Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.

Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
> good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
> because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>
> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>

many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol. It is
much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.

On 9/6/2014 11:09 AM, sf wrote:
>
>
> Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
> good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
> because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>
> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>
>
Interesting read - but how precisely do we change the "food environment
and food system"?

It's well known that most major cities have grocery "deserts" where
convenience stores proliferate.

One of the really good trends that is coming on is community gardens,
oft times replacing older and drug-laden city parks with places folks
can raise a crop and trade labor for fresh veggies.

When you start talking about urban renewal that's a fantastic way to
"seed" good habits and build trust amongst neighbors.

On 9/6/2014 1:20 PM, Pico Rico wrote:

>
> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol. It is
> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>
>

Will trade EBT card for cigarettes too.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
> > good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
> > because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
> >
> > Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
> > classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
> > http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
> >
>
> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol. It is
> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>
Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
poor.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 2014-09-06 3:41 PM, sf wrote:

>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>
>>
>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol. It is
>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>
> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
> poor.

Actually, that opinion has been proven. There is a high correlation
between poverty and alcohol and drug abuse. For some people, it is a
matter of priorities, and they will spend their money getting drunk or
stoned rather than spending it on food, clothing and housing.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2014-09-06 3:41 PM, sf wrote:
>
>>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>>
>>>
>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol.
>>> It is
>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>
>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>> poor.
>
> Actually, that opinion has been proven. There is a high correlation
> between poverty and alcohol and drug abuse. For some people, it is a
> matter of priorities, and they will spend their money getting drunk or
> stoned rather than spending it on food, clothing and housing.
>

add to that the correlation of drug and alcohol abuse during the "learning
years" and you have a built in lifelong problem.

On 9/6/2014 1:41 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
>>> good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
>>> because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>>>
>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>
>>
>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol. It is
>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>
> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
> poor.
>
>
No one tests them for alcohol, or cigarettes.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articl...be-drug-tested

"If adopted, this amendment would join a list of good-government reforms
contained in the farm bill to save taxpayer money and ensure integrity
and accountability within our nutrition system," Hudson said.

Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
addicted to drugs

"Mayo" > wrote in message ...
> On 9/6/2014 1:41 PM, sf wrote:
>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
>>>> good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
>>>> because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>>>>
>>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>>
>>>
>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol.
>>> It is
>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>
>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>> poor.
>>
>>
> No one tests them for alcohol, or cigarettes.
>
> http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articl...be-drug-tested
>
> "If adopted, this amendment would join a list of good-government reforms
> contained in the farm bill to save taxpayer money and ensure integrity and
> accountability within our nutrition system," Hudson said.
>
> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
> addicted to drugs

but if means testing for income tax is ok, which indicates a possible
addiction to work and thrift . . .

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> >
>> > Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
>> > good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
>> > because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>> >
>> > Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>> > classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>> > http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>> >
>>
>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol. It
>> is
>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>
> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
> poor.

I was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly bankrupt.
Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so hard they cannot
afford their water bills and their supply is being turned off I would
like to think that they can find such generous folk as those here, so that
at least their children can get breakfast!

I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 9/6/2014 2:20 PM, Pico Rico wrote:
> "Mayo" > wrote in message ...
>> On 9/6/2014 1:41 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
>>>>> good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
>>>>> because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol.
>>>> It is
>>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>>
>>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>>> poor.
>>>
>>>
>> No one tests them for alcohol, or cigarettes.
>>
>> http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articl...be-drug-tested
>>
>> "If adopted, this amendment would join a list of good-government reforms
>> contained in the farm bill to save taxpayer money and ensure integrity and
>> accountability within our nutrition system," Hudson said.
>>
>> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
>> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
>> addicted to drugs
>
> but if means testing for income tax is ok, which indicates a possible
> addiction to work and thrift . . .
>
>
Um, yes.

On 9/6/2014 2:20 PM, Ophelia wrote:
>
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
>>> > good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
>>> > because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>>> >
>>> > Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>> > classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>> >
>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and
>>> alcohol. It is
>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>
>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>> poor.
>
> I was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly
> bankrupt. Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so
> hard they cannot afford their water bills and their supply is being
> turned off I would like to think that they can find such generous
> folk as those here, so that at least their children can get breakfast!
>
> I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.
>
D, as in Detroit.

Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
urban graveyard.

"Mayo" > wrote in message ...
> On 9/6/2014 2:20 PM, Ophelia wrote:
>>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
>>>> > good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
>>>> > because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>>>> >
>>>> > Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of
>>>> > all
>>>> > classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>>> >
>>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and
>>>> alcohol. It is
>>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>>
>>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>>> poor.
>>
>> I was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly
>> bankrupt. Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so
>> hard they cannot afford their water bills and their supply is being
>> turned off I would like to think that they can find such generous
>> folk as those here, so that at least their children can get breakfast!
>>
>> I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.
>>
> D, as in Detroit.

Ahh yes!


> Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
> urban graveyard.
>

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:10:58 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
> addicted to drugs

Yes.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 21:20:54 +0100, "Ophelia"
> wrote:

> was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly bankrupt.
> Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so hard they cannot
> afford their water bills and their supply is being turned off I would
> like to think that they can find such generous folk as those here, so that
> at least their children can get breakfast!
>
> I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.

Detroit is a glaring example, but many cities are on the precipice.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:42:37 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

> On 9/6/2014 2:20 PM, Ophelia wrote:
> >
> >
> > "sf" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> "sf" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
> >>> > good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
> >>> > because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
> >>> >
> >>> > Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
> >>> > classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
> >>> >
> >>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and
> >>> alcohol. It is
> >>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
> >>>
> >> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
> >> poor.
> >
> > I was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly
> > bankrupt. Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so
> > hard they cannot afford their water bills and their supply is being
> > turned off I would like to think that they can find such generous
> > folk as those here, so that at least their children can get breakfast!
> >
> > I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.
> >
> D, as in Detroit.
>
> Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
> urban graveyard.

Driven into receivership by the Republican lead politicians of
Michigan.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:52:41 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 2014-09-06 3:41 PM, sf wrote:
>
> >>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
> >>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
> >>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
> >>>
> >>
> >> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and alcohol. It is
> >> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
> >>
> > Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
> > poor.
>
> Actually, that opinion has been proven. There is a high correlation
> between poverty and alcohol and drug abuse. For some people, it is a
> matter of priorities, and they will spend their money getting drunk or
> stoned rather than spending it on food, clothing and housing.
>
Oh? You have my permission to tell the state of Florida that your
findings are different from theirs.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 9/6/2014 3:21 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:10:58 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
>> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
>> addicted to drugs
>
> Yes.

Uh, no...

It certainly says there is a problem at that income level and there is),
but I would not leap to the conclusion that it stigmatizes all recipients.

If anything it raises up the vast majority who pass.

On 9/6/2014 3:22 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 21:20:54 +0100, "Ophelia"
> > wrote:
>
>> was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly bankrupt.
>> Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so hard they cannot
>> afford their water bills and their supply is being turned off I would
>> like to think that they can find such generous folk as those here, so that
>> at least their children can get breakfast!
>>
>> I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.
>
> Detroit is a glaring example, but many cities are on the precipice.
>
>
It was mentioned before, perhaps you recall the name of the California
city with they absurdly high salaries for the city administrators?

On 9/6/2014 3:23 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:42:37 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> On 9/6/2014 2:20 PM, Ophelia wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 10:20:16 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
>>>>>> good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
>>>>>> because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>>>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>>>>>
>>>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and
>>>>> alcohol. It is
>>>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>>>
>>>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>>>> poor.
>>>
>>> I was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly
>>> bankrupt. Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so
>>> hard they cannot afford their water bills and their supply is being
>>> turned off I would like to think that they can find such generous
>>> folk as those here, so that at least their children can get breakfast!
>>>
>>> I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.
>>>
>> D, as in Detroit.
>>
>> Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
>> urban graveyard.
>
> Driven into receivership by the Republican lead politicians of
> Michigan.
>
>
Chicken/egg?

Where was the damage done which led to insolvency?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3303624.html

DETROIT, May 19 (Reuters) - Bond restructurings, negotiated settlements
with bondholders and bond insurers, and tough talk with unionized
workers are on the agenda as Detroit's emergency financial manager tries
to meet a self-imposed, six-week deadline to decide whether the city can
get through its financial crisis without a bankruptcy filing.

Kevyn Orr, a former bankruptcy lawyer, in his first report to the state
of Michigan since Governor Rick Snyder appointed him, laid out last week
a bracing picture of steps he may need to take to address the city's
troubles.

