The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 161 to 168 of 168
  1. #161
    Join Date
    May. 5, 2006
    Posts
    2,984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MistyBlue View Post
    A horse is not a dog. As has been stated. A dog lives in your home, dog food amount in nominal and inexpensive, etc.
    A dog is very different from a horse, but the amount it costs to feed a dog is not "nominal" or "inexpensive" when you just don't have the money. Expensive is relative.
    Sheilah



  2. #162
    Join Date
    Jan. 14, 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    6,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    Speaking of which. IIRC, you need to have very, very few assets before you qualify for food stamps. Yes, you get to keep your owned home but otherwise, no more than about $700?
    I had a friend who had cancer and was out of work for the surgery and treatment. She was in her mid 20's and lived paycheck to paycheck. she had $1000 in the bank, her $800 car and the clothes on her back and when she was about through the $1000 she checked into food stamps and welfare to get her through the chemotherapy until she could get well enough to return to work. She was told her car was worth too much. I think at that time she had to have less that $400 in assets. While I guess I can understand that to out your hand out, it ought to be empty, but it needed to be so empty that she would have to get rid of her car and have no transport to her treatments and how the hell would she get back to work when the time came. It was unbelievably harsh, especially when I compared it to the families I lived next to in the city while in college, all who knew how to milk the system, all who knew down to the penny what they were entitled to for free and knew how to get the resources for someone to fight it for them.

    But my sick friend, 25 and with a hysterectomy and severe abdominal pain from radiation treatments, rolling around the bed in anguish, no money fro rent or groceries and being told her craptastic car was worth too much.
    Last edited by sketcher; Nov. 25, 2012 at 01:21 PM.



  3. #163
    Join Date
    May. 5, 2006
    Posts
    2,984

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showhorsegallery View Post
    If someone needs a helping hand for a few months I wouldn't begrudge them that. But if it doesn't look like you're going to be back on your feet soon, at that point you need to be selling your horse.
    I am so glad that you are such a font of wisdom that you get to decide how long someone needs to take to get back on their feet.

    I agree with you in part, in that there does need to be movement to self sufficiency. But it is so offensive to me, considering my personal experience, to hear someone who has never needed assistance use the word "begrudge" in this way.

    Hear is a news flash to the uninitiated. The "system" is not set up to teach anyone the skills they need to make better choices. Or to support them as they transition out of poverty. Study skills so they can learn a trade or get a degree that leads to a profession? No. What about teaching them how to get and KEEP a job? Not so much.

    These kinds of things seem like common sense to those of us that actually know how to do them. But for those people that have never seen them modeled? They have to be taught how to show up for work. They have to be taught how to navigate the political ins and outs of a work place.

    What about transportation? For many people living in poverty, reliable transportation is a freaking mystery. And yet, there are no consistent programs that help with that aspect of climbing out of poverty. Many living in poverty live out in the middle of nowhere, without any chance of public transportation (http://www.dailyyonder.com/poverty-r...009/11/23/2466) and even when public transit is available, it is expensive.

    What about day care? Because most of the people living in poverty and using public assistance are children, and their Mothers have to be able to pay for affordable, reliable day care while they get out and navigate the working world.

    For those of you who have so many friends or family members cheating the system, TURN THEM IN. How hard would that be, since you consider them able to work? Do the right thing, as you see it, and just turn them in. If every like minded person did that, there sure would less abuse of the system. If you know someone who is abusing the system and you don't do anything to stop it, are you any better? Is your official silence a form of implied consent?

    Be a part of the solution, rather than just an anonymous voice on the internet. Advocate for services that will actually make a difference. Those people that can't get it together enough to use those services should be on their own, with or without their horses or their house pets. But be aware that the process will take longer than some of you are willing to "begrudge" and it will cost more (initially) than the pathetic system we have in place now.
    Sheilah


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #164
    Join Date
    Nov. 6, 2001
    Location
    Fairfax
    Posts
    1,868

    Default

    If you haven't worked at putting an emergency fund aside to take care of yourself in a crisis, you have no business diverting dollars to purchase and own a horse.

    Sure, it would be nice to live in candy land and have your neighbors pay your way, but about 40cents of every dollar we spend is BORROWED, or created out of thin air by that wonderful fed program called QE that is devaluing the dollar. We just don't have the largesse now to help those who can help themselves, we must focus on those who are really at the end of their rope.

    I have no issue helping folks who hit hard times that legitimately need the help. I do have a problem paying for folks who were either unwilling or too entitled to do the hard work of creating backup savings but instead said, hey let's buy a horse because I can just about scrape by on the monthly bills...you don't have any business buying a horse if you don't have a substantial savings account to cover 6 or so months of bills.

    You may love your horse like a pet, but it absolutely is a luxury. I'm waiting for the inevitable posts telling me I'm mean. This country can no longer financially afford the luxury of being nice.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  5. #165
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2000
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    13,236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred_Petra View Post
    I have to disagree with you on this. I'm a card carrying, flag waving democrat who supports Obama. All the people I'm thinking of in this thread are Romney supporters, some of then even volunteered on the Romney campaign, all while saying "i don't need to sell my horse, I qualify for food stamps so I might as well use them."

