1 in 7 Americans Went Hungry in 2008

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • theweakerbrother

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Mar 28, 2009
    14,319
    48
    Bartholomew County, IN
    I was thinking of what people already said... with programs like food stamps, WIC, food banks, soup kitchens, heck, even grocery store garbage cans and church pantries... how can someone go hungry in this country (currently)?

    The only people I can see going hungry are irresponsible parents who aren't taking care of their kids. If you're on government assistance and your kid goes hungry, there is probably a special place in hell for you. I say this out of jest, but only sort of.
     

    inxs

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    269
    18
    Totally on board with you on that one. I'm not saying the article is right about the magnitude. What I am saying is that there are people who, for whatever reason, are not on the dole and not "making it".
    But where are they? I also hear reports of Zombies?????
     

    El Cazador

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 17, 2009
    1,100
    36
    NW Hendricks CO
    Depends on where you are. If you're in a decent-sized town, yeah... there's probably something. There are people living in the middle of nowhere though, who don't get served by these programs, don't know about them, and would have no way to get to the program if they did.
    There is no such thing as "the middle of nowhere" any more. I've been on Indian reservations in the Southwest that are 40 miles from any "decent-sized town", and there was info for WIC and welfare, and an office there. The Alaskan Inuit have access to it. The Methodist and Baptist churches here in my town check regularly on our less mobile friends; and church folk, neighbors, and relatives are there for rides to the doctor's and to either get food or have it delivered.

    The poor are not the government's responsibility, they're our responsibility. The good folks of America have abdicated their duties in favor of letting someone else handle it, and it's sickening to see that we're so convinced the problem is "handled" that we won't even acknowledge the mere possibility that there is a problem any more.
    It used to be WE were the government. There are legitimate uses for government, especially local government, and providing a safety net is (or should be considered) one of them. The problem is that the Federal Government (well, Democrats mostly) has decided it shouldn't be a safety device, but a permanent way of life. There are a bunch of us who don't expect some one else to "handle it". I've done a fair amount of work because the churches called and asked me to swing by and fix something in member's houses, and I've walked away with jars of green beans and cookies and pies because they wouldn't accept my not getting paid somehow.

    ETA: I guess that last paragraph is really only addressed to fellow Christians.
    I don't get your last statement. Surely you're not intimating some of us are not Christian because we want people to take responsibility for their own welfare to the best of their ability?

    I'll Edit this to add that "the best of their ability" ought to include stretching out a bit from their comfort zone. Asking for help, or even walking a bit to get help used to be normal. It might not be easy to accomplish, but aid is there to those who need it.
     
    Last edited:

    Fletch

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 19, 2008
    6,415
    63
    Oklahoma
    There is no such thing as "the middle of nowhere" any more. I've been on Indian reservations in the Southwest that are 40 miles from any "decent-sized town", and there was info for WIC and welfare, and an office there. The Alaskan Inuit have access to it.

    And what about the towns that aren't on reservations? Did it ever occur to you that this might have more to do with the federal attention given to natives than with a perfectly uniform saturation of assistance to every village and burg in the nation?

    It used to be WE were the government. There are legitimate uses for government, especially local government, and providing a safety net is (or should be considered) one of them.

    I disagree. I don't believe government should ever be involved, no matter what level of government we're talking about. When it comes to charity and taking care of one another, the government aid folks should show up and realize that there's nothing to do, because the rest of us have already done all that needs doing.

    I don't get your last statement. Surely you're not intimating some of us are not Christian because we want people to take responsibility for their own welfare to the best of their ability?

    No, I'm allowing those who don't identify as Christian to understand where I'm coming from, and self-select out of the group I'm addressing. We do have atheists on this board, and I don't want to assign responsibility on the basis of assuming shared beliefs when some don't share those beliefs.

    That said, there are atheists who make better Christians than many Christians. The devil is always in the details.
     

    6birds

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 15, 2008
    2,291
    36
    Fishers
    Highest Number since USDA Began Tracking Food Security Levels in 1995

    More than one in seven American households struggled to put enough food on the table in 2008, the highest number since the U.S. Department of Agriculture began tracking food security levels in 1995.

    That's 14.6 percent of U.S. households, or about 49 million people. The numbers are a significant increase from 2007, when 11.1 percent of U.S. households suffered from what USDA classifies as "food insecurity" — not having enough food for an active, healthy lifestyle.

    Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the numbers could be higher in 2009 because of the global economic slowdown.

    "This report suggests its time for America to get very serious about food security and hunger," Vilsack told reporters during a conference call.


