isabel Paterson said it beter than me in "The Humanitarian with the Guillotine," read it here:

http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=38

[chris]

Anarcissie wrote:

"I am not sure what the example is. Having six children in a world already populated well beyond its carrying capacity bespeaks considerable egotism, which may also explain the athleticism in charity."

Nonsense, the world is nowhere near its capacity for supporting human life. The idea that food and water are limited is naive and foolish. The only impediments to an abundance of both are despotic and tyrannical governments.

If the people of North America minus Mexico swapped places with all the residents of Africa, the Dark Continent would become a modern state overflowing with natural resources and a plethora of everything good while the diseases plaguing its current residents would disappear.

[Dylboz]

Anarcissie said "By and large, you won't see them complaining about defense contractors, subsidized agribusiness, or other high-status leeches, although these take much bigger cuts of the pie than the poor welfarados. If only they understood that the Welfare money _also_ goes to high-status people like landlords and bureaucrats!"

Well, you'll hear one or the other, I think. It seems that people who identify with the political "left" are ceaselessly complaining about the evil corporations and their fascist enablers in government. Those who call themselves the "right" are always complaigning about welfare queens, but don't mind a few Enrons so long as the Dow stays over 10,000. What it comes down to is that politics is always about rewarding your friends and punishing your enemies while spending other people's money.

I object to all of it. The war, the welfare both corporate and individual, the parasitic beauracratic class, everything. It's all financed with plunder, and backed with violence.

As for landlords, I've got no issue with them so long as their property was aquired without force or fraud (and hopefull without subsidy either). I just can't stand when businessmen or their political cronies yak about "the market" while using every handout, regulation and lawsuit they can come up with to insulate themselves from liability, competition and risk.

A real free market would look nothing like the fascict parody our hyper-regulated corporate controlled joke of an economy has become. It would be a lot fairer, with better wages, more employment, smaller, more efficient businesses with local interests and employees, distribution networks that are not wildly distorted by subsidies and tarriffs, and most important a currency backed by something of value, instead of the empty promises of politicians.

Anarcissie said "Happiness is a warm gun...."

I'm with you there, so long as it's only used in self defense (or target practice).

[saltyC]

Wow hey Barbara, here's why women have trouble getting rich: It's not capitalism, it's because we make too many excuses!

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15016540

[Anarcissie]

chris: 'Nonsense, the world is nowhere near its capacity for supporting human life.'

Not in theory. I am going by behavior and actually existing conditions, though, not by theory. For instance, you'll notice our exemplary family educated their children on the state's, that is, the taxpayer's tab. And went to Goodwill as well, that is, bought stuff cheap which had been charitably donated for poor people. That is, they couldn't fully provide for their six children out of their own resources, which is no surprise given their race to be the kings of charity themselves. But two hundred years ago it was nothing to have six children (in North America) because the major resource of the time -- agricultural land -- was available for them almost free of charge. Clearly, then, conditions have changed. As the world becomes more crowded, we observe that it becomes more difficult to make a place for our children, which, after all, we owe them, having brought them into being to gratify our own desires and beliefs. Maybe Nature is telling us something.

[jm]

Buffy,

I can understand you comments. My sister was in Healthcare for 26 yrs. She eventually had a nervous breakdown. Fortunately, She could retire at 45 (her husband workd.)

Now I'm in the same field, but in a clerical capacity. And I can tell you, it's stressful, degrading and I can't wait for it to end!

[Dieter der Grosse]

Hier ist Dieter. I just drank a few Schnaps. First of all, you can all return to your jobs at Walmart and go back to driving your Ford Focus to work, stuffing your obese faces with Taco Bell and McDonalds, because America = crap. I am going back to the Fatherland. Better Arbeitslos in Germany than a slave in a McDonalds. Multiculturalism, as practiced in America, will never go well. China, being monocultural and homogeneous has a better chance. As for Germany, well, the times are over for us. It is a Brave New World and America will lead us, thighs rubbing together, into it. Das ist alles that I have to say. Gott sei mit euch! Viel Glück und alles Gute! Dieter

[Bill Thomas]

Leaders operating within politics, commerce and public services seem to suffer from what we might wish to call a series of "compassion-deficits" or "service-meltdowns"!

You should read an article describing these and other leadership betrayals here:
http://www.leadership-toolkit.com/Articles/betrayalsofleadership.php
[url=http://www.leadership-toolkit.com/Articles/betrayalsofleadership.php ]

[Jacqueline]

I have personally experienced abuse from customers behind me in the supermarket and snotty attittudes cashiers when I had to use the Access card (food stamps) to buy food. One cashier made it a point to roll her eyes at me, sigh heavily and talk about me right in front of me as if I wasn't even there while she couldn't seem to get the computerized cash register to register the Half-n-Half (cream for my coffee, my ONLY indulgence!)as a food item along with the rest of our food. The people waiting behind my husband and I started to bitch loudly about "those goddam welfare recipients always cause these check-out hold-ups with their damn food stamps! Why can't they just get a job and pay for their food like everybody else!" So please do not tell me that food stamp customers don't get abused in stores because I know better. And for this crappy treatment, I am to be humbly grateful?

