Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsSunday, May 18, 2008 6:11 PM CDT
Comments Comments (260) | E-mail this page E-mail this page | Print this page Print this page | Enlarge type Enlarge type | Reduce type Reduce type | Search archives Search archives | RSS RSS feeds | Add to My Yahoo! Add to My Yahoo!
Food stamp recipients struggle through the month
By Don Babwin
Associated Press
Advertisement

CHICAGO — Danielle Brown stands outside a South Side market at midnight, braving the spring chill for her first chance to buy groceries since her food stamps ran out nearly two weeks ago.

For days, Brown has been turning cans of “whatever we got in the cabinet” into breakfast, lunch and dinner for her children, ages 1 and 3, who finished off the last of the milk and cereal long ago.

“Ain’t got no food left, the kids are probably hungry,” said Brown, a 23-year-old single mother who relies heavily on her $312 monthly allotment of food stamps — a ration adjusted just once a year, in October.

This is what the skyrocketing cost of food looks like at street level: Poor people whose food stamps don’t buy as much as they once did rushing into a store in the dead of night, filling shopping carts with cereal, eggs and milk so their kids can wake up on the first day of the month to a decent meal.

Here’s what it looks like another way: The number of Americans relying on food stamps has climbed 6.1 percent in the past year, from 26.1 million in February 2007 to 27.7 million in February this year. The sputtering economy, persistent unemployment and the mortgage crisis have all contributed to the increase. The U.S. Agriculture Department expects the overall number of participants to reach 28 million next year.

“People with incomes below the poverty threshold are in dire straits because not only are food prices increasing but the food stamps they are receiving have not increased,” said Dr. John Cook, an associate professor at Boston University’s medical school who has studied the food stamp program, particularly how it affects children.

On the south side of Chicago, what it means is that people like Danielle Brown wait for the stroke of midnight, when one month gives way to another and brings a new allotment of food stamps.

Dennis Kladis began opening his family-owned One Stop Food & Liquors once a month at midnight nine months ago to give desperate families a chance to buy food as soon as possible.

“I’m telling you, by the end of the month they’re just dying to get back to the first,” said Kladis, who has watched other area stores follow his lead.

For Lynda Wheeler, who receives $281 in food stamps each month, the rhythm of life has been one of shopping for food, running out of food and turning to churches, food pantries and friends for food. And all the while, she is doing things such as cutting milk with water to make it last a bit longer.

“You get it on the first and it runs out by the 14th and 15th,” said Wheeler, a single mom who brought her 14-year-old son and 2-year-old daughter shopping at midnight with the Link card, the Illinois version of food stamps.

The consumer price index for food rose 5 percent last year, the highest gain in nearly two decades. It is especially grim news for the poor.

Start with milk. Between March 2007 and this year, a gallon of milk jumped from just over $3 a gallon to nearly $3.80, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. During the same period, eggs climbed from about $1.60 a dozen to $2.20. Meanwhile, everything from white bread to chicken to tomatoes is more expensive than it was last year.

Just last summer, the maximum food stamp payment — $542 a month for a family of four with a gross income of no more than $2,238 — was enough to cover the USDA’s “thrifty food plan,” a bare-bones diet that meets minimal nutritional needs. Studies show that allotment now falls about $25 short, Cook said.

Because food stamp allotments are adjusted every fall based on the federal food inflation rate, recipients are months away from getting any relief. But even when that relief comes, advocates say, it won’t come close to keeping pace with rising costs.

And just getting to the store is a lot more expensive. Since October, the cost of gas has shot up nationally from $2.70 a gallon to $3.62, according to the Lundberg Survey, a petroleum market research firm. With 31 cents of that jump in the last month alone, Lundberg says there is a good chance the price will top $4 a gallon by the end of the summer.

USDA spokeswoman Jean Daniel said the agency is trying to help and noted recipes for inexpensive meals are posted on the agency Web site.

But she said there is only so much food stamp programs can — or were meant — to do.

“Food stamps were designed to be a supplement to the food budget, (they) were never intended to be the entire budget,” she said.

If the USDA pulls $1.7 billion from a contingency fund of $6 billion this year to support the food stamp program, as it expects to do, that would be the largest withdrawal since $2 billion was pulled out after Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

On Thursday, the Senate passed a five-year, $300 billion farm bill that includes $200 billion for nutrition programs such as food stamps and emergency food aid for the needy. Daniel said it was too early to say how that will affect benefits to food stamp recipients and she knew of no provision in the bill to make the annual adjustment before the fall.

For now, many of the needy, including many in Kladis’ store pushing carts laden with soda pop, bags of cookies and chips — much of it cheaper than healthier food — are doing what they can to stretch their shrinking buying power.

“The bottom line is, a mother trying to feed her kids is not really picky about what she puts in their bellies,” said Dan Gibbons, executive director of the Chicago Anti-Hunger Federation. “She just wants them full.”



Food stamp program



A history of food stamps in the United States:

1939-1943: People buy orange stamps equal to their normal food expenses; for every dollar of orange stamps purchased, they receive an extra 50 cents in blue stamps to purchase surplus food.

1961: President John F. Kennedy signs his first executive order to expand food distribution and announces on Feb. 2 that food stamp pilot programs will be initiated.

1964: The programs expanded from eight areas to 43, with 380,000 people in 22 states participating. President Lyndon Johnson requests Congress pass legislation making the Food Stamp Program permanent and signs into law the Food Stamp Act of 1964.

1965-1971: The number of people receiving food stamps climbs past 561,000 in 1965, then beyond 1 million in 1966, 3 million in 1969 and 10 million in 1971.

1974: The Food Stamp Program begins operation nationwide July 1.

1988: Development of electronic benefit delivery systems begins, leading to issuance of plastic cards instead of paper food stamps.

2008: The total cost of the program exceeds $33 billion, up from $2.8 billion three decades ago; 27.7 million people participate as of February.

Source: United States Department of Agriculture.

Take a look
Lynda Wheeler shops with her daughter, Jaime, 2, shortly after midnight at One Stop Food & Liquors on Chicago's South Side on May, 1, 2008. The market doors open at midnight on the first of each month for the express purpose of letting her and a dozen or so others to start shopping the instant they have access to the new month's allotment of food stamps. (AP Photo/Paul Beaty)
Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 260 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

leroymom wrote on Jun 1, 2008 7:30 PM:

" I have to say that I have no sympathy for these parents, only the children. I was a single mom, as well. And I had nobody to run to for financial assistance. But you know what? I went out and got not one, but two jobs to support my child and myself. Things were tight, but no one felt sorry enough for me to hand me $312 a month in free food. I was lucky to have $200 a month for food, of my own $$. But I made it work. If people quit having parties and feeding the neighborhood, then they could make their link card last. If not, once again, get a job like everybody else. News flash, nobody really likes to work, but they do. Life's full of choices, and these people would rather have everything handed to them than go out and earn it. But as screwed up as our system is, the government doesn't want to help those who are helping themselves. They only want to help those who are too lazy to work. "

LexiLee wrote on Jun 1, 2008 5:24 PM:

" Before the food stamp program, who did people turn to: friends & family. I raised 2 children (two & four) by myself when husband was out of the picture. I didn't like daycare either, but they survived. Yeah, I worked so I could feed, house and clothe them. I had these two children, and took them to raise as best I could. Both graduated from college; one got a full ride scholarship. I supported my own w/o assistance. Why should I have to support welfare children ? This kind of assistance from tax dollars should be to support our vets, especially disabled vets. Current program stinks! "

HAPPY ONE wrote on Jun 1, 2008 4:25 PM:

" still boils down to a system that needs to have better monitoring of use. Limits on types of purchases, continue as just a supplement,limit to cover only first few people (no matter how many kids you continue to have) and limit to how long can be on it. Should only be used as tool to assist persons and encourage them to work on getting job/education to get job, to support themselves without taxpayers dollars.
The whole system is way off what it was set up for initially.It rewards some people for doing nothing but having children they couldn't afford without it, and sitting on their butts all day.Take them off after time limit, and make them get JOBS- just like the rest of us. "

editorgirl62 wrote on Jun 1, 2008 8:51 AM:

" I cannot deny that there are many out there cheating the system and getting assistance when they either don't need it or are perfectly capable of working. However, there are those who really need the help. I became disabled and was ordered by a neurologist not to work. I was owed nearly $50,000 in child support but wasn't getting it. I had worked all my life, since age 15. I had three children I was raising alone - I had no choice but to apply for a Link card and medical card. I had paid taxes all those years I worked, so my taxes helped pay for my assistance. That was over 6 years ago, and I haven't need assistance in a long time. If people really need it, I'd rather have my tax dollars supporting those here at home than going to buy new $30,000 toilets for politicians. Wouldn't you? "

timmey wrote on Jun 1, 2008 6:03 AM:

" Jipsi-
Your comment probably speeks for less than 5% of all welfare cases. Less than 5% are probably legitamite cases. SAD "

timmey wrote on Jun 1, 2008 6:00 AM:

" The people on welfare did it to themselves! Most of these low incomer's on welfare have 3,4 or 5 kids and probably could barely support themselves. If you cant afford to live by yourself then you need to stop having children. Its funny that they whine about not getting enough money from the government "i mean taking it from the working man" and most of them are pregnant with their 3 or 4th kid. STOP HAVING CHILDREN THAT YOU CANT AFFORD TO PAY FOR AND YOU WOULDNT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH MONEY!!!!!!!!!!! "

jipsi wrote on May 31, 2008 11:26 PM:

" to Poster:
And, to your other post ('she should've thought of things BEFORE having 7 kids'???): almost NONE of us have the ability to see into the future, including yourself. Everyone here, married, with kids, happy, working... can be in a TOTALLY different place a year from now, by NO FAULT of their own.
And guess what? The kids don't just 'go away', like everything else may have. You still have to be a good parent and raise them, even though circumstances change (spouses die, divorces happen, businesses fold, cancer or debilitating injury happens, etc.). It goes NO WHERE to condemn parents for the children they HAVE when hard luck steps in.
Although there are sad exceptions, most parents try NOT to have kids when their financial situation is in turmoil. Remember that for every system-abuser you might see, there are surely DOZENS of genuinely in-need recipients that use their benefits wisely as they try to get BACK on their feet, with their families intact. "

jipsi wrote on May 31, 2008 11:22 PM:

" A 30 hour a week job is the logical solution for a single parent of school-age children (especially if there are more than 2 or 3): many day-care centers will not accept children over 10 or 12, yet this is still too young for these kids to go home to an empty house after school! Finding a neighbor or friend to 'keep an eye on things' for you while you finish your 8 hour workday (in a 40 hour a week scenario) is easier said than done!
I know *I* had to rearrange MY workday hours from 40-48 a week, to 30 a week, for a few years, too, while mine were in that transitional period, and I STILL don't trust my kids alone in the house as teens... :-)
I believe the 30 hours a week the lady in question here works is out of NECESSITY, not choice. She IS, after all, a PARENT first. "

Livesinbtown wrote on May 31, 2008 9:42 PM:

" I am a mother of 2 and for the last 3 months I have got $406 in link and section 8 where I pay no rent. You sit up here a judge people for situation that you don't know about. Myself for example I stayed in home sweet home mission for 7 months after I left my abusive husband of 6 years with my two kids. Now I am finally getting back on my feet with the help of food stamps and section 8. I am a full time student at ISU AND I am looking for employment. I don't plan on having to support my family with government assistance all my life, but these programs are out there to help people so don't get down on someone when they need a little help. "

poster wrote on May 31, 2008 7:59 PM:

" cont. there are cases that need the assistance.. My aunt is mentally ill she needs it. Having 15 kids isnt a good enough excuse for me. I get that some people are disabled or whatever but I see alot of welfare cases where i am and trust me most of them are not such cases. Also, let me say many of the welfare cases i see are not demoralized in the least bit. One story for you. I scrape all through the house to find enough change to buy one Lb of gorund beef,a nd stand in line behind one woman, two carts and all kinds of steaks, chicken, chips, and other name brand foods. If I didnt have to buy her food I couldve afforded that hamburger and maybe even had a bill not change to pay with. NO SYMPATHY FROM ME. "

poster wrote on May 31, 2008 7:55 PM:

" All I have to say is: yes the war and the money I hve to spend on that makes me mad, spending 4 dollars a gallon makes me mad, and paying for everyone on welfare makes me mad as well. Now that I have cleared that up let me say: if you have 7 kids you ahve to work more than 30 hours a week. Your choice to reproduce now you have to work for it. I work 45 hours a week and have one child. If you dont trust a daycare so you cant work than again you shouldnt have kids. Noone enjoys sending their kids to daycare but we suck it up. "

jipsi wrote on May 31, 2008 1:20 AM:

" to 'usetoliveinbloomington': First, Hang in there. Don't stop working, and above all don't let the abusers AND the critics (there are quite a few here) get you down.
Second, and not as important, but you might want to keep it in mind: never use ALL CAPS in 'talking' online. It is viewed as SHOUTING, and considered rude and immature, so others might not read your post enough to know there's substance therein...

So many years I've struggled, myself, my children bereft of a Dad (and co-breadwinner) because he was just 'not ready' (EVER) to be a contributing father, to feed, shelter and raise them on my own using combinations of coupons, assistance, tips (from odd waitressing jobs) and my wits. Like you, it made me despondant seeing so many others getting away with milking 'the system'. But they're building their life with LIES and deceit, a very shaky structure, and the children will suffer for it in the long run.

In the end, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, some of us get to go to bed at night knowing we've at least got our integrity going for us.
Good luck. "

jipsi wrote on May 31, 2008 1:15 AM:

" to good ol boy:

You replied to 'usetoliveinbloomington' with an ARROGANCE that totally belies any credibility your comment might've shared.
Why speak so condescendingly TO another human being, especially one who is obviously struggling to work and take care of a family by herself and thought enough to post a comment? It's bad enough you speak so, ABOUT people down on their luck, just lumping them in with the drug users, gang bangers and 'welfare pros'... but you litter your 'responses' to hers with ambiguity and saracsm! Do you believe all 'poor' folk are STUPID, too??

And listen: She may be on assistance, but she's using HER tax dollar, NOT 'yours', because she is a tax-payer herself!
I'd call you an 'Archie Bunker', but that would be a kindness and, hence, misplaced... "

LexiLee wrote on May 31, 2008 12:36 AM:

" Bumper sticker seen around town: If ya can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. I can't believe this food welfare program is for 5 years. Does it really terminate after 5 years? I'm thinking that probably doesn't happen. But, I will be writing to my legislators (Again). I would encourage the rest of the posters who are fed up with the way this systems works to also write to the people who pass those the laws for these programs. They are the only ones who determine how and when to suck more money out the taxpaying public. Don't delay - - write today. "

alwayssomething wrote on May 30, 2008 10:52 PM:

" something is definately wrong with the system....when we lived in south carolina there was a family of different race than we and both drove caddies had better house 5 kids etc....we really struggled for what we had...found out later that they were living off the government...neither worked...would just have another baby when the younger ones got too old to be on the card. We had 1 beat up ford truck ...and 1 child and could barely get by. Really aggravating! "

hardrockcromo wrote on May 30, 2008 10:18 PM:

" i believe that if you are on food stamps that you should only be able to buy generic foods and not name brand items or alcohol- if you have a problem with money then you need to learn that generic items are cheaper and will stretch your dollar farther before you have to complain about the state providing money to support you. "

landlord wrote on May 30, 2008 6:56 PM:

" to vzbb again- Please don't ASSUME that all office jobs are "cushy". I know my desk job required lots of brain power, if not muscle. I don't understand what your insult there is supposed to mean. "

landlord wrote on May 30, 2008 6:55 PM:

" to vzbb- uh, yes- I do believe that the tax paying citizens should have a right to say that NO you cannot buy alcohol on OUR DIME! If you need food to survive, fine, but no one needs alcohol just to get by! "

tammy wrote on May 30, 2008 5:08 PM:

" to vzbb i understand if someone wants to buy some beer every now and then fine a drink isnt so bad but if you cant afford to buy food on a regular basis how are you able to buy alcohol on a regular basis alot of alcohol costs more then a gallon of milk or even a case of pop is cheaper then a 6 pack of beer "

vzbb wrote on May 30, 2008 3:55 PM:

" Not everyone has cushy jobs in an office, sitting in cubicles all day people... "

vzbb wrote on May 30, 2008 3:54 PM:

" So people who have the link card shouldn't be allowed to drink? That's a privilege right?? What gives you the right to think they should be tested? Maybe for certain drugs yes, but not alcohol. "

Shiyane wrote on May 30, 2008 2:48 PM:

" to good ol boy:

Lighten up. You are picking on a link recipeint that WORKS. That means she doesnt get free rent and help with her bills because she makes too much MONEY at her JOB. But even if she did with the high cost of gas and food it takes 2 to raise 6 kids. "

Robert Edward Johnson wrote on May 30, 2008 2:23 PM:

" Hey, good ole boy - yes, it's simple, but maybe YOU'RE simple too. You see, in the first case, yes, you buy gas, you get gas, but you get GROTESQUELY OVERPRICED GAS where you're being ripped off at least a dollar per gallon in the last year and that's just talking gasoline, not heating oil, electricity, products you buy that are now more expensive due to higher priced oil, etc. In the second case, you're ripped off less than a dollar a year for poor critters LIKE THE WOMAN WHO CAPITALIZES EVERYTHING SHE WRITES (sigh) and probably ISN'T eating steaks, and now she's got a five year limit on her welfare that she needs since her "man" left her with kids but no support. Do you LIKE being conned like that? Do you like the fact that without our interfering presence in the idiotic war in Iraq, over half the insurgents would go back to their families and the others would be ruthlessly slaughtered by the Iraq gov and we'd be back to $2.00 or even $1 gasoline? "

tammy wrote on May 30, 2008 2:17 PM:

" to good ol boy not everyone on link has section 8 or housing some people actually pay a regular rent and pay their own utilities some people cant get housing b/c they have been evicted due to not being able to afford rent makes sense doesnt it some people dont get assistance with utilities b/c the some towns think that if you get link and medical card then you should be able to afford your utilities you can get help from liheap but thats a one time deal you cant go every month and say i cant afford my gas or electric or both bills "

Shiyane wrote on May 30, 2008 1:27 PM:

" To Usedtoliveinbloomington:
You are right, abusers make it unfair for those that actually need those link cards. I like the idea of drug and alchohol testing to receive those so that it weeds out some the abusers. Those that abuse give those that need a bad name. Too bad they cant use a price per item limitation based on item type because that would stop the expensive food purchases such as the high dollar steaks that some of them buy. I have a family of 5 and our budget(our own money) is right around $400/month and we eat very healthy with just a few snacks for the kids. "

good ol boy wrote on May 30, 2008 1:07 PM:

" I just had a flash. If you have 6 kids and with the summer being the only time they are not in school ( getting free lunch and in some schools free breakfast ) $400 should go a month for food, with what you earn and the gov't. programs that help pay your heating bill on your section 8 ( free ) housing. No medical costs to boot ! They should also let you use your link card at the SHARE program, You will have to work a couple hours but you'll get good value for my food dollar !! "

good ol boy wrote on May 30, 2008 12:51 PM:

" OOOPS, I forgot make sure they take sex ed. to, that is a class they need to stay awake in !!! "

good ol boy wrote on May 30, 2008 12:34 PM:

" usetoliveinbloom : very good, and yes I agree totally after trying to read your post, keep your kids in school. Mainly writing and ENGLISH !! If you need to cut some costs, public trans. would be a good option as it is much cheaper than all the gas and ins. on a car. Good luck and your welcome. "

usetoliveinbloomington wrote on May 30, 2008 11:17 AM:

" IM A MOTHER OF 6 I WORK 30 HOURS A WEEK LIVE ON WELFARE. I GET LINK/MEDICAL CARD IM 1 WHO DONT HAVE A NICE CAR JUST A BEAT UP VAN. I DONT BUY TONS OF JUNK FOR MY KIDS MOSTLY WE GET VEGGIES & FRUITS. WITH GAS/FOOD RISING WE WILL HAVE A HARD SUMMER. I DONT GET $800/$900 IN LINK ONLY $400 MONTHLY FOR 7 PEOPLE NOT ENOUGH. I DO WORK AND NOT DRIVE A NICE CAR. NOT EVERY ONE LIKE HALF THE PEOPLE I AGREE DO ABUSE THE SYSTEM. PEOPLE AT THE SALVATION ARMY GETS LINK TO CAN SELL IT FOR ALCOHOL HOWS THAT FAIR? MY ELDERLY MOTHER WHO IS 70 SHES DISABLED AND ONLY GETS $40.00 A MONTH LINK WHEN YOU HAVE THE BUMBS SELLING THEIR LINK CARD FOR ALCOHOL/DRUGS NOT FAIR TO ME. THERE ARE OTHERS WHO DONT USE THE LINK RIGHT THEN ARE SOME SINGLE MOTHERS WHO DONT HAVE HELP FROM DADS WHO NEED LINK TO FEED THEIR CHILDREN. I DO WORK BUT IM ONE WITH KIDS WHO NEED TO EAT. IM TECHING MY CHILDREN STAY IN SCHOOL NOT TO LIVE THE WAY I DO ON WELFARE. "

good ol boy wrote on May 30, 2008 8:40 AM:

" REJ : Yes it's simple I pay for gas I get gas - I pay for welfare and some non-working, baby making machine, is driving a nicer car than mine to pick up the welfare. Then buying junk food and high price steaks / and Kingsford to cook them on while I'm getting hamburger and generic veg's. ( so I pay and they eat better than me and have the nerve to complain it's not enough ) See - 1. I pay I get gas 2. I pay and I get nothing, they get free everything. Simple, thats why people are pi$$ed !! "

Robert Edward Johnson wrote on May 30, 2008 12:15 AM:

" I'm just curious. Food stamps cost $29 billion a year in 2005. Outright fraud is estimated at $241 MILLION a year in 2005 (i.e., less than a buck per person in the US). Why do any of you even care? I'm pretty right wing, and even I'M not THAT mean. But EVEN if the whole danged thing (saving each American about $100 per year) were junked, compare that to the amount we're being ripped off on oil. Prices have gone from $50 to $130 in 16 months. We imported 13,439,000 barrels of oil each day last year. That means that we're paying an EXTRA 1 billion or so dollars per day to other nations thanks to the price rise, not even counting the amount extra we're paying for our OWN national production of oil. Thus, in a month, you're being ripped off oil-wise WAY more than with the ENTIRE food stamp program in a YEAR. Yet you've had almost TWICE as many folks talking about this topic as those of us talking about us getting ripped off on the price of energy. Would someone care to explain this? "

Tom Terrific wrote on May 29, 2008 8:24 PM:

" I wonder how my grandparents ever managed. "

Independent? wrote on May 29, 2008 5:23 PM:

" I feel like everyone talks past each other... My view is that yes, there is absolutely flaws in the system and we should be doing everything we can to fix them. At the same time the majority of people on the system who need it, must continue to receive assistance, especially when children are involved. We absolutely need a better system, but assistance must be available when needed. It's not so simple to just tell people to quit being lazy and work, but at the same time we cannot just give out money to people who abuse the system. Very complicated. "

