Meghan Noecker wrote:

> Like I said, I am lousy picking fruit. I wish I could find my favorite
> fruits canned so that I could just enjoy the ones I like, without the
> ones I don't.

You might be lousy picking fruit, but it sounds more like you're lousy
at letting fruit "ripen" to the proper degree? Some things, like those
pears, need to ripen. Did you know that??

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:44:10 -0800, Christine Dabney
> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:38:59 -0500, "Dee Randall"
> wrote:
>
>>>> It would, but I'm married to a carpenter who can get materials for
>>>> free!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's just getting him to do it.
>>>>
>>>> kili
>>
>>> <lol> Old story..... :-)
>>> It's hard to get someone to do for free at home what they normally do
>>> for a living.
>>> --
>>> Peace, Om.
>>
>>Here's the trick -- just hint that you might be thinking of something that
>>will cost money $$$$. That gets the ball a-rollin' around my house. But it
>>has to get to the point of desperation first!
>>Dee Dee
>
>Yeah, I was thinking along those lines too..... Like looking in a
>catalogue, or online, and saying: "Look at these shelves, I think they
>would be perfect for my needs...maybe I should order these? "

I know y'all are probably joking (or mostly joking), but I just
shudder when I think of using tricks on my partners to get them to do
what I want. If I can't do it myself and they don't seem inclined to
do it, I have other options. Trickery seems like an icky precedent to
set in a marriage.

serene

jmcquown wrote:
>
> That's my problem in a nutshell. I saved money (as much as possible) over a
> total of a 25 year period so I have more "assets" (I'm not talking about
> physical property like my car) than allow me to qualify. What the regs
> don't take into consideration is I'm depleting those assets because I don't
> qualify for any help. By the time I do qualify, I'll have absolutely
> nothing to fall back on. At my age, it's not a comforting thought to be
> eating through my "retirement" while other people buy sodas and junk food
> using government benefits.

That is the problem of all responsible people living in social
societies, that they are "punished" for thinking ahead.

In denmark you can choose to save up for a rainy day (if your expences
are too large for normal welfare), or to spend that money on an
insurance that ensures that your welfare for X years will be Y % of your
salary (the cost for the insurance depends on X and Y). However, the
money you make sure you have cannot make up for all the free services
the welfare dependant people recieves, especially if they are single
parents. Women are speculating in getting children and then divorced,
because they get homes, free institutions, xtra welfare payments, etc.
worth much more than a man could earn at a job (you have to earn twice
the amount to get it, because of the 50-67% tax).

Cheryl Perkins wrote:
> You have savings - the benefits are for people who do not have savings;
> that is, they are for people who are poorer than you are.

The bad side of the coin is that those poorer people may have had more
money than Jill ever had but chose to have fun with it, instead. And it
is bad to show them that it was the best choice. I'm not saying penalize
them for bad choices, but don't award them for it. At least in Denmark,
the retirement funds are not included in the assets evaluation. It is
stuff like cars you don't need for work (which you can sell), expensive
homes (just move to a smaller, cheaper place), etc.

>>>Here's the trick -- just hint that you might be thinking of something
>>>that
>>>will cost money $$$$. That gets the ball a-rollin' around my house. But
>>>it
>>>has to get to the point of desperation first!
>>>Dee Dee
>>
>>Yeah, I was thinking along those lines too..... Like looking in a
>>catalogue, or online, and saying: "Look at these shelves, I think they
>>would be perfect for my needs...maybe I should order these? "
>
> I know y'all are probably joking (or mostly joking), but I just
> shudder when I think of using tricks on my partners to get them to do
> what I want. If I can't do it myself and they don't seem inclined to
> do it, I have other options. Trickery seems like an icky precedent to
> set in a marriage.
>
> serene

It IS an icky precedent and one that one never wants to resort to. No
marriage is perfect, least of all mine, but it has been going strong for 33
years March 13 this year. Actually I tricked him into marrying me -- tee
hee!
Dee Dee

Jen wrote:
>
> I can too. But at the same time, I think, where will it end! First it's
> aspecific amount of money just for food, then (as many here think it should
> be), it's specific types of food, how long before people are told *exactly*
> what they should buy and eat, and not be able to make any choices for
> themselves anymore.

I know a E.R. doctor in San Francisco and they give welfare cash to
homeless addicts, but they spend it on alcohol and drugs, so the E.R. is
chaotic the day they get the welfare. That money would be better spent
on shelters and free food courts.

"Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen" > wrote in
message ...
> Cheryl Perkins wrote:
>>
>> Yes, that's the disadvantage of a system like Jill's - it does not
>> provide assistance to those who do have savings, which means that someone
>> who has saved for retirement may end up in exactly the same position as
>> someone who never bothered to save (or who was never able to save). But,
>> as you point out, there are other methods which can provide some benefits
>> to people who aren't destitute, which presumably would allow them to
>> maintain their retirement funds and cost the system less in old age.
>
> It is a good investment to help people, who will be able to take care of
> themselves again after a period, through tough times. It is a better
> investment than throwing resources after people, whom you know never will
> be able to support themselves anyway. I'm not saying "screw them" but I
> don't see why only help those (like a eternal monetary respirator).

The System/Government is never without self interest and is never moved to
good works through a charitable heart. Without assistance programs, society
would be overrun by areas of overcrowding, disease and intense crime. Over
time this would begin to spill out over greater and greater areas and lead
to more discontent/disease and threaten the fabric of society as a whole.
Janet

Lena B Katz wrote:
>
> I think those have about the caloric content of... 450 calories? maybe?
>
> And when I buy them, they're generally for about a dollar... or less.

