Jump to content
  • Sky
  • Blueberry
  • Slate
  • Blackcurrant
  • Watermelon
  • Strawberry
  • Orange
  • Banana
  • Apple
  • Emerald
  • Chocolate
  • Charcoal
IReallyAmHopewell

Bates on Nightline & TWITTER EVENT & Bates and "one income"

Recommended Posts

IReallyAmHopewell

The BATES use LAWSON'S income, but claim they only use one income. They even teach that in ATI.......hmmmmmmmmm. I suppose the do not "count" that because the pay him back at some point? So much for "no debt".......

 

NIGHTLINE: http://abcnews.go.com/US/tennessee-fami ... 190&page=2

 

Also you can read about the Twitter thing here http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=249523481745673 (Make sure to click on "See More" so you can read all of the instructions)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jessica

Yeah well they also like to claim that "We like to be on the giving end" but then accept free prenatal care. :roll: Free Lawson!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slickcat79
The Bateses do not use food stamps. "I don't take anything from the government. We probably qualify for a lot of things but … I don't want to be a burden on everybody else," Gil said.

But apparently you don't mind being a burden on your teenage son? :x I would be ashamed of myself if I couldn't provide for my family without taking thousands in "loans" from a child as young as 13. Plus they deliberately don't have insurance, so they "take advantage" of other taxpayers every time they use the ER for primary care, get rushed there during a difficult delivery or have their baby in the ICU for 3 weeks and can't pay the bill in full.

Note to Gil Bates: JUST TAKE THE SNAP/WIC/MEDICAID. They are there for people like you! If your 4-year-old continues to have hearing problems and needs treatment, will you forego them because you can't afford them? You shouldn't have had more children than you could afford, but now that they're here they shouldn't have to suffer so that you can hold on to your pride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilwriter85

Gil's comment about not wanting to a burden on the government is pretty stupid. I think some people will defend the Bates tonight when this thing airs. They will probably say that the Bateses are better than people on welfare/wic/ food stamps. I don't think the Bateses are any better than people on food stamps. They sometimes rely on donations from other people and they are burdening Lawson. Some naive people will probably send them clothing and other donations after tonight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IReallyAmHopewell

They have accepted a house, vans, a bucket truck (given by a "group of businessmen"), and who knows what else. I can live with that. But making their son help support them is another thing. I'm happy he helped his sister pay for college though. That was nice. And a car for his siblings--sure, that's fine. But he shouldn't be supporting the family in such ways. I'm disappointed in the Bates on this one--very disappointed.

As for negotiating with hospitals on bills--that's common sense. If you don't have insurance you can almost always negotiate down to what it would be with insurance or similar. I don't think that's evil. It's hard to find a job with health insurance any more, let alone buy it on a self-employed income.

I am surprised they do not participate in a Christian health "share" plan though. Maybe even that is too expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Childless

I feel sorry for the kids in these types of families, but I feel that if I donate to them, then I'm just encouraging their lack of responsibility and disregard for reality. These people need to grow up and take a good hard look at themselves in the mirror. If you cannot provide even the basics for your kids without having to rely on donations and handouts, then you need to stop having kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lizzy

Can somebody clue me in on the deal with Lawson? What does he do that they are taking income from him? Besides, don't they own their own tree business or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YPestis

I think the Bates find gov't handout evil but general donations good since they are not "forced". The only problem with this, as discussed before, is that handouts are not reliable. Would you depend on the kindness of strangers to put food on the table? Food stamps have its own problems but it's regular and it keeps kids from starving.

The Bates do try to keep things economical, but they do so at the expense of their children (re: son working to support family) and they do so at a cost to the taxpayers. They get deductions for each child. I didn't see where they get their healthcare but if they lack insurance, there is a cost. Even if they negotiate, if the bill is very high and they have to pay in installments, it can still cost the hospitals money. A NICU stay alone would put them into bankruptcy if they had to pay it in cash. No amount of donations will cover the stay in full. In these cases of no insurance, even among diligent families, the hospital typically eat most of the cost. That, in turn, gets translated into higher premiums for the rest of us. Nothing is for free.

I guess I feel that despite the Bates and Duggars of the world ascribing to a no debt, no gov't handout thing, they are putting economic stress on others. They pay far less in taxes which would go to support roads and police dept. Having a larger family necessitate more social services that they may not be able to pay (re: NICU, ER stays, public libraries etc). It's not "getting gov't aid" directly, but there is an indirect cost. I guess these fundies don't understand that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
doggie

with them out of site out of mind is what is going on. if they use the emergency room it is a good bet that they are not paying for it. If they planned on paying for it they would go to a clinic it would cost far less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
takers401

I typically don't have a problem with the way the Bates (and Duggars) chose to run their (and their children's lives) as I believe that parents have a right to raise their children the way they want to (baring physcial/emotional harm) and creating a sheltered life is their choice. HOWEVER, finding out that Gil and Kelly take care of their family by relying on their own child's income is HORRIBLE! I could see if they got into a financial pickle and temporarily received assistance from their children until they were back on their feet, but to basically have a second income come from the sweat of their own child. UGH. Not cool, Bates, not cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilwriter85
They have accepted a house, vans, a bucket truck (given by a "group of businessmen"), and who knows what else. I can live with that. But making their son help support them is another thing. I'm happy he helped his sister pay for college though. That was nice. And a car for his siblings--sure, that's fine. But he shouldn't be supporting the family in such ways. I'm disappointed in the Bates on this one--very disappointed.

As for negotiating with hospitals on bills--that's common sense. If you don't have insurance you can almost always negotiate down to what it would be with insurance or similar. I don't think that's evil. It's hard to find a job with health insurance any more, let alone buy it on a self-employed income.

I am surprised they do not participate in a Christian health "share" plan though. Maybe even that is too expensive.

I remember hearing about the vans in another thread here. I also remember someone said Gil put out a DVD about living on one income. I also think it weird that they aren't doing a Christian health share plan thing either, but it could be too expensive for them. Some QF families may have less kids or income and they may be to do the health share plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
demgirl
I think some people will defend the Bates tonight when this thing airs.

I think you can count on it.

I typically don't have a problem with the way the Bates (and Duggars) chose to run their (and their children's lives) as I believe that parents have a right to raise their children the way they want to (baring physcial/emotional harm) and creating a sheltered life is their choice.

But by creating that sheltered life, they are effectively denying their children any choices later in life. Raising your children conservatively or religiously or whatever, fine. It's not how I'd raise my kids, but as long as you give me the choice about how to raise my future children, I'll give you the same freedom. But the Duggars we know deny their daughters any real childhood once they hit adolescence. Even worse, they have shown that their homeschooling is incredibly inadequate and they have denied opportunities for any real higher education. THat's not acceptable.

One would think that if the Jeubs could afford a Christian healthshare plan, then the Bates could as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilwriter85
I feel sorry for the kids in these types of families, but I feel that if I donate to them, then I'm just encouraging their lack of responsibility and disregard for reality. These people need to grow up and take a good hard look at themselves in the mirror. If you cannot provide even the basics for your kids without having to rely on donations and handouts, then you need to stop having kids.

That is how I feel. I do feel sorry for the kids, but I can't picture myself sending these people clothes or gift cards to grocery stores. I think tonight's episode of Primetime will be probably edited as a "fluff/feel good" piece and some naive people will believe it and send donations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilwriter85
I think the Bates find gov't handout evil but general donations good since they are not "forced". The only problem with this, as discussed before, is that handouts are not reliable. Would you depend on the kindness of strangers to put food on the table? Food stamps have its own problems but it's regular and it keeps kids from starving.

The Bates do try to keep things economical, but they do so at the expense of their children (re: son working to support family) and they do so at a cost to the taxpayers. They get deductions for each child. I didn't see where they get their healthcare but if they lack insurance, there is a cost. Even if they negotiate, if the bill is very high and they have to pay in installments, it can still cost the hospitals money. A NICU stay alone would put them into bankruptcy if they had to pay it in cash. No amount of donations will cover the stay in full. In these cases of no insurance, even among diligent families, the hospital typically eat most of the cost. That, in turn, gets translated into higher premiums for the rest of us. Nothing is for free.

I guess I feel that despite the Bates and Duggars of the world ascribing to a no debt, no gov't handout thing, they are putting economic stress on others. They pay far less in taxes which would go to support roads and police dept. Having a larger family necessitate more social services that they may not be able to pay (re: NICU, ER stays, public libraries etc). It's not "getting gov't aid" directly, but there is an indirect cost. I guess these fundies don't understand that.

I think the Bates and other QF families who take handouts probably have seen a decrease in donations in recent years because of this economy. The only thing may never have to worry about is clothing donations.

