Very OT - Fahrenheit 9/11

That's the norm in Oregon now too, rather than the exception. We had to
struggle to allow for direct payment.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Karleen/Vibrant Jewels wrote:


This girl may not have been receiving "benefits" however, she may just have
been getting her child support re-directed thru Support Enforcement... which
anyone with a valid support order and a dead-beat parent (dad or mom) can
do. Her checks may have come from the State, but they were funded by the
child's parent, not tax money.

No, just a very young, very self-absorbed woman. She'll probably grow
out of it. Sorry to be ageist, but I'm being optimistic, here; if it's
not youth and ignorance, there's no hope at all.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Dr. Sooz wrote:
I'm wearing a shirt I got at Girl Scout camp that's dated 1990... It's a
comfy shirt, but a little disheartening that I am still wearing the same
size I wore as a twelve year old.


You're 26 years old?!?!?!?
I thought you were a bitter, very old woman, the way you think! Good god!
~~
Sooz

Oh, Tina! You made me cry. I na good way, though! Thank you, sweetie!

((((((((((Tina)))))))))))

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Christina Peterson wrote:
Thank you for your post. I'm proud of you as a woman, an artist and a human
being.

Tina


"Kalera Stratton" wrote in message
...

I was a single mother with no degree, and I *know* how hard it is. I am
going to say this flat-out and I don't want it to sound arrogant because
I absolutely don't mean it that way, but I am *lucky*, because A: I am
above-average intelligence, B: I am highly literate and self-educated,
C: I am talented at the art of self-promotion (I don't really like it
but it's a good survival skill) D: I had resources in the form of
friends and family to babysit or sometimes bring me food, and E: I
*knew* there was a better future in store.

If it was as hard as it was for me, how hard must it be for a woman with
fewer advantages? If I had been short in any of the above areas, would
I have made it? It was touch and go for a while; I would do my monthly
budget and without fail I had more expenses than income, even though I
was working full-time and was only paying $20/day for childcare, and
that only three days a week because I worked over the weekend and my ex
had them then.

I can survive on three hours sleep a night for months, my immune system
is surprisingly resilient, I can cook meals from scratch from such
dubious ingredients as a sack of dry beans, some flour, and an egg, I
can run a sweet-talking sales pitch that would sell air conditioners in
Antarctica, and I have the tenacity of a pit bull. With hope and a
liberal dose of good circumstances, it got me through.

I have seen other single mothers struggle and lose; lose their job
because they couldn't find childcare one time too many, lose their
health because they pushed their immune system a little too far with
stress, too little sleep, and inadequate nutrition, lose their houses
because of all of the above.

Having been there and done that, I would NEVER presume that because I
made it, anyone can. Like I said, I'm lucky. And when I consider myself
lucky, I think of this: I had just acheived financial equilibrium when I
met Moxley. A sensible woman of thirty, I had an IUD because I knew I
didn't want any more children. I had my house, a good job, and a routine
that my little family was thriving on. I hadn't been dating for over a
year; by choice, because I had run that gauntlet and decided I was over
it. Then I met a guy, fell head-over-heels, and -surprise!- got
pregnant. I knew I didn't want an abortion.

What would have happened to me and my little family, and the balance I
had fought so hard for, if Moxley had *not* been the man he is, and had
evaporated like so many men do? I don't know, but that's one reason I
know for certain we need to work toward a better support system for
single mothers... and, for that matter, all struggling families... in
this country.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay

mjoann wrote:

Louis Cage wrote:


It is a total no win situation for poor single mothers. They have to
work
like dogs chasing from one agency to the next getting welfare, food
stamps,
etc. when often they do not have the education necessary to read and
understand obtuse government forms. When they do receive benefits,
they are
for limited periods of time and the mothers have to go through the same
rigmarole to keep them current.


It is so hard for me to feel sorry for single mothers who can't get aid.
Why? Because I was raised by one. We had generic food, welfare clothes,
and a junky home, but my mom (without a good education) went to work
everyday in a grocery store and never even tried to get any help. I look
at my situation, and see so many places that are hiring, and wonder why
there are so many desperate single women. Then, I look at the taxes I
pay now and wonder why my money goes to support other people when I was
taught never to make myself a burden to others.
On the other hand, while I was growing up, my mom had a cousin her age
with children my age. She never worked, but her kids got free school
lunches and breakfasts, plus always had the latest toys. These kids had
everything; going to their welfare paid for home was like going to an
amusement park (that was much larger than the home my own mom worked to
pay for.) She went to college for free and now works as a nurse, holding
her very first full time job making twice as much as my mom who has
worked for forty years.
How absurd is that?
So many times, if people would stop trying to get aid, and would just
take control of their situations, there wouldn't be a problem.
Disability is one thing, but I am absolutely sickened by a healthy
person who wont work. I myself am sickly with a ton of problematic
health issues, but I went out a got a full time job and never expected
someone else to help me.

mjoann

Eeeeek!