You can get 450 cals worth of lard cheaper, and it is equally healthy

A pound of ground beef on sale is how much? It can be stretched.
A chunk (e.g. breast) of beef on sale for soup is how much?

Whn I'm low on cash I can make a huge potful of something based on e.g.
3lbs of ground beef and beans and veggies (whatever is in the house).
That is max an hour and I have for a week of dinner and lunch.

>
> And I'd tell you that the only cereals i can get for less than two
> dollars are probably those "hip" cereals. Grapenuts are never on sale.

How about eggs or leftover dinner? I remember they are cheaper in the US
than DK.

>> I suppose that's a good excuse; not having time. I don't know too many
>> places where you can go fill out a job application after 5 or 6PM,
>> even at
>> businesses that have operations going during the night. Besides, you
>> gotta
>> sleep sometime.
>
>
> wtf? haven't you ever heard of online applications?

It is funny about Denmark. The welfare system requires 2 applications
per month, so when people are called to a meeting after e.g. 6 months
they have to write 12 applications a coiuple of days before they go, so
they can show something. It is too beneficial to be unemployed.

When I was abou tto be unemployed, I contacted my "unemployment union"
to register my C.V. (resume) but got the error "can't register when you
have a job". I called them and said "hellooooo, I want a job waiting
before I'm done" and that made them activate me. Amazing that that is
uncommon behaviour.

> I make a pot of chili -- it takes about three hours. It feeds two for
> two days. Yes, i am assuming it takes ten hours to cook. For me, it
> would, even if done in bulk.

When I'm working up to a deadline and work 14 h a day, I still cook.
Breakfast can be an omelet of 3 eggs and some cream and bell pepper.
takes 20 minutes (while I get dressed). Leftover dinner for lunch. A
fried piece of meat (plus the one I need for lunch the next day) and
some veggies for dinner (cooking time 20 min.). I believe the time is
worth it. There's always something I can throw together fast even if I
didn't plan anything.

Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen wrote:
>> I'm also registered on two "job search" web sites. I did attend
>> classes and become a licensed life, accident and health insurance
>> agent (again; I was licensed from 1984-1999 but never actually used
>> the license for anything); so I have two resumes on these sites for
>> two different types of employment. The only thing the insurance
>> license has netted me is companies wanting me to sell Medicare
>> supplements to the elderly.
>
>
> When you have a car, you can make a quality homecooked food service.
> You
> can cook healthy food for people, who don't have the time and won't
> eat
> the junk fast food. Either cook from your home or in their kitchens
> (I've seen that in DK, where you call for a chef to cook the meals in
> your own home).

That opens up a whole new can of worms (so to speak!). I'll admit I have
only skimmed some information on the "personal chef" thing but it appears
only well-off people hire these services. And the chefs providing the
services consist of people with a culinary degree or certification. And if
you are qualified to offer such services, you also have to be willing to
cook for a large party.

Here's a quote from one site which lists a few of these businesses in TN:
"Chefs for hire are highly trained individuals with a culinary background
and the ability to prepare any type of meal. Perhaps your on a healthy, low
fat high fiber diet and don't have the time or energy to shop for, and
prepare the food yourself, a personal culinary chef service is the natural
choice. Culinary chef services are usually available for events to prepare
food and beverage items right there in front of the guests. The Chef will
prepare the dish to the taste of the particular guest, with the amount of
salt, spice and fat the guest wants. The Cook will buy all the necessary
ingredients before the event and have them on hand to prepare a culinary
masterpiece each and every time. "

I enjoy cooking, don't get me wrong. But I pretty much only know how to
cook things *I* like. I sure couldn't prepare anything and everything
someone might want for their dinner or "event". I certainly don't have the
skill or patience to prepare a dish to each particular guests
specifications. If someone hired me to cook for 25 people and 4 of them
required no salt, 3 of them were diabetic, 10 of them were low or
no-carbing, yada yada yada, I'd probably shoot myself

Jill

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Crabby Angel wrote:

> ~what TICKS me off BAD that there is TOTALLY something wrong with this
> picture --> seeing them dressed in brand new clothes, new shoes, and
> designer handbags, wearing gold, PLUS they are driving a 2005 SUV's,
> their kids have play stations and they all have cellphones. Excuse me if
> i am mistaken BUT They sure don't look like they need help to me.

these people are undoubtedly contributing to the underground economy.
Just because they aren't working legally, doesnt' mean they aren't
working... Or that they aren't making minimum wage (most drug dealers
make less than minimum wage...).

Lena

On Thu 23 Mar 2006 07:38:24a, Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it jmcquown?

> Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen wrote:
>>> I'm also registered on two "job search" web sites. I did attend
>>> classes and become a licensed life, accident and health insurance
>>> agent (again; I was licensed from 1984-1999 but never actually used
>>> the license for anything); so I have two resumes on these sites for
>>> two different types of employment. The only thing the insurance
>>> license has netted me is companies wanting me to sell Medicare
>>> supplements to the elderly.
>>
>>
>> When you have a car, you can make a quality homecooked food service.
>> You
>> can cook healthy food for people, who don't have the time and won't
>> eat the junk fast food. Either cook from your home or in their
>> kitchens (I've seen that in DK, where you call for a chef to cook the
>> meals in your own home).
>
> That opens up a whole new can of worms (so to speak!). I'll admit I
> have only skimmed some information on the "personal chef" thing but it
> appears only well-off people hire these services. And the chefs
> providing the services consist of people with a culinary degree or
> certification. And if you are qualified to offer such services, you
> also have to be willing to cook for a large party.
>
> Here's a quote from one site which lists a few of these businesses in
> TN: "Chefs for hire are highly trained individuals with a culinary
> background and the ability to prepare any type of meal. Perhaps your on
> a healthy, low fat high fiber diet and don't have the time or energy to
> shop for, and prepare the food yourself, a personal culinary chef
> service is the natural choice. Culinary chef services are usually
> available for events to prepare food and beverage items right there in
> front of the guests. The Chef will prepare the dish to the taste of the
> particular guest, with the amount of salt, spice and fat the guest
> wants. The Cook will buy all the necessary ingredients before the event
> and have them on hand to prepare a culinary masterpiece each and every
> time. "
>
> I enjoy cooking, don't get me wrong. But I pretty much only know how to
> cook things *I* like. I sure couldn't prepare anything and everything
> someone might want for their dinner or "event". I certainly don't have
> the skill or patience to prepare a dish to each particular guests
> specifications. If someone hired me to cook for 25 people and 4 of them
> required no salt, 3 of them were diabetic, 10 of them were low or
> no-carbing, yada yada yada, I'd probably shoot myself

Or, your could shoot those 17 people instead! Then you would only have to
cook for 8.

--
Wayne Boatwright o¿o
____________________

BIOYA

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen wrote:

> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> That's my problem in a nutshell. I saved money (as much as possible) over
>> a
>> total of a 25 year period so I have more "assets" (I'm not talking about
>> physical property like my car) than allow me to qualify. What the regs
>> don't take into consideration is I'm depleting those assets because I
>> don't
>> qualify for any help. By the time I do qualify, I'll have absolutely
>> nothing to fall back on. At my age, it's not a comforting thought to be
>> eating through my "retirement" while other people buy sodas and junk food
>> using government benefits.
>
> That is the problem of all responsible people living in social societies,
> that they are "punished" for thinking ahead.
>
> In denmark you can choose to save up for a rainy day (if your expences are
> too large for normal welfare), or to spend that money on an insurance that
> ensures that your welfare for X years will be Y % of your salary (the cost
> for the insurance depends on X and Y). However, the money you make sure you
> have cannot make up for all the free services the welfare dependant people
> recieves, especially if they are single parents. Women are speculating in
> getting children and then divorced, because they get homes, free
> institutions, xtra welfare payments, etc. worth much more than a man could
> earn at a job (you have to earn twice the amount to get it, because of the
> 50-67% tax).

Speaking of denmark... Do all traditional folktales from there end with
the storyteller heading off to get some beer? (I've been reading a book
of folktales or two, and only the Danish ones seem to end like that...)

Lena

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen wrote:

> Lena B Katz wrote:
>>
>> I think those have about the caloric content of... 450 calories? maybe?
>>
>> And when I buy them, they're generally for about a dollar... or less.
>
> You can get 450 cals worth of lard cheaper, and it is equally healthy

not sure i could _find_ lard around here. and cheese and tomato gotta
have some nutrients that lard doesn't have.

> A pound of ground beef on sale is how much? It can be stretched.
> A chunk (e.g. breast) of beef on sale for soup is how much?

a chunk of beef on sale is about $3 a pound. _on sale_

> Whn I'm low on cash I can make a huge potful of something based on e.g. 3lbs
> of ground beef and beans and veggies (whatever is in the house). That is max
> an hour and I have for a week of dinner and lunch.

Got a dollar figure for that? (and a recipe?)

>> And I'd tell you that the only cereals i can get for less than two dollars
>> are probably those "hip" cereals. Grapenuts are never on sale.
>
> How about eggs or leftover dinner? I remember they are cheaper in the US than
> DK.

i eat leftover dinner for breakfast frequently.

but two pounds of french fries for a dollar is a good deal for me! (and my
breakfast this morning...)

I rarely eat eggs -- other member of household is "allergic" (I'm betting
it's a contamination issue of either sulfur or metals... it doesn't always
strike, but it's better not try unless you need to. i still bake cakes.)


>> I make a pot of chili -- it takes about three hours. It feeds two for two
>> days. Yes, i am assuming it takes ten hours to cook. For me, it would,
>> even if done in bulk.
>
> When I'm working up to a deadline and work 14 h a day, I still cook.
> Breakfast can be an omelet of 3 eggs and some cream and bell pepper. takes 20
> minutes (while I get dressed).

hmmm... is this cooking unsupervised?

> Leftover dinner for lunch. A fried piece of
> meat (plus the one I need for lunch the next day) and some veggies for dinner
> (cooking time 20 min.). I believe the time is worth it. There's always
> something I can throw together fast even if I didn't plan anything.

guess my dishes just take longer...

lena

Lena B Katz wrote:

> Speaking of denmark... Do all traditional folktales from there end with
> the storyteller heading off to get some beer? (I've been reading a book
> of folktales or two, and only the Danish ones seem to end like that...)

They seem to like their beer. It is the only thing that I found to be cheap
there. And it's good beer. There are few gatherings, including church dinners,
that do not include beet.

In article >,
says...
> Lena B Katz wrote:
>
> > Speaking of denmark... Do all traditional folktales from there end with
> > the storyteller heading off to get some beer? (I've been reading a book
> > of folktales or two, and only the Danish ones seem to end like that...)
>
> They seem to like their beer. It is the only thing that I found to be cheap
> there. And it's good beer. There are few gatherings, including church dinners,
> that do not include beet.
>
>

Now there's a Freudian (or perhaps Foodian) slip!