And I DID rip out their asses. I told them that if it wasn't for age and disability discrimination in the job market, not to mention too much nepitocracy instead of meritocracy, maybe I too could get a good job and support myself and my ailing and much older husband and also repay my $54,000 in college student loans. I retorted loudly enough for EVERYBODY to hear, that ending up poor with my gas shut shut off, my modest home in foreclosure and having to endure this humiliation ceremony over using food stamps wasn't what I had in mind when I went into steep unaffordable student loan debt to get the college degree in order to be able to re-enter the workforce after being left disabled , without the ability to work in any job for 10 years.

And you know what? Many people who NEED food stamps and Medicaid actually DO work - they just don't make enough money - despite putting in 40+ hrs a week - to be able to economically fend for themselves. For many others, it is simply that while you continue to "just keep trying" to get a decent job, you still need to be able to live. While you pound the pavements applying and getting rejection upon rejection, sent home poor and empty-handed without a chance for a good job (or at least a job that will lift you out of poverty) for which you struggled to get that almighty education/degree for, you still need to eat, have a roof over your head in which to sleep, bathe and cook and you also still need to get medical care (especially when you're middle-aged like I am and more vulnerable to medical problems). These are basic human needs to which you are entitled because EVERYBODY has a right to be able to live!

After a 4 1/2 year long fruitless job search (during which time our ONLY income was my husband's social security check of $604/mo) we ended up selling the few nice things we had for a song out of desperation. We ended up having to go on welfare as a matter of life or death - just so we could get SOME help with basic human needs such as my husband's heart medicines and treated for blood poisoning from my abscessed, rotting teeth which went without dental care for many years - for lack of enough money or a crack at a good job with health/dental benefits.

The sad reality is that you can do "all the right things" and still end up getting nothing but the shitty end of the stick. The ONLY jobs I as a middle-aged disabled woman was offered were commission-only insurance sales jobs. Ever work on commissions-only while having to put money out of pocket that you don't have for the office supplies you need in order to work? Try it sometime.

When you have given 50-60 hrs/week of your time in such a "job" only to bring home $300/mo (or maybe nothing at all) in commissions-only pay which is NOT commnsurate with your time and effort, then you can tell me I haven't "earned my food stamps and Medicaid" that I would NOT need just to survive on a subsistence level if: (A) I was afforded an equal opportunity to get a salaried job that paid enough to live and (B)There was enough jobs to go around so that even economically disadvantaged, middle-aged disabled ladies like me with a work history gap spanning a decade could get a job appropriate to our physical capabilities, respect for the hurdles we had to overcome and academic accomplishments and desire to learn and work more - if only given the chance.

[lc2]

The question I have after reading your story, Jacqueline, is this: what will it take for us to finally realize as a people that it is in our best interest, humane impulses to help others aside, to realize the contributing potential of _all_ our citizens? People like you who've struggled with disabilities but yearn for the opportunity to do something meaningful and have so much experience and wisdom, enrich our society. Teenagers like the ones I work with whose youthful energy, imagination, and enthusiasm is being consumed by omnipresent media and disaffection with a society that doesn't invest adequately in their futures, could enrich our society immeasurably. Instead even those who achieve academically feel disconnected and disillusioned with the society they will be charged with leading in a matter of decades.

And finally, to tie in with your story re food stamps, isn't it in our best interest to ensure ideal nutrition for all our citizens? This doesn't necessarily mean pricey protein sources like halibut, but legumes and local produce should be accessible for everyone. That's why I personally favor expanding food stamps benefits but converting 75% of them to vouchers, similar to the WIC program. Any gov't that cared about its citizens and its farmers would endorse such a system. I realize that this limits the freedom of choice of food stamp recipients, but in my opinion our national health is in crisis and I cannot in good conscience contribute to a system that makes it cheaper to buy high-sodium processed foods than nutritious perishable goods.

But the question remains: what's the tipping point at which we feel invested in the welfare of our fellow citizens? How many struggling people do we have to know personally, how bad do things have to get before we will be at that point? When will we realize that, for instance, many if not most Katrina evacuees were in financial crisis before the hurricane hit?

Your anecdote about the grumbling customers and cashiers speaks to this point. How foolish are we to not realize that most of us, definitely a cashier unless s/he's a teenager living at home, are 6 paychecks at best from the same boat you're in?