I was at my last job for three years and there were no pregnancies, but
then I conceived Ophelia, and by the time I left for maternity leave
FOUR other women were pregnant! Actually one gave birth three days
before me. All five babies (including mine) were girls.

Something in the water? One might be led to wonder...

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Carla wrote:
I don't know, Kalera. There was an office I worked in years ago, where
the receptionist got pregnant and everyone who filled in for her while
she was on maternity leave got pregnant (four women in about six
months). I figured she left "conception cooties" in the chair g.

Fortunately, filling in for the receptionist was *not* a part of my job.

Cheers,
Carla

Kalera Stratton wrote:

Only if you are contagious and it's an extremely dangerous condition;
there's actually no parasite I'm aware of that merits government
quarantine. Being sent home with head lice is not *quite* he same
thing as being taken in for quarantine. Contagion requires that it be
spreadable through casual contact from one infected person to another;
however, no matter how much time I spend with my friends while
pregnant, I am unable to make them pregnant as well.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Kaytee wrote:

In article , Kalera Stratton
writes:


the government also does not have the legal right to de-parasite
anyone against their will.




But they can quarantine you....
Kaytee
"Simplexities" on
www.eclecticbeadery.com

ICK yes it does. Indeed. shudder. Talk about Draconian.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Christina Peterson wrote:
Though sterilizing undesirables has plenty of history here in the US.

Tina


"Kalera Stratton" wrote in message
news
Um, except that the government also does not have the legal right to
de-parasite anyone against their will.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Karleen/Vibrant Jewels wrote:

"Louis Cage" wrote in message
...


As stated before no one has the right to use someone else's body

against

their will. Therefore, when a fetus becomes a person is irrelevant.


I do think you've struck on the only valid biological argument FOR

abortion.

That an unborn child is a parasite who lives in his/her mother's body

for

the purposes of survival until he/she is able to live outside the womb.

Of

course if this reasoning is used, it follows that ALL pregnancies are
parasitical infections and should be aborted to perserve the health of

the

mother in every case. In fact, it would be a public health matter,

similar

to an outbreak of tapeworms or some other noxious affliction.

The stupidity of this position should be clear, I hope. And your

contention

that a fetus "uses someone else's body against their will" certainly

gives

the fetus motive, purpose, and the ability to facilitate that purpose,

which

looks like personhold, humanness, or life to me. On the other hand, if

the

fetus is in the position of having someone use his/her body against

his/her

will by ending his/her life, then abortion is wrong in every case. The
parasitical argument however was not the reasoning behind Roe v. Wade.

I'm not stupid, you know. I do know the difference between the US
Constitution and whatever constitution or basis of law the Nazis had.

But

the relegating of undesirables to subhuman status in Nazi Germany is the
same as Roe v. Wade. As was the relegating of blacks to subhuman status

as

slaves/property. As was the relegating of women to the status of

property

early in US history as you pointed out yourself. As was the relegation

of

Native Americans to subhuman status (of which I am well aware since I am
Native American). And as will be the relegating of undesirables to

subhuman

status if euthanasia becomes legal.

You stated: "There will not be any kind of wholesale rounding up of

persons

to be euthanised on the order of Nazi Germany or slavery or removal of
indigenous Americans to reservations which you neglected to mention)."

50 million aborted fetuses .... who'd have thought in 1971 that the
slaughter would be so extensive? It trumps the 6 million Jews and 5

million

non-Jews that the Nazis caused to be killed. It trumps the number of

slaves

who were in bondage, mistreated, and died without freedom. It trumps

even

the 4,000 Native Americans who died on the Trail of Tears. In fact, it
trumps any modern tragedy or disaster that I can think of.

You said : "I will side with personal freedom over government

intervention

in my life any day."

Don't you see how hypocritical this is? Your position has denied

personal

freedom to 50 million unborn children because of the governmental
intervention of Roe v. Wade... is this the side you are on?

