‘A perfect storm’: US facing hunger crisis as demand for food banks soars no

Irresponsible parents don't parent well.

 

Hunger crisis in America lol

That is funny lol

Only eating 10 cheeseburgers a day is not a crisis

 

I don't think there's enough money to get into the hands of people as possible to fix this problem and the World is in for a Reckoning. Here's what I believe, the Planet Earth is ONLY! big enough to sustain a certain amount of organisms upon it for the resources available. Humans have been overpopulating and polluting the Earth at an Alarming rate for Decades and they've caused the extinction of other Animal Species for Centuries and this can't go on forever without some kind of World catastrophe happening. Think about it, what is the purpose of a Virus, they're small insignificant things that we can't see, but they can unleash HELL upon the Earth when the Planet decides that enough is enough and if a certain species (Humans) can't control it's numbers, the Virus's will do it for them.
When we finally reach the Light at the end of this Tunnel we don't know how long is, Hopefully we Humans as a whole can realize that we need to be better stewards of Earth and do things different OR! we'll just pick up the pieces and in another 100 years or so replay this Crisis all over again

 

And leaving children with parents who aren't caring for them anyway isn't punishing them? The children are being harmed by their parents. Since the parents aren't feeding them already, please explain how taking the parents out of the picture harms the children.

I've completely proven my point and you're just twisting words and repeating your same arguments, ignoring my responses.

 

agree 100%. one of my favorite customers who is very comfortable, not loaded, but comfortable, never made more than 75k any year in his life. But he always was thrifty and smart, made wise investments, lived below his means, I wish I had half his discipline, but I'm happy to have about 40%.

my neighbor is a good example, owns two homes, very successful, worked for a car company for good but not great wage . smart investor, still does 90% of his home maintenance even in his late 70s, including 5 pallets of sod he laid himself. took him and his wife 3 days.

I asked him why the other day and he said he did the math and figured he was getting paid $60 an hour to lay the sod, and he never made $60/hr on his real job so he figured he couldn't pass up the opportunity. I couldnt argue with that logic.

 

Neither of those are hungry children. They may be ready for supper but they're not hungry. No child in the United States is hungry. These are hungry children:

 

Of course it doesn't make sense to you because you have that Democratic blindfold on. It's very, very, simple. Ignore the dollars. Raising the minimum wage does absolutely nothing for the guy flipping burgers. Don't think of the compensation in terms of dollars. Flipping burgers pays the shack in the poor side of town. Being a manager of McDonald's pays a slightly better shack. A district manager might actually get paid a modest, middle-class, home. Being the owner pays a nice 3000 foot home in a newer suburb. Being the owner of a bunch of McDonald's pays a much larger, newer, fancier home with a large lot or even acreage.

You can raise the minimum wage all you want, causing all of those homes to go up proportionately. You can cause the numbers to change but the end result never changes. "Do you want fries with that," gets you a shack in the poor side of town - or mother's basement.

Big deal. You just prove that you believe that you can do it and no one else can. Elitist.

I have plenty of empathy. I mentor poor and underprivileged kids and troubled kids. I have helped plenty of young people who were willing to listen and learn to get started in IT jobs that they never thought they wanted or could have. Once exposed, and once they realize they actually can do it, it's amazing what people will do. See, that's the conservative way: enable and empower others to succeed on their own. The liberal way is to tell them they can't succeed and they need a handout from their liberal benefactors just to survive day to day.

Conservatives oppose bringing cheap labor. You keep associating Republicans with conservatism.

You persist in saying my ideas hurt children. How so? My suggestions would prevent children from missing meals. Yours ensure that they do miss meals.

 

That's the parents job. Why should I do it? If the parents are making children and not caring for them, put the parents in prison.

 

Maybe they're poor because of ill health.

 

It doesn't make sense because it is an inaccurate portrayal of how the economy works.

You tried this BS before. Not everyone can what either of us did and you're demanding more from people than they can accomplish.

In those days, I used to teach better students how to program in assembly language--all I had to do was get them started. So what? Most high school students struggled. What did you do with or to poor kids of average ability?

Bad me.

Oh, please.

