Kelly @ GC: How Dare People Look for Government Handouts!

[aggythenostic]

While I realize she's an utter moron, it is impossible not be aggravated at her latest screed. So we all "expect free handouts?" Free healthcare isn't an undeniable right?! This from the woman who just had her HOME BUILT BY FREE HANDOUTS. Who took her daughter to a VET FOR STITCHES because she couldn't afford a pediatrician. Who probably never takes her eight plus children for annual exams! Who lives on her parent's property! Whose dirt dumb hubbie works for her father because he clearly can't get enough work doing anything else! Oh and Kelly? Your visits to the ER because you have fake Samaritans coverage are NOT FREE. We're paying for you to 'live frugally.' Everyone depending on the hospital for primary care? is costing the country BILLIONS. A little lesson in Economics would be good right now.

I think if I lived in Alabama, I'd be tempted to hunt her down and throw a big fat cream pie in her smug, meth-browed face.

http://www.generationcedar.com/main/201 ... onomy.html

[No, I'm not breaking the link. Come chat with us, Kells! We'd love to have you ;)

[Dinorah]

Is she aware all of the industrialized world except the US has "free handouts" of healthcare of some sort and it doesn't seem to turn everyone into lazy bums?

Plus, I am in favour of kids helping around the house, even as a way to learn basic skills they'll need, but is the mom's job just to "manage" the home? That sounds like another way of saying "saddling the kids with endless chores". And her idea of solving economic problems with activities such as "pencil drawing businesses" is laughable.

[lisespieces]

Urgh. She does make good points but coming from HER idea of saving money... that is annoying. But the whole thing about Obama wanting to eliminate the "stigma about free lunches" (if it's true I'm too lazy to look it up) would irritate me. I bought lunch most of my years in school (full price) and that was fine but the kids buying free/reduced lunches always seemed to have on wayyy more expensive clothing than me! I didn't understand why they came to school every other day wearing brand new, expensive shoes and getting free/reduced lunch while my parents shopped at goodwill and when they found a nice shoe cheap they bought it in two sizes so I could have shoes for 2 years. (True story)

[LynnKaboom]

She's a disgrace to libertarianism.

Newsflash, Kelly- if your house got built because people gave you free stuff you have no right to complain about other people getting free stuff. If you do you're a big fat hypocrite.

Also, I swear to Longcat that if any of my hard-earned federal taxpayer money is going to support this bitch I am going to scream.

[debrand]

My mom was a single woman who worked as a waitress at a bar. We didn't have nice clothes or wear expensive shoes.Most of our clothes were hand me downs or goodwill specials. For all my mom's problems, she did hold down a job.

One year the names of every single student who received free or reduced lunch was called out over the loud speaker. We had to march down to the auditorium to get our cards. Yeah, it was humiliating. We were given a paper card that had to be punched everytime we got lunch, so there was no hiding that we were the poorer kids.

A bunch of us skipped lunch after that. Most of us said that it was because school lunch was crappy but I noticed that a lot of those who skipped lunch got free or reduced lunches like me. Kids can be very sensitive to such embarrassment.

[debrand]

•

Think in terms of “multiple-income familyâ€. This is something I’ve been mulling over. When we marry, we are one, and therefore our income is one. We have one account and all expenses/needs/wants are paid out of it with no distinction about who made what. What about our children? Should money they make go into this “family poolâ€? And if so, how do we teach them the distinctions between a socialist attitude (where money is forcibly taken from one and given to another) and a “family-is-one†economy? Just thinking out loud on this one. Would love your thoughts. I love what Kevin Swanson says: “We’re a seven-income familyâ€. Bottom line is, we all work and we all reap the rewards.

I don't agree with this thinking, at all. There are some situations, when a family is extremly poor, that the kids need to help.When I was young, I gave most of my babysitting money to my mom. That was an unusual case. My mom had mental issues and our financial situation was not her fault. Mom had mental issues and worked low paying jobs.

