View Story | 256 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
On us.
"Truck Stop Women," a New Film By Phil Gramm and John McCain.
by bink on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 05:27:20 AM PDT
I think we are examining two sides of the same issue - my diary (which as i write is also on the recommended list) examines the loss of hope for a better future for many, examines the increasing economic inequity in this country.
The numbers of those without medicalinsurance increases, as is true with those needing food assistance, or assistance to pay for heating fuel . . .
and the administration keeps cutting the threads of the social safety net
do we still have a Republic and a Constitution if our elected officials will not stand up for them on our behalf?
by teacherken on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 06:31:07 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
Out of food.
"Somewhere. Someone's god is laughing." - Three Days Grace
by Intercaust on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 06:57:06 AM PDT
Barack Obama -- The President we were promised as kids!
by Jimdotz on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 07:11:47 AM PDT
As no one should have go without food in this country. It is positively obscene that in this country with so much prosperity, that people are going hungry. We help other countries, but we have to help our own in this country as a top priority.
Granted, more and more the Prosperity of this country is seem by fewer and fewer people but those of us with even a little can help out somewhat.
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Martin Luther King Jr.
by wishingwell on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 08:24:09 AM PDT
it makes you sick to think that in many places there are people going hungry just down the road. Not only is there an issue with economic inequity in this country, there is a real problem with greed, over-indulgence and waste.
$300 billion spent in Iraq would have fed a lot of Americans. This administration has its priorities totally wrong. At this rate there won't be an America to "defend", but maybe that's what they want as they enjoy the fat cat lifestyle.
by Mysteron on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 08:43:39 AM PDT
$300 billion = $100 per American. That would have fed every single person living in this country for a month.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. - George Orwell
by kyril on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 09:07:11 AM PDT
Only if there were three billion Americans. I think the real amount is more like $1,000 per person.
by bink on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 09:09:12 AM PDT
Smack me, I lost a decimal. Ok, every American for almost a year.
by kyril on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:17:21 AM PDT
and we still don't have nearly enough food. the prices in silicon valley are absolutely excruciating. it costs $4.59 for a gallon of milk. $3 for a loaf of bread. $5 for a pound of meat. i've been eating frugally for years, but there's a point when you can't be any more frugal - you just starve.
The modern news media draws half its power from coils placed around the spinning in Edward R. Murrow's grave.
by aigeanta on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:44:24 AM PDT
buying trips. The showrooms in my market was full of free food and beverages all day long with a couple of 'great' cocktail hour 'fashion shows'. The group of buyers that I traveled with would meet for 'dinner' around 8. By the time I ate my fav salad and bread, the entree was 'too much'. I always got the 'doggie bag' and on the walk back to the hotel I would either leave it by a homeless person sleeping in a doorway or set it on the sidewalk someplace.
That was when the meme was don't feed the homeless, 'cause it just 'encourages' them. If you don't feed them, they will just 'go away'.
Another real gag me is the amount of 'free food' that doctors-administrators get while those that clean up after them for very low wages have to pay.
"...fighting the wildfires of my life with squirt guns."
by deMemedeMedia on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:17:01 AM PDT
Certainly not as popular in other parts of the world even though it is still found there (England, Australia, New Zealand from my own experiences), the doggie bag is classic evidence of the waste in our society. Why don't restaurants just serve smaller portions? Is there some perception that serving smaller meals is mean and/or stingy or do people get the feeling that they are just not getting value for money if the portions are smaller?
In a world where so many people go hungry it is shameful to see people taking home a doggie bag and letting it site in the refrigerator for a week before throwing it out.
by Mysteron on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 11:34:05 AM PDT
Cutting portions would help with other problems as well. Not only would there be more food to go around in situations like those detailed in the diary, but Americans would be in better health.
Portion sizes in the U.S. are often double what is recommended. In many cases, one meal has more calories than what's recommended for an entire day. Once you start to cut back to "normal" portions, you realize just how much excess you were eating (and didn't need to nourish yourself).
Better health, more manageable weight, more food to spread around to others, less waste -- plus it gets you thinking about how wasteful you might be in others areas without realizing it.
by donnas on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 11:49:30 AM PDT
This is the reason that the US has rediculously high instances of things like diabetes. When I was in my 20's diabetes was a rare thing, now it seems that everyone I know is getting it because of poor nutrition.
Having spent most of my life in Australia and New Zealand I am staggered at the amount of suger in food here as well as the growing instances of obesity.
It seems such an easy solution, reduce portions, improve our health and as a result provide more food to go around.
