I'm with you. Another minor correction, Dr. Atkins' death certificate stat es that the cause of death was "blunt impact injury of head with epidural h ematoma". As I recall, he slipped on an icy sidewalk (in New York, I think ?), and banged his noggin'. Of course, like most of us who are getting old er, he probably did have other ailments, but they don't seem to have been t he ones that did him in.
BTW - not sure if I mentioned it: I'm not a fan of food stamps the way the y are presently done. I would be more in favor if the government did more aggressive means testing. I do think too many of the assistance applicatio ns are pencil-whipped. To be clear, though: I'm not a heartless bastard. Those who need help should be able to receive it. And preferably, without diluting the resources otherwise available to them by money-sucking scumba gs who actually don't need the help, or who could easily apply themselves t owards some productive endeavor.
Where did you get that idea... from the leftist media? The statistics (from the IRS no less) are quite clear... conservatives are FAR more charitable than leftists. Leftists are all talk and no do.
Yep, stuff that is banned from the school lunch programs by the leftists... the same leftists who want to ban large soda drinks.
Ever eat in a school cafeteria? I have, on those occasions where they allow us paisano's to come and have lunch with their children and grandchildren. The "food" is not fit to eat. ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
There's certainly a book available that tells this story. John Larkin has r ecommended it here. There's a whole publishing business of writing books th at flatter right-wing nitwits, and John Larkin seems to have bought most of them.
The "Bell Curve" was the only one I've read, and the flattery in the introd uctory section was amazingly unctuous. The statistical case that backed up this flattery turned out to be deeply flawed - see "Inequality by Design", which is a much better read.
formatting link
Myth
I imagine that what Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson has found is a b ook that demonstrates that the right-wing enthusiasm for tax avoidance has lead right-wing tax payers - who do tend to be well off - to declare their payments for right-wing political propaganda as contributions to charities, and proceeds to sell this as evidence that right-winger are more charitabl e.
ates that the cause of death was "blunt impact injury of head with epidural hematoma". As I recall, he slipped on an icy sidewalk (in New York, I thi nk?), and banged his noggin'. Of course, like most of us who are getting o lder, he probably did have other ailments, but they don't seem to have been the ones that did him in.
The family suppressed it, but some anti-meat leaker (A doctor from Physicians For Responsible Medicine, IIRC, a vegetarian terrorist group) got a hold of his death certificate and put it on the web. (Almost as scurrilous as hiding his actual condition.) The rub was that Atkins had advanced coronary artery disease, and likely fell when his heart seized. Not definitive though--the family had him toasted before anyone could check.
hey are presently done. I would be more in favor if the government did mor e aggressive means testing. I do think too many of the assistance applicat ions are pencil-whipped. To be clear, though: I'm not a heartless bastard . Those who need help should be able to receive it. And preferably, witho ut diluting the resources otherwise available to them by money-sucking scum bags who actually don't need the help, or who could easily apply themselves towards some productive endeavor.
This whole thread is based on your assumptions based on your prejudices. You have no idea whether the money was his or how many people he was shopping for.
As to a person's methods of shopping it is their business not yours or mine. We, for instance, shop once a month and the supermarket delivers for a small fee, it's no big deal and makes a lot of sense if one does not have a car.
As an aside, I do know a bit about this as a young relative with health issues lives in an area of California where youth unemployment is around
30%. He has been applying and interviewing for jobs for over a year, a network of relatives keep him afloat and his food stamps keep him fed. He is just one of millions in a supposedly civilised country who cannot find a job and who are terrified of getting ill.
Yes, I saw something that didn't fit my preconceived (due to media and conversations) notions so I asked the good folks here. I thought it was a pretty civilized and informative discussion, all things considered.
Impressions tend to be cartoonish when you're not paying much attention, or there are people paid to promote a certain POV.
I could give current examples, but that would only piss off some.
Chances are very good he was the recipient. I only have one data point here .
It's my business what I choose to inquire about and learn about, not yours. Even if you don't think it's politically correct to ask about something that is apparently an uncomfortable subject for some.
I was pleasantly surprised to see that that the method was modern and appeared very efficient (lots of food per dollar).
Sure, why not? A lot of stuff like eggs will last a month okay. Produce, not so much. Some (especially Europeans) seem to shop almost daily to get the freshest bread, produce, fish etc. We probably get stuff 3x/week (I can walk to one nice, but a bit expensive, store). Warehouse stores less than 1x/month, get bulk stuff in bulk.
I hope he finds a job there or is able to move to someplace where jobs for youth are more available. In the US there's a boom in shale, for example, which is happening in some rust-belt states. Dunno about shale jobs, but oil sands jobs in Alberta pay very well.