Sweetcheeks wrote on May 29, 2008 12:24 PM:

" What is sad is those that actually need that link card and are told they "make too much" but have jobs that only pay them $10 an hour with less than 40 hours a week. Those are the people that should get them not people who refuse to work at all. I am not talking about those with disabilities or circumstances that prevent them from working outside the home but those that wont and I have personal friends in another state that refuse to work and their kids have lived on welfare their whole lives and the oldest is 16! Laziness should not be rewarded. "

justme50 wrote on May 29, 2008 8:53 AM:

" IL_MD: you hit the nail on the head. I too, work as a cashier and see the link card abuse. Buy a bunch of junk food, pop, candy and then pull out a wad of money to buy alcohol, cigs & lottery. What a racket, but as long as the state lets them abuse the system, the more abuse we will see. It is sickening. "

IL_MD wrote on May 29, 2008 8:04 AM:

" I am going to have to disagree with you jipsi. I bet you would be surprised on what would be found out if they started doing mandatory, random drug and alcohol testing. I don't think that the testing should be done just on the person that has their name on the card...it should be done to anybody living at the residence, as they are eating the food as well.

I have personally witnessed, as I was the cashier, people spending 100 bucks on their link card then follow that up with a cart of alcohol totaling almost as much as the food. Then on the way out of the store, slip in a 20 on the instant lottery machine. I can already hear..."You don't know the circumstances" arguement. Maybe they were having some kind of party. Well they weren't, as this family also lives within a block of my house. There was no party. More like they are just alcoholics, not an assumption but the truth. "

110100100 wrote on May 29, 2008 6:57 AM:

" good ol boy

That's a great point. I can't get a normal job without being drug tested, so why should people get handouts without being drug tested? Some will argue that it will cost too much to test, but it will probably pay for itself. Alcohol tests might not hurt either.

I think another good idea would be for the state to buy the food and supplies and let these unfortunates pick up rations of food and supplies rather than rations of spending money to be spent on... whatever. "

jipsi wrote on May 29, 2008 6:47 AM:

" to good ol boy:
You're making the broad assumption that gov't assistance recipients (cash, foodstamps/Link, WIC, subsidized housing, etc.) are, for the most part, also drug users...
You won't catch very many fish in THAT little net.
Most of those on assistance are woman with children, usually with no father (however that came to be is NOT my concern here: the father could have died, divorced and/or left for another woman/man, etc..
Drug users in the assisted households are typically the children, siblings, other live-in relatives, and, since the state could only mandate the RECIPIENT be drug-tested... well. Doesn't look like the largest group of drug users (abusing publis assistance) will get "found" this way, now, does it?
JUst so you know, I agree with the gist of your post.
I just don't see it working well enough to curb the problems... "

good ol boy wrote on May 28, 2008 3:49 PM:

" How about this, We can save a lot of money by making random drug tests mandatory for welfare participants!! If you need assistance you shouldn't have money for drugs anyway !! I take them so I can earn money to pay for the program, the people who get my tax money should have to take them to get it !! "

tammy wrote on May 28, 2008 2:50 PM:

" to MRS it will take us up to 2 years before we will here anything about SSI then it could take another year or so if they approve us before we actually get anything until then im the one who stays at home to take care of him and have the therapies and to run him up to chicago and my bf the father of the children works as much as possible but he gets paid on a being there way so if he has to stay home to watch the other two children then we are out of usually 2 days pay no holiday pay or anything "

MRS. wrote on May 28, 2008 12:25 PM:

" Please don't read I was being critical. That is why I said you could get that tax money through the year. With 20K income why don't you have the baby on SSI? It is run through Social Security but it is a state program. Disabled children qualify if the family income isn't a lot. I know several families with disabled children with epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, blind and things of that nature. You’re family would fall into the real reason help is there. "

tammy wrote on May 28, 2008 10:50 AM:

" to MRS one parent does work and very hard and yes we pay taxes yes come feb we get a good check back but that is usually spent on bills that we could not afford to pay i am unable to work do to the fact my 18 month old has congenital scoliosis and has mutiple tests and trips to chicago to get casts and surgeries done until he is done growing plus since doctors say that this is a worse case that they have seen in any child as young as he it takes quite a lot of therapies and stuff to take care of him "

Momof2 wrote on May 28, 2008 7:44 AM:

" There is an old saying....Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish, and he will eat for a lifetime. My grandparents taught this to me when I was little; they had learned it when they were little. They were very wise people, and I have never forgotten it. In order for the Link program to truly work, the people that utilize it must be taught how to make their dollars stretch the entire month, just like the rest of us. I have a set amount of money budgeted for my family of 4; it runs around $400 a month. It is quite a challenge to get everything that we need, including non-grocery items like shampoo and toothpaste, but with coupons, watching the sale items, and a lot of planning, we manage. To be given $312 a month for a family of 3, and then have it run out by the middle of the month, shows a terrible lack of planning. "

HAPPY ONE wrote on May 27, 2008 9:41 PM:

" Education is the key to get out of poverty. There are grants etc to help- Just like incognito stated earlier. No one can ever take away your education, knowledge is powerful. It's hard to get a degree , but the payoff is worth it. It was the way out for me when I was supporting 3 kids on my own . It's doesn't mean you won't still have to work more than 1 job, but pay is better ( depending on field you enter). And sets example for your kids to follow, the struggle they see you go thru helps them make smarter choices. And you are never too old- I was 32 when I finished (16 yrs ago). Best think I ever did for my family (and myself), changed my life forever. Just have to take it maybe 1 class at a time. "

Hootie wrote on May 27, 2008 9:40 PM:

" Many years ago (1971) my family of four used the food stamp program because my husband was seriously ill and could not work. When I applied for assistance I was told I would only be allowed to purchase specific foods that would provide healthy meals. These items did not include soda pop, pizzas, frozen dinners, all items had to be nutrious. I was informed that I would need to make my own cookies and I should not buy pre-packaged cookies as my own baking would go further. Of course there was no paper products, alcoholic beverages nor sodas. I think there should be a limit to what can be purchased with a Link card and certainly Link cards should not be sold for drugs & booze. Heck now a Link card is used at Papa Murphy's for pizza with no limit.............this must be some party for some. "

Super Grover wrote on May 27, 2008 5:26 PM:

" GO GET A JOB !!!!!!

Eveyone else has to get a job,Why not you ?? "

MRS. wrote on May 27, 2008 5:25 PM:

" Well, Tammy: A family of 5 means at least 3 minor children. An income of 20,000.00 means you either pay no income taxes or get it at the end of the year. There is a way you can pay 0 income tax through the year AND claim the earned income through the year also. True, you won't get a large check around feb. but you will have more disposable cash during the year.If there are two adults and combined the total income is gross 20,000.00 there is a problem. I thingk even fast food pays better than that.I could see with that income only one parent working full time. A babysitter would be out of reach. "

incognito wrote on May 27, 2008 3:18 PM:

" Tammy, your point is valid. I am glad I do not have to feed my family with $20K gross salary! When I was earning far less than that I took advantage of various programs (pell grants, and student loans) to get an education. If you qualify financially, these opportunities still exist. Now I have been out of school for some time, but I still am paying for student loans; truth is, I would rather do that than struggle as I was as a single parent. At least I have an education, can work, and can make the payments. The opportunity is there and does not discrimnate, you simply must qualify financially. Check it out.

This is also why I feel so strongly that we need to rally locally NOW. With increases in all costs (medical care, food, transportaion, and housing) our existing food banks, soup kitchens, and homeless shelters are seeing an increase in need.