As he has gone about his work, though, with unions, bond insurance firms
and others, Orr so far has communicated little about how they will be
affected.

Orr's spokesman, Bill Nowling, said the emergency manager expects to
decide soon whether talks with the affected parties will get the job
done. "It's safe to say we will have a good idea of whether we can reach
an out-of-court restructuring with our bondholders, pensioners, retirees
and city employees within six weeks," Nowling said.

"This is not going to be a prolonged process. We are in a financial crisis."

The Detroit story has taken on outsized importance. Once a symbol of
U.S. industrial might, the city now represents something different
altogether: a case study of the struggles many U.S. cities and states
are enduring as they grapple with crippling debt and untenable
obligations to public workers.

And as Orr begins initial talks with Detroit's employees and creditors,
the process raises worrisome parallels with historic precedents close to
home. Five years ago, the leaders of General Motors and Chrysler were
undertaking similar preliminary steps with their creditors and workers,
only to find that negotiations and concessions were not enough to avoid
bankruptcy. Orr represented Chrysler during its restructuring.

Orr is moving forward on two major fronts: with creditors and workers.
With bond holders and bond insurers, he is sending signals - but has not
yet met with them. He is taking an aggressive approach to the unions
representing the city's public safety workers but has not yet sat down
with dozens of others.

Ideally, restructuring experts said, all stakeholders should be invited
to participate early in the process.

Detroit's debt is one of Orr's top targets because payments on the $2.9
billion of general fund debt - including $1.45 billion of pension
obligation certificates and associated interest rate swap contracts -
accounts for about 19 percent of the city's general fund budget, Orr
reported to the state.

Orr last week said Detroit will have enough cash to meet obligations
through December, though portions of pension payments may again be
deferred. In the 2014 fiscal year, which begins July 1, Detroit will
need to pay $565 million to service its debt and another $112 million
toward pension obligation certificates, according to a preliminary
budget Orr released last week.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_bankruptcy

On August 2, the bankruptcy court set a hearing date of October 23,
2013, for trial on any objections to the city's eligibility for Chapter
9 bankruptcy, and March 1, 2014, as the deadline for the city to file a
bankruptcy plan.[8] After a nine day trial on eligibility, the
Bankruptcy Court on December 3, 2013, ruled Detroit eligible for Chapter
9 on its $18.5 billion debt.[9] On June 3, 2014 the Michigan Legislature
passed a package of bills to help Detroit avoid further bankruptcy
proceedings.[10] On the same day, Governor Snyder pledged to sign the
package of bills.

n May 2014, Michigan House of Representatives Speaker Jase Bolger
announced the formation of a special committee, House Committee on
Detroit's Recovery and Michigan's Future, to help Detroit settle the
bankruptcy while protecting Michigan taxpayers statewide.[78] The
committee introduced legislation giving Detroit's retirement systems a
$194.8 million lump sum.[78] As well, legislation was passed to create
an oversight commission to aid Detroit's recovery.[78]

Bolger also called on unions to make contributions to help in the
Detroit settlement.[79] Bolger requested unions to make a material
contribution that is reflective of other parties involved in the
settlement.[79] Speaker Bolger's request did not come without
opposition, the Detroit Free Press wrote an editorial suggesting that
Governor Rick Snyder should convince Bolger to drop his request of labor
unions, or the governor should bypass Bolger.[80] Other critics wrote
that Bolger's request would imperil the settlement.[81] On the other
hand, the Detroit News editorial board wrote in support of labor unions
contributing, but noted that the likelihood was slim.[82] Bolger held
firm to his request, and beginning with the Michigan Building and
Construction Trades Council, some unions did agree to make material
contributions towards health care costs to help with the Detroit
bankruptcy settlement.[83] After unions agreed to contribute money
towards the settlement, the Michigan House passed legislation with major
bipartisan support.[84] Governor Snyder called the legislative package
an opportunity to change the direction of Detroit.[84] Upon passage, the
Detroit News called the final legislative package a "grand piece of
work," and the Detroit Free Press opined that the deal showed lawmakers
"get it."


So it looks from the actuals that Republicans managed to craft a plan to
SAVE Detroit.

And their newspaper agreed.