A family should avoid poverty. That is common sense. If you want to teach your child to be careful with their money than make them pay for their own clothing or hair cuts. Dont' take the money from them for your lifestyle choices. Kelly chose to have several children. Her kids should not have to pay her for that choice.

[Childless]

I do not agree with children pitching in money unless the family is desperately poor. As adults, it's the parents' responsibility to raise the children. That includes clothing them, feeding them, and providing a roof over their head. A child should not be responsible for those expenses. They will have plenty of time in the future as adults to have that responsibility. Instead, they should save their money and use it to purchase something they desire, but is not a necessity (a car, expensive clothes, electronics, college fund, etc.). You can teach them an appreciation for hard work by making them work for any extras they want and you can teach them an appreciation for saving money by making them put a portion of everything they earn into a savings account. They should not be responsible for feeding their siblings. The only thing Kelly is teaching her kids is the fact that she was to stupid to plan her family according to her ability to provide for them.

[lilwriter85]

I do not agree with children pitching in money unless the family is desperately poor. As adults, it's the parents' responsibility to raise the children. That includes clothing them, feeding them, and providing a roof over their head. A child should not be responsible for those expenses. They will have plenty of time in the future as adults to have that responsibility. Instead, they should save their money and use it to purchase something they desire, but is not a necessity (a car, expensive clothes, electronics, college fund, etc.). You can teach them an appreciation for hard work by making them work for any extras they want and you can teach them an appreciation for saving money by making them put a portion of everything they earn into a savings account. They should not be responsible for feeding their siblings. The only thing Kelly is teaching her kids is the fact that she was to stupid to plan her family according to her ability to provide for them.

I agree Kelly didn't plan out a lot of things and some fundies don't. There are few other bloggers that we discuss or have discussed that have shown that they weren't totally prepared for the finances of having a big family.

[Austin]

I agree Kelly didn't plan out a lot of things and some fundies don't. There are few other bloggers that we discuss or have discussed that have shown that they weren't totally prepared for the finances of having a big family.

A few?

[Austin]

Urgh. She does make good points but coming from HER idea of saving money... that is annoying. But the whole thing about Obama wanting to eliminate the "stigma about free lunches" (if it's true I'm too lazy to look it up) would irritate me. I bought lunch most of my years in school (full price) and that was fine but the kids buying free/reduced lunches always seemed to have on wayyy more expensive clothing than me! I didn't understand why they came to school every other day wearing brand new, expensive shoes and getting free/reduced lunch while my parents shopped at goodwill and when they found a nice shoe cheap they bought it in two sizes so I could have shoes for 2 years. (True story)

You have no way of knowing how other people come into possession of things. For instance, I get a lot of nice, even new, things from the thrift store for pennies on the dollar. Relatives give things to kids as gifts.

Parents have to submit forms and proof of income for their kids to qualify for free/reduced lunch. I really don't see the point in humiliating kids because they qualify for free/reduced, even if they have a few nice outfits. So what exactly are you mad at Obama about on this issue?

[Guest Anonymous]

I agree with Austin..you don't know how some of these kids came to get the nicer clothes and shoes but still get the reduced/free lunches. I'm sure some people may abuse the system but it might be harder to do because of the fact that you have to prove your low income. Also nowdays at least at my daughters school theres no separate lunch line or anything distinguishing the free/reduced lunch kids from the rest of the kids.

My husband and I aren't "poor" but we can't always get my daughter the more expensive clothes that are at the trendier stores she likes so my mom (her grammy) likes to take her school shopping at the beginning of the year and treat her to a little shopping spree at these stores. Maybe the kids you see with the nicer shoes or clothes have a generous Grandma/Grandpa or aunt or uncle.