That may be a bit harsh. Knowing Spehro (personally), I think he was asking out of genuine curiosity -- not to make a political or moral statement.
E.g., my first time north of the border (i.e., into Canada -- Spehro's place of residence), I was *livid* when told I *had* to wear a seatbelt. I.e., "You can't *make* me..." (in the US, seatbelts weren't mandatory for at least a decade after that!).
Of course, the gentleman in the car with me was a gummit official and worked *real* hard not to show his displeasure with me as he simply stated "its the law" (i.e., you are in *my* country, now, Yank!)
Unfortunately, people see "abuses" and make generalizations from those. E.g., the push for voter ID to combat "voter fraud" (though if it is so RAMPANT, it is a wonder why we don't hear of all the CONVICTIONS and see tens of thousands of folks imprisoned for this heinous crime!)
Growing up, a restaurant owner in the next "town" over used to buy up foodstamps (which were literally "tickets"/coupons) at a discounted rate. And, use them to purchase *meat* for his restaurant.
Decades earlier, those "on the dole" were *given* foodstuffs (e.g., cheese) along with clothing (effectively "uniforms"). No doubt very demoralizing ("Oh, they're on public assistance...").
It's hard to design a system that is charitable and *not* also subject to abuses. E.g., you can make claims on your income tax returns for charitable contributions. Without showing proof of these! Unless, of course, you are selected for an audit. Wanna bet there are a lot of folks making claims that they *couldn't* support in an audit? And, those folks sure aren't the "destitute" ones on government assistance! :-/
Yesterday, I overheard (through no fault of my own) three students discussing the stipends they receive (to stay in school) from a charity. Were they using these to buy food? Clothing? School supplies? No. *Games*/toys.
Should they be "punished" for this behavior? (if so, how will you be able to *reliably* detect it -- if they don't self-report?) Shouldn't they, also, be allowed to "enjoy life"? Why should they be forced to "eat beans, rice and potatoes" everyday? Perhaps they were able to come by food from some other source and opted to spend *that* stipend on something "fun" (or, are only wealthy people allowed to have fun?)
Should you, instead, give them their stipend in *foodstuffs* and clothing? What's to stop them from selling these (pennies on the dollar) and using the cash that results from those transactions to "buy toys"?
SomeONE, someWHERE cheated. So, let's do away with this! (e.g., should we also apply that mentality to Enron, Exxon/Mobil, BP, AIG, etc.?)
states that the cause of death was "blunt impact injury of head with epidur al hematoma". As I recall, he slipped on an icy sidewalk (in New York, I t hink?), and banged his noggin'. Of course, like most of us who are getting older, he probably did have other ailments, but they don't seem to have be en the ones that did him in.
Oh, here it is--
formatting link
death-report
Medical history notes indicate: history of mycardial infarction, congestive heart failure, hypertension.
Food Stamp outreach programs produced and aired commercials with the stated goal of overcoming the stigma against getting food stamps. (Technically there have been no "stamps" for more than a decade, and FS is now officially called SNAP for Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program. ) In the promotions (sic) one of the better points that I saw was that it ena bles people to buy more fruit which in many areas is very expensive. It occ urred to me that even when I buy a great big bag of fabulous oranges transp orted here to Iowa, I find myself tending to hold back a bit on eating them because of their high cost. I've also heard that food banks are always short on canned fruit. If you re ally want to donate something good to a food bank, buy them several CASES o f canned fruit. This would cut down sorting and enable them to just add one can to every bag for a week. The bigger food bank here serves a limit of
30 families per day, 5 days per week, or 150 sets of food bags for 150 diff erent families.
Of course it's an income supplement. It makes no difference if it's for specific expenses. No matter how low you set expectations, you guys continually demonstrate even less understanding of the simplest economic concepts than before.
Here's a test. When a hotelier from Macau with obvious Chinese government connections paid $100,000 to Clinton's lawyer, and did it in the East Wing of the White House where the President must be aware of every single visitor (it's his home after all) was that an income supplement?
Yes, and also a bribe. But come to think of it social programs are bribes too.
I went to a Tea Party meeting once. There was a guy who owned a hardware store. What an extremist. And the guy who owned a laundromat was absolutely insane.
But big business got a 1-year postponement of their ACA obligations.
--
Reply in group, but if emailing remove the last word.
Golly, and yet you still have problems with understanding why i do not trust your description of the situation. Start with the differences between who creates the most jobs and who automates the most out of existence. Do look up the BLS data before responding. You do not understand who your enemies are nor why.