Peter Aitken

Dave Smith a écrit :

> Jen wrote:
>
> > Maybe if people stop thinking of it as *their* money, and think of it as
> > money pooled in to improve the country. Geez the US is full of rich people
> > who could afford it.
>
> Sure there are lots of people who can afford it. There are also a lot who
> can't. I like to think that the people who can afford to pay taxes should pay
> more, but I make more than a lot of other people and they might be thinking the
> same about me.

Sort of like that old line about the politician running on a platform
to tax the rich. After the election, the people who voted for him
fuind out they *are* the rich :-)

jmcquown wrote:

> I enjoy cooking, don't get me wrong. But I pretty much only know how to
> cook things *I* like. I sure couldn't prepare anything and everything
> someone might want for their dinner or "event". I certainly don't have
the
> skill or patience to prepare a dish to each particular guests
> specifications. If someone hired me to cook for 25 people and 4 of them
> required no salt, 3 of them were diabetic, 10 of them were low or
> no-carbing, yada yada yada, I'd probably shoot myself
>


You'd also probably also have insurance/liability costs doing something like
this...and a whole range of other costs.

--
Best
Greg

Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen wrote:

> Jen wrote:
> >
> > I can too. But at the same time, I think, where will it end! First
it's
> > aspecific amount of money just for food, then (as many here think it
should
> > be), it's specific types of food, how long before people are told
*exactly*
> > what they should buy and eat, and not be able to make any choices for
> > themselves anymore.
>
> I know a E.R. doctor in San Francisco and they give welfare cash to
> homeless addicts, but they spend it on alcohol and drugs, so the E.R. is
> chaotic the day they get the welfare. That money would be better spent
> on shelters and free food courts.


That's the People's Republic of San Francisco for you :-)

Back in the 60's you could go out to the Bay Area and immediately sign up
for all kinds of benefits, e.g. welfare, food stamps, medical care, cash
grants, etc. That's one of the reasons why the "Summer of Love" happened
back in 1967. You could be a penniless kid and hitchhike out to SF, get a
friendly hippie doctor at the free clinic to certify you as "disabled" and
thus qualify for the freebies. Housing was cheap as you could share a house
with a bunch of others and pay a few bux for rent; you could become a member
of a "commune" and barter goods and services with other communes...with the
cash and benefits life was basically a big party.

Ronnie Raygun put a stop to a lot of these handouts druing his terms as
governer, he was appalled by the "hippies"...and the rest is history :-)

Now it's a LOT more expensive to go out and get "established" in San
Francisco and the Bay Area :-|

--
Best
Greg

Lefty wrote:
>
> I think that should be pointed out is all, I am not supporting any causes
> here. We are probably more alike than different.

Oh, I'm pretty well certain of that.

> Lefty

--Bryan

alsandor wrote:

> > Sure there are lots of people who can afford it. There are also a lot who
> > can't. I like to think that the people who can afford to pay taxes should pay
> > more, but I make more than a lot of other people and they might be thinking the
> > same about me.
>
> Sort of like that old line about the politician running on a platform
> to tax the rich. After the election, the people who voted for him
> fuind out they *are* the rich :-)

Someone told me a story about revolutionary Russia when a Bolshevik came to a small
town to explain to the peasants how communism works:

Bolshevik - if your neighbour has 30 acres of land and you have only only 10, we take
10 from him and give to you so you both have 20 acres

Peasant - That sounds good.

Bolshevik - If your neighbour has 30 chickens and you only have 10. We take ten of
his and give them to you so you each have 30.

Peasant - That sounds good.

Bolshevik - If you neighbour has 5 cows and you have only one, we take 2 from him and
give them to you so you each have 3.

Peasant - That's sounds good.

Bolshevik - If your neighbour has 10 pigs and you have 2, then we take 4 from him and
give to you so you both have 6.

Peasant - That not good.

Bolshevik - Why not?

Peasant - I have 10 pigs

Gregory Morrow wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>> I enjoy cooking, don't get me wrong. But I pretty much only know
>> how to cook things *I* like. I sure couldn't prepare anything and
>> everything someone might want for their dinner or "event". I
>> certainly don't have the skill or patience to prepare a dish to each
>> particular guests specifications. If someone hired me to cook for
>> 25 people and 4 of them required no salt, 3 of them were diabetic,
>> 10 of them were low or no-carbing, yada yada yada, I'd probably
>> shoot myself
>>
>
>
> You'd also probably also have insurance/liability costs doing
> something like this...and a whole range of other costs.

Exactly; I neglected to mention liability insurance and a business license.

Jill

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Thu 23 Mar 2006 07:38:24a, Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it
> jmcquown?
>
>> Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen wrote:
>>> When you have a car, you can make a quality homecooked food service.
>>> You
>>> can cook healthy food for people, who don't have the time and won't
>>> eat the junk fast food. Either cook from your home or in their
>>> kitchens (I've seen that in DK, where you call for a chef to cook
>>> the meals in your own home).
>>
>> I enjoy cooking, don't get me wrong. But I pretty much only know
>> how to cook things *I* like. I sure couldn't prepare anything and
>> everything someone might want for their dinner or "event". I
>> certainly don't have the skill or patience to prepare a dish to each
>> particular guests specifications. If someone hired me to cook for
>> 25 people and 4 of them required no salt, 3 of them were diabetic,
>> 10 of them were low or no-carbing, yada yada yada, I'd probably
>> shoot myself
>
> Or, your could shoot those 17 people instead! Then you would only
> have to cook for 8.