    I don't think this issue can really be divided by political affiliation.
    I think maybe i need to clarify for you and mvp. Just like the sentence," all dogs are animals.But not all animals are dogs." People who feel entitled, that the govt should support them (even if they made stupid decisions like blowing their paycheck on big screen TV's, etc and having no savings, then lose their job), and who want lots of free help/programs from the taxpayers/govt voted for Obama. Not everyone who voted for Obama wants all that free stuff. But the people that want all of that stuff sure didn't vote for Romney. I know some people voted for him for other reasons, like abortion, women's issues, etc. But the people wanting the handouts and free govt stuff didn't vote for the candidate who alienated them with his 47% remark, and not wanting govt to give free stuff. They voted for the candidate that they think is going to give them stuff...just look at all of the people who thought the free phone program (Safelink), is an Obamaphone (in spite of the program not being started by him.)


    3 members found this post helpful.

  6. #166
    Join Date
    Dec. 11, 2002
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,976

    Default

    I understand what some of you are saying about people who have no emergency fund. But even those that do, can very suddenly Find themselves in a huge financial bind.

    I have a good job, and a good side business. But I recently broke my leg. And my out of pocket, WITH medical insurance is over $5,000. AND while I have been laid up, my horse incurred about $2,200 in vet bills.
    My second job is trimming horses, so obviously, that's lost income.

    We are not in distress, thankfully, but I wonder, just how many of you that say you wouldn't want your tax dollars to help someone with a horse, could afford such a hard financial hit in the same month?
    I\'m not crazy. I\'m just a little unwell.



  7. #167
    Join Date
    May. 18, 2011
    Location
    Southern Appalachia
    Posts
    265

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by showhorsegallery View Post
    Communism has nothing to with this situation. Quiet the opposite. Taking money from those who earn it and giving it to those that haven't so we all have the "same amount of stuff" (except the ruling class of course) is communism.

    Expecting that you support your children on your own dime is not communism. You're welcome to have as many children as you like, but when you start expecting tax payers to pay for them that's where the feedback of not having any more children comes in. Having multiple children is expensive. This is why many people plan their families. Not to get derailed into a whole other topic because there's a lot to be said on it and it's not completely cut and dry.
    It reminded me of communism from China's former one child rule, which I understand is a different situation as this was implemented due to the overpopulation problem.

    Yes, having children that you can only afford is common sense, but ultimately it is someone's choice to have children if they want, and none of my business if they keep wanting children when they can't hardly afford them. I think it is unfortunate for the children, but this is life. All we can do is educate people to be more responsible. There will always be people who take shortcuts around government funding, and there's not much we can do other than try and fix the loopholes. It is not worth invading people's privacy and controlling their life choices, but rather get to the root of the problem.
    Last edited by Swishy-Tails; Nov. 25, 2012 at 11:34 AM.
    You only have to let the soft animal of your body / love what it loves
    "Wild Geese" by Mary Oliver


    1 members found this post helpful.

  8. #168
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    15,549

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetsmom View Post
    I think maybe i need to clarify for you and mvp. Just like the sentence," all dogs are animals.But not all animals are dogs." People who feel entitled, that the govt should support them (even if they made stupid decisions like blowing their paycheck on big screen TV's, etc and having no savings, then lose their job), and who want lots of free help/programs from the taxpayers/govt voted for Obama. Not everyone who voted for Obama wants all that free stuff. But the people that want all of that stuff sure didn't vote for Romney. I know some people voted for him for other reasons, like abortion, women's issues, etc. But the people wanting the handouts and free govt stuff didn't vote for the candidate who alienated them with his 47% remark, and not wanting govt to give free stuff. They voted for the candidate that they think is going to give them stuff...just look at all of the people who thought the free phone program (Safelink), is an Obamaphone (in spite of the program not being started by him.)
    I get it.

    But I'm not pleased by the bye that the poor Romney voters seem to get in your logic.

    So: You are part of the 47% he has alienated. You are so poor that you cannot feed yourself, let alone a kid. But you vote for Romney (and presumably your and your unborn child's future starvation) because.... wait for it... you want to insist that every conceived fetus gets the chance to go down that inevitable path?

    WTF?

    And this isn't a dis against the poorest of the poor. I voted for Obama because A) the math changes for no man-- either prez would have to fix the same heinous set of problems; and B) Because while I'm well above that 47% mark, even *I'm* too poor to get onto Romney's radar.
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat



Similar Threads

  1. Spinoff: Weirdest food you've eaten!
    By kateh in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: Nov. 27, 2011, 11:52 AM
  2. Spinoff—give me your raw food recipes (dog/cat)
    By didgery in forum The Menagerie
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: Oct. 31, 2011, 01:54 PM
  3. On food stamps and owns 4 horses, one is a stallion
    By Dutch Lovin' Dressage Rider in forum Off Course
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: Mar. 6, 2011, 10:21 AM
  4. Devoucoux stamps?
    By mane-to-tail in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Jan. 18, 2011, 09:22 PM
  5. Spinoff: Cat Food
    By ladybugred in forum Around The Farm
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: Jan. 10, 2011, 10:35 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness