Hunger in America

35 Million I find that hard top believe. Thats like 1 in 8.

First of all in the U.S. you can apply for assistance from the state. In most cities where you see homelessness, its not because shelters are full, in fact a lot of them are empty. Most homeless people are either addicts that choose not to work because they can keep the party going by hustling and panhandling, or the people are mentally ill.

Now I have seen some really poor areas in various states like Alabama, Mississippi, etc.

Now I am sure a lot of people on ATS that live in states around large population areas can attest to this, epecially if they live in the St Louis, Area.

Take East St. Louis, IL, Or large portions of Downtown St. Louis, Mo. or North City in St. Louis, Mo. for example.

Most of these people are under 35 able to work, in fact some of them do work but still collect the govt. assistance!

Tons of inner city poor. A large amount of the population lives apartments or houses being paid for by the state and collecting govt assistance in the form of food and money, but have the latest greatest hip hop clothing, 22" Rims on their DUBS, and SUVs, Cellphones, Cable, Big Screen TVs, Xboxes, etc. What money they get they waste on crap like that, a lot of them sell their food stamps. And most are really overweight. They dont save anything.

BTW most of the people below the poverty line has heat, airconditioning, and lives in a apartment or house that would be on par in size of what middle class Europe lives in.

A large amount of these people are living better then the middle class because of all the taxes to support all these people living on the govt. dole.

reply to post by Xyzzy


yeah i do alot of work in peoples homes and i have to say that more people who live in housing projects collecting social assitance have nicer computers than people who own houses and work for a living. Plus the largest high speed internet subscription areas are all in poor neighborhoods and that is a FACT that anyone who works for a telecommunications company can back me up on. The truth is yes there are alot of people using foodbanks and whatnot, moreso than ever before, but what is not being said is that alot of those people are putting pleasure before business. There is this girl i used to know who would not eat for days and her child ate maybe 1 or 2 very small meals a day, yet she was able to afford internet, computer, satellite dish, big screen tv, brand new living room set and went out to the clubs twice a week. All on social assistance.

reply to post by metaldemon2000


As a matter a fact I worked for at&t for seven years. Although I worked in IT on developing their CLEC ordering systems. But my friends that did outside work for Ameritech/AT&T biggest complaints is how they would come out there and find half/dozen power drops that they couldnt remove from other CLEC's because the customers dont pay their bills and get disconnected then call another carrier for service.

But when I worked in casino industry I had a lot of friends that lived in these places and when you would go there they would have every lastest game system, big screen, etc.

The whole living beyond your means is a whole problem in the U.S. period.
The thing that kills me is I know some people that spend tons on a house and you go in there and their isnt a damn bit of furniture.

[edit on 23-11-2007 by Xyzzy]

reply to post by Xyzzy


yeah we have a ton of problems with unpaid accounts and ordering issues (my favorite being LNP) but the biggest problem in those areas are the high speed provisioning, there are rich neighborhoods where we wont even provision high speed because there arent enough requests, and in poor areas we cant supply enough of it. Dont even mention each place having one or 2 of every satellite dish from each supplier in the region.

Only a small percentage of people who are starving are because of circumstances, and most of those people are only because they are not aware of some of the options they have.

The social assistance programs are necessary yet i believe they should be revised from the ground up to be more fair to those who actually need it and more strict on those who abuse it. Also if they want to throw around statistics mabe the stats should start to include real life variables such as what we are discussing.
I know im going im going to get hanged for saying it but im tired of it being taboo to suggest that not all people below the poverty line or on a social assistance deserve a handout and that we should feel sorry for all of them. Like i said a couple of bad apples.
Im apologising in advance to anyone i may have offended who do require social assistance or live below their means, trust me i understand ive been there myself.
But i definately agree that the healthy stuff be less expensive and the packaged instant stuff be done away with.

as far as how well people are living on the public assistance programs here in the states goes, I think it depends on what state you are talking about. In NY, we often had to try to live on $30 or so dollars a week for groceries...far less than what the government would have given us in food stamps if my husband and I had both quit our jobs and gotten assistance from them. NY state is very generous to their poor, and I wouldn't be too surprised to find that many of the hungry in that state are working making fairly decent wages, just gliding above the guideline for getting that assistance.
We live in the mountains now in Virginia....they aren't as kind to their poor. One girl I was working with was raised in one of the little communities in these mountains....she grew up (1960's) using an outhouse. I wouldn't be surprised if many were hungry sometimes.