[Jacqueline]

In response to lc2:

Freedom of choice is already limited for food stamp recipients. Food stamp recipients cannot buy already-prepared, hot rotisserie chickens for $4.99, for example. You can only buy cold foods or foods that must be cooked. The problem with that is that if you're so poor that you actually qualify for food stamps, you are also likely to be that poor that one or more of your utilities are shut off for being unable to afford the bills, and the help from LIHEAP being inadequate for preventing shut-offs - especially when gas companies like National Fule here in northwestern PA decide to raise their rates by 41% in one shot like they did in September of 2005. So what good is it to buy perishable foods that you can't cook or can't keep in a refrigerator or freezer? Food vouchers for food that you have no way to cook and eat, and then save the leftovers for the next day, are useless and actually make the problem worse for poor people who already are suffering badly enough and really shouldn't have to suffer more, and who really can't suffer any more. What would be more to the point would be for those well-off who don't need help to realize that those of us who didn't deserve to be poor should not be further punished when becoming disabled is not our fault, getting older is not our fault, and being denied chances for jobs that pay enough to live - after we got expensive degrees and training for - is not our fault. While I don't believe we should be demonizing families with children who fall on hard times, I must stress the point that there is SOME degree in choice in having kids - but NO choice in getting older or being disabled - thus less able to get good jobs and be economically self-sufficient - all due to discrimination.

How many others out there are like me? How many who have done "all the right things" and STILL ended up poor with nothing? There's plenty of help for the young single mothers in comparrison to the far-less-help that you have to fight tooth and nail for if you're a poor older adult without little kids. There's training and job placement programs sponsored by PA welfare that targets single mothers where they not only get the training and placed in living wage jobs as CNA's, but they also get helped with the purchase of cars and insurance. But older poor people without little kids get virtually NO help at all and we're the ones who have less of a chance for getting good jobs because of age discrimination, downsizing, off-shoring and disability discrimination.

The "experts" (read as: those who lucked out getting gov't jobs and who are educated beyond their mental capacity)at PA Career Link and PA OVR always tell the disabled, the middle-aged woman re-entering the workforce and the newly jobless that we are to make ourselves worthy of a job by getting retrained, by getting more and more educations.
Those of us who did just that who are now poor and without any hope left at all of ever getting a chance for a good job got nothing but to lose everything we had or close to it, end up on food stamps (after fighting like hell just to get even that), offered only commissions-only paying jobs which don't pay enough for the time worked or pay enough to be able to live, lack of access to affordable health and dental care, and saddled with student loans that we can't repay in our middle-aged years. That is what I got for doing "all the right things" and trying my damndest. And I am not supposed to be bitter about any of this?

I didn't go to college for a degree in selling insurance - which is what I do. I went to college for a degree in math/computer science because that is what the non-disabled, non-disadvantaged "experts" told me to do. Now I have a degree that I can wipe my ass with because I never got a chance to gain any work experience using those skills and building on them after graduating college and re-entering the workforce at age 35. In fact, I don't even remember how to write a simple program in C++ or Visual Basic anymore because I never got the chance to work in that type of job after getting my degree. The real kicker was when I received my very first appointment from an auto insurance carrier in order to sell their insurance, I was told by the agency sales manager that companies no longer consider any prospective agent a candidate for agency appointment unless they have a 4-yr degree!

I work 50-60 hrs per week. I must provide my own office supplies, computer, equipment, etc needed in order to work selling insurance. I get no health benefits and no base pay so that I can afford to buy food and pay the bills without some help with food stamps. This just isn't right. Work of any kind should pay enough to be able to live and there should be enough jobs to go around for everybody who wants to work and who needs a job and who got re-trained and whatnot in order to be able to work in something. They passed the ADA back in 1990 so that the government could shove tens of thousands of disabled people off of the SSI/SSDI rolls but the job opportunities still are not there for us. Proving age or disability discrimination in an "At-Will" state is nearly impossible so forget getting any justice when discriminated out of a chance for a job and into poverty and onto the food stamp rolls.

And I feel the very least I deserve working more hours than most is at least the right to some damn decent cooked food such as halibut, steak, chicken, veggies & salads instead of legumes, raw carrots or corn on the cob (which I can't eat as a denture wearer so the veggies I CAN eat have to be cooked). And I shouldn't have to justify my need for that to some snotty welfare caseworker when that same welfare caseworker is more than willing to help non-disabled young single mothers with everything including job placement plus help to purchase, repair and insure a car!

[Jacqueline]

Another point about help for the poor: I work in the thankless, commissions-only paying insurance racket as an independent agent selling auto and homeowners insurance. In that capacity, I learned that one's driving record counts less than one's credit score. Basically, thanks to a practice by the insurance industry of insurance-credit scoring, the good, safe driver with shit credit will pay 40%-50% more for auto insurance than an upper-middle class driver who might have a DUI or two plus a few speeding tickets but whose credit score is above 700. It costs more for the basic things you need to live or are required by law to have if you are poor.

