On 9/23/13 11:41 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 11:15:23 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



I guess I really shouldn't be surprised anymore by the lack of
compassion on the right for those who are poor or the lack of
understanding of the challenges the poor face just to eke out an existence.

Around here, for fresh food items, Wal-Mart does not beat out the
national chain stores. It's not really the issue, anyway.

The fact that there isn't a McDonald's on every corner isn't any sort of
equivalence for the fact that both urban and rural poor do not have the
ability to make what dollars they have go farther in efforts to feed
healthy foods to their families because they don't have access to
supermarkets that sell healthy food at reasonable prices. If all you can
get to is a little corner bodega that sells mostly fatty, salty
"convenience" food and a little bit of fresh food, then you are going to
pay through the nose for it and it would not be healthy food for your
family.

And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have
voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the
choices the latter have will be limited further.

I still don't know where you are going with this.
I understand you want to slam anyone who is not "Harry" without really
having a clue what you are talking about but giving "country poor"
public assistance won't help much if they don't have a place to spend
it.,

A also wonder where you were in the Carolina woods that had a
"bodega".
I have seen little country stores but they are likely to have a guy
selling fresh fruits and vegetables out of a truck in the parking lot
if they don't have them inside.
Maybe you are really talking about some yuppie haven of million dollar
houses, not farm country. We spend a lot of time out in the boonies on
our vacations and fresh produce is not the problem in that area.
Buying packaged foods is the expensive thing.


Near the beginning of this thread, the usual right-wing assholes made
derogatory comments about the poor food choices being made by many of
the poor. One of the ranking assholes suggested they shop at Wal-Mart or
Target. That assumes, of course, that the poor have reasonable access to
large chain stores from which they can buy food. For many of the poor,
that is a fallacious assumption. Many of the poor without easy access to
transportation only have access to overpriced little neighborhood stores
that carry minimal amounts of fresh, healthy food and charge much more
for it than a big-time grocery store.

The point of all this is that there are many reasons why the poor may be
making poor nutritional choices. Access to decent food at a reasonable
price is one of them.

When *you* are out in the boonies on vacation, you don't have trouble
finding the food you want because *you* have the money with which to buy
it and the transportion with which to fetch it. A lot of the poor in
this country haven't the money or the transportation.

Oh. Bodega. It's just another name these days for a small corner/
neighborhood grocery/convenience store. We are nothing if not
multilinguistic down here in southern redneck maryland.

On 9/23/2013 10:45 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 08:55:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/23/13 1:31 AM, wrote:

Harry is saying they won't build a store like that in a really ****ty
neighborhood although I would not count on Walmart not doing it.
It wouldn't be a super store but it will have the basic necessities at
the cheapest prices around.


It's not just a "****ty" urban neighborhood problem, it's also a
"****ty" rural problem. We have a relative who lives in western North
Carolina, near a small city. The two supermarkets in her city aren't so
super, and the prices they charge are outrageous, substantially higher
than our overpriced markets here in the Washington, D.C., area.

They don't have a McDonalds on every corner either so I am not sure
where you are going with that.
In those kinds of places you can have a garden or barter food from
people who do. It is how the country folks survived for the last 8000
years or so.


AYKM!??





I'm not convinced Wal-Mart has lower grocery prices. Two of the local
outlets of national chains publish ads and flyers with "shopping
baskets" full of the usual foods and their prices, and while Wal-Mart is
cheaper on a few items, in the end both of the national grocery chain
stores beat Wal-Mart's prices by an average of 20%.

About a year ago, when visiting relatives in Florida, I was dragged,
kicking and screaming, into a nearly new Wal-Mart super store in their
town. It had a complete supermarket inside, and a Wal-Mart liquor store
attached to its side. Huge store. I was not impressed with the variety
or quality of the produce or fresh beef and chicken products I saw
there, the grocery side of the store was not that clean, and the shelves
were not being replenished properly. I was going to cook a few meals for
everyone, so I drove over to the Publix, a huge store, too, but with
much nicer fresh goods, an active bakery, better prices than Wal-Mart,
and fully stocked shelves.

I'm sure Wal-Mart will be selling all the chicken we're going to be
importing from China, and I'll bet the Waltons get an exemption from
labeling the country of origin of that poultry. Let the buyer beware.


Walmart will beat Publix on price if you shop but I agree it is not as
nice. You get what you pay for. If you are really that poor you will
find the best nutrition for your dollar tho assuming you understand
how.
I threw a bone to Michelle and you are still arguing with me. I guess
you can't help it. Send her a letter.

On 9/23/13 10:45 AM, wrote:

Walmart will beat Publix on price if you shop but I agree it is not as
nice. You get what you pay for. If you are really that poor you will
find the best nutrition for your dollar tho assuming you understand
how.


Well, I am no expert on what is inside Wal-Mart full line grocery
stores, since the only time I have been in one was that one time last
year in Florida. One more thing I noticed there...not only didn't I see
any employees restocking or straightening out the shelves, but I didn't
see any front-end managers, grocery managers, produce managers, et
cetera, policing their departments. Whenever I go into the big grocery
stores around here, I always see the department managers working their
employees and making sure the shelves are stacked, and even the overall
store manager gets into the act. The other day, I saw the general
manager of the Giant supermarket I frequent personally restocking the
dairy cases. I've known him for years, so I teased him about being a
working stiff, and he smiled and said his dayshift dairy manager and the
stock guy for that department were both out sick. This is a guy who, if
everything else is shipshape, has his employees mopping floors,
polishing freezer case doors, picking up trash in the parking lot and
making sure there is fresh toilet paper in the bathrooms. Obviously,
he'd never make it at Wal-Mart.

