I totally agree with you. I have a friend whose wife teaches in the inner city, and she always has stories like this, where people use poverty money to purchase $300 sneakers, manicures, hair styling, cell phones, lottery tickets, alcohol, drugs. Our liberal society, although well-intended, has created a monster and an underclass of dependent people.
Spoken like a true Limbaugh & Hannity conservative.....Obviously to people like you....poor people are not to be trusted. They're parasites on society. God forbid someone who you deem unworthy should have anything you regard a "luxury". You just make ASSumptions on a whole group w/o knowing the individual circumstances....You looked at this man and prejudged him by his current situation and probably his ethnicity and came to a negative conclusion. Pretty sad.
I am 59 years and didn't have a cell phone till 4 months ago, and when I finally got one, it was a "basic" model, not a blackberry. My car is 15 years old and has 110,000 miles on it, my wife's has 170,000, same age. Ethnicity has nothing to do with it, although if you did research on numbers certain patterns would likely emerge. This is not stereotyping, it is probability. I've been "on the ropes" a few times, and I hope this chap succeeds, but we have set up a system that breeds entitlement.
No, spoken like a person who is presenting the facts. Let me get this straight, if you are in poverty you get money from the government it's OK to spend it on "sin" items, like cigarettes, beer, lotto tickets. You think there is nothing odd about someone who is in poverty and decides to spend their money on $300 sneakers instead of food, clothing or shelter. OK, I guess you could call the $300 sneakers "clothing". Poverty because of poor stupid choice is different from the other kinds.
Not at all, in fact if you read the title, Richard represents what I refer to as resourceful. I know because I see him regularly. He's also a very dedicated artist and an interesting person. Not only that, a spiritual person, who I believe (which should be obvious by the dialogue), deserves to have more access to information . He used a tool that can be picked up by anyone economically, and it worked well for the situation. It is innovative thinking like this that bring opportunity.
I guess you're trying to make an issue about this man having a cell phone. Ha ving a cell phone may be this man's only way to get back on his feet. You came across as condescending in your interview.
Yeah, "back on his feet". Speaking of feet, he's probably wearing a pair of $300 sneakers on his feet. He says he wants to be "free" and it sounds like he has totally learned the concepts of the word "free", but not in the spiritual sense, but in the "free" as in handout, sense. Despite my apparent harsh words I do wish him will in his struggle, but it's a tragic and all too common scene, where people use my money, and where "poverty", as depicted by this guy and situation, is distorted.
The well-meaning welfare laws have created a society where it's OK to drive up in Cadillacs to cash welfare food stamps/WIC or whatever. Working people have to keep their home thermostats set down low but the people in subsidized housing have free heat and regulate it by opening their windows. The worst part is that when anyone points this idiocy out, they are branded as condescending or narrow-minded or hard-hearted. Where does this "poor" guy's phone bills get sent, if he is homeless???
Well, I hope Richard makes it, I truly do. All I am talking about is the insane system that we have set up where a person who works a full week at Burger King actually has less health benefits than somebody who sits at home and receives welfare. In my job, to fill out a data form, I had to ask people their occupation. You'd be surprised how many say: "welfare". And I can't blame them. The sad part is that this is the logical conclusion to an illogical path that we implemented to "cure" poverty.
Richard has enough money to buy a camera phone but not enough to eat. This is what this country has come to!
warbucks13477 2 years ago
I totally agree with you. I have a friend whose wife teaches in the inner city, and she always has stories like this, where people use poverty money to purchase $300 sneakers, manicures, hair styling, cell phones, lottery tickets, alcohol, drugs. Our liberal society, although well-intended, has created a monster and an underclass of dependent people.
wojo403 2 years ago
Spoken like a true Limbaugh & Hannity conservative.....Obviously to people like you....poor people are not to be trusted. They're parasites on society. God forbid someone who you deem unworthy should have anything you regard a "luxury". You just make ASSumptions on a whole group w/o knowing the individual circumstances....You looked at this man and prejudged him by his current situation and probably his ethnicity and came to a negative conclusion. Pretty sad.
kanuri 2 years ago
I am 59 years and didn't have a cell phone till 4 months ago, and when I finally got one, it was a "basic" model, not a blackberry. My car is 15 years old and has 110,000 miles on it, my wife's has 170,000, same age. Ethnicity has nothing to do with it, although if you did research on numbers certain patterns would likely emerge. This is not stereotyping, it is probability. I've been "on the ropes" a few times, and I hope this chap succeeds, but we have set up a system that breeds entitlement.
wojo403 2 years ago
No, spoken like a person who is presenting the facts. Let me get this straight, if you are in poverty you get money from the government it's OK to spend it on "sin" items, like cigarettes, beer, lotto tickets. You think there is nothing odd about someone who is in poverty and decides to spend their money on $300 sneakers instead of food, clothing or shelter. OK, I guess you could call the $300 sneakers "clothing". Poverty because of poor stupid choice is different from the other kinds.
wojo403 2 years ago
Let Richard know he is in prayer and will also begin to thank God for what He has done, is doing, and is going to do for Richard. Praise the Lord!
Rosyzi 2 years ago
Not at all, in fact if you read the title, Richard represents what I refer to as resourceful. I know because I see him regularly. He's also a very dedicated artist and an interesting person. Not only that, a spiritual person, who I believe (which should be obvious by the dialogue), deserves to have more access to information . He used a tool that can be picked up by anyone economically, and it worked well for the situation. It is innovative thinking like this that bring opportunity.
ToddCWiggins 3 years ago
I guess you're trying to make an issue about this man having a cell phone. Ha ving a cell phone may be this man's only way to get back on his feet. You came across as condescending in your interview.
kanuri 3 years ago
Yeah, "back on his feet". Speaking of feet, he's probably wearing a pair of $300 sneakers on his feet. He says he wants to be "free" and it sounds like he has totally learned the concepts of the word "free", but not in the spiritual sense, but in the "free" as in handout, sense. Despite my apparent harsh words I do wish him will in his struggle, but it's a tragic and all too common scene, where people use my money, and where "poverty", as depicted by this guy and situation, is distorted.
wojo403 2 years ago
The well-meaning welfare laws have created a society where it's OK to drive up in Cadillacs to cash welfare food stamps/WIC or whatever. Working people have to keep their home thermostats set down low but the people in subsidized housing have free heat and regulate it by opening their windows. The worst part is that when anyone points this idiocy out, they are branded as condescending or narrow-minded or hard-hearted. Where does this "poor" guy's phone bills get sent, if he is homeless???
wojo403 2 years ago
Well, I hope Richard makes it, I truly do. All I am talking about is the insane system that we have set up where a person who works a full week at Burger King actually has less health benefits than somebody who sits at home and receives welfare. In my job, to fill out a data form, I had to ask people their occupation. You'd be surprised how many say: "welfare". And I can't blame them. The sad part is that this is the logical conclusion to an illogical path that we implemented to "cure" poverty.
wojo403 2 years ago