Now the reasoning behind insurance credit scoring is that insurance companies feel that the poorer people, those with bad credit, are more likely to file claims and seek compensation in the event of a loss than the affluent becuase the affluent can afford to sit and think first before filing claims, weighing the potential of increased insurance rates as a result of filing a claim and therefore decide to not file a claim and absorb the loss with their own resources. But the poor don't have the financial resources to do that.

The problem with this logic behind insurance credit scoring is this:
The careless (and hence, more accident-prone driver)has as much of a chance of causing a loss to a poor person on food stamps with bad credit and no money as they do for causing a loss to a middle class driver with the resources to absorb the loss without filing a claim. Good drivers already pay for bad drivers when rated higher for living in urban areas, thus increasing risk exposure. But to "reward" a bad driver just because he or she is affluent and has a credit score above 700 (thus a good insurance score) by giving them the best rates based on the crackpot theory of "claims consciousness" is wrong. There would be alot less claims filed if bad drivers were kept off the road by being assessed across the board solely on their driving records and not given preferential treatment if they happen to be a part of this "700 Club".

That being said, let us now look at doing some basic math. Every dollar a poor person must spend for mandatory auto insurance (insurance is mandatory in PA)is a dollar they do NOT have to buy food without food stamps, pay their gas and electric bills without LIHEAP assistance, or pay for shelter without having to prevail upon some local charity (which may or may not help them). Given the trend of "white flight", of urban sprawl with the more well-off fleeing to the suburbs and the few REMAINING jobs here in America following suit by gravitating to the suburban industrial parks that are not accesssible by bus or subway, this all serves to leave the poorer people who are in the most need of a job with the least chance of landing - and keeping a job. Plus we have not considered the nepotism and discrimination factor in hiring practices. The Joint Economic Committe back in 1998 said that having a car was essential for getting and keeping a job.

But that is not the only thing. There also needs to be enough jobs for everybody and if that is not possible, then what right do the more fortunate ones have in committing the violence with the proverbial gun in the room (in response to Dylboz) of denying help for basic human needs to those who are poor through no fault of their own?

What right do the more fortunate ones who got lucky have in telling someone less fortunate that they don't deserve anything and if they couldn't get a chance for a good job oh well, too bad just starve to death, suffer further from unabated medical problems because of having no health insurance, and just drop dead out of sight and out of mind?

As far as unearned social privileges are concerned, which I believe Anarcissie and Antigone addressed quite well, those who got lucky or who got a helping hand up to get what they got are no more deserving of being able to live and no better than those of us who weren't that lucky: The marginalized disabled who are poor because they've been shoved off of SSI/SSDI but whom no one will hire or even give a chance for a good job, the unemployed who are now poor due to age discrimination in the job market, the working poor (including those of us working in commissions-only paying insurance sales jobs)who don't get paid adequately, and all the rest of the poor who have no chance to become successful because all the opportunities in this country have been off-shored, downsized or otherwise used up, limited with structural and social barriers, and are now gone. Like the old song goes "There's no more gold in California..... all the gold is in a bank in Beverly Hills in somebody else's name."

For every BMW-driving trust fund brat who didn't earn his or her good lot in life solely on his or her own merit with no helping hand (regardless of what form of help it was) there is a "gun in the room": the violence of class warfare committed against the poor (in the form of tax cuts for the rich), the powerless, and the helpless with cuts to the point of evisceration in food stamps, Medicaid, SSI/SSDI, and social security and Medicare - to redistribute money up the socio-economic ladder to the richest 1% for them to stash in off-shore bank accounts in Luxemburg or Switzerland. All of this is at the expense of those who didn't enjoy the unearned social privileges of being able to afford Ivy League college degrees and graduate degrees in law or medicine, who can't afford a 15 year old used Ford and who didn't have the unearned social privilege of the socio-economic ties of elitist nepotism to help them get in at a good job.

All of this is an act of violence because it is at the expense of forcibly taking food out of the mouths of those with nothing, it is depriving those in need of access to healthcare so they do not become sicker and die prematurely, and at the expense of funds to help the less fortunate keep warm in the winter as opposed to dying from freezing to death, hypothermia and pneumonia.

What right do you, Dylboz and the rest of the selfishness-justifying "haves" of making claims on the human right to life of others, on THEIR right to survive and be able to live and have a chance? What right do the lucky ones have in depriving everybody else of the basic needs of life and the fair fighting chances to be able to earn the money to be able to meet those needs?

And make no mistake about it, this IS a zero-sum game because for every single job opening that pays a living wage - NOT an 8 figure salary w/ a golden parachute - there are approximately 98 unemployed job applicants who are spending THEIR time, THEIR lives working at being "worthy" of a chance for that job that they desperately need to survive and support their families WITHOUT needing "shameful government hand-outs".