[2Cents]

Urgh. She does make good points but coming from HER idea of saving money... that is annoying. But the whole thing about Obama wanting to eliminate the "stigma about free lunches" (if it's true I'm too lazy to look it up) would irritate me. I bought lunch most of my years in school (full price) and that was fine but the kids buying free/reduced lunches always seemed to have on wayyy more expensive clothing than me! I didn't understand why they came to school every other day wearing brand new, expensive shoes and getting free/reduced lunch while my parents shopped at goodwill and when they found a nice shoe cheap they bought it in two sizes so I could have shoes for 2 years. (True story)

I am a single mother raising my children on my own while going to school full time and working and there are times my kids have had to take advantage of the school lunch program. My children do have some nice things but the nicest of all are the grandparents and the aunts and uncle who while out will pick them up things that they know they need. When I was working full time there was no need for the kids to use the school food program but I would never begrudge a hungry child/person of a meal based on the clothing that they are wearing. I have seen ppl get name brand clothing at thrift shops and from other charity organizations, so there is no way of telling how someone got such items. When ppl complain about someone else getting something such as this it comes across to me as being jealous.

[demgirl]

Children can't eat expensive clothing or shoes. Even if their parents are irresponsible and buying such things above their means (which I doubt is true of the majority of them, but even if), does that mean that the children should starve to punish their parents?

[lilwriter85]

I agree with Austin..you don't know how some of these kids came to get the nicer clothes and shoes but still get the reduced/free lunches. I'm sure some people may abuse the system but it might be harder to do because of the fact that you have to prove your low income. Also nowdays at least at my daughters school theres no separate lunch line or anything distinguishing the free/reduced lunch kids from the rest of the kids.

My husband and I aren't "poor" but we can't always get my daughter the more expensive clothes that are at the trendier stores she likes so my mom (her grammy) likes to take her school shopping at the beginning of the year and treat her to a little shopping spree at these stores. Maybe the kids you see with the nicer shoes or clothes have a generous Grandma/Grandpa or aunt or uncle.

I agree some people do abuse the system and sometimes they will have things covered by government assistance, while buying expensive clothes or shoes for themselves. But I agree in some cases it could be that kids are receiving expensive clothes or gift from relatives. A similar thing happened with a friend of mine growing up. His father died before he was born and he had older brother. Even though his family received SSI, they still struggled and his grandparents on both sides and a few other relatives often bought clothes and shoe for him and his brother.

[Dinorah]

I agree as well. Sure, there might be people who abuse the system or misuse their money, but you don't know each person's situation and you can't make sweeping generalizations based on what you see on the outside.

[margiebargie]

Urgh. She does make good points but coming from HER idea of saving money... that is annoying. But the whole thing about Obama wanting to eliminate the "stigma about free lunches" (if it's true I'm too lazy to look it up) would irritate me. I bought lunch most of my years in school (full price) and that was fine but the kids buying free/reduced lunches always seemed to have on wayyy more expensive clothing than me! I didn't understand why they came to school every other day wearing brand new, expensive shoes and getting free/reduced lunch while my parents shopped at goodwill and when they found a nice shoe cheap they bought it in two sizes so I could have shoes for 2 years. (True story)

I was in a similar situation because my parents are cheap. ;) I don't begrudge those kids their free lunch though. Like many others have pointed out, those nice clothes might have come from family members or the thrift store.

And debrand's story about being called out that way. Terrible. It's insensitive at best and an intentional bitch slap at worst.

I don't understand why our very wealthy society is so reluctant to help out our poorer citizens. If done right, its an investment.

[gilora]

Kelly's post -- wow, just wow. Yes, let's tolerate children going hungry because their parents MAY have made bad decisions. People like this should move to a country where there's truly no safety net and see how they like it.

As for Obama's plan to give certain schoolchildren free breakfast & lunch, it's pretty clear that chldren who are fed properly will learn better. A child needing a free lunch may need a free breakfast too. From the posts above, the stigma attached to being a free lunch student may lead to kids skipping meals and therefore not learning as much as they could. Plus, a district where 40% of the children receive free lunch probably means that many more qualify but for whatever reason haven't applied for assistance.