And at least when I was convicted on multiple murder charges I'd get free
housing and three meals a day Of course, we don't want to talk about
what those meals consist of.

Jill

~patches~ wrote:
> kilikini wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> Yep, Jill's exactly correct. I kind of "got stuck" with my friend
>> because she's one of the few folks in my neighborhood who is of my
>> age and race - not that ethneticity has anything to do with it. I
>> don't live in a good area; I live in crackville. I'm just doing the
>> best I can.
>>
>
> There are a lot of plumbers in your neighbourhood
>
Shades of Dan Ackroyd... eeeek!

jmcquown wrote:

>
> >
> > You'd also probably also have insurance/liability costs doing
> > something like this...and a whole range of other costs.
>
> Exactly; I neglected to mention liability insurance and a business license.

It depends on the way you offer the service. I would think that if you were
hired to cook in the house the liability lies with the home owner.

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:25:14 GMT, Gregory Morrow wrote:

> That's the People's Republic of San Francisco for you :-)

That's any place that offers welfare to citizens. Open your eyes.
What happens the day welfare checks are delivered?
--

Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 14:27:01 +0100, Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen
wrote:

> Jen wrote:
> >
> > I can too. But at the same time, I think, where will it end! First it's
> > aspecific amount of money just for food, then (as many here think it should
> > be), it's specific types of food, how long before people are told *exactly*
> > what they should buy and eat, and not be able to make any choices for
> > themselves anymore.
>
> I know a E.R. doctor in San Francisco and they give welfare cash to
> homeless addicts, but they spend it on alcohol and drugs, so the E.R. is
> chaotic the day they get the welfare. That money would be better spent
> on shelters and free food courts.

Oh, my goodness... you made it sound like doctors are issuing checks
to welfare recipients, which is not the case at all. You also made it
sound like the drug and alcohol problem is limited to San Francisco,
which it's not. Unlike most cities, we have a "Care, Not Cash"
policy. http://www.carenotcash.com/
http://www.sfgov.org/site/dhs_index.asp?id=13701
http://www.sfgov.org/site/mayor_page.asp?id=28677

Welfare is a nationwide problem and the problem of recipients cashing
their welfare checks to spend on illicit drugs and/or alcohol is also
nationwide. If taxpayers in other parts of the nation choose to turn
a blind eye to the issue, that's their call.... but the fact remains
it's not limited to San Francisco (or the Bay Area). In fact, SF has
cut welfare to the point that welfare recipients are now going back to
where they came from. So, AMERICA... face *your* problem and take
care of the sons and daughters who didn't lived up to your hopes and
dreams. Yes, the citizens of SF have QUIT (by official vote)
underwriting their inability to function in the mainstream.

Apparently most of you are reading it here first.... so here is the
message: We are not enabling their addictions and/or insanity anymore.

You gave birth to them and we are not taking responsibility for their
subsequent bad choices. We have seen the light and you can have them
back We thought we could make a difference, but we now admit were
WRONG!.

In fact they are leaving in droves because we've cut their welfare
checks to the point where they need a JOB to live here. So,
acknowledge your wayward children, because they are your problem now.

sf

--

Practice safe eating. Always use condiments.

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:00:33 -0500, ~patches~
> wrote:

>That is rather callous. You never made a mistake or go caught in a
>problem when you were a teen?

And some girls are getting pregnant as an escape route. They get on
welfare and can move out of their parents place that way.

I was shocked when I was 14 and told by another (pregnant) 14 year old
that my paper route didn't pay enough. I should get pregnant and get
on welfare.

I thought that was horrible and rare. But now I hear the kids at work,
teenagers, talking about so and so being pregnant, getting welfare,
etc. It's normal to them. They don't see it as shocking, or even as a
mistake.

My 18 year old co-worker just started a couple weeks ago. She lives in
an apartment with her boyfriend and another couple (that girl is
pregnant). Nobody has a car. Until this week, there weren't enough
keys. She works late and was planning to walk home in the dark through
a bad neighborhood, so we are all taking turns giving her a ride home.
We're terrified of letting her walk home in this area at 10pm.

And a couple days ago, she casually said that she thinks she may be
pregnant. She's making just barely above minimum wage, has no savings,
no transportation, no secue family support, and her housing may not
even be secure (one apartment for two couples with new babies?). But
she doesn't seem to be too worried about it.

It's really sad that these kids don't realize how much work it is
going to be, what a committment it really is, and just think about the
here and now, and that welfare check looks better than working a
minimum wage job.




--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:59:52 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:


>It's unfortunate that they have these across the board rules. Most of
>the grocery stores around here over rotisserie chickens that are a
>pretty good deal. They are a lore more nutritious that a lot of other
>prepared foods that would be eligible because they aren't hot.


Actually, we used to put the leftovers out cold, and then they were
allowed, but my boss won't let us. I don't understand why. It would
increase sales, and doesn't cost us more than changing a label.

I'd rather sell them the cold chicken than an expensive sandwich.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On 20 Mar 2006 11:27:57 -0800, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:


>Lack of medical care can means you don't get treatment for obviously
>serious things like chronic diseases/conditions; it also means more
>mundane things like not having the means to visit a dentist to get
>dental work done so you can feel that you can properly present yourself
>to a prospective employer (who is going to hire someone who is missing
>a front tooth or two?)...