If we all choose ACT LOCALLY we can make a difference in how our community experiences the tough financial times. "

110100100 wrote on May 27, 2008 2:33 PM:

" G. Larson

I will stipulate that the picture is terrible for this article and probably draws a lot of stereotyping attitudes (including my own). "

tammy wrote on May 27, 2008 2:27 PM:

" try to feed a family of 5 off of 20,000 a year gross not bring home after taxes and everything your looking at bring home about 10,000 a year of actual bring home to feed a family, pay bills, and pay rising gas prices i'd like to see that one "

tammy wrote on May 27, 2008 2:24 PM:

" now you start commenting on the war b/c of oil since when did 9/11 turn into an oil thing if i remember gas was still around 2 bucks then not 4 the war was suppose to be about finding osama and getting the iraqi people thier freedom that we have but it seems like we are out to help them more then our country i'm proud of our soldiers for going and fighting for someone who doesnt get a right to say anything like we do but i also think that before we can help others we need to help the u.s. first that way we are stable enough to help other countries i thought this was about the fact that some people are having a terrible time with the price of food and no one can afford these ridiculous prices and since when does wieght figure out if a person needs to eat or not just b/c they are obese that doesnt mean a person shouldn't get help to eat "

IL_MD wrote on May 27, 2008 1:59 PM:

" Thanks incognito...atleast somebody understands me. That was a good post.

And for this....2. If you really think that the war is all about oil...well you are dumber than me!!

I appologize. Some people just take every opportunity to blame everything on the war and the current president. It just gets irritating. I don't feel I have friends serving over there just for oil and I would hate for them to think that as well. There were people abusing the system and people suffering from the system long before the war started and the presidents term started. "

G. Larson wrote on May 27, 2008 12:03 PM:

" 110100100: that is, also, the other side of the story. my posts are mostly serving to keep a balance, simply providing a counterpoint, but no matter what "getting out of poverty" is far from a simple cut-and-dried thing. perhaps the lady pictured above is a bad example, perhaps not. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF SHE IS OR ISN'T, as she is one of 27.7 million. at that number, its nothing short of absurd and cartoonish to nitpick a photo of ONE PERSON. say anything you will about the picture, IT DOESN'T CHANGE A THING. the picture, at worst, still gives us nothing but what we already knew, and what we should also already know is that there are countless people like "4hrjc" actually getting up from a bad place. so, by your logic, this one completely out-of-context picture means "4hrjc" shouldn't EVER have been helped? any way you cut it, these are human beings, not characters in grand theft auto. you don't win money for aiding in pain, suffering, and death. well, not unless you're an incredibly successful capitalist, that is. "

HAPPY ONE wrote on May 27, 2008 11:46 AM:

" incognito- your points are valid, you make a good argument. We do need to focus on changing the system as it is set up. Set limits on how long assist will be given, limit number of people per family coverage. Encourage/educate link users on diets and food choices. Also maybe get coding system working to limit certain types of purchases.Encourage job training, better child care, and self esteem classes. Big list but would help across the board in many areas. Also stiff treatment for abusers, make have to think hard about doing it- jail time that works. "

incognito wrote on May 27, 2008 11:13 AM:

" Finally, by stooping to calling people "dumb, ignorant" or whatever, demeans this discussion. Just because someone has a different point of view does not mean that they are stupid. They just disagree. The people calling each other names are representative of the people who should be working together to address the real issue.

I believe strongly that people are inherently good. I believe that this means:

1) if given opportunities, those who are abusing the system would not
2) No one WANTS to be on public assistance, it is demoralizing
3) the taxpayers really do want to HELP our citizens who really need it

If we sit back and recognize that everyone wants this to be different, that there are opportunities to make a difference, and if we took strides in our own community we could change things one place at a time. "

incognito wrote on May 27, 2008 10:58 AM:

" Part 2 - REPEATING MYSELF.....

The bottom line:

The anger here is representative of the bigger issue. People who are supporting the BROKEN systems are sick of it. People who need the system to work, need more. These two groups need to get together to eliminate the abusers. Many of you have referred to people abusing the system.

More importanty what about realizing we are ONE? One people, many faces.

Accept the many faces around us, be tolerant, see one another as a neighbor, help those around you, be the change that we need in this society.

If everyone did this we would see an incredible miracle... "

incognito wrote on May 27, 2008 10:57 AM:

" If you review IL_MD comments through this thread, I think you will see that her/his comments are being misinterpreted, at this point. He clearly states early on, "For the people that use the system like it was set up...good for you. Use the assistance to get back on your feet and then get off of it."

The system was designed to be a SUPPLEMENT while someone gets on their feet. Now it is being used as a lifelong support mechanism, by SOME (not all) who do not really need the support. This rankles many taxpayers.

I was probably one of the first to bring up the "war comparison," yet it was not intended as it was taken. Actually, my point was more around the idea that if we can find $$ to support a war in Iraq, we should be able to find dollars to change the LINK system so that it is less abused than it is now.

(con't) "

IL_MD wrote on May 27, 2008 10:46 AM:

" Of the people that I am talknig about using the system, there is not a one of them that feel bad about doing it.

Let me clarify this statement before you start yelling at me more...


I meant abusing the system... "

IL_MD wrote on May 27, 2008 10:32 AM:

" I am not the one that brought the war comparison to this thread. Nor did I say that I agree with or don't agree with the war that is going on.

Of the people that I am talknig about using the system, there is not a one of them that feel bad about doing it.

I will agree to disagree with you on the whole war thing...but that is not the issue here. Peoples complaint in these threads are about the people that abuse the system and how the state ultimatly does nothing to police the sad state of affairs that is the link system.

And evidently there are plenty of smarter people than me, because I work 4 jobs to feed my family rather than rely on your tax dollars to pay me. I guess I am the dumb one here!! "

ES wrote on May 27, 2008 9:36 AM:

" IL_MD I honestly do not think many people are "dumber" than you, sir. Although I agree this war is not just about oil. It is also about being re-elected for the President, paranoia, and an odd McCarthy-like sense of distrust. Explain the logic of attacking someone because we fear they may attack us? So, using your lack of logic, if I have some paranoia that my neighbor may steal my belongings, its OK to take my neighbor's stuff first? That makes no sense. Sorry, you can try to explain Bush's shallow reasoning behind the war, but it makes no difference to me. The World Cultural community agrees with me, this was an unnessary and unwarrented war to the extent that "mission accomplished" has no ring of truth in it. Now go help your fellow man and quit whining about people on food stamps. They feel bad enough without your lecturing. And yep, I would rather my tax money go to those people than breaks for industry, money for an illegal war, and money to fill the pockets of rich people because they have influence and power. "

IL_MD wrote on May 27, 2008 7:37 AM:

" 1. Nobody ever said I was a Dr...I know I didn't. So if you want to talk about knowing your facts...maybe you should start by looking in the mirror.

2. If you really think that the war is all about oil...well you are dumber than me!!

3. I never said anything about the Iraq government attacking us on 9/11...I said the troops are fighting a war to make sure something like 9/11 don't happen again. There is a huge difference there.


"

Meh wrote on May 27, 2008 6:53 AM:

" IL_MD, if you think that this war in Iraq is to keep you and me safe, you're beyond hope. I honestly hope that the MD in your nickname doesn't stand for medical doctor because I would wonder how someone like you could get through med school.