I donate 400-500 hours annually. It never appears on my tax form. I *don't* donate because it's a "financial consideration" but, rather, because of an innate belief in the service that is being provided.
How much does that say "rightists" *do*? Does "writing a check" count as "doing"?
Regardless of how much you might want to convince yourself that dollars equate to hours on some scale, when you're on your death bed, you'll find that relationship falls apart. Dollars, by themselves, don't *do* anything. They need "legs".
But do the "healthy well off" invest in getting people "healthy well off"? Or, just want them "out of their *pocketbooks*"?? There is a huge difference in "motivation" and "attitude" conveyed in that. And a fair bit that folks aren't comfortable answering (in mixed company including folks who may choose to judge them on their answers!).
We've a neighbor who is a staunch advocate of securing the border, anti-immigration (legal or not!), etc. In his mind, if you're not
*white*, you're not WELCOME! (I wonder how the native americans thought!)
Yet, he always seems to hire folks of questionable legal status. And I'm sure he doesn't *check* their "papers" or "err on the safe" (white?) side.
When you are losing the argument, drop the race card... it's the Democrat way. ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
(sigh) I tried finding Jim's posting (cited by you, above) but it doesn't appear in my news reader. In fact, I see *none* of his posts, here. :< I'll have to check my NNTP preprocessor and see if it's decided to spam filter them (and which *other* folks it has decided to act upon!)
First four hits from a search for 'charity conservatives liberals' and selected (my choice) quotes from each:
"Sometimes it helps to read the whole report, not just the sections that make you feel superior."
"We found that while both Republicans and Democrats tend to equally value justice and caring for the vulnerable... Republicans are more inclined to donate to a charity when these values of purity and respect are met, whereas Democrats are more inclined to donate when the emphasis is purely on equality or protection rather than respect or purity."
(i.e., Republicans seem to think they have an "exclusive" on knowing Right from Wrong...)
"But Margolis and Sances' work should put to rest the idea that liberals and conservatives differ in the level, rather than the form, of their charitable giving."
(Of course, Margolis and Sance are OBVIOUSLY leftish wackjobs from some elitist school -- near Beantown. That alone should disqualify their findings! :> )
"The lesson here is, don't just believe the headline for any study. Learn to ask the right questions."
Last time I checked, the IRS didn't ask me what my political affiliation was at the time I filed. Nor have any of the charities at which I've donated (literally) thousands of hours over the past few decades. But, folks are confident drawing conclusions from incomplete data...
How do you measure charitable contributions? Dollars? Percent of pre/post-tax income? If someone BELOW the poverty level gives $5 to a charity, how does that equate (fair is fair) with someone in the top 1% giving $10,000? I know folks who write 5+ and 6+ digit checks to charities. Should I be more or less impressed than the student who gives $10? Instead, I watch where people spend their *time*. You can always get more money; but, you've only got a finite amount of *time*! How you "spend" that demonstrates what's REALLY important to you. Writing a check just amounts to that "smugness" feeling Klauss (?) mentioned.
I found _The Republican Brain_ an interesting read. Unfortunately, a poor choice of title (obviously intended to provoke). I've since started using the criteria "identified" therein to try to guess the political affiliations of folks that I know -- based on their behaviors/preferences (this is a misapplication of the findings he presents but I'm only doing it as a curiosity).
What I would *really* like to see is how well the findings apply to DESIGN METHODOLOGIES! This would be a valuable hiring tool if that were known to be the case.
It's a quick read. Well worth the time if only to get you thinking about the conclusions drawn.
Actually, the whole idea of a "charity" is highly misunderstood! And, the rules regarding which you can give to (and claim as deductions -- the only logical way that the IRS could even
*begin* to have an inkling as to who gives what).
E.g., here, you can opt to redirect a portion of your state income tax to a "charity" (this is IN LIEU OF taxes, not a "deduction!) Things like:
- churches/ministries
- "Cochise Area Network of Therapeutic Equestrian Resources"
- "Catholic Charities Community Services"
- "Ecumenical Chaplaincy for the Homeless, Inc."
- the school YOUR child attends (why would I consider giving to some OTHER school or The School System, in general?) (this is actually a *different* dollar-for-dollar deduction)
OTOH, the Humane Society doesn't seem to qualify as a charity (I guess pets, not being human, don't deserve "charity"?)
[Actually, I think the criteria is the organization must expend >50% of its donations on The Poor (apparently, they can spend the other ]
Yet another case where a complex qualification process has been trivialized to some arbitrary criterion. Yet, we seem to tolerate
*those* (potential) "abuses" without painting all in broad brushstrokes!
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.