People have to realise that big pharma wants people to be obese and unhealthy for as long as they are, they will increase profit margins. This is the bind we find ourselves in - the healthcare industry won't insure us because of a prevalent unhealthy lifestyle and big pharma wants us to remain sick. The sooner there is a revolution in healthcare in this country the better.
by Mysteron on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 01:43:53 PM PDT
Odd as that may seem, hunger is a money shortage.
If you have enough money, you eat.
If you don't, you won't.
That was true in the 1800s, the 1900s, and now, everywhere in the world.
Time for a change.
"Injustice wears ever the same harsh face wherever it shows itself." - Ralph Ellison
by KateCrashes on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 05:29:51 PM PDT
I hadn't seen that phrase used before, but had heard of this new Bushism. If you go to the site and plug in your zip code, it will tell you the hunger stats for your county. SF's "food insecurity rate" is 11.5%.
NetrootNews coming soon!
by ksh01 on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 08:14:50 AM PDT
for hunger used by the Bushies now. Doesn't sound quite as heartless as "starving", does it. Cold, distant and impersonal. Just like the repubs.
Barack Obama Respects Your Opinion
by DJShay on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 08:34:55 AM PDT
of us struggling to pay our exhorbitant mortgages are "roof insecure". Those suffering under death by spreadsheet are "Wellness insecure". Those who died as a result of corporate insurance company greed are "life outsourced".
by KibbutzAmiad on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:06:33 AM PDT
'Food insecurity' was a phase Bush introduced into the lexicon early into his administration, to replace the work 'hunger.' It reminds me of Reagan, and ketchup is a vegetable.
Obama/Gore
by Village expects idiot home soon on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:08:42 AM PDT
I would say that it's worse this year...
by califdem on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:16:20 AM PDT
year period, 04-05-06. And probably skewed by the Bushies reporting and math/accounting methods like everything else.
Refusing to identify a problem and quantify it properly is just more of the problem.
Up thread I posted a 'story' about leaving my 'doggie bag' of clean food where a homeless person could access it without dumpster diving. My point was that "don't feed them" and they will go away/ Get them off of the streets so they are not visible so they don't exist totally sucks. Also, the 'gap' between the 'have alots get the perks' and the 'struggling to have not have to pay' is grossly disgusting.
I would reinforce this with a story my son told pointing out how his peers who were comfortable in the college-suburbia cocoon had no idea about the 'world'. After his first WestPac cruise, he recalled his ship dumping garbage in the Philippines with locals digging through it for morsels. As he pointed out the food waste, etc. was mixed with spit, other gross things like used kleenex, and general garbage.
by deMemedeMedia on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 12:25:45 PM PDT
Which site?
We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.
by dconrad on Sun Dec 23, 2007 at 03:13:00 AM PDT
And every year, our so-called leaders just ignore it and refuse to do anything about it, and the policies they set during the rest of the year often make it worse.
Shame on us indeed.
Seven score and five years ago... -7.62, -6.36
by wiscmass on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 08:31:35 AM PDT
When Bush emphasizes Red Cross donations over the government helping a city that's been destroyed, it's not a stretch to believe that he thinks hunger and homelessness should also be handled by individual charitable giving.
Like the woman Bush praised for being "uniquely American" for working three jobs -- even though she had to do it to make ends meet -- I'd guess he thinks it's enough that uniquely American fellow citizens are charitable at this time of the year.
by donnas on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 11:54:01 AM PDT
Our local food pantry does not accept clothing items, but, they have a voucher program in place with Goodwill. When items are dropped off, you just indicate the clothes are on behalf of the center and then they can refer people to get clothing at the Goodwill.
I just recently learned about this, and regret I didn't know about it sooner. You might inquire at your local pantry, shelter, etc. to see if they have a similar program set up. It costs you nothing and benefits someone else.
Fight for Peace.
by operculum on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 09:13:26 AM PDT
our local YMCA is sponsoring a 'coat collection' after Xmas, urging people who got a new one to donate their old one...I'm planning to hit Goodwill and buy up a bunch of their half-price sale-day coats and jackets in various sizes (men/women/kids) and take them to the Y....that way I can afford twice as many and select for quality/warmth/etc.
Tell me how you spend your time and how you spend your money -- I'll tell you what your values are.
by oldpro on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:01:59 AM PDT
This year our County Dem Party took on a project to support the Albuquerque chapter of the NM Veterans Reintegration Center, which houses and counsels vets who become homeless or arrive back in the U.S. and run into trouble finding jobs, housing, etc.
