What it means to be poor and hungry in America
By Pauline Arrillaga
The Associated Press
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 03.01.2009
link read the full story here, but just wanted to point out a few arguments...
'A mouse scurries by, but Chilton doesn't flinch.' What a poetic understatement about the creeping socialism our country is facing.
"And how, at times, she makes chicken for her children but eats Oodles of Noodles herself." Wait a second, I like Ramen - but here is a funny thing - Oodles of Noodles is the 'self-contained' ramen in a cup. It costs 4 times what a bag of ramen costs. Simple (and I mean simple) math tells us that she could be saving significant money buy buying smarter. Especially when 60 cents means the difference between one cup o noodles and 4 bags o noodles.
"Tianna Gaines is her name. She is 29, black, with twin babies and a toddler, facing eviction because she's $300 behind on rent." Again, why mention that she is black? Are we all not equal, the same, etc... so what does color have to do with it? Should everytime we mention Pres. Obama in paper, should it look like this. 'Today Pres. Obama, who is 45 and black, etc....' Yeah, that would go over well...
"Hers is not the picture of hunger that Americans are accustomed to seeing. She isn't emaciated, like those living in squalid conditions in famine-stricken countries, but she is underweight and malnourished, often fed chips and sugary drinks instead of milk and formula." Wow, chips and soda is expensive. Again, shop smart... not at the local convenience store, which I am sure is what is going on here - all to often I see folks shopping for groceries at the local Circle K. That's fine if you are on a road trip, don't know the area, and can afford paying extra for the convenience. But when you cannot, like most folks on food stamps, convenience should not take the place of frugality. Chips and a soda - $2.50 if you are lucky. $2.50 can buy a gallon of milk (on sale), 2 frozen juices, 2 loaves of bread, or a bunch of bananas. Or 3 cups o noodles. Or 15 bags of Ramen! (not that ramen is healthy, mind you, but better than chips and soda)
"What bothers Chilton is that the numbers, startling as they are in a country as rich as this one, seem to do little to bring about lasting change. And that's not an easy thing for a number-cruncher to admit." And the meat of the argument: Socialism does not make the poor richer. It makes the rich poorer.
"So when she learned she'd won a $100,000 award in late 2007, she ignored suggestions that she take a vacation and instead started work on "Witnesses to Hunger." She purchased digital cameras and distributed fliers to some of the mothers who had been interviewed over the years." Wow, a private sector solution! Someone WILLINGLY making the choice on how and to whom to spend their money, not government dictating how, when, where, and to whom. You can throw your own pearls into the slop, don't throw mine.
"If only it was that easy. Izquierdo pays $400 in housing every month, $80 for day care, $54 for the phone, $60 for electricity, $80 on Pampers and baby wipes, another $80 or so on transportation, leaving a few hundred dollars for food, health care and anything else she needs for herself, her 3-year-old daughter Leylanie and 1-year-old son Aidan." I don't mean to sound jaded, however, the breakdown of the family, and sexual promiscuity is at fault here - not unemployment, lack of services, etc... single parent, 2 count them 2 kids. Maybe there is something else to this story, we'll never know since it is not told. Yet, are we doing anything to combat the loss of family structure? The loss of sexual restraint? No, instead we create programs that teach our kids the "world" view on sex. We provide programs and welfare that reward based on numbers - and the wonder why these mothers have more kids then they can handle.
It's time to start treating the cause of the problem, instead of putting band-aids on the outcomes!
Showing posts with label daily star. Show all posts
Showing posts with label daily star. Show all posts
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Is this what we get to look forward to?
First of all, I am printing the important part of the Daily Star article here, since they only keep them up for 7 days:
Tucson Region
Rio Nuevo bond money shifted again
By Rob O'Dell
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 02.19.2009
advertisementRio Nuevo has changed course again. The City Council voted 6-0 Wednesday to redirect money from its recent bond sale to projects "like" revamping the Tucson Convention Center and a new convention hotel.
...
Details of what projects will get more money, or lose funding — or even when the city will have the new plan ready — were not available, other than the money should go toward infrastructure and revenue- and job-generating projects.
...
The council also criticized a Sunday Arizona Daily Star story that estimated it will cost taxpayers $10 million more in interest because the city went to the bond market in December, when interest rates were highly volatile and other communities were postponing bond sales.