That means that for every job, each job applicant has - at best - a 1% chance at getting hired, earning a paycheck to be able to buy food, keep the gas and electric turned on in extreme weather, and afford medical and dental care. So for each one who gets a good job and the chance to live decently with some dignity, whether by sheer luck, by merit only (which is rarely the case these days) or by nepotism and unearned social privilege of "kowing the right people", of being non-disabled and under age 35, there are 98 others who get sent home poor and empty-handed with nothing. For those who are sent home poor and empty-handed with NO chances for a good job due to age or disability discrimination, or who must resort to delivering pizzas for $5-$6/hr (using personal vehicles), the programs of food stamps, LIHEAP and Medicaid have been gutted to give more money to the rich to boost their trust funds and to finance an unpopular war against other poor people in foreign lands. That is the REAL gun in the room, my friend.

[lc2]

Jacqueline,

You missed an important part of my aside about food stamps, which is that I said they should be expanded -- as in with $$. And I said that I support a voucher system (for 75%, not all benefits) similar to WIC in which there are choices on each voucher e.g. 1 jar of peanut butter _or_ 2# of dried beans _or_ 1 gallon of milk and approved cereals. In other words, a food program that gives people a fair shake at putting a balanced diet on the table, rather than forcing them to buy packs of broken ramen noodles and second-day cake to stretch their benefits to the end of the month. My spouse works in grocery retail and is appalled by the choices too many people are forced to make with the inadequate benefits they get -- they come to him asking if there's any damaged product in the back room they can go through. Nutrition is the last concern on their minds -- just how much food they can get to avoid being hungry. In the USA? It is not a judgment on recipients, it is a judgment on a gov't program that recognizes the importance of providing good nutrition for kids under 5 and pregnant and nursing moms (WIC) regardless of cost increases but fails to recognize that people cannot provide a month's worth of quality food on current food stamp benefits. This is a point I'm surprised you don't see since you are (accurately) aware of the ways in which the needs of childless adults are ignored in gov't programs. That's all I'm saying.

BTW, watch what you say about social workers ... my best friend is a social worker who grew up on HEAP, WIC, intermittent welfare, etc. and she is far from a snot-nosed trust funder. She is tough though because she's had to go it alone (no family to help; no children to help her qualify for assistance). She is now one of good old WM's newest hires and is looking for a second job at night -- made a couple of bad choices and is now in the same or worse boat as her former clients. Don't let your deserved bitterness cloud your perspective on this -- there are plenty of people who give attitude because they feel like they are getting the sh#tty end of the stick, too. Time we saw the difference between the power of caseworkers and people who can give away $125 of their personal funds to combat tobacco addiction (NYC Mayor Bloomberg, as noted in last Sunday's NYT). A laudable goal, but doesn't address the basic question of why in God's name someone should have $125 million in the first place. It's an embarrassment of riches.

[Jacqueline]

Lc2:
You didn't read my post correctly or you totally misunderstood it.
I was directing the "trust fund brats" commentary to the poster who by his/her own admission is a wealthy recipient by virtue of inheritance, a recipient of unearned social privilege and wealth who came off saying that we (those of us in support of social programs for the poor) have no right to make a claim on the money of the wealthy & successful in the form of taxes to support those who are far less fortunate who can't get good jobs or make enough money to be able to live. (I know for a fact that most welfare caseworkers do not earn enough money to afford a BMW and their income is earned, not inherited or otherwise gifted to them courtesy of a wealthy parent).

The remark I made about snotty welfare workers stands because it rightly describes the attitudes of those welfare caseworkers locally in my area who I have either personally encountered or know someone who has. And yes Lc2, alot of them DO act like it's their money and they DO power-trip and lord it over the poor whom they are supposed to be helping. They often do not tell you until they already drop the bomb in you that your food stamps or Medicaid is being cut, often taking far more away in benefits than what you are earning. And they don't give you any time to actually get back on your feet once your income goes so much as one dollar over the threshold even though you can't afford your husband's heart medicine for that dollar over the limit, or food on that dollar over the limit. See my point here?.

Maybe your friend is an exception but that still doesn't make the crap treatment right when most people who are forced as a matter of survival to apply for Medicaid or Food Stamps want a chance for a good job and the chance to live decently but can't get it if they can't get the clothing allowance they need in order to get professional/business clothes which they can't afford on their own, or if they can't get put in the job placement program which is solely reserved for young, healthy single mothers who do not face age discrimination in the job market that the poor older childless adults face who want a chance for a decent job with a living wage and health benefits just like everybody else.

The time someone in poverty must spend waiting, getting the run-around and getting what amounts to no help or a hand up (not to be confused with a hand out), is time they are not able to spend on job searching, collecting scrap metal to get some emergency money, or maybe investigating a self-employment venue that would uplift them. Meanwhile most caseworkers act all snotty like they just don't care because after all, it's not them -they've got their good paying jobs with security, benefits, paid sick days, paid vacation days and a retirement plan - something the average poor person would kill for a chance to have it like that. It is enough to wear anyone's patience after awhile.