Exactly.

My mom was a teacher for many years. My dad worked for Boeing for
almost 30 years. Both are retired now. It was okay at first. But their
health plan changed when they reached age 62. My mom has several
medical problems, and her prescriptions are over $600 a month. She
gets very little assistance with prescriptions. They thought the new
plan was going to help, but it doesn't really. She has stopped taking
certain prescriptions because of the cost. She'd rather twitch at
night than take the medication for that one. And she has cut off the
daily asthma medication too. She just feels it doesn't help enough to
justify the cost.

Right now, she is calling dentists looking for one that will fix her
tooth. The new plan does not cover dental work, and she has a crown
that has come loose. She is using orajel to keep the pain down. She
went to a dentist toda and needs a root canal.

My parents have worked all their lives, and paid plenty of taxes, but
there is very little help for them now. What a great reward for
productive members of society. They also volunteer at charities. My
mom is the president for the local pregnancy Aid charity. She is there
at least once a week helping to give out supplies to families in need.
She spends hours every week typing in the statistical information that
is required for grant money from the local cities. Without the grant
money, they can't pay the rent, heat, and electricty to run this small
chairty, which is in a building about the size of a one bedroom
apartment. There is no pay for anybody. It is completely volunteer,
and most are elderly women, so they are afraid to touch the computer.
When the cimputer has a problem, or my mom has a problem with the
computer, it's up to me and my sister to fix it. I'm the technical
hardware expert, and my sister is the software expert. My dad is the
handy man to fix anything else that needs work.

It is still very frustrating to see some of them go from one charity
to the next, working the system. Some that refuse anything that isn't
new. (There isn't enough grant money to buy new stuff - we take
donations, and go to garage sales)

Many of these people have better medical help (because of welfare)
than my mom does.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Mon, 20 Mar 2006 22:58:22 GMT, "Jen" >
wrote:


>But the thing is - these people are *human beings*! How can anyone let
>another human being suffer or starve. If we don't help our own kind what's
>going to happen to our society. Yes some people cheat the system. Yes some
>people are stuck in a vicious cycle of poverty for whatever reason. And yes
>some people are really stupid and made really stupid choices. But they're
>human. And these kids that theses single mothers have are not to blame. I
>don't know the answer. But I do know they can't just be ignored and
>neglected.
>


But they aren't starving. We aren't suggesting that they receieve
nothing. But they do seem to be eating better than many of the working
poor.

Why do the NON-working poor get treated better than the working poor?

Why does somebody on welfare get free medical care while somebody
working a minumim wage job doesn't qualify for medical care?

The options are to sit back and take what you can get, or struggle
like hell on your own.

Why isn't there something that rewards the working poor and helps them
move up?

I can't afford to go back to school. I don't make enough money to pay
for school, but I make too much to qualify for assistance. And to do
well. I would need to cut back on hours. I certainly cannot afford to
do that. So, I won't be able to get more education to get me into a
better job. And jobs that I am qualified for are not going to hire me
at the smae or higher rate than I make now.

So, my only options for improving (and affording my own place, etc)
would be management or my own personal business.

I don't think I will ever qualify for manager. They have to do a lot
of kissing up, and I am not good at that. I am better qualified than
my own manager and often have to teach her things, but I see all the
sucking up she has to do, and it makes me gag.

The only promotion in my work that is not management is checker. And
because checker starts at a lower wage than the highest deli clerk, I
would be on a pay freeze for over 3000 hours. At full time 40 hours
(which checkers rarely get, especially those on the bottom), that
would mean over 6 years with no raise. Some years, journeymen get
wages, but nobody else, so if I stay a deli clerk, I can keep getting
those wages, but if I move to checker, I have to wait until I work
those 3000 hours as a checker. Unless I plan to be there for 10 years,
what's the point? I'm better off in the deli. There's no reward for
getting promoted. Just crappy hours and no raise.

So, it's my personal business as my escape plan. It's slowly picking
up, but it's hard when I don't have a lot of time. There's no
assistance for this either. It's all personal financing. If I pick a
show that turns out to be a dud, it's my loss. I've had some shows
that are great and some that are horrible. Nothink like paying a $100+
vendor fee, requesting 4 days off work to go to a show, spend all day
each day there, and come home with les than $50 in sales.

If I buy a product that turns out to be unpopular, it's my loss. Sure,
I can take a tax deduction, but it's still a loss. I still have to pay
taxes on what I earn with my business. And what I do earn goes back
into the business. It certainly doesn't pay any bills yet. All my
vacations from work are working vacations to promote my business. I
use them for weeks when I have multiple shows so that I still have a
paycheck. And once I do go full time on that, I will paying my own
health premiums. No help there. And no tax break.

So, I guess I don't see why we reward those who choose not to work
while not helping those who work hard. I was actually praying for a
strike 2 years ago, because I figured it would be a 1-3 month time
that I could be off work and have the time to spend on my business
full time. I wouldn't have to quit or be fired to have a chance to try
it full time, and I would have a job to go back to. I was already well
stocked on food and some savings, so I was ready to give it a try.
Instead, my co-workers were completely unprepared and accepted the
worst contract we've had in 15 years. A lot of people didn't even
bother to read the contract until after they voted. They were very
surprised at what we accepted.