 

I guess you're embarrassed by the hateful nature of your approach. Of course, the girl isn't hungry. She appears to be having a healthy, happy childhood.

I figured you'd eventually make this absurd claim.

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/13/americas-dirty-little-secret-42-million-are-suffering-from-hunger.html​

No, these are starving children.

 

Because when parents can't (or won't) do it, a child goes hungry. Why should we wait until children go hungry, we have proof and then prosecute, before we help?

Yes, but what about the children?

See a hungry child, feed a hungry child.

 

My wife works at the school which has a very highest percentage of free or reduced lunch (I think the highest in the state) and she now refuses to even talk to me about it because I bring up those very points. I just simply can't fathom noticed my kids. It is my option that if you can't feed your kid I don't think you should be able to have them live with you. You are doing something wrong.

 

It's exactly how the economy works. Exactly, 100%, beyond any shadow of a doubt how the economy works when raising minimum wage or limiting prices, or any government attempt to control the economy.

That is so very sad for those who you failed to inspire and teach. The contempt with which you hold those who you believe are beneath you really is sad. I just don't know what else to say. If you didn't have so much disrespect for them then you might actually have been able to teach them.

 

Absurd? Here's absurd - quoted from the article you linked:

Seriously? She gets 500 dollars a month to feed her 21-year-old son and 17-year-old daughter!

As I said, there are no hungry children in the United States. If there were hungry children in the United States it is because their worthless parents are selling the SNAP card for drugs and not feeding their children.

The 17-year-old, assuming she's still in school, gets free breakfast and lunch every day so that's 10 out of 21 meals a week that don't come out of $500 that worthless mother gets.

Actually, I knew you'd eventually post an absurd link pretending to show starving children in America. In another thread, someone posted a link telling how some children have to be fed (discounting, of course, all the free meals from the schools) with "as low as" $1.50 per meal. Of course I demonstrated how you can feed a fully balanced, completely healthy, meal including dessert - and still have enough for a bit of sugary candy for a treat, all for LESS THAN $1.50 per meal.

Let me repeat it slowly so you can understand:

There..... are..... no..... hungry..... children..... in..... the..... US.

 

From the article, the following picture is captioned as a family walking home from a food bank. None look particularly hungry but, certainly, mom doesn't look like she's ever missed a meal. And dad is all tatted up. Two children are barefooted while mom and dad are not so I assume the bare feet is by choice - disagree if you think that the two are barefooted due to parental neglect.

And an infant in mom's arms. Dad has no job, mom has no job, they can't feed the others, and, yet, they keep cranking out little tax deductions for that negative tax rate you keep going on about and I keep having to feed those children and I didn't even have sex with mom.

 

Absurd. The idea prices rise as fast as the minimum wage depends upon how much the minimum wage is increased.

Ah, so you didn't help average kids who deserve just as much help as that bright kid who you focused on.

Levant talks trash...

I think you may have said enough to let people see you for what you are.

Uh huh. You're an expert on education.

P.S. I won't forget...

 

Garsh, it's a damn shame you're not running the country.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/key-statistics-graphics.aspx

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/hunger/

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/09/health/champions-for-change-child-hunger-in-america/index.html

 

All three articles are lies. There are no hungry children in the US unless the parents are spending the SNAP money on drugs.

The stats in all articles are around "food insecurity" defined, for children, as at least one child in the home had their food cycle interrupted at least one time during the past year. That's not hungry; that's going to bed without dinner.

Saturday was a very hard working day for my wife and me. She is wheelchair bound and has poor overall health but worked her tail off doing what she can. At the end of the day, somewhere around 9:00 at night, we started to talk about dinner. She mentioned something easy, I don't remember what, and I just told her I was so tired that, even though we were both hungry, could we skip dinner. She agreed. Even though she can't do the cooking and is dependent on me to prepare meals, she went without because I was literally exhausted. Her food cycle was interrupted. That meets the criteria for the three articles you posted. We both survived.

From the National Geographic article you posted:

I already posted a great chicken breast meal with vegetable, starch, great quality meat, dessert, and a chocolate treat, for less than $1.50 per meal. Breakfast is even less. That a responsible parent can't feed a child for $1.50 a meal is a lie.