Oh, yes, good lord. The idea of being in a club for people with IQs over
140 is about as appealling as being a member of a club for people with a
slightly larger left nostril. "Hi, I'm part of a club that celebrates my
random statistical existence!" It's pretty much tantamount to saying
"Hi, I'm a member of a club that celebrates the fact that I really have
nothing else to be proud of!"

And I'm not at all enticed by the promise of being able to hobnob with
the card-carrying members I've met. YMMV.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Kathy N-V wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 15:04:37 -0400, Dr. Sooz wrote
(in message ):


How the heck do you get those crazy ideas out of my comment?

I can easily see how. For someone so precious about your Mensa membership,
you're pretty dense, Mjoann.


Mensa membership means nothing, IMO. I have been invited to join
many times, and was a National Merit Scholar (a thousand years ago)
I went to check it out and was thoroughly underwhelmed. It may have
that chapter alone, but the group was full of people who spent an
awful lot of time admiring their own wonderfulness.

Since that time, other people have told me that their local Mensa
chapters are like that. (To be fair, I also have a couple of friends
who love their local Mensa chapters, too) Since walking around and
proclaiming how smart I am doesn't interest me, I didn't bother going
back.

Just my two cents, and your Mensa experience may vary,

Kathy N-V

I can bring a bunch of music and some mean eats.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Arondelle wrote:
Candace wrote:

Only if I can personally escort him.

*hugs sweetie*


Looks like the party's at my house. However, you're going to have to
bring your own munchies.

Arondelle

snorting beer outta my nose

WARNING: DO NOT DRINK AND READ RCB.

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


Dr. Sooz wrote:
Only if I can personally escort him.

*hugs sweetie*


I dunno. Maybe send Orland Bloom to come rub my feet?


Can I rub *him*?
~~
Sooz

Heh. You and me both, girl! When you said you'd call me the other day I
was like "right, and monkeys will fly outta my butt". Oh, and after
that, we can three-way call Sooz and Kandice!

-Kalera
http://www.beadwife.com
http://www.snipurl.com/kebay


starlia wrote:

If I had email as a teen I would probably be worse. I don't have a problem
interacting with folks I just would rather not use a phone. I'm weird I
know.

Kalera Stratton wrote:
Was she receiving *benefits*, or was she receiving a check from the
state that was from her child's father's child support?

Well, she lived in subsidized housing and used food stamps. Because our
city doesn't actually have section 8 apartments, she was living in one
of the older homes that the county refurbished for the purpose of
meeting section 8 quotas. She had also been accepted into a program
wherein she became a homeowner through subsidies. She showed us the
stats on the development she was moving to, and said she was eligible
due to her low income. It was some kind of deal where the county helped
low income families buy a home for cost, without interest. Sounds like
aid to me as opposed to child support. Although she still received child
support and flew every other weekend to visit the father.


Your example of someone
with one dependent working full-time and making more than minimum wage
(you said she was making "a good bit" more than you, therefore logic
decrees that she was making "a good bit" more than minimum wage) getting
more in state aid than others earn in full-time wages... that's patently
ridiculous.

Well, I did say "a bit" rather than "a good bit." It was just my part
time job, and she had been there much longer. Based on the typical
starting pay for her position, she was making at least $15,000 a year.
It is ridiculous that her lifestyle was more adept to twice that much or
more.

I think that you haven't done your research and can't cite any evidence
to support your claims. Furthermore, I think your claims are based on
assumptions, not evidence. I think you are wilfully misinformed. I also
think that if you give me dates, places and figures, I can prove that
your examples are misinformation.

Well, I am not sure what internet protocol is for citing breakroom
lunchtime conversations. I can't really offer evidence for what a
co-worker tells me. I don't even remember her last name. Perhaps she was
lying, but from what I saw and heard from the person, the situation was
absurd. I personally believe there was some drug money coming in
somewhere, so maybe talking about the aid she received was just an
excuse for having so much extra money. She talked about all the money
she spent, and when I was surprised at how far $15,000 a year could go,
she told me she had low rent because of her income, and claimed she
received food stamps for her son.


Last but far from least, a person with no children can fairly easily
take advantage of the educational opportunities our society offers, but
it becomes difficult to near-impossibility when there are children
involved. Financial aid is very unforgiving about the number of credit
hours you MUST take in order to qualify.

Here it is six hours for half time with lowered aid, 12 for full. Six
hours isn't really asking a lot; two classes a session.