I'm not saying that some people don't need welfare. But I see hundreds
in my neighborhood alone, who don't feel the need to work. They know
they won't get a high paying job, so they don't even bother. Working
hard doesn't pay that well, so welfare is good enough.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 21:32:39 -0500, ~patches~
> wrote:

>Ok, still trying to wrap my head around this one. So how can anyone
>look in someones grocery cart then see the card and determine they are
>on assistance or not and especially given that someone could have one of
>those cards without being on assistance? We shop a lot in the US.
>Sometimes we use debit card. The card comes out so fast is swiped and
>put away. No one would even know whether it was a credit or debit card.
> Are these some kind of special cards that would flag the user? I
>guess my ultimate question is do these cards in any way single out the user?


Food stamps ARE assistance, just one form of it. It comes from the
same place, just into a different account since it can only be used
for food.

Some people do qualify for food stamps without getting cash along with
it, so while they receive assistance, they only receive that type.

As for the card, it has a distinctive look, at least in my state. So,
unless you don't know about ebt cards, you'll recognize it as one. And
the customer don't hide them. I usually know before the prompt, and
without anything said, that they are paying with an ebt card.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 15:16:58 -0600, OmManiPadmeOmelet
> wrote:

>You can get cans of tuna for 50 cents each. There are frequent sales of
>canned veggies 2 and 3 cans for $1.00. Chicken hindquarters at $.49 per
>lb. Fresh producs is really NOT that expensive when you compare it to
>other things.
>

Where do you shop? I rarely see the cans of tuna for less than a
dollar anymore. Unless you go to Costco.

And the canned veggies? Twice a year for the best sale - 44 cents a
can. I know this because my dog eats green beans as a supplement to
her food. She will gain weight on half a cup of kibble a day, and she
has to maintain a healthy weight due to a heart condition. So, we
giver a quarter cup of kibble and green beans. I need the french style
with NO salt added, which is not made by many brands. So, in November,
they do this great sale. I tell the head night stocker to order big
when the sale comes, and I buy him out every night. Last November, I
bought 130 cans of green beans. It should last me till August or
September. There should be another good sale in June or July, and I
will buy enough to make sure it lasts to November. Otherwise, it is
$1.19 can for the no salt brand, or 79 cent a can for the high salt
brand.

I did buy some chicken breasts (with skin and on the bone) for 99
cents a pound last night. The skinless boneless were on sale for $2.49
a pound. For slightly more work, I saved some money. They are in the
crock pot now, and will be great for use in salads.

--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 20:27:49 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>I think most of us know about nutrition. The problem is applying what we know to
>what we like and what we can afford.
>
>

Yes. What do you do when you hate most veggies, and most fruits, and
mostly like meat? I know what I eat isn't that healthy, but I don't
see many healthy things that I want to eat. If I had to stick with a
purely healthy diet, I would probably be very depressed. I go through
cook books and almost everything in them, even non-healthy books, look
bad to me.


>The dog would love it. It might be hard on you for a while, but after a while you
>will start looking forward to it. My wife is able to keep the weight off. She gets
>up in the morning and takes the dogs for a 1 mile walk. She also comes to the Y
>with me frequently, about three times a week.
>

I started walking my dog again. It's even more exercise than
originally planned. My dog is 12 years old, and small. She has to trot
to keep up with a slow walk. So, I end up carrying her more than half
the way, and usually the hardest parts (uphill, and on the way home).
I didn't exactly plan on carrying a 12 pound weight. But she likes to
go, and it's pretty funny watching the other dog getting jealous, and
Jenny looking so princess-like as she gets the royal treatment.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:11:09 GMT, "Jen" >
wrote:

>
>You certainly have a much better lifestyle if you work. Noone wants to be
>poor. I don't think it's OK at all to blow money on drugs or anything else,
>but we can't FORCE anyone to do anything. We just have to pick up the
>pieces, help where we can, and hopefully help to change things. I'd rather
>they just collect the money, than be homeless or starving. It's not a
>perfect system but At least here we don't have so many living in poverty or
>homeless.


If a bunch of lazy people got to work and stopped taking advantage of
the system, how much money would not be available for better schools,
fixing the roads, and other problems we all deal with.

The people that abuse the system hurt all of us.

We all have a responsibility to do our best and not take advantage of
others.

It's very idealistic to just give them some money, but that doesn't
solve the problem. It just encourages more to take advantage.

How many millions of people in the US are receiving welfare? Has it
really reduced crime? What percentage of those people are actually
productive and off welfare 5 years later?

We give out tons of welfare in our state while our education system
sucks. We'd be better off putting the money into the education system
and get these people out of the rut. And not just the kids. Get the
adults into classes for finances, cooking, job training, etc. That
would be money better spent and might actually make a difference in
people's lives.





--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:58:44 +0000 (UTC), Cheryl Perkins
> wrote:
>
>Well, I'm a taxpayer, but once I've paid my contribution to running the
>country, it's not my money any more, it's the country's. Just like when my
>employer's money hits my bank account - it's not their money after that,
>it's mine.
>

If you don't work, your employer doesn't pay you. They can even fire
you if your work isn't up to standard.

Not so with the government,. They can waste it all, and we still have
to pay. There is very little accountability.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 18:29:10 +0000 (UTC), Cheryl Perkins
> wrote:

>You have savings - the benefits are for people who do not have savings;
>that is, they are for people who are poorer than you are.

So, two people work the same job for the same pay. One saved money.
One wasted money. The business shuts down and both lose their jobs. Is
it really fair that the one who skimped and saved gets punished while
the one who wasted their money gets assistance?

You are making the assumption that the one with savings was somehow
rich, and the poor person has never had any opportunity, but you don't
know that. Why does the one worked hard and saved, have to give up
their returiment money and wait til they are as poor as possible
before receiving any help?

What's the point of saving for retirement if one illness is going to
wipe you out? You might as well spend it now, and take welfare when
you get sick. You're going to broke afterward anyway.



--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Thu 23 Mar 2006 11:16:45p, Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it Meghan
Noecker?

> On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:58:44 +0000 (UTC), Cheryl Perkins
> > wrote:
>>
>>Well, I'm a taxpayer, but once I've paid my contribution to running the
>>country, it's not my money any more, it's the country's. Just like when
>>my employer's money hits my bank account - it's not their money after
>>that, it's mine.
>>
>
> If you don't work, your employer doesn't pay you. They can even fire
> you if your work isn't up to standard.
>
> Not so with the government,. They can waste it all, and we still have
> to pay. There is very little accountability.
>
>
> --
> Meghan & the Zoo Crew
> Equine and Pet Photography
> http://www.zoocrewphoto.com
>

Meghan, I've just been looking at your website and I'm quite impressed
with your pet photography! We have 5 cats; a female bobtail, a male
silver mackerel tabby, 2 male tuxedos, and our latest, a female tuxedo
named Popie. I would really love to be able to have them professionally
photographed, but I doubt I could really afford it. Your work is
wonderful! Here's a candid shot of Popie...just awakening from a nap...

http://i1.tinypic.com/s42tlv.jpg

--
Wayne Boatwright o¿o
____________________

BIOYA

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 17:02:27 -0500 (EST), Lena B Katz
> wrote:


>
>> A 12 oz. bag of those tiny little pizza rolls (which contain next to nothing
>> in terms of filling, BTW, so you're basically eating what amounts to a bit
>> of eggroll wrapper) costs about $4.50.
>
>I think those have about the caloric content of... 450 calories? maybe?
>
>And when I buy them, they're generally for about a dollar... or less.

For a 12ox bag? I think you are referring to the little single serving
boxes with about 9 pieces.

I happen to have a bag (they are quick), so I got it out of the
freezer. The best value (per pound) was the 19.8 ox package with 40
pieces. It was on sale for $3.99, usually $4 something. I don't eat
them very offen. Frankly, I prefer real pizza. But they are quick, fit
in the toaster oven in my room, and I can fix them when I am really
pooped.

One serving is officially 6 pieces (about 3 oz), which is not big
enough for a real meal. One serving is 220 calories, so your 12 oz
serving would be 24 pieces and 880 calories.

When in eat them, I eat 10 pieces. That's enough to be satisfied, and
I can get 4 servings to the bag. When my nephew eats them, he'll eat
half the bag by himself.


>
>So, you tell me you can buy a pound of chicken breast for $3.00?

Yes, it is on sale at Safeway this week for $2.49 a pound. Skinless,
boneless chicken breast. And they have the regular (bone-in, skin)
breasts for only $0.99 a pound right now. I just bought two packages
for $3.09 and $3.28. They had 5 and 6 breasts in them. That's 11
chicken breasts for only $6.37.

I was actually planning to buy a whole chicken, eat the thighs and
wings, give the legs to the dog (I hate chicken legs), and use the
breasts for salad. But this was a much better deal. For the price of
one whole roasted chicken, or $ more than a raw chicken, I can have 11
chicken breasts to cook any way I want.

>
>wtf? haven't you ever heard of online applications?

Well in that case, they should be able to cook. I thought job hunting
was taking all their time. If they are applying online, they can have
time to cook.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 14:55:21 +0100, Michael Archon Sequoia Nielsen
> wrote:

>
>When I'm working up to a deadline and work 14 h a day, I still cook.
>Breakfast can be an omelet of 3 eggs and some cream and bell pepper.
>takes 20 minutes (while I get dressed). Leftover dinner for lunch. A
>fried piece of meat (plus the one I need for lunch the next day) and
>some veggies for dinner (cooking time 20 min.). I believe the time is
>worth it. There's always something I can throw together fast even if I
>didn't plan anything.


I have found that I need to eat right before I start work. I work with
food all day, so I need to go into work not feeling hungry. And if I
eat at home, I would still eat right before I start work. So, rather
than eat twice, I just wait til I get to work, eat something there,
and then start. So, I prepare something beforehand and take it there.
I usually just use one of my lunch plates, only I eat it only for
breakfast that week. So, this week, breakfast is chili. I have two
days off, so I stuck the leftovers in the freezer at work. Some days I
have roast. Some days, it is broccoli beef. Breakfast only takes me
the time it takes to heat it in the microwave at work. Lunch is
something else I heat at work. Dinner is the only one I do at home.

On days off, I may actually cook a breakfast, like eggs. Today, I had
a panini sandwich on my grill. Very tasty. I turned on the grill, put
together my sandwich, then shoved it in teh grill. 3 minutes was
actually a tad too long. Not burned, but I could have pulled it out
sooner. Took me a lot longer to eat it than cook it.


--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:07:26 -0500 (EST), Lena B Katz
> wrote:


>not sure i could _find_ lard around here. and cheese and tomato gotta
>have some nutrients that lard doesn't have.
>

It could be in two places. With the butter on the cold aisle, or with
the crisco on the baking aisle. I just had to look last week. Ours is
only available on the baking aisle. In a tub.




--
Meghan & the Zoo Crew
Equine and Pet Photography
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com