[Jacqueline]

To Lc2: The point, in short, that I was trying to make is that when someone like Dylboz pisses and moans about how their money shouldn't be taxed to help the poor w/ life's basic needs has no idea what unearned social privileges have done for them (that the many lower-middle class and most of the poor never got), who ended up starting out in life on 3rd base because their parents got lucky in getting chances for good jobs and were able to give them advantages that many of us did not get, walk around with attitudes like they hit a triple....they need a reality check.

I would take your idea one step further. Instead of treating the poor as if they were a bunch of stupid children incapable of managing any money they might get, scrap the food stamps and scrap the voucher idea in favor of a guaranteed minimum income and state-wide (not federal) health insurance plans that go from $0 to market value on a sliding fee scale based on income. If they screw up and blow their money on stuff they shouldn't, then the onus is on them. You can't save someone from their own stupidity. But to have any kind of system that insults the poor, that is degrading to the poor who have suffered already just from being poor, simply is not right.

For example, when you are so poor that you can't get your gas turned back on in order to have cooking, hot water and heating fuel, but can't get a hot meal on a cold winter day because you cannot buy a hot already-prepared rotisserie chicken for $4 with your food stamps...is wrong.

The other point I was trying to make is that many of us who are middle-aged, disabled and now consequently poor certainly didn't have a poverty lifestyle in mind when we did "all the right things", strove to get unaffordable educations at steep student loan debts in order to "re-train", etc. This is something that poor older adults without kids get no recognition or consideration for while all the help (what help there is) and all the job placement programs, seems to go to young, healthy parents who have far better chances of getting good jobs than the older people due to age and disability discrimination.

Before starting the insurance agency venture as a theater of last resort, with NO money, our utilities shut off and NO access to any credit or business loans whatsoever, I was actively applying for jobs appropriate to my physical capabilities and education. When I gained weight from aging plus the stress from being desperately poor with no hope in sight, having no professional clothes that fit me anymore to be able to go on job interviews with, I tried to get the help from welfare with the clothing allowance that they help the single mothers with.

I was told by the Dept of Welfare that as a very poor person, I qualified for this help. This was when my ailing husband and I had a total monthly household income of $604/mo social security to live on and keep a roof over our heads. I filled out the forms and then waited and waited and waited. Heard nothing until 4 months later when I got a letter from welfare saying I didn't meet their criteria for getting helped with job interview clothes. I called the caseworker to ask why (since a family of 2 on an income of $604/mo is certainly poor enough).

The caseworker told me that I didn't qualify because I was not participating in welfare's training and job placement program (SPOC) for a job in the medical field such as medical/dental office assistant or CNA. I then asked why my 4800+ resumes, applications, civil service exams, etc did not count since I was never offered the opportunity through welfare to participate in SPOC. She then told me that because I wasn't a single mother with children under age 18, I didn't qualify to be able to be in their SPOC program!

I was discriminated against by a government program that is supposed to help the poor and those with the least advantages for being able to get jobs because I am a middle-aged disabled woman without small kids and couldn't get the clothing I needed to be able to continue applying for jobs on my own, but couldn't get to participate in the SPOC program where I would have been guaranteed job placement at the end of the program, and consequently qualify for the clothing I badly needed. But as a food stamp and Medicaid recipient, I was still told by welfare that I had to prove I was actively seeking gainful employment. All I had to wear for almost a year was two pairs of old sweatpants and a few of my husband's shirts. This is what I was supposed to wear to job interviews. They matched nicely with the missing/rotting teeth that I had no means to get taken care of and got no help for during the several years I was jobless, poor and without health & dental benefits. Medicaid would not pay for an upper denture after I lost all my upper front teeth. No dentist would treat me because I hadn't the money or the insurance to pay for care. This is how I had to present myself to prospective employers for 4 1/2 years.

Desperate and taking matters into my own hands, we used my husband's social security check to buy a sewing machine and some fabrics and without ever having had any formal training, I taught myself how to make my own professional clothes - skirt suits, pant suits, blazers, etc. I can now proudly add "tailor" to my list of "marketable skills". Since our electric and gas were cut off because we were too poor to pay the bills and the LIHEAP help wasn't enough to keep the utility companies from shutting us off, we had to run an extension cord from a sympathetic neighbor's to run the computer when I started the insurance selling venture. At night, the computer would be unplugged and I would then plug in the sewing machine and worked by sewing machine light and candle light in order to see to make outfits just so I'd have something to wear - just in case one of those 4800 jobs I previously applied for actually called me for an interview and hired me and also so I would be dressed appropriately to meet with insurance company agency sales manager reps to get appointed from the carriers to sell their insurances. Of course, I also never smiled and had to try to hide my broken/rotting or missing front teeth whenever I spoke. I never smiled in 4 1/2 years.