We were in oaklahoma in the late 70's I have never seen proverty like that in my life!!! but many of the residents were native american....so, it might be a matter of how our country takes care of the natives..don't know.
by what I understand, life on the reservations in arizona isn't much better.

but anyway, as far as hunger goes...when it comes to kids...
I would just about bet that overall, there are more kids from homes where there's at least one working parent, maybe two going hungry than they are where the parents are too lazy to work...since no work means no income, which means, free food, compliments of the hungry and homeless working class...

raise the danged wages, let everyone earn enough to live, and well, reduce the glutton of the companies that provide the necessities of life, and restrict the public assistance programs to only those who honestly can't work...only then can you say that the people are hungry because they are too lazy to work.

no see you are missing the point. It is always about choice. If you are poor and have kids, feed the kids 1st, then the rest goes to you this is something that most do the opposite however. Also it used to be that if you were poor, working or not, you didnt have the lastest tech, or clothes, and didnt own very many luxuries. During the depression for example, people contructed their own houses, they were small and not up to code by any means but some were constructed well. How many people do you know that are willing to do the same today? Oh no we certainly couldnt live like that, it would go against the high set standards in society. Honestly there is nothing wrong with outhouses, many people who have them are by no means poor and it is a perfectly normal and sanitary way to get rid of waste. Way back when if you were on the dole you didnt have a telephone, everything you owned was second hand, you didnt have a car, but whatever you were able to buy food thats all that matters. These days it is unthinkable to not have a phone or second hand clothes. People would rather starve themselves so they can have the latest and greatest. North America is the worst place for this, if you could see half the poverty around the globe you would think the poorest American inner city ghetto to be rich when compared to those standards.

go ahead, and try to bypass all the rules and regulations, go out and find an unclaimed peice of land to build your house on....good luck!!
one guy around here got into trouble for trying to repair his roof without running the ropes to get permission from the gov't....he went quit awhile without a roof over part of his home while the city debated weather or not he should be able to repair the thing, how it should be done, ect...
or try to raise a goat or a cow in your small yard in the city.
it's just as much that the american public doesn't want the eyesore of proverty glaring them in the face day after day as it is the poor just refusing to live like that, probably more.

as far as second hand clothes....hey, that's what most of my clothes are...have a problem with it, too bad. I imagine our fine government might have one too, since I personally informed them of the reason why I buy my clothes second hand....less sales tax given to idiots who I feel don't deserve my money any more!

as far as the rest of what you say about the best of the best, and all.....
it might sound well and good, but I know for a fact that for some of those WORKING, and unable to pass the guidelines that the gov't uses to determine eligibility for these programs, well, they might not be able to afford the second hand clothes, they might be finding that they have to make a choice between medicine for one kid, a roof covering the whole family's head, or food on the table...forget the danged cable, or new sneakers and the rest....

This site shows how America rates its cities when it comes to wealth,

The poorest and wealthiest places in the United States.

wealth.mongabay.com...

People sometimes do not understand that you can be working and still falling under poverty line.

A job and income do not guarantee that you are living at the nations standards of living.

What can you find edible in the upper east side? well to start how about rats considered a delicacy in India.Taste is actually somewhat mild and great when barbequed. Cats feed on the rats they should be easily trapped. Possums are actually plentiful in about any urban environment you should find some there. Fish can be caught in the river and ocean inlets, watch out for bottom scavengers. Mussels could be scraped from the pier pilings. Roaches like most all insects are high in protein and a few go a long way. AS for vegetables the lowly dandelion can be used for a salad, the flowers deep fried for a wholesome and tasty snack, and the roots can be dried and ground for a coffee substitute. Are there no oak or hickory trees in NYC? The acorns can be dried leached and ground for a very tasty flour that can be used to make anything from bread to pancakes. Any grass in the U.S. is edible but taste bland. What about dumpster diving? You would be surprised at what is thrown away in restaurants and groceries these days. And to answer you question yes I have done and tried them all. And even today while financially stable I sometimes look to the aformentioned foods.

What is wrong with an outhouse?

Respectfully

Reluctantpawn

I made a post on a similar thread a little over a week ago. Those who have already read it please bear with me or skip to the next post:

I sympathize with the plight of those who are hungry, and I'm not trying to minimize the problem. I have been on public assistance in my life and in the past have received food stamps. In addition, there were several food banks where I could get canned goods, etc.

In theory, at least, these two sources of food are available to everyone who needs them. Even illegal residents have access to food banks if they can't get stamps. Unless a person (or their parents) are too sick or too disorganized to know how and where to apply for assistance there shouldn't--at least theoretically--be a problem. Maybe more people need to be put in touch with the proper agencies, and maybe some people in very rural areas need transportation to get there.

America produces enough food for much of the world, and food in this country is cheap compared to many other countries. Having enough to eat should be the privilege of every citizen. I hope the numbers are wrong.