<p>Good grief. I haven't had ice cream in over a year and now all I can think about is a bowl of ice cream.
[quote]
Rising food costs mean that for one Ohio family, meat and ice cream are out of reach
[/quote]
<p>I'm not gonna lie, I laughed when I saw their picture</p>
<p>^^^^ lol, I couldn't help but laugh.</p>
<p>So they cut back on expensive items like meat, and they don't buy extras like ice cream anymore. Instead, they eat a lot of starches like potatoes and noodles.</p>
<p>But the serious point of the article is that, without a car, she can't get a job; without a job, she can't get a car. We need mass transit.</p>
<p>I almost thought it was satire when I saw the picture, but then I saw the NPR. They could afford to skip a few meals. </p>
<p>It's too bad though that healthy food tends to be more expensive.</p>
<p>I'm from Ohio, and I know quite a few people in similar situations. But for a lot of people, it's not really that they can't get a job, they're just too lazy to get one. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but I know of too many people who live on Social Security, settlements, and disability. It's easier for them to make money that way than to work. But the transportation thing is definitely an issue. In Ohio (as in most other states), only the largest cities have bus service. I couldn't even tell you where the nearest bus stop is. I'm pretty sure there are none in my county.</p>
<p>I find the funniest part about the article is you can "enlarge" the picture.<br>
NPR must have a wicked sense of humour.</p>
<p>This is so important:
"But the serious point of the article is that, without a car, she can't get a job; without a job, she can't get a car. We need mass transit."</p>
<p>A lot of low income people are very overweight. That's because many of the cheapest types of food have a high fat content. Also the supermarkets in low income areas tend to sell things unhealthful, fat full foods like lard, things that you don't find in markets in higher income areas.</p>
<p>"Because people of higher socio-economic backgrounds have more access to healthy foods and more money to spend on the recommended diet of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, lean meats and fish, they have a leg up on dodging the obesity epidemic, according to many experts.</p>
<p>Conversely, nutrition experts believe, and studies show people of lower socio-economic backgrounds, opt to buy cheaper foods -- white bread and sugary treats, for example -- that tend to be unhealthy.</p>
<p>This is compounded by the fact that low-income areas generally have fewer grocery stores and higher concentrations of fast-food restaurants, not to mention fewer outdoor spaces and parks for exercise.</p>
<p>The limited outdoor space, the lack of grocery stores, and the high cost of produce in poor areas create the perfect recipe for obesity.</p>
<p>Gloucester illustrates the advantage wealthier people have in the fight against the obesity epidemic. With a median income of $48,000 -- $6,000 above the national median -- it has a single McDonald's, four large supermarkets, seven beaches, five parks, two fitness centers, and one yoga studio-a sharp contrast to a poor urban neighborhood."
The</a> Boston University Washington Journalism Center</p>
<p>If I were to run the food stamp program, all program participants must pass some kind of test first. They must know what kind of food to look for, buying things in bulk, etc... Food stamp has certain restrictions to buying generic store brand only, no soft drinks, no ice cream, no nonsense stuffs. The mom should have her tube tied as a condition to continue getting foodstamp or welfare. The government should seriously facilitate Darwinism.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The mom should have her tube tied as a condition to continue getting foodstamp or welfare. The government should seriously facilitate Darwinism.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's really f'd up. It could easily turn into something that targets minorities. We all know how great the government is. </p>
<p>I agree that the last thing they should do in that situation is have a kid, but tubes tied is extreme. What these two ladies should do is walk to work and eat less. The government should do a better job at getting more healthy food selections to the lower class considering how widespread obesity is nowadays. </p>
<p>For some reason this reminds me of the mass sterilization of lower class Puerto Rican women by the U.S. government. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, for this reason, a "license to breed" would never work out.</p>
<p>That policy sounds way too Chinese for my approval.</p>
<p>Potatoes and noodles? Well, that explains it. Couldn't they try to cut on the quantity, not the quality? It's within every healthy person's reach to reduce the amount of calorie intake, especially when it's obviously grossly excessive. Don't get me wrong, I think that what happened to this family and many others is tragic. However, I don't think they are managing their resources as well as they could.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That's really f'd up. It could easily turn into something that targets minorities. I agree that the last thing they should do in that situation is have a kid, but tubes tied is extreme.
[/quote]
They are considering it and let's cut to the chase, she's not pregnant yet because she couldn't find anyone to procreate with. It's a vicious cycle. These people can't take care of themselves. I still can't believe how retarded our system is. Welfare should be a temporary solution to help them to get back on their feet.</p>
<p>"Welfare should be a temporary solution to help them to get back on their feet."</p>
<p>Agreed. Even welfare in the nearly-socialist European nations is not as generous as US welfare. The government has a responsibility to help these people find jobs, but if the people themselves are unwilling to work these jobs or make the least bit of effort to maintain them, to hell with them. It's not fair that I work and they get to use my tax money to bum around all day.</p>
<p>The highest unemployment rate of the four counties adjoining this city is 6.8% (as of June 2008). Contrast that with some counties in next door Indiana where the unemployment rate is up to 11.5%. A used car can be had for a few hundred. Sell the high priced car and pay off the loan. Insuring only 1 designated driver might be another 100/month (get the highest manageable deductible). Most work at home schemes are scams, but perhaps they can supplement their government assistance with babysitting income, sewing, etc. The minimum wage in Ohio is $7, contrast that with the minimum wage in Indiana ($5.85 today). The one without the GED should get one right away. Their situation has more hope than smaller towns with less opportunities farther away from sizeable cities that have much higher unemployment rates, such as parts of rural Indiana, compared to which they have it much better. Ultimately, move out of the townhouses, sell any property, and move somewhere with a better economic climate.</p>
<p>Actually, Fostoria (city featured in the article) isn't that big. It has less than 15,000 people. But it has a bad reputation for having a high crime rate, and just being a crummy city.</p>
<p>Really the minimum wage doesn't matter very much. Usually, the only people who make minimum wage are high school students or maybe people just starting at a new job. Most places pay well above that.</p>
<p>My solution to food stamps: Make it where only certain items are on the list of things they can purchase. They don't need Skittles, orange drink (you know, the coke?), or lobster. They need bread, meat, vegetables, fruit. Food stamps are supposed to SUPPLEMENT, not be the sole provider. It makes me so mad when people with food stamps buy the un-necessary expensive items and then complain about not getting enough stamps. Maybe if you'd trade that lobster tail in, you could get at least a 3 day supply of chicken. Those 4 liters of orange crap could easily be your side dishes for those 3 days. Also, you don't have to have the brand names. I bet I could easily live off of food stamps for a month if I had to.</p>
<p>Doesn't seem like they were working before the car broke down anyway. There are programs that allow poor people to eat better, they just have to choose to do so. I know this because I have given out healthy staples of food out to poor people. It's about making choices.</p>