I think mindsets like Kelly's arise from an attitude that "irresponsible" parents are somehow getting away with their "irresponsibility" by having others feed their children. She talks about finances of a "family" but in her view, aren't we all part of god's family and should therefore be resonsible for making sure that the basic needs of each family member are met? WWJD? I'm an athiest and even I see the interconnected/interdependence of human beings.

[Childless]

Back in the day, my sister and brother-in-law could not afford any extras for their two girls. They weren't on free/reduced lunches, but they just didn't make enough money to buy the trendy, expensive clothes for them or take them on vacations, to the movies, etc. So, I did. I had a good job and made a very good living. I was single with no children of my own. So, I would spoil the girls with trips to their favorite clothing stores. I would take them out to movies. I would take them out to good restaurants. I loved spoiling my nieces. My parents took them on vacation to Disney World one year. Their other grandparents took them on vacation to the Western U.S. They were the only two grandchildren on both sides of their family and they had 5 single aunts with no children and a single uncle without children. They got stuff every time they turned around.

So, those kids getting free/reduced lunches who are wearing new, expensive clothes could have generous grandparents or aunts and uncles who are single without kids and enjoy spoiling them.

[JesusFightClub]

Aargh!

I used to work in a job where I got to see free breakfast programs in action in a deprived area of the city. They were BRILLIANT.

Not only did the kids get a choice of nutritious breakfasts, they learnt social skills and hygiene. Children took it in turns to help each other, the oldest helping the youngest. Afterwards they brushed their teeth and were ready to go.

Kelly hates the poor because if they were worthwhile people in her mind they would be carbon copies of her. If I was still religious I would ask her how sure she was that she won't get "Begone, I never knew ye" while the primary school teachers using their time to lovingly prepare meals for kids from broke and chaotic households enter into the joy of the Lord.

[fundifugee]

I agree with Austin..you don't know how some of these kids came to get the nicer clothes and shoes but still get the reduced/free lunches. I'm sure some people may abuse the system but it might be harder to do because of the fact that you have to prove your low income. Also nowdays at least at my daughters school theres no separate lunch line or anything distinguishing the free/reduced lunch kids from the rest of the kids.

My husband and I aren't "poor" but we can't always get my daughter the more expensive clothes that are at the trendier stores she likes so my mom (her grammy) likes to take her school shopping at the beginning of the year and treat her to a little shopping spree at these stores. Maybe the kids you see with the nicer shoes or clothes have a generous Grandma/Grandpa or aunt or uncle.

And let's not forget that most cheap clothes, and probably most expensive ones too, are 'subsidized' by being made by folks, sometimes children, in countries where they can pay them $2/day for 12 hours of work, six days a week, no labour laws, and people live in shit poverty. As well as being subsidized by Walmart labour policies such as 'we don't provide benefits. if you get sick, quit and sign up for welfare and medicare.'

i have known kids who wore expensive-ish clothes (but only had a few outfits) because their parents were trying to make ethical buying choices with the little money they had and didn't want to exploit other people's labour the way they were being exploited at their minimum wage jobs.

[tehfanglyfish]

You have no way of knowing how other people come into possession of things. For instance, I get a lot of nice, even new, things from the thrift store for pennies on the dollar. Relatives give things to kids as gifts.

Oh my god, this! When I was growing up, my mom married an alcoholic who had a major problem holding a job. As a result, my family was basically broke a lot of the time. We ended up in public housing and on food stamps for a stint. However, I did name-brand clothes, not because my mom used the savings from food stamps to purchase them, but because my grandmother happened to take pity on her grandkids and bought us school clothes every year. She didn't have the money to pay our rent and our groceries, but she could help out in this one way. If it had been left to my mom and my step-father, there were times where we couldn't have even afforded thrift store clothes.

Also, thrift stores (at least where I live) get a lot of irregular name brand stuff. The company gets a tax write off for merchandise they can't sell and the rest of us get an awesome deal.

Finally, it's best not to make arguments unless you have evidence with which to back them up. (I say this as someone who is trying to finish a dissertation & has had this point made to me many, many times over the past few years from people far wiser than myself.) If you can't cite it, don't say it.