The CNN article is simply an editorial regurgitating the same information with a lame, unsubstantiated story of a fictional family not able to feed their children on their own SNAP - $1.50 per meal per person.

I keep saying it in English and you don't seem to understand. Maybe if I say it in Venezuelan: No hay niños hambrientos en los Estados Unidos.

 

From the USDA article:

So, in fact, not a single one of these articles demonstrates that there are any hungry children in the United States. In the Very low food security definition, it says not that a child missed a meal but that any household member had normal eating patterns disrupted. Dad missed a meal once during the year?

There are zero hungry children in the United States except for where negligent parents are selling the SNAP for drugs.

 

Well, Trump can at least deal lies coming from the FDA. Time to fire folks, huh?

So, then, there is no problem. Elementary school kids who tell school officials and teachers of not having enough to eat at home are making it up.

I wonder why you're so intent upon denying what teachers see with their own eyes. Are you propagandizing Trumpers? Or perhaps believe school officials and teachers are running a con.

(I suppose you're also opposed to what we're doing to bail out the economy. Who is getting something they shouldn't?)

Some people don't earn enough money to cover rent, the barest essentials, and food.

I understand perfectly well you don't know what you're talking about.

 

I hate to see food go to waste, is there away to get unsold crops like these to food banks:

 

Did you read the article? It said:

"Very low food security—In these food-insecure households, normal eating patterns of one or more household members were disrupted and food intake was reduced at times during the year because they had insufficient money or other resources for food.

• 4.3 percent (5.6 million) of U.S. households had very low food security at some time during 2018.

• Essentially unchanged from 4.5 percent in 2017."

​

It also showed us the food insecurity was worst in states that voted for Trump.



You Trumpers really take care of your own.

It also said:

"In 2018:

• 37.2 million people lived in food-insecure households.
• 9.5 million adults lived in households with very low food security.
• 6.0 million children lived in food-insecure households in which children, along with adults, were food insecure.
• 540,000 children (0.7 percent of the Nation's children) lived in households in which one or more child experienced very low food security."

​

Did you catch the last one? 540,000 children lived in a household where one or more child "experienced very low food security."

I take it you can figure out, too, most of the adults went hungry rather than seeing their child go hungry.

 

How many gig workers have you seen with a brand new I-Phone 11? I've seen allot. We are a nation with the highest disposable income and the largest waist.

When I wanted to start my own catering company, I was making a little over $5 an hour. I save every dime I could. Ate my share of roman and Mac n Cheese while living in a 2 bedroom apartment with 6 other dudes. I tried to spend the majority of my time at work, getting what ever shifts I could to get to as close to 40 hours as possible. Ever dime outside of meals went into a savings. I did this for about 3 years until I had enough for a down payment for my first catering truck and leased a small kitchen.

first year in business was ruthless. Goodwill was my shopping hotspot and I didn't earn a salary for nearly a year. Paid wages and reinvested every dime I had. After year 2, I finally made my for real salary in some time. After year 3, I was earning over $100K.

Most people could absolutely make sacrifices to put away rainy day funds. People chose to have Cable TV. The newest gadgets. Eat out every night.

 

Actually, children do lie about being fed at home. They see other kids getting food and want some. Not all kids, but it does happen. Teachers absolutely have an agenda to control and indoctrinate children. It's a lie that teachers see children going hungry with their own lies. Teachers don't know what is happening in the homes of the children they teach. Straight up lie.

Those who don't make enough to cover rent is not the subject of this thread, is it? But in response, why is that my problem? Why do I have to pay their rent?

And you're correct; I am completely against the government picking winners and losers, taking money from future generations and giving it to people who don't deserve it. Disasters happen every year. Tornados, hurricanes, winter storms, fires, etc., all cost individuals, families, small businesses, and large businesses trillions of dollars in total and, yet, the government doesn't make them whole at the expense of future generations as they are doing in this disaster. Bad stuff happens in the world. Live with it.

There are no hungry children in the United States unless bad parents are selling the SNAP money for drugs. Period.