Brain Fertilizer

Wow...I don't have a DVD player, A/C, two cars, and what the heck is this garage of which they speak? :) With Michael moving in we now have video games, a microwave, and a TV. But that's pretty much the exent of it.

Are we poor? :) That's a weird thought. I mean, on any given day we might be broke, yeah, but...there's a pretty big difference.

I wonder how much being "poor" has to do with too much debt from buying all the crap mentioned.

And that's the crux of the problem. Urban poor are often more comfortable than rural poor. Standards of living are ambiguous and mutable. While I don't doubt you could qualify for more government assistance if you wanted to, you have chosen to remain largely self-sufficient, or relying on family to help the rough spots.
But what I find perplexing is that you show no inclination to even request that others make the same effort. By our discussions and your alignment with the Democrat Party, I know you both tacitly and overtly support taking more taxes from "rich" people so that "poor" people can be less poor. But these statistics do demonstrate what I've been saying for some time: our "poor" aren't necessarily poor. So your votes on the state and national level have gone to support taxes to ensure these poor people have DVD players, or have relief from the debt they incurred in buying their homes and DVD players and internet access.
It's defensible, I guess, but I don't agree. No one is owed anything in this country. You should earn everything you get. I don't mind providing life-sustaining elements while you get back on your feet, and so government funding to ensure food and shelter is okay with me. But our taxation/welfare/entitlement system has gone way beyond that, I think it is clear.

Oh, I'd agree our system could be fixed. Clinton initiated the first round of "fixes", but believe such matters have to be routinely "checked", and that falls to each new administration.

And you should earn everything you get, outside of a few things. We've discussed job crops and such, I believe these government programs make people more self-reliant. Sometimes, just a smidge of "gubmint" can be very helpful.

Ummm, make that job CORPS. If there were job CROPS, it would make the whole thing much easier. ;)

Well, if I haven't made it clear, I apologize...but my view is that government help is necessary and good, just with more care and wisdom as to its scope and direction. If we could successfully limit it to just "get back on your feet" programs and let non-profit organizations handle the hard-core "unwilling-to-work" -ers, then we could significantly reduce both the size of government and the number of votes purchased through government entitlements. It's a win-win situation.

You know, I think I may have either commented on this very subject somewhere or briefly and waaaaaayyy back in my archives actually discussed this thought of the measure of material goods defining wealth or poverty.

Some people would consider my husband and I to be extremely wealthy- but as Nathan says, we simply choose (and not so easily, let me tell ya ;) not to have some things now, in order to have others later, like say paying for four college educations, retirement, those 150 acres that call to me across the divide back in Missouri...Oh, anyway, I learned a long time ago, statistics are a lot like a penis*: interesting, fun, easily manipulated, and the size must be kept in perspective with regard to other factors.

*there is generally a lot of breast-talk around these male dominated blogs; I just thought I would throw in a little something to which the ladies could relate :)

I feel doubly impugned:
1) there really hasn't been much breast-talk around my blog
2) Jo has more comments than anyone, and I think you, Rae, might be in 2nd place, so I don't think I would characterize this blog as 'male-dominated' in any way other than a male is its sole author.
That being said, your comment may be my favorite of all time! I'm going to memorize that quote about statistics. Not to mention highlight it.

Oh, Nathan, I didn't mean your blog specifically (with regard to breast-talk and maleness) ...just the "gang." You know, ZB, Andy, Jerry, you, etc. both here, there...

Awww... I am sorry :( I didn't mean to make you feel criticized. You know I think you are a terrific writer and a very diplomatic person, Nathan.

On the statistics comment...that fact that you, the King of Pundom, found it acceptable and clever is a lovely compliment to me. Thanks :)

Nah, I'm just playing around. If I were actually offended, I'd let you know in a better way than just leaving a commment. But re-reading my comment, I can see that's not clear. My apologies. I'd say "it won't happen again", but knowing me, it probably will. :)

Eastern Washington- is that where Nathan resides or were you speaking of yourself, Jo?

I ask because we will be roadtripping that direction next late summer....

Oops- comment on the wrong post...

Me. But I will have moved on to my next assignment by then.

Ironically, I am below and to the left of Nathan. haha!

Heheheh...ironic indeed, Jo :)