On 2014-09-06 5:21 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:10:58 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
>> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
>> addicted to drugs
>
> Yes.
>


If they are not.... not a problem. Some people don't want to be expected
to support people who spend they money on dope and booze. Some people
don't want to be expected to support people who waste their lives
drinking and doing drugs. Some people are willing to pay to help
support those who have problems that make it difficult for them to earn
a living.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:42:37 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

>D, as in Detroit.
>
>Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
>urban graveyard.

Not quite. You guys built cars nobody wanted, and with inferior
quality into the bargain. Just like the Australian automotive industry
did, who took too long to adapt to change... and is now dead because
of it.

Any action by unions only compounded the problem, but then, what
American or Australian would work for wages that made the industry
sufficiently competitive? None would. There's always illegal aliens, I
suppose.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 18:07:10 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2014-09-06 5:21 PM, sf wrote:
>> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:10:58 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>>
>>> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
>>> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
>>> addicted to drugs
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>
>
>If they are not.... not a problem. Some people don't want to be expected
>to support people who spend they money on dope and booze. Some people
>don't want to be expected to support people who waste their lives
>drinking and doing drugs.
snip
You talking about your elected politicians?
Janet US

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 17:21:53 -0600, Janet Bostwick
> wrote:

>On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 18:07:10 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>
>>If they are not.... not a problem. Some people don't want to be expected
>>to support people who spend they money on dope and booze. Some people
>>don't want to be expected to support people who waste their lives
>>drinking and doing drugs.
>snip
>
>You talking about your elected politicians?

Mind you, they don't have a monopoly when it comes to hypocritical
politicians, by any means.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 18:07:10 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> On 2014-09-06 5:21 PM, sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:10:58 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
> >
> >> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
> >> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
> >> addicted to drugs
> >
> > Yes.
> >
>
>
> If they are not.... not a problem. Some people don't want to be expected
> to support people who spend they money on dope and booze. Some people
> don't want to be expected to support people who waste their lives
> drinking and doing drugs. Some people are willing to pay to help
> support those who have problems that make it difficult for them to earn
> a living.
>
Taxpayers are paying a bloody fortune to find a needle in a haystack.
Guess who founded the company that does the testing and whose wife
holds the controlling share "in trust"? Yep. Gov Rick Scott.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:40:01 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

>
> So it looks from the actuals that Republicans managed to craft a plan to
> SAVE Detroit.
>
BS. They aren't saving anything.

> And their newspaper agreed.

Yeah, The Free Press is a (union hating) Gannett owned publication.
Why am I not surprised.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:32:22 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

> On 9/6/2014 3:22 PM, sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 21:20:54 +0100, "Ophelia"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly bankrupt.
> >> Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so hard they cannot
> >> afford their water bills and their supply is being turned off I would
> >> like to think that they can find such generous folk as those here, so that
> >> at least their children can get breakfast!
> >>
> >> I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.
> >
> > Detroit is a glaring example, but many cities are on the precipice.
> >
> >
> It was mentioned before, perhaps you recall the name of the California
> city with they absurdly high salaries for the city administrators?

Sorry, I don't. It's a very small "city" somewhere in the LA area.
Maybe this is it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Bell_scandal

Both
Stockton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockton,_California
and
Vallejo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallejo,_California
went bankrupt, but the state didn't manipulate them into bankruptcy
and California didn't throw out the constitution by removing elected
officials from office and installing an emergency manager as a
dictator who does not answer directly to the local voters. See Benton
Harbor, Michigan.

Oakland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland,_California
is slowly climbing out of the financial mess it was in - a lot of the
improvement is due to gentrification. Families (and businesses) that
can't afford San Francisco and the peninsula locate over there.

The entire state of California was in a huge mess after the Enron
scandal and further mishandling of state finances by the Governator.
Thanks to belt tightening by Jerry Brown, the budget crisis is almost
over. Too bad California lost the Tesla battery "gigafactory" bid,
but he wasn't prepared to give away the farm by way of incentive
packages to gain unskilled labor jobs that pay basically minimum wage.
We don't need to support any more people at the poverty level.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 9/6/2014 5:13 PM, Jeßus wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:42:37 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> D, as in Detroit.
>>
>> Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
>> urban graveyard.
>
> Not quite.

Yes quite, you're not living here, so don't pretend to know what happens
in this nation.

> You guys built cars nobody wanted, and with inferior
> quality into the bargain.