They took donations of food, clothing, towels, personal and miscellaneous items and money to buy coats and other things that weren't donated in adequate numbers. We also collected donations at this month's DFA Meetup. The amount and quality of the stuff donated was amazing. A real outpouring.
This past Thursday the Party had a holiday potluck, where more donations were received. After the meal everyone pitched in to put together a big gift box for each resident at the center. Today, other vols wrapped the packages and organized the extras for use by the center in the future, then took everything over to the vet center using a festive trailer with hand made kicking donkeys and Christmas lights.
Granted, all this helped only a relatively small number of people in need of both material support and holiday spirit, but the whole project turned out to be very moving for all involved. The plan has now evolved into making projects like this a regular Party activity through the year. The need is certainly there.
Just think if Party organizations, grassroots groups, etc. around the country each did something like this. It would make a real dent.
Visit my blog DemocracyForNewMexico: NM grassroots politics and activism
by barbwire on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 09:43:51 PM PDT
Everytime I read another petty arguement on this site.
I don't care if I'm accused of spamming or TR'd, if people don't understand what this means and react to it they don't get my respect.
When harmonious relationships dissolve, respect and devotion arise; when a nation falls to chaos, loyalty and patriotism are born - Daodejing (paraphrased)
by koNko on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 09:56:42 AM PDT
...and a cruel hoax. Under Bush, in addition to the food banks being stretched past their limits, hundreds of thousands of poor full-time working families have lost their food stamp safety net, too. This is just an example of these idiots' cold-hearted attitudes to our lower income famlies' plight:
Punishing Food Stamp Program Success: The Bush Administration's Farm Bill would reverse Oregon’s progress against hunger by Michael Leachman and Janet Bauer July 17, 2007 snipet
The Bush Administration has proposed eliminating $543 million in food stamp benefits for about 329,000 low-income Americans over the next five years. The Agriculture Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives may soon vote on this proposal as an amendment to the 2007 Farm Bill. Oregonians would suffer a larger share of the reductions than most states. Under the Administration’s plan, a minimum of approximately 41,530 low-income Oregonians, including about 17,000 children, would lose food stamp benefits. While Oregonians comprise less than two percent of the national food stamp program caseload, Oregonians losing food stamp benefits would equal about 13 percent of the total number of people nationwide who would be cut (Figure 1 see PDF). Oregonians losing food stamps under the Administration’s proposal would also lose automatic eligibility for a number of other programs, since eligibility for these other programs is linked to food stamp receipt. For instance, about 12,600 Oregon children would lose automatic eligibility for free school lunches and breakfasts under the Administration’s proposal.
The Bush Administration has proposed eliminating $543 million in food stamp benefits for about 329,000 low-income Americans over the next five years. The Agriculture Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives may soon vote on this proposal as an amendment to the 2007 Farm Bill.
Oregonians would suffer a larger share of the reductions than most states. Under the Administration’s plan, a minimum of approximately 41,530 low-income Oregonians, including about 17,000 children, would lose food stamp benefits. While Oregonians comprise less than two percent of the national food stamp program caseload, Oregonians losing food stamp benefits would equal about 13 percent of the total number of people nationwide who would be cut (Figure 1 see PDF).
Oregonians losing food stamps under the Administration’s proposal would also lose automatic eligibility for a number of other programs, since eligibility for these other programs is linked to food stamp receipt. For instance, about 12,600 Oregon children would lose automatic eligibility for free school lunches and breakfasts under the Administration’s proposal.
http://www.ocpp.org/...
"Great men do not commit murder. Great nations do not start wars". William Jennings Bryan
by ImpeachKingBushII on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:04:59 AM PDT
The poorer the poor are, the richer the rich are.
by KateCrashes on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 05:40:28 PM PDT
Hunger in America
I am a democrat because it's very much in the Christian tradition (not that one, the real one) to help others in need.
It breaks my heart. :(
by califdem on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:14:51 AM PDT
Would it be a good Idea to update this diary with links to each campaign and a form letter or talking points to request the candidates to speak-out publicly to define thier positions and publicize the problem?
Or if they fail to, to fillow-up with a second Diary here to request people stop making campaign contributions and send the money to local foodbanks instead with copy to the campaign requesting support?
No work,no pay.
That's they way iot works for the rest of us.
by koNko on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 10:16:24 AM PDT
How about asking each campaign to take what they'd spend on 1 week's TV ad budget and donate it to food banks...
by barbwire on Sat Dec 22, 2007 at 09:53:45 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 256 comments