And I'd far rather pay for some lazy person to sit on their rear then spend another dime killing innocent Iraqis who never attacked us and had nothing to do with 9/11. "

ES wrote on May 27, 2008 6:43 AM:

" IL_MD, Uh, the Iraq government attacked us in September 2001? Really? I thought it was Afganistan using Al Quida members from Saudi Arabia. Perhaps you should check your facts on that one. And no one is comparing the useless war with poverty, I am saying that you cannot complain about the minutia of money for something like food stamps to the billions and billions this war is costing. I am further saying we are not using money well if we turn our back on our citizens and we fight for oil. Are you sure you are a doctor, because it seems you skipped the class on bedside manner and compassion for others, especially when you use words like "trash" and "sitting on their butt." Maybe you are pediatrician because you act so child-like with faulty logic. "

110100100 wrote on May 27, 2008 6:26 AM:

" I forgot, there's an excuse for everything. How childish of me. She bought the biggest, most expensive bag of charcoal because she had no choice but to do her shopping at a liquor store at midnight and buy the most over priced groceries in town. Pardon me but that's garbage. Anyone can get to a normal grocery store 2-3 times a month and it's not difficult to make inexpensive meals that are still healthy. For crying out loud she can't even fit that bag of charcoal in her cart! You're telling me she's going to buy the meat to grill at the gas station too!? No wonder she's broke half way through the month. "

IL_MD wrote on May 26, 2008 10:38 AM:

" To ES and the others that have copmared this to the war and bush. How can you even compare the war and welfare. That is the most ridiculous thing I have heard. The troops are fighting a war to try and keep us safe, to try and prevent a tragedy such as 9/11. I would much rather my money go to keep my family and friends safe rather than some piece of trash sitting on their butt and getting money that could be going in my pocket. I am by no means saying that everybody on the program is trash...so don't put those words in my mouth.

to 4hrjc ...I am taking for granted that by the way you talk that you had to use the link and then you did what you had to do to remove yourself from the program. If that is the case...that was a job well done and that is how the program is intended to work!! "

4hrjc wrote on May 26, 2008 2:28 AM:

" A few years ago, we had to have a link card. It was a life saver at the time. We are a family of 4 and got about $500 a month. I would sit down at the beginning of the month and make a menu for the whole month. Then I would look through the ads in the paper and and make a shopping plan. It was hard to buy groceries for us for that amount without a lot of planning. I learned to shop a lot at Aldi's and then buy sale items for the rest. A lot of the food that we ate at that time wasn't the best food.....either health wise or taste wise. But we survived and I was thankful that we were able to get Link and that I learned in a hurry to be a better shopper. We never ate Steak or anything else expensive. Most meals were pretty cheap and then we also saved all leftovers....what there was of them.
.

"

G. Larson wrote on May 26, 2008 12:05 AM:

" ONCE AGAIN, i'll reiterate a clear and relevant point that this very article clearly states: THE CHEAPEST (and most available) FOOD IS THE LEAST HEALTHY. 110100100, your childish ignorance is incredible, if you are to seriously suggest that "being fat means you're well off". nothing but the exact opposite is true in america, due to the simple fact that "health food", even simple fresh fruit and vegetables, is the most expensive food you can buy, not to mention it goes bad in DAYS. on top of that, things like gym memberships, even medications and vitamins, cost ALOT of money. also, i will reiterate ONCE AGAIN that the majority of places to buy food in low income areas are gas stations or other extremely expensive small independent stores. just GO TO A GAS STATION: do they have fifteen choices of charcoal, most of them cheaper but comparable? NO, as with all their supplies, they will be ONE BRAND, and only the primary NAME BRAND. i assume "One Stop Food & Liquors" is no different. more likely than not, this woman HAD NO CHOICE. pay attention, people, these things were already said, in part by the article itself. "

ES wrote on May 25, 2008 11:22 PM:

" So many comments show so much ignorance. Why don't you people live and let live. You pay much more for Bush's war than you do for welfare in this country. Given the two, I would rather my money go to the welfare of our citizens. The difference is the welfare recipients gain something you want; the soldiers take a chance of losing their lives. I am confident there are abusers of the welfare system; but I am more confident that the vast majority of welfare recipients do not wish to be on welfare. Just leave these people alone and be pleased you are helping folks instead of causing their anquish. "

c.a.t.s. wrote on May 25, 2008 2:20 PM:

" CAT FIGHT ! ! ! "

user_name23 wrote on May 25, 2008 1:46 PM:

" To editorialgirl62, continued: Maybe if you had made a different decision and waited to have a child until the two of you were married, then you would not have been in the situation of needing to be on welfare when you had to go on bed rest. Even if he had divorced you at that point, you would have equal right to the communal property. My point is, you needed to use food stamps, fine, but the story should end there. The rest of it sounded like a lie and a sob story. "

user_name23 wrote on May 25, 2008 1:42 PM:

" To editorialgirl62: I don't have anything against welfare in general, especially when you're using it for an emergency as you did, but your story is not believable and does not make a lot of sense. If your child's father had so much money, why would he sign over his assets to avoid paying child support? Maybe he was lying to you about all of the assets he owned. Besides, you said you DO get child support from your child's father who works as a mechanic (?), if that's what you mean when you call the father of your child a grease monkey. This sounds like someone who makes a pretty good living to me, although it may not be the lifestyle you were hoping for when you had a baby with him out of wedlock. "

cocoa wrote on May 25, 2008 11:35 AM:

" I once worked (in retail) with a girl who had 4 children and admitted she was having them because she got more welfare assistance that way. Her boyfriend, the kids' father, was a drug dealer in town and frequently in jail, so she said she needed the extra income to feed the kids. I'm not saying some people do honestly need the assistance, but there are still too many people abusing the system and they are giving a bad rap to the people who truly need it. Ever since I worked with this girl, I've never looked at people on welfare with multiple kids the same way. It's a bias and I admit it, yet every time I read an article like this, I think of her. "

jimmychoogirl wrote on May 25, 2008 10:31 AM:

" Knowing - What would make you think I'd call you ignorant? : )

I'm not as simpled minded as you may think. I know guys get the bad rap most of the time and my comment enfoced that even more. I will apologize for that. I will say though in my short life, I've seen women getting screwed by men a lot more than I've seen men getting screwed by women. That doesn't mean women are getting screwed more, it just means that's what I've seen. BUT yeah, there are great guys/dads out there and I should have acknowledged that also. "

110100100 wrote on May 25, 2008 8:05 AM:

" The lady in the picture has a huge bag of the most expensive charcoal you can buy! No doubt she's planning on grilling some nice thrifty meals (steak, shirmp, ribs). I have to buy the crappy charcoal that won't light unless you soak it in high octane fuel! Certainly doesn't look like she's missed any meals! And somebody on another article was complaining about spending money on Mars missions. Nice pic Pantagraph. "

Independent? wrote on May 24, 2008 11:31 PM:

" Happyemus... Your point is taken and I completely agree that the people who abuse the system such as the ones you mention need to be stopped... BUT here's the point... People like that are few and far between. They are a small minority of food stamp recipients. Fix the problem of people abusing the system, but we still have to have legislation in place that can guarantee starving kids a meal. I think we can all agree on that. "

knowing is half the battle wrote on May 24, 2008 10:43 PM:

" To Jipsi, Jimmy Choo, and tracey. You all three have arguments that are correct some of the time. Yes, there are women who got hosed by a deadbeat dad. Yes, that happens. There are also baby's momma's out there who birth 13 kids, reap the windfalls of their welfare checks and food stamps, and make sure that the father stays as far away from them as possible so as not to interfere with the free government money and government cheese that they can get. Anyone of the 3 of you can argue with me if you want but please don't try and tell me I"m childish or ignorant on the subject, or less informed on the subject. NOPE FOLKS! I have the life experience your parents never taught you. "

isabelle wrote on May 24, 2008 11:54 AM:

" Thanks, gipsi! :) "

happyemus wrote on May 24, 2008 4:49 AM:

" I completely understand that people have unexpected bad things happen and need help sometimes. But when I'm in line with my cart of generic groceries and there are people in front of me with expensive clothing and gold dripping off of them and a cart heaped full of name brand food, mostly junk food, using their Link card and then load those groceries into their $30,000+ SUV; it infuriates me!! Link needs to establish their own grocery stores where there are ONLY generics and healthy food. They should monitor what the cardholder is wearing and what vehicle they are driving & if it's not "reasonable", they need to be investigated & have their card pulled. I work hard for MY money & I don't like giving it to people who are just "working the system". It makes it too hard for the people who really need it. "

jipsi wrote on May 24, 2008 12:17 AM:

" Isabelle: THANK YOU!
Your comment was dead-on profound, and if anyone "walks away' from this discussion remembering any one post, I hope it is yours.
Just a few years ago, worlds away, my life was a GREAT life: great career, many friends, new car, nice home, bright future for me and mine...
And a car accident (not my fault; other car ran a stop sign in town doing 40mph into my car's driver side) changed EVERYTHING... in a moment. "

jipsi wrote on May 24, 2008 12:10 AM:

" tracey: hiw OLD are you? 14? 15?
You're NOT thinking with the maturity of an adult.
Man and Woman get married (that was the idea, at least), Man and Woman have Baby (Babies?), Man leaves Woman (for another, usually) OR vice versa, OR one parent dies.
Woman with Baby (Babies) = now is Single Parent

That you automatically think every single parent on public assistance got that way either on purpose or carelessness shows your narrow-mindedness OR lack of worldly experience/knowledge.
Educate yourself before attempting to educate others... "

HAPPY ONE wrote on May 23, 2008 7:40 PM:

" Tracey- not all pregnancy were planned to get more government assistance. And the only birth control 100% effective is not to have sex. But there are the abusers of the system who do have more to continue on govern. assistance, thats why we need better rules- limit assist to first 2 kids and for 5 yrs as stated earlier in other posts, would help cut back abuse. The system needs to be fixed. It doesn't do any good to tell people not to have kids, won't happen in our life time. "

gad wrote on May 23, 2008 6:44 PM:

" $312 a month for 3 people, free money, is nothing to gripe about. i feed our family of 4 for @ that for a month (basics not including going out or grilling, but heck, we don't get food stamps). "

tammy wrote on May 23, 2008 4:37 PM:

" to tracey yes it is easy to get pregnant on the pill and its not always the persons fault in fact im one who did get pregnant on the pill and you know what i was told by my doctor that she didnt perscribe the right dosage for my wieght so i ended up with another child i love my kids more then life it's self and i would do anything for them i'll tell you what you go and find an employer who will let someone off mutliple times a month to take care of a disabled child you wont find one yeah they will say oh yeah whenever you need off just tell us we understand then when it comes down to the wire you miss work cause your child is having surgery after surgery and your out the door in someway i agree with you about not having kids i knew a girl who once told me that as long as she could she'd keep popping out kids she was on the link system no its not right to have children just to get link thats wrong "

isabelle wrote on May 23, 2008 4:23 PM:

" You are all just one layoff, one death of a (breadwinner) spouse, one uninsured terminal diagnosis away from being on food stamps and in this position. Get over yourself. "

tracey wrote on May 23, 2008 3:49 PM:

" tammy...

i am pro-choice before conception, pro life after...however, in todays world, there are so many options for birth control that are very effective...and the "i got pregnant while on the pill" story is just not as common as people claim...either they arent taking the pill correctly, or they are just flat out lying...on rare occasions does it fail. check with planned parenthood...im sure they will explain that to you.

if your employer has a problem with your responsibilities, (im assuming they were aware of them before you were hired) then maybe you need to find another job...or maybe get some training so that you can find another job.

see, my problem is, those people who go to welfare/food stamps and just stay there...that is their ending point...it should be a stepping stone to something better...but it just isnt...it isnt what it was intended to be. "

tammy wrote on May 23, 2008 2:32 PM:

" to tracey try this one on for size one birth control is not 100% affective lots of women have children on birth control second what about when the child is disabled and one parent has to take off a lot to take that child to hospitals or therapy appointmentsor even surgeries most empolyers are not that forgiving in missing a bunch of work b/c of your kids disability they dont care they are out to make money not lose it so they dont keep around the emoployees that have to take off or no one thinks about i tried getting a job to help my family out and you know what it cost me more in daycare then to work i works for 2 months and racked up 3,000 in daycare i only brought home a little over 1500 for the time explain to me were that equals out to anything "

JimmyChooGirl wrote on May 23, 2008 2:18 PM:

" tracey - Wow you are such a thinker! Before posting, you should read other posts because your comment has already been blown away by many other comments on here but I'll give ya an example...

How about you had babies with your boyfriend/husband and could afford them and then the deadbeat up and leaves you with nothing. Now gee that never happens huh. Or you were a physically able person who had children then got into an accident and can no longer work.

"

tracey wrote on May 23, 2008 2:03 PM:

" i have an idea!! how about not having babies that you cant afford to feed??? i hear birth control is free!!

"

HAPPY ONE wrote on May 23, 2008 1:39 PM:

" jipsi- just for the record, I never said kids need to work to support family- read my post. I said working for kids is not a bad think. I'm not talking forcing kids into labor camps, but it was said in another post "kid wants to work, but I won't let them". Mine wanted to earn extra money for things they wanted, I supported them totally. They learned good life lessons doing it.
But this is way off article.
I think with todays bar coding it would be easier for stores to code items,but I do see where your coming from on picky eaters. Have autistic grandchild- hard to get him to eat alot of foods, really have to play with menu to get him to eat anything. He wouldn't eat if tried to force him, and would starve if foods not available he likes. It's part of the makeup for autism. Some fast foods are cheaper than buying all the ingredients needed. Still need some kind of check and balances set up for abuse. "

Rational Humanist wrote on May 23, 2008 1:32 PM:

" "Good"? ol Boy posted "Bread, beans, rice, flour, sugar, baking soda, meat, veg's, milk, butter, and eggs', etc .... Well, last I checked these are are the very things on which prices have been going right through the roof. AND make up an ever smaller segment of what is found in the stores. They require preparation and proper cooking. They also tend to have the shortest shelf life. At the same time, pre-packaged, "value-added" and ready-to-eat food (Plastic Food) is everywhere and usually on sale. So, if you cannot cook so well, and need to have something that will keep AND want to "save money", which way do you go? The answer is in most of the shopping carts you will see at any check-out. "

FCMom wrote on May 23, 2008 1:22 PM:

" What some are failing to remember is that as taxpayers we are paying for these food stamps. I am all to familiar with how hard it is to put food on the table for a family. I have been doing it for 14 yrs. I don't mind helping a family who appreciates it and tries to help themselves. I am disgusted with the idea that some can simply choose not to work, but they still get to eat. No where in our constitution does it say that you have the right to sit on your fat ass while I have to feed you. "

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 11:59 AM:

" Thanks, IL_MD.
And although my posts were, in part, referring to YOURS, I understood entirely where you were coming from. And it gave me the opportunity (ACKK!) to expand on that thought a little bit.
Well, maybe a LOT a bit... LOL
"

good ol boy wrote on May 23, 2008 11:56 AM:

" Bread, beans, rice, flour, sugar, baking soda, meat, veg's, milk, butter, and eggs. You can feed a family. Chips, soda, candy, and any prepackaged food should not be allowed. If you want the extra stuff go out and work for it. Also don't pull the picky eater crap if a kid is hungry he'll eat what you put in front of him. You can also make a cake out of the above mentioned items so birthdays are not an excuse either!! If your not working then you should have plenty of time to cook from scratch ( if you don't know how you better learn ) and grow food in your yard. you want healthier food for your kids right? "

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 11:56 AM:

" to nunya:

It depends.
Because Mickey Dee has the "dollar menu", I can see a LOT of people literally deciding $2.00 and some change for a HOT McChicken sandwich and fries to be CHEAPER than having the outlay at home to make it from scratch, not to mention HEALTHIER than some of the potential at-home fare. The $2 to $3 kids meal (chicken nuggets, fries, juice or milk) just MIGHT be the healthiest meal of the day for some kids.
I know, I know, it still doesn't "look right", but it's not the same "eating out" thing that would be far worse were they to be using their Link card at a pricier, "fine dining" restaurant.