Inferior quality the UAW helped propagate and assist with.

> Just like the Australian automotive industry
> did, who took too long to adapt to change... and is now dead because
> of it.

We're still taking your last Holden Monaros.

> Any action by unions only compounded the problem,

No, they actively helped grow it.

> but then, what
> American or Australian would work for wages that made the industry
> sufficiently competitive? None would. There's always illegal aliens, I
> suppose.

Oddly Americans are more than happy to work for non-union manufacturers
here like BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, Toyota, etc...

You've inserted your slack opinions into a subject you're ill prepared
to discuss.

On 9/6/2014 5:21 PM, Janet Bostwick wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 18:07:10 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2014-09-06 5:21 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:10:58 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Democrats say the amendment allowing drug testing of recipients is
>>>> offensive because it implies that those who rely on the program are
>>>> addicted to drugs
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>
>>
>> If they are not.... not a problem. Some people don't want to be expected
>> to support people who spend they money on dope and booze. Some people
>> don't want to be expected to support people who waste their lives
>> drinking and doing drugs.
> snip
> You talking about your elected politicians?
> Janet US
>
Or many of ours!

sf wrote:
>
> Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
> good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
> because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
>
> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/

A very large portion of the problem is education. Unless you learn how
to cook and what constitutes a healthy diet you are unlikely to have a
healthy diet. The cost angle is bogus, it has been shown time and again
that healthy food does not cost more than unhealthy food, you just have
to shop smarter to find healthy food at non-inflated prices. Indeed the
ethnic markets which tend to be more accessible to the poor also tend to
have better prices on a lot of food, including nice healthy non
overpriced non organic produce. The problem is generational ignorance in
the inner city minority areas, if your parent served unhealthy food and
you dropped out of school you probably aren't going to learn how to
cook, shop smart or formulate a healthy diet.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 19:36:17 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

>On 9/6/2014 5:13 PM, Jeßus wrote:
>> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:42:37 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>>
>>> D, as in Detroit.
>>>
>>> Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
>>> urban graveyard.
>>
>> Not quite.
>
>Yes quite, you're not living here, so don't pretend to know what happens
>in this nation.
>
>> You guys built cars nobody wanted, and with inferior
>> quality into the bargain.
>
>Inferior quality the UAW helped propagate and assist with.
>
>> Just like the Australian automotive industry
>> did, who took too long to adapt to change... and is now dead because
>> of it.
>
>We're still taking your last Holden Monaros.

Good. You can have them!

>> Any action by unions only compounded the problem,
>
>No, they actively helped grow it.
>
>> but then, what
>> American or Australian would work for wages that made the industry
>> sufficiently competitive? None would. There's always illegal aliens, I
>> suppose.
>
>Oddly Americans are more than happy to work for non-union manufacturers
>here like BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, Toyota, etc...
>
>You've inserted your slack opinions into a subject you're ill prepared
>to discuss.

Bullshit. Youre just a troll, with generic american insecurities that
go along with all that. End communication.

On 06/09/2014 1:52 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2014-09-06 3:41 PM, sf wrote:
>
>>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and
>>> alcohol. It is
>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>
>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>> poor.
>
> Actually, that opinion has been proven. There is a high correlation
> between poverty and alcohol and drug abuse. For some people, it is a
> matter of priorities, and they will spend their money getting drunk or
> stoned rather than spending it on food, clothing and housing.
>
>
JEEEESUS!!! These arguments are >150 years old with the well-off wanting
to condemn the poor to the slums of the 19th century.
HAVEN'T YOU LEARNED ANYTHING?

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:06:47 -0600, graham > wrote:

>On 06/09/2014 1:52 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2014-09-06 3:41 PM, sf wrote:
>>
>>>>> Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
>>>>> classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
>>>>> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> many of the poor seem to find a way to buy illegal drugs and
>>>> alcohol. It is
>>>> much easier when the taxpayer picks up their living expenses.
>>>>
>>> Your opinion hasn't been proven to be true via mandated testing of the
>>> poor.
>>
>> Actually, that opinion has been proven. There is a high correlation
>> between poverty and alcohol and drug abuse. For some people, it is a
>> matter of priorities, and they will spend their money getting drunk or
>> stoned rather than spending it on food, clothing and housing.
>>
>>
>JEEEESUS!!! These arguments are >150 years old with the well-off wanting
>to condemn the poor to the slums of the 19th century.
>HAVEN'T YOU LEARNED ANYTHING?