But in having to buy the sewing machine and the materials, we had to forego paying our mortgage which at that point had put us 90 days delinquent - resulting in foreclosure notice from the bank. We were without gas and electric for a year. I barely made enough in selling auto insurance in my living room/office w/ my crappy old used furniture to manage to keep our ome and keep us from ending up destitute out on the streets pushing what we could carry in shopping carts and sleeping under a bridge somewhere. It wasn't until I got a "windfall" last year at the end of the very end of the year that I was able to afford the extractions and upper denture I needed so at least I could smile, speak normally, and eat stuff other than scrambled eggs, mashed potatoes, Ramen Noodles and store-brand soups.

We never got any help. But I did get told by countless thoughtless assholes that if I was poor and without a good job, it was my own fault for "not trying hard enough" and that with my education I shouldn't be poor if I was really trying hard enough because America is the "land of opportunity". Yep, America the Beautiful, greatest country in the world.... as long as you don't get older, don't become disabled or don't end up unemployed in your middle-aged years.

[mandie]

Faux Real wrote in a blog: "Barbara Ehrenreich wrote recently on this, and I sat on her post for weeks not knowing how to address it. The truth is that my lack of success, my disappointment with myself and my circumstances, has led me down a very difficult path, one of severe depression and yes, suicidal thoughts." It has had a profound effect on this blogger.

[Monica]

If even the cheapest clothes were out of the question, wouldn't it have been better to buy at a second-hand store? Some would actually make sure clothes are in good condition, and certainly not any worse than sweatpants. I got a nice blazer at the Salvation Army store for $4, and it is not obvious that I did not simply buy it new a while ago. In fact, it does not look obviously old. And I don't know if there is any church or charity in your city that could give you any clothes, but in some cities, people would simply give away for free things they no longer need. That's how I got my microwave oven. To find out about that, you have to subscribe to a mailing list (of course, you need Internet access and an email account). The one I know about is called Freecycle. It's not sure that you would have found exactly what you need, but sometimes, it happens. For teeth, there are some thin dentures (veneer) used to cover teeth (some, for instance, Imako Cosmetic Teeth, are marketed for the very purpose of being able to smile again in social situations without geting real dental work). Even that may cost too much for someone with so little money, but it's nice to know. You may find that they look obviously fake in real life (they are great for pictures, for example), but then, it's better than having really bad teeth. I actually tried something like that.

[jm]

Imako Cosmetic Teeth. Where do I find out more?

[Jacqueline]

Monica: Because I gained weight due to stress and also aging, getting anything that fit me that was in good shape from the places you cited was not possible. When I was younger and thinner, I too could easily find clothes in thrift stores like the Salvation Army. That is not the case now that I am considerably older and 5 sizes bigger than when I was 23.

Besides, once your metabolism goes haywire, you never know if the outfit you buy today will fit you in a week or two. This is what I had to deal with. Plus, NONE of the local charities here had any professional clothes for heavy women. Hence I had no choice bu to resort to making my own. But learning hopw to become proficient in tailoring takes TIME and the first couple of outfits are not going to come out right, especially when you start from scratch with NO knowledge in how to sew or follow a pattrn - as I did. I still have difficulty following an unfamiliar pattern. Burda is the most difficult. McCalls and Vogue are the easiest.

As far as the veneer dentures Imako (?) teeth, I had never heard about them. And I used the Internet to try to find pro-bono dentists back then. I also did a search on alternative dental solutions back then and nothing came up in my online searches back then insofar as solutions for those unable to afford dentures. Of course, you missed the point entirely which was that when I needed help the most, I couldn't get any and what little help with food stamps we finally got - we got looked down on for when we were having to use them. ANd now that I no longer need the food stamps (I make $82/mo too much), and was able to save our home plus get my denture AND get the utilities back on after having been without utilities for a year, that does not mean I will ever forget the horror of being that freakin' poor while nobody else cared!

[Monica]

I did not miss the point that it was very hard. It's just that, of course, if a sewing machine is going to make a difference between getting or not getting a foreclosure notice, I thought it was obvious that, in the short run, cheap clothes were a better idea. It is true that large-sized women may have trouble finding clothes. I am one myself, although not excessively so. I even know where to buy good plus-sized clothes but then, they may have been too expensive at the time. At this time, I prefer Junonia (you don't have to pay full prices, because they keep offering all kinds of sales). It is on purpose that I did not explain in more detail where to find things like dentures or mention any Web sites, since I don't want to look like a spammer and I did mention key words and a brand name. That's all it takes to find the information on Google. And I have also been very poor myself without even being eligible to any kind of government help because I came to Canada as an immigrant sponsored for 10 years by my father who later kicked me out of his apartment. That is, until I was 29, I was not even entitled to any welfare benefits whatsoever. It's not that it was my intention to use them for a long time, but I had no Canadian work experience and for a while after my father kicked me out, I had no income. That didn't last forever, and I even went to university, but I know how dire poverty feels. To this day, I hate apples because that's what my parents used to give me to help me out, together with a chicken (good enough, but not enough to eat for a week or two, and I did not have money to buy more food). In case you wonder: it is not on the apples and chicken that I became a plus-sized women. That was a long time ago. I gained weight when I became extremely busy to the point that I hardly had any time to move. There was a time when I used to actually sleep at the office quite often (I don't drive and it was hard to get transportation at night). Eventually, I just got an apartment that is really close.