I also agree some of the things the family is doing some things are at the cost of the other people. Kelly being in her 40's and still having kids is a risk that might lead the Bateses into debt. I would feel sorry for the family if some other catastrophe happened to the family like one of the kids being injured in an accident or someone getting cancer or another serious illness. They would probably going around to churches for donations and donations still wouldn't covered certain things in full.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Justme

Isn't there a verse in the Bible about not lending/borrowing from family? I'm pretty sure I read one once that borrowing/lending from/to family is worse than doing so with strangers....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 is enough

So many questions. Paper plates??? I know we harp on the Duggars for doing this, but at least they can afford it. If money is so tight for the Bateses, then WHY waste it on paper plates? They live out in the country, so I assume they have no water bill.

Also, in the footage the other night I saw a horse, and I believe I've read they have more than one. Horses are expensive to keep. I'm all for pets, but if you can't afford to buy health insurance for 18 kids ( and counting) why would you keep animals? Chickens or cows, fine- they provide food. But horses?

All the ATI fees, and travel costs. As seen on their blog, the Bates family takes a lot of trips, and they probably aren't subsidized like their friends the Duggars. As an independent businessman, how can Gil afford to pick up and leave so often? No wonder he makes "just enough to get by", and has to rely on the Bank of Lawson.

I am thoroughly disgusted by these revelations. As much as I dislike Jim Bob, at least he can afford his large family. Sadly, the same can't be said for Gil.

ETA:

If your 4-year-old continues to have hearing problems and needs treatment, will you forego them because you can't afford them? You shouldn't have had more children than you could afford, but now that they're here they shouldn't have to suffer so that you can hold on to your pride.

I've never heard about this before. Can someone provide some more info?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slickcat79
So many questions. Paper plates??? I know we harp on the Duggars for doing this, but at least they can afford it. If money is so tight for the Bateses, then WHY waste it on paper plates? They live out in the country, so I assume they have no water bill.

Also, in the footage the other night I saw a horse, and I believe I've read they have more than one. Horses are expensive to keep. I'm all for pets, but if you can't afford to buy health insurance for 18 kids ( and counting) why would you keep animals? Chickens or cows, fine- they provide food. But horses?

All the ATI fees, and travel costs. As seen on their blog, the Bates family takes a lot of trips, and they probably aren't subsidized like their friends the Duggars. As an independent businessman, how can Gil afford to pick up and leave so often? No wonder he makes "just enough to get by", and has to rely on the Bank of Lawson.

I am thoroughly disgusted by these revelations. As much as I dislike Jim Bob, at least he can afford his large family. Sadly, the same can't be said for Gil.

ETA:

I've never heard about this before. Can someone provide some more info?

Agreed about ATI and all the trips. Every family I know has been hard hit by the crap economy, and you'd better believe that vacations were absolutely the first thing to go. It doesn't take Dave Ramsay to tell you that you should cut out luxuries when you're already living beyond your means :|

As far as the hearing problems, I only read about it in the article linked on the other bates thread:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/bates-fami ... 053&page=2

Addee was born prematurely, had to be resuscitated and spent some time in the NICU. She now suffers from "slight hearing problems", whatever that means. If they're following the Duggars' example, I imagine they will be oblivious to their daughter's problems or will otherwise downplay them for the media.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lilwriter85
So many questions. Paper plates??? I know we harp on the Duggars for doing this, but at least they can afford it. If money is so tight for the Bateses, then WHY waste it on paper plates? They live out in the country, so I assume they have no water bill.

Also, in the footage the other night I saw a horse, and I believe I've read they have more than one. Horses are expensive to keep. I'm all for pets, but if you can't afford to buy health insurance for 18 kids ( and counting) why would you keep animals? Chickens or cows, fine- they provide food. But horses?

All the ATI fees, and travel costs. As seen on their blog, the Bates family takes a lot of trips, and they probably aren't subsidized like their friends the Duggars. As an independent businessman, how can Gil afford to pick up and leave so often? No wonder he makes "just enough to get by", and has to rely on the Bank of Lawson.

I am thoroughly disgusted by these revelations. As much as I dislike Jim Bob, at least he can afford his large family. Sadly, the same can't be said for Gil.

ETA:

I've never heard about this before. Can someone provide some more info?

I think having a horse is ridiculous for people like the Bateses to have. I dislike Jim Boob but at least he manages money well and have as health insurance for his family. Gil seems to manage money poorly and I do wonder how he just picks up and leaves and travels around to ATI events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
elliesmash

The horses thing ticks me off too. If you can't afford to feed your kids, you can't afford to feed and worm and care for a horse the way it deserves, and the last time I looked in their photos, at least one of their horses had a foal at her side. I don't know what they're doing with the babies, but horses are in the same overpopulation crisis as dogs and cats in this country, and a lot of it winds up on the slaughter truck.