"

IL_MD wrote on May 23, 2008 11:49 AM:

" I am the one that made the comment about being there on the first and I will accept that sometimes there are other circumstances going on. Birthday party, whatever...I do understand that. But I have been involved with the store that I work at for about 7 years now. I haven't always worked there, but I am friends with the owners and the employees and I am there constantly. It is non stop abuse by many people. Calls in to the program do nothing and get absolutely no results.

Jipsi...they were lengthy...that is for sure...but they were good posts. "

nunya wrote on May 23, 2008 11:28 AM:

" Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't McDonald's accept Link now? In my opinion, eating out is a luxury - or used to be more so than it is now - For what you're going to pay to feed a family of four at McDonald's, you could've made that money stretch a lot farther at the grocery store. Not as convenient I know, but what's the saying...."Beggers can't be choosers?" "

incognito wrote on May 23, 2008 11:04 AM:

" Jipsi....

Thank you! I love that you not only provided 2 terrific solutions (education and the commissary type store). BUT you pointed out something that I think this town needs to remember and take to heart....

"first think of the possibility there could be extenuating circumstances behind a person's "fancy" grocery purchases. Precisely because of this "never knowing without actually ASKING them", the grey area exists. And abusers will exploit it."

Perhaps if we stop ASSuming that things fit our narrow profile, quit judging those around us, and started talking to one another, things would change....

Thank you for your "food for thought" "

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 11:03 AM:

" to HAPPY ONE, cont. 2:
You've picked a VERY disparate subject to sound off on (parenting, differences in children's stages of growth, etc.) and it's actually gone off the topic subject a long time ago.
Face the facts: NOT ALL children are able to hit the workplace at a young age just because YOURS could.
And if another parent's child cannot start bringing in income at 13, you are really in no position to judge them, OR act as though they OWE you that because you're a tax-payer.
Because children develop at drastically different rates, Child Labor Laws were enacted to prevent ANY child under 18 from being FORCED to work, regardless of how much sense (pun intended!) it could make to families.
More power to the who are able, and CHOOSE, to go to work and help their families.
"

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 11:02 AM:

" to HAPPY ONE:
Many here feel strongly about this subject, and, just as you've stuck to YOUR GUNS (rather strenuously, I might add, about how 'right' it is that 13 year olds 'go to work' as soon as possible to help support the family through hard times), yaitsme has only done the same (just as strongly, that NOT ALL 13 or even 16 year olds are academically or emotionally 'mature' enough to hold down a job AND do well in school ).
But you just made yourself look plain mean when you accused yaitsme of having a 'pity party'...
Remember, you STRESSED your opinion, and she has only STRESSED hers in rebuttal.
Just let it go, okay? You must have some extremely sound, high-achieving kids, and I'm happy for you.
One of mine will do fine in the workplace soon, the other, well, he may not be ready to go to work until after high school, when he's better able to FOCUS... (cont.) "

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 10:56 AM:

" (cont5 - last one on this, I promise! LOL):
In my opinion, a "state" grocer (think Sam's Club layout, or like a base comissary) would be a great idea (the only place a Link card user could shop, with foods donated by various charities in large part); only approved items therein, but covering a wide range of needs, including a certain amount of foods that SOME might consider fluff or junk (ie: poptarts, sandwich cookies, jello, brownie mix, etc.).

You're never going to flat-out MAKE someone and their family eat just beans, frozen fish sticks and apples, but SOME discipline could be maintained in a subsidized 'state market'... Just my 2 cents.

"

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 10:54 AM:

" (cont 4)
Consider...
There are always going to be people who have to buy "convenience" foods for a month or two while they save up and look for a replacement stove, those who are shopping for a birthday or anniversary (and please don't suggest low-income families NOT have that birthday meal for their child, that's cruel because it's the child that ultimately suffers), and people who don't even know how to cook (if they've grown up on chips and soda for "supper" themselves, then, sadly, it's all they know to furnish their own children with).

But it IS easy to spot the abusers... you just KNOW 'EM when you SEE 'EM...
I'm only saying, first think of the possibility there could be extenuating circumstances behind a person's "fancy" grocery purchases...
Precisely because of this "never knowing without actually ASKING them", the grey area exists. And abusers will exploit it.
There once WERE restrictions on certain foods that could be purchased with foodstamps, but in the 80's this was dropped, I believe, mainly because grocers didn't want to have to deal with the 'details' involved in both labelling as "approved" and in policing their checkouts. (cont)
"

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 10:44 AM:

" I try to remember this everytime I'm in checkout behind someone using a Link card, but I do agree: when that person has a cartfull (or TWO!) of name-brand items, choice rib-eye steaks, "gourmet" (as in $10 a piece or more) pizzas, DELI meats and cheeses, bags of candy (when it's not Halloween or Christmas), cases of name brand soda and, overall, just a veritable wishlist of "treats", and they pull out their Link card, sure, I get a little suspicious and resentful (as I, on my tight budget, push a basket of "from scratch" basics, with maybe a 2 liter of lemon-lime soda to mix in with my kids' KoolAid...).

There will ALWAYS be a grey area between what some people consider 'pure junk' and others consider as 'concessions' to a picky child, or a special event, etc.
I really do think there should be more budget/shopping/cooking-from-scratch workshops or classes available (or mandatory?) to those on the Link system.

(cont) "

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 10:41 AM:

" (cont. 2)
*I* can look at the above and think, at first glance, wow, there's some healthy eating (NOT!)...

My first son's birthday was coming up, and the chips, ice cream and soda, although something many here would think of as luxury or junk food items, were the least I could do to provide him with a basic birthday party (his presents , from me, were mostly thrift store items).
And my second was extremely fussy at three, with the only way I could get him to eat meat was if I "snuck" it in via corn dogs, pizza rolls, etc.
Poptarts and bananas were afterschool snacks for the one in gradeschool.
Understand, there ARE "stories" behind many of the purchases people make.
So one can't justify "reporting" someone based purely on what's in their shopping cart; you're NOT looking at their kitchen cupboard, but perhaps the odds and ends they're needing to complete a whole laundry list of meals and purposes! "

jipsi wrote on May 23, 2008 10:27 AM:

" Earlier a post summed it up well: that there are the abusers, those who legitimately need the benefit resources (MANY are disabled and/or WORK, just don't make enough to not need some help), and those who are working taxpayers who are not eligible for benefits.

Another mentioned hanging out at the supermarket on the 1st of a given month, to "watch" Link users and observe their purchases.
Well, this can be tricky. Although I am not eligible for foodstamps, myself, when my second child was born (and "daddy" left for good), I did need the help while I was trying to get back to the workforce fulltime (and struggling with childcare costs (which I was not eligible for assistance with) costing me 2/3 of my income!
If you had been behind me on the 1st of April, for instance, you might've seen, in my basket:

2 boxes cake mix
2 cans ready frosting
1 dozen eggs
2 - 12 packs store-brand soda
2 bags chips
4 Hersheys candy bars
2 containers ice cream
1 pkg frozen pizza rolls
1 - 12ct carton corn dogs
1 box blueberry poptarts
1 bunch bananas

(cont.) "

HAPPY ONE wrote on May 23, 2008 9:42 AM:

" yaitsme- your comments show that you feel like everyone is talking about you in particular. Not true, but it seems to feed your pity party. Stick to the article , noone is picking on you or your kids. Everyone has opinion about article and it is not about you personally ,even when you try to make it about you.
Its about finding solutions to welfare system in general, the article was not about YOU. "

HAPPY ONE wrote on May 23, 2008 9:37 AM:

" (cont) now this is totally off subject of article, but if encouraged kids to work summers jobs- they would be less likely to get into trouble, and develop more self esteem. Also would