Shawn Dralle, the city's bond adviser, said the markets were so chaotic toward the end of 2008 that no one could predict future interest rates. To look back in hindsight at the sale eight weeks later is "disingenuous," Dralle said.
Star Managing Editor Therese Hayt said the newspaper stands by its story. "They went into the market when it was sky-high. Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said.
...
On StarNet: Check out a searchable database of where the Rio Nuevo money went at azstarnet.com/special/rionuevosummary
I want to draw attention to something here. The Council wanted to "jump-start" the Rio Nuevo project (and keep it alive) by stimulating it with 80 million dollars. Dollars gained through bonds. Now, governments have three ways of raising funds: raise taxes, sell bonds (at interest), or print money. Well, there is no tax base in Tucson right now since there is no business, and the only group that can print money is the Feds, so City Council sold bonds.
At a ridiculous rate.
Since NO ONE is buying bonds right now.
And Tucsonans are upset that we wasted all this money starting projects that are only partially funded or have no funding. And that it's going to cost Tucson $10 MILLION in interest to pay off these failed projects. Again: ""Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said."
Fast forward a few years, if you will.
The U.S. has spent $750 BILLION on stimulating the economy by starting programs or providing intitial funding on thousands of pet projects. $750 BILLION that is raised in three ways - raising taxes, selling bonds, or printing money. Raising taxes on a society that is struggling will stall any kind of recovery quicker than anything. Printing money will create hyper-inflation and/or stag-flation. So we sell bonds.
Bonds that nobody wants to buy.
How do we make them buy the bonds? Make it lucrative to do so. And how? Issue them with a high interest rate. A rate that will come back to haunt us, just like the Rio Nuevo bonds of just last December are hauting us already!
By the way, $750 Billion is 9,375 times bigger than $80 Million. Again: ""Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said."
Tucson Region
Rio Nuevo bond money shifted again
By Rob O'Dell
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 02.19.2009
advertisementRio Nuevo has changed course again. The City Council voted 6-0 Wednesday to redirect money from its recent bond sale to projects "like" revamping the Tucson Convention Center and a new convention hotel.
...
Details of what projects will get more money, or lose funding — or even when the city will have the new plan ready — were not available, other than the money should go toward infrastructure and revenue- and job-generating projects.
...
The council also criticized a Sunday Arizona Daily Star story that estimated it will cost taxpayers $10 million more in interest because the city went to the bond market in December, when interest rates were highly volatile and other communities were postponing bond sales.
Shawn Dralle, the city's bond adviser, said the markets were so chaotic toward the end of 2008 that no one could predict future interest rates. To look back in hindsight at the sale eight weeks later is "disingenuous," Dralle said.
Star Managing Editor Therese Hayt said the newspaper stands by its story. "They went into the market when it was sky-high. Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said.
...
On StarNet: Check out a searchable database of where the Rio Nuevo money went at azstarnet.com/special/rionuevosummary
I want to draw attention to something here. The Council wanted to "jump-start" the Rio Nuevo project (and keep it alive) by stimulating it with 80 million dollars. Dollars gained through bonds. Now, governments have three ways of raising funds: raise taxes, sell bonds (at interest), or print money. Well, there is no tax base in Tucson right now since there is no business, and the only group that can print money is the Feds, so City Council sold bonds.
At a ridiculous rate.
Since NO ONE is buying bonds right now.
And Tucsonans are upset that we wasted all this money starting projects that are only partially funded or have no funding. And that it's going to cost Tucson $10 MILLION in interest to pay off these failed projects. Again: ""Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said."
Fast forward a few years, if you will.
The U.S. has spent $750 BILLION on stimulating the economy by starting programs or providing intitial funding on thousands of pet projects. $750 BILLION that is raised in three ways - raising taxes, selling bonds, or printing money. Raising taxes on a society that is struggling will stall any kind of recovery quicker than anything. Printing money will create hyper-inflation and/or stag-flation. So we sell bonds.
Bonds that nobody wants to buy.
How do we make them buy the bonds? Make it lucrative to do so. And how? Issue them with a high interest rate. A rate that will come back to haunt us, just like the Rio Nuevo bonds of just last December are hauting us already!
By the way, $750 Billion is 9,375 times bigger than $80 Million. Again: ""Taxpayers are now on the hook for all that interest, which is not in the taxpayers' interest," she said."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