Nope. And they never will.

On 9/6/2014 5:56 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:40:01 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>>
>> So it looks from the actuals that Republicans managed to craft a plan to
>> SAVE Detroit.
>>
> BS. They aren't saving anything.

They sure are, needed and expected pensions will be paid.

>> And their newspaper agreed.
>
> Yeah, The Free Press is a (union hating) Gannett owned publication.
> Why am I not surprised.

They are?

I wonder why a Detroit paper would hate unions?

;-)

On 9/6/2014 6:41 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:32:22 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> On 9/6/2014 3:22 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Sat, 6 Sep 2014 21:20:54 +0100, "Ophelia"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> was listening to a report about a city in USA which is nearly bankrupt.
>>>> Many people have lost their jobs and are finding things so hard they cannot
>>>> afford their water bills and their supply is being turned off I would
>>>> like to think that they can find such generous folk as those here, so that
>>>> at least their children can get breakfast!
>>>>
>>>> I can't remember the name, I think it began with a B.
>>>
>>> Detroit is a glaring example, but many cities are on the precipice.
>>>
>>>
>> It was mentioned before, perhaps you recall the name of the California
>> city with they absurdly high salaries for the city administrators?
>
> Sorry, I don't. It's a very small "city" somewhere in the LA area.
> Maybe this is it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Bell_scandal

Yes, that IS the one I was thinking of.

> Both
> Stockton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockton,_California
> and
> Vallejo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallejo,_California
> went bankrupt, but the state didn't manipulate them into bankruptcy
> and California didn't throw out the constitution by removing elected
> officials from office and installing an emergency manager as a
> dictator who does not answer directly to the local voters. See Benton
> Harbor, Michigan.

I'll research that, thanks.


> Oakland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland,_California
> is slowly climbing out of the financial mess it was in - a lot of the
> improvement is due to gentrification. Families (and businesses) that
> can't afford San Francisco and the peninsula locate over there.

Very positive.

> The entire state of California was in a huge mess after the Enron
> scandal and further mishandling of state finances by the Governator.

And don't forget Gray Davis and your state assembly mandating utilities
sell off generation assets and buy spot power.

> Thanks to belt tightening by Jerry Brown, the budget crisis is almost
> over.

I've read some analysis that suggests it's only been forwarded.

> Too bad California lost the Tesla battery "gigafactory" bid,
> but he wasn't prepared to give away the farm by way of incentive
> packages to gain unskilled labor jobs that pay basically minimum wage.
> We don't need to support any more people at the poverty level.

But what you DO need is as many Supercharger stations as you can get and
the Gigafactory would have dovetailed nicely with your Tesla assembly plant.

Critical mass is nothing to wave across the border.

Btw, I knew NM was only being used as a stalking horse.

The backup plant will either land in Arizona or Texas, if it is built -
my opinion.

On 9/6/2014 7:45 PM, Jeßus wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 19:36:17 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> On 9/6/2014 5:13 PM, Jeßus wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:42:37 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>>>
>>>> D, as in Detroit.
>>>>
>>>> Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
>>>> urban graveyard.
>>>
>>> Not quite.
>>
>> Yes quite, you're not living here, so don't pretend to know what happens
>> in this nation.
>>
>>> You guys built cars nobody wanted, and with inferior
>>> quality into the bargain.
>>
>> Inferior quality the UAW helped propagate and assist with.
>>
>>> Just like the Australian automotive industry
>>> did, who took too long to adapt to change... and is now dead because
>>> of it.
>>
>> We're still taking your last Holden Monaros.
>
> Good. You can have them!

LOL!

They have awesome Corvette engines here!


>>> Any action by unions only compounded the problem,
>>
>> No, they actively helped grow it.
>>
>>> but then, what
>>> American or Australian would work for wages that made the industry
>>> sufficiently competitive? None would. There's always illegal aliens, I
>>> suppose.
>>
>> Oddly Americans are more than happy to work for non-union manufacturers
>> here like BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, Toyota, etc...
>>
>> You've inserted your slack opinions into a subject you're ill prepared
>> to discuss.
>
> Bullshit.

Fact.