They also don't put helmets on their kids when they're on the horses, and it makes me want to scream. Even the calmest, oldest, most bombproof horses can freak out of stumble or have a stupid moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trynn

Are you sure the horses belong to the Bates? Maybe they are just boarding the horses and being paid for it and part of the deal is that the kids can ride them?

And yes, absolutely you should wear a helmet when riding! Even if the horse is gentle, the kid could do something stupid and fall off. Or the horse could get hurt, have an accident, and stumble.

I just cannot imagine using paper plates at every meal. Even in a family of 4 that would be sooooo expensive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
elliesmash

Trynn, that's a good point, but I'm not sure any boarder would leave their horse there. The horses themselves are scrawny and not behind appropriate fencing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GolightlyGrrl

Okay, somehow I'm a horrible person because I'm on food stamps for a short time due to a bad economy (that I am not responsible for) and difficulty finding work (I started a temp job this week, and it's going well).

However, I do not qualify for child tax deductions, and being childfree, I'm also not getting child tax credits like the Bates. You just know they are taking advantage of those things. Most likely the Bates are getting more out of the system than paying into it. Unlike Kelly, I have worked outside the home and have paid taxes non-stop since I was a teen-ager. Yet, I'm the freeloading "welfare queen?"

Plus, there are the load of donations and charity just handed to the Bates. Some say, unlike taxes, these are "freely" given. But are they? How much pressure is there in the fundie community to give stuff to super-sized families? What about people who fall on hard times but have smaller families? What about people without children? What about empy nesters? Do they get donations and charity? I rarely hear about it. But the Bates, Duggars, the Jeubs, Kelly Crawford, et al, always seem to being getting stuff just handed to them all the time! What gives?

Also, where is the Bates family acts of charity? Do they donate to struggling families? Do they do any volunteer work? Or like so many of the fundies we discuss here, is charity all about receiving and not about giving?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YPestis

A quick read upthread indicates that at least one of their child was born premature and spent time in the NICU. It makes me wonder if the Bates, true to their no-debt philosophy, are still paying for the stay. If they have no health insurance, and void medicaid or other types of "gov't handout", how do they handle the high cost of a hospital say? A day in the NICU can run in the thousands (easily). The Bates never answer if they just pay in installments in cash, or work with the hospital for deep discounts or what.

Around the hospitals here, we get a lot of Amish patients They typically pay through a community pot...like their own insurance policy. However, they also avoid the insurance and gov't aid thing. The Bates do not belong to any insurance tithing group as far as I can see. It makes me fearful how the Bates usually handle the ER bills and the hospital stays for birth.

Fact is, when Gil says he takes his kids to the ER because they don't deny anyone service instead of accepting "government aid" makes me think he is either financially naive or he doesn't pay the bill in full. ER bills are very expensive because ERs are expensive to run. It's one reason we have insurance---so when things like this happens, ERs still get paid.

I actually suspect that the Gil kind of look for ways to reduce their ER bills by declaring themselves indigent. They probably don't think anything of it because the ER "magically" discounts their prices. They probably think it's like negotiating for the price of corn.....if you are good at negotiating then you get a "better" deal----not really, the taxpayers just end up with the rest of the bill. I have yet to hear most fundies who joyfully ignore insurance ever acknowledge this ugly fact. Just because you don't "take" money directly from the gov't doesn't mean you aren't costing money to the taxpayers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gilora

The Bates family uses the ER because public ERs cannot turn away anyone in a genuine medical emergency. They're freeloading off the taxpayers just as much as the "welfare queens" they denigrate. As for Lawson, relying on his income to support the family is despicable. Gawd, I never thought another dad could be worse than Jim Bob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trynn
Trynn, that's a good point, but I'm not sure any boarder would leave their horse there. The horses themselves are scrawny and not behind appropriate fencing.

I didn't see the episode, so I didn't know that. You have a point about the fencing, but I did have a friend who had a horse that literally ate more than all the other horses, and it was still anorexic looking to the point where I asked, "do you feed him?" My other friend who is a vet said that I just described about a hundred possibly horse diseases. So it could be one of those cases. I don't like the Bates anymore than most people here, but just because we see horses there I don't think we should assume they belong to the Bates family unless it is stated.

But even if they treat you for free in the ER....don't you still end up with possibly thousands of dollars of medical debt? I'm confused, I thought that yes, they had to take you, but you still had to pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.