[Jacqueline]

Monica: Buying the sewing machine and materials did not - by itself - make the difference in getting a foreclosure notice. That would have happened the month following anyway irregardless because we just didn't have any money, or any way of getting any money. Clothing sales? We were way too poor! Couldn't even afford to shop at Goodwill! In fact, I still don't make enough money to be able to afford to buy any clothing. I am barely making enough commissions-only pay selling insurance to keep our utilities on and our house from going into foreclosure - again.

ALso you must consider this, in the outside chance I would have gotten hired, I would have needed more than just one or two outfits to get through the first month of employment until I could afford to buy clothes.

When you are that poor, that close to the edge for any length of time (I am not talking a couple months - I am talking YEARS), it makes perfect sense to try to do what you can to have enough clothes when you are desperately and aggressively active in a job hunt. Now you can't really present yourself without the right clothing and expect to get a job so you can save your home (it was bad enough having to face people missing my top four front teeth, and trying my damndest to hide that!). And I couldn't get anything in my size ( I wear a US size 20) at the charity places (which charged like $5/clothing item).

Also, not to be rude, but unlike you, my husband who is much older and on social security, and me - we didn't have parents to turn to for ANY help at all. We had NO family to help us. His parents have been dead a long time. And his adult kids are too self-absorbed and selfish to give a crap about anyone but themselves. And his daughter makes about $20,000/yr (with only a HS diploma) and is married to a city worker who makes $50,000/yr which is a hell of alot more money than I ever got to make, and now that I am only a few months away from age 40 and have a 10 year gap in my work history due to having a disability, I stand NO chance of EVER getting a good job, or even a living-wage job, even though I did "all the right things" - like getting a college education and overcoming some pretty difficult obstacles to do so (learning disability, poverty, health problems).

[Monica]

I'm pretty sure that was really hard. However, my parents were helping me very little, and I did not even have the meager support otherwise available to other people. I had no food stamps (in fact, I believe they don't even exist here). I simply did not have the money to complete my diet (for instance, by adding some "helper food" like rice to that chicken). Can you imagine not even having money for that? I was also young and a recent immigrant, so, on one hand, I did not have the know-how that may have helped me make some choices I can make now (for instance, to eat gruel for breakfast). In my country, I had never seen that, and cereal was a snack, not a breakfast staple (in fact, there were hardly any varieties). On the other hand, I had trouble finding work without nevertheless being in a position to say that I am handicapped (not that I would have had anything to gain if I tried). For instance, you may say that a basically healthy person with basic language skills or better can always get a menial job. However, even though I was young and thin at the time, I had trouble standing up for extended periods. I was able to walk and to stand up, but doing so for a whole day was very hard, especially on my back. Or, what kind of desk job would I have been able to get, with 12 years of education in a different country and language, somewhat insufficient language skills for an office job (if you don't think they are insufficient, that's because I have improved since), a foreign accent and limited experience in my new country? I also happen to be an introvert. I like reading and intellectual occupations rather than interactions with people. Sewing machine operators may sit down, but I was a clumsy person who tried to learn that skill while in school and had trouble doing so (I was doing better in more intellectually-oriented subjects). It is true that I did not try for too long. So, in order to make myself employable, I had to get an education, which I eventually did, and I'm not saying that someone should have supported me until I turned 29 or that there was no hope for me, but the fact is that for a while, I was really very poor without even having the resources and know-how available to a person who grew up here, a husband, things accumulated while working in the past, a small income, etc.

I studied translation. While I happen to work in an office, this is one of the few occupations where working from home is practically the norm. That was my opportunity, since I'm not very good at sales or sewing. But that may not be a realistic option for someone who does not already possess a fairly good grasp on at least one foreign language or who can't get a degree, nor is it particularly well-paid, and hours are often long and/or odd.

I wonder where I would be now, if I did not at least have some skills in that area. It is only now, in my 30s, that I became a decent cook (in fact, I'm actually canning food), and I still can't sew. I know better what to say to people but I like them even less, since I had to learn to become self-reliant and, being very busy, I often find that they are just in my way while I'm trying to enjoy what little spare time I have. And I find it frustrating that, having been unable to afford food, now that I can afford it, I have to voluntarily reduce my caloric intake and waste time trying to burn more calories when I'm not busy earning the money to buy the food they come from.

[Steve Adams]

One of the most ignorant and bigoted postes I've read all year. Try slandering (or libeling) Islam the way you just did Protestantism and see what happens. And, for the record, I am definitely NOT a Calvinist. I just hate bigotry.