> Youre just a troll, with generic american insecurities that
> go along with all that. End communication.

Insecurities?

It is to laugh.

But I do predict the whole Chrylser-FIAT mess will end badly, trust me.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:16:20 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

> On 9/6/2014 5:56 PM, sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:40:01 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> So it looks from the actuals that Republicans managed to craft a plan to
> >> SAVE Detroit.
> >>
> > BS. They aren't saving anything.
>
> They sure are, needed and expected pensions will be paid.
>
> >> And their newspaper agreed.
> >
> > Yeah, The Free Press is a (union hating) Gannett owned publication.
> > Why am I not surprised.
>
> They are?
>
> I wonder why a Detroit paper would hate unions?
>
> ;-)

LOL! Because it's a Gannett publication, silly goose.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 19:36:17 -0600, Mayo > wrote:

> On 9/6/2014 5:13 PM, Jeßus wrote:
> > On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 14:42:37 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
> >
> >> D, as in Detroit.
> >>
> >> Ruined by the greedy auto unions, plagued by corrupt leadership, now an
> >> urban graveyard.
> >
> > Not quite.
>
> Yes quite, you're not living here, so don't pretend to know what happens
> in this nation.
>
> > You guys built cars nobody wanted, and with inferior
> > quality into the bargain.
>
> Inferior quality the UAW helped propagate and assist with.
>
> > Just like the Australian automotive industry
> > did, who took too long to adapt to change... and is now dead because
> > of it.
>
> We're still taking your last Holden Monaros.
>
> > Any action by unions only compounded the problem,
>
> No, they actively helped grow it.
>
> > but then, what
> > American or Australian would work for wages that made the industry
> > sufficiently competitive? None would. There's always illegal aliens, I
> > suppose.
>
> Oddly Americans are more than happy to work for non-union manufacturers
> here like BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, Toyota, etc...

Don't forget that those manufacturers would be willing to work with
unions if they weren't inhibited by the states they are located in.
>
> You've inserted your slack opinions into a subject you're ill prepared
> to discuss.



--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:40:08 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>
> sf wrote:
> >
> > Higher costs and limited supermarket access are cited as barriers to
> > good health. Of course, fair and amusement park food isn't mentioned
> > because as with recreational drugs, poor people can't afford it.
> >
> > Notice that the article says: Today **two-thirds** of Americans of all
> > classes are overweight or obese, with higher rates among the poor.
> > http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...r-food-health/
>
> A very large portion of the problem is education. Unless you learn how
> to cook and what constitutes a healthy diet you are unlikely to have a
> healthy diet. The cost angle is bogus, it has been shown time and again
> that healthy food does not cost more than unhealthy food, you just have
> to shop smarter to find healthy food at non-inflated prices. Indeed the
> ethnic markets which tend to be more accessible to the poor also tend to
> have better prices on a lot of food, including nice healthy non
> overpriced non organic produce. The problem is generational ignorance in
> the inner city minority areas, if your parent served unhealthy food and
> you dropped out of school you probably aren't going to learn how to
> cook, shop smart or formulate a healthy diet.

Are you old enough to remember when schools used to have classes,
called Home Economics, focused on that concept? They were told to
stop doing it in order to focus on college prep. So, are you
proposing that they should be vilified for not providing the classes
they were forced to stop?

WOW - it's Catch 22 all over again.


--
Avoid cutting yourself when slicing vegetables by getting someone else to hold them.

On 9/6/2014 9:35 PM, sf wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:16:20 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>
>> On 9/6/2014 5:56 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:40:01 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So it looks from the actuals that Republicans managed to craft a plan to
>>>> SAVE Detroit.
>>>>
>>> BS. They aren't saving anything.
>>
>> They sure are, needed and expected pensions will be paid.
>>
>>>> And their newspaper agreed.
>>>
>>> Yeah, The Free Press is a (union hating) Gannett owned publication.
>>> Why am I not surprised.
>>
>> They are?
>>
>> I wonder why a Detroit paper would hate unions?
>>
>> ;-)
>
> LOL! Because it's a Gannett publication, silly goose.
>
>
I have watched Gannet TV news and read USA Today and I find it to be
impartial, albeit the McNews moniker applies.

In a way that very brevity takes it back journalistically to just what
it should be 5 Ws and and H.

Yes they have op-ed, but it doesn't bleed into the reportage.