    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/16/national/main5673056.shtml?tag=stack

    Contrast that with this:

    Rising obesity will cost U.S. health care $344 billion a year
    If Americans continue to pack on pounds, obesity will cost the USA about $344 billion in medical-related expenses by 2018, eating up about 21% of health-care spending, says the first analysis to estimate the future medical costs of excess weight.
    These calculations are based on the projection that in 10 years 43% of Americans adults may be obese, which is roughly 30 or more pounds over a healthy weight, if obesity continues to rise at the current rate. Extra weight increases the risk of diabetes, heart disease and many types of cancer.
    This report comes as the country struggles to find ways to curb medical costs and Congress debates health care legislation.

    Rising obesity will cost U.S. health care $344 billion a year - USATODAY.com

    I call :bs:

    What are you calling BS on, your ability to link the two stories?
     

    El Cazador

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 17, 2009
    1,100
    36
    NW Hendricks CO
    And what about the towns that aren't on reservations? Did it ever occur to you that this might have more to do with the federal attention given to natives than with a perfectly uniform saturation of assistance to every village and burg in the nation?

    The reservation I was on multiple times only really had one "town", and it was the center of activity of the rez. At the pueblos out in the cedar brush, someone always seemed to be going to town for one thing or another. And I never saw any Federal attention per se, but plenty of Federal inattention, or just plain old prejudice from the IA guy. He was a real winner...

    I never mentioned a perfect saturation of aid available, but that aid is there and attainable, although it might take more effort than some want to expend (or think they should have to).

    I disagree. I don't believe government should ever be involved, no matter what level of government we're talking about. When it comes to charity and taking care of one another, the government aid folks should show up and realize that there's nothing to do, because the rest of us have already done all that needs doing.

    Again, government used to be "We The People". Local government can be a positive, if it is kept local. You keep identifying it as only the juggernaut of the federal government, but local government is everyday people who hear from neighbors wherever they go. Honestly, "they" don't like to hear it, but local church and local government have a lot of parallels, especially in providing aid and a temporary safety net to the indigent and truly poor.
     

    antsi

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 6, 2008
    1,427
    38
    It is entirely possible to starve or go hungry in America. Just because the programs exist doesn't mean that people are aware of them, or are in a position to take advantage of them, or would be willing to if they were.

    I'm sure that there are some. You name or invent any conceivable problem, and someone somewhere probably has it. But as someone who works in the field of indigent health care (read; poor people with no insurance), I'm saying that obesity far outweighs starvation as a health problem in the US.

    The major problem I see among the poor is eating a lot of junk food and nothing with nutritional value. I do diet recall with people and ask about vegetables, and they answer "potato chips."
     

    Fletch

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 19, 2008
    6,415
    63
    Oklahoma
    I never mentioned a perfect saturation of aid available, but that aid is there and attainable, although it might take more effort than some want to expend (or think they should have to).

    You keep saying "effort" and assuming perfect awareness. I'm saying that I don't find it preposterous to believe that there are people who are unaware of help available to them. When I was a single white guy living on my own below the poverty line, I was aware of plenty of programs for families, children, women, and minorities. I knew of no programs whatsoever that were available to me. I lived in a fairly good-sized town, but the best I could tell, nobody had any programs to help me out if I fell off the ledge I was clinging to.

    I'm not bitter about it, and indeed the experience made a better man out of me. All I'm saying is that I don't find it at all difficult to imagine someone in the same situation, only without the benefit of a (sort-of) warm place to sleep and a job that pays next-to-nothing.

    Again, government used to be "We The People". Local government can be a positive, if it is kept local. You keep identifying it as only the juggernaut of the federal government...

    If so, then I'm not communicating clearly. I'm identifying ALL levels of government beyond self-government. Town, county, state, federal, international. Anyone who presumes to control the lives of others, or asserts the right to steal money or land or property from them.

    Honestly, "they" don't like to hear it, but local church and local government have a lot of parallels, especially in providing aid and a temporary safety net to the indigent and truly poor.

    They do have a lot of parallels, except one: churches are run on voluntary donations. Local governments are run by forcibly extracting wealth.
     

    Fletch

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 19, 2008
    6,415
    63
    Oklahoma
    I'm sure that there are some. You name or invent any conceivable problem, and someone somewhere probably has it. But as someone who works in the field of indigent health care (read; poor people with no insurance), I'm saying that obesity far outweighs starvation as a health problem in the US.

    The major problem I see among the poor is eating a lot of junk food and nothing with nutritional value. I do diet recall with people and ask about vegetables, and they answer "potato chips."

    I don't disagree with you, and I've already stated that the first article is almost certainly wrong. All I'm trying to do is counter the assertion that it's essentially impossible to starve to death in the USA.
     

    dburkhead

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    3,930
    36
    I don't disagree with you, and I've already stated that the first article is almost certainly wrong. All I'm trying to do is counter the assertion that it's essentially impossible to starve to death in the USA.

    Well, I wouldn't say impossible, but it does take effort and real talent to make it happen.
     
    Top Bottom