"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House
have
voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the
choices the latter have will be limited further.

---------------------------

First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10
years .... about $4 billion per year.
The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order
to cut back on massive abuse of the program.

BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of
control:

http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423

On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have
voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the
choices the latter have will be limited further.

---------------------------

First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years
.... about $4 billion per year.
The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order
to cut back on massive abuse of the program.

BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control:

http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423



The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them.

Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the
Republicans to crap on the poorest among us.

On 9/23/13 5:22 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:44:50 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have
voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the
choices the latter have will be limited further.

---------------------------

First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years
.... about $4 billion per year.
The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order
to cut back on massive abuse of the program.

BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control:

http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423



The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them.

Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the
Republicans to crap on the poorest among us.

If they have 28 democrats, including BOTH of yours, there must be
something else going here besides just feeding the poor.

Maybe I will go look at Thomas and see just what is really in this
bill.


Those 28 votes in the Senate were on an Amendment, not on the House
bill. The House bill will not pass the Senate.

On 9/23/2013 4:44 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have
voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the
choices the latter have will be limited further.

---------------------------

First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years
.... about $4 billion per year.
The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order
to cut back on massive abuse of the program.

BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of
control:

http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423



The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them.

Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the
Republicans to crap on the poorest among us.

You have a way with words. Unfortunately it's not a good way ,or an
honest one.

On 9/23/13 8:30 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:58:03 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/23/13 5:22 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:44:50 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/23/13 4:38 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...


And, of course, now that the Republican assholes in the U.S. House have
voted to cut $40 billion out of the food programs for the poor, the
choices the latter have will be limited further.

---------------------------

First of all, they cut approximately $40 billion over the next 10 years
.... about $4 billion per year.
The eligibility and work requirements have been re-emphasized in order
to cut back on massive abuse of the program.

BTW, it's not just Republicans who recognize the program is out of control:

http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/...action_KEY=423



The abuses aren't massive, and the GOP-passe cutbacks won't address them.

Fortunately, the Senate likely will trashcan this latest attempt of the
Republicans to crap on the poorest among us.

If they have 28 democrats, including BOTH of yours, there must be
something else going here besides just feeding the poor.

Maybe I will go look at Thomas and see just what is really in this
bill.


Those 28 votes in the Senate were on an Amendment, not on the House
bill. The House bill will not pass the Senate.

That is the problem with KOS, they don't put a date on their articles.

Have you actually looked at how the house is saving that $39b?
(actually a CBO projection that may not be true anyway)
It is H.R 3102


Actually, no. I rarely read the details about the Crazy Republican bills
emanating from the U.S. House. When the GOP majority in the House stops
terrorizing the country, I'll pay a bit more attention to them.

On 9/23/13 8:54 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 20:35:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/23/13 8:30 PM, wrote:

Have you actually looked at how the house is saving that $39b?
(actually a CBO projection that may not be true anyway)
It is H.R 3102


Actually, no. I rarely read the details about the Crazy Republican bills
emanating from the U.S. House. When the GOP majority in the House stops
terrorizing the country, I'll pay a bit more attention to them.


You really need to read legislation before you approve of it or
condemn it. Unfortunately congress has the same opinion you do.
That is how we get so much bad legislation.



Poppycock. If the House GOP virtually unanimously puts forth a piece of
purely political legislation, I pretty much know it is nonsense without
reading it.

On Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:54:26 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Hamburger Chef Jamie Oliver Proves

McDonald’s Burgers “Unfit for human consumption”



Hamburger chef Jamie Oliver has won his long-fought battle against one

of the largest fast food chains in the world – McDonalds. After Oliver

showed how McDonald’s hamburgers are made, the franchise finally

announced that it will change its recipe.



Oliver repeatedly explained to the public, over several years – in

documentaries, television shows and interviews – that the fatty parts of

beef are “washed” in ammonium hydroxide and used in the filling of the

burger. Before this process, according to the presenter, the food is

deemed unfit for human consumption. According to the chef and hamburger

enthusiast, Jamie Oliver, who has undertaken a war against the fast food

industry, “Basically, we’re taking a product that would be sold in the

cheapest way for dogs, and after this process, is being given to human

beings.”



Besides the low quality of the meat, the ammonium hydroxide is harmful

to health. Oliver famously coined this the “the pink slime process.”

“Why would any sensible human being put meat filled with ammonia in the

mouths of their children?” Oliver asked.



In one of his colorful demonstrations, Oliver demonstrates to children

how nuggets are made. After selecting the best parts of the chicken, the

remains (fat, skin and internal organs) are processed for these fried foods.



In reply to all of the bad press this process has received from Oliver,

the company Arcos Dorados, the franchise manager for McDonalds in Latin

America, said such a procedure is not practiced in their region. The

same, it should be noted, applies to the product in Ireland and the UK,

where they use meat from local suppliers.



In the United States, however, Burger King and Taco Bell had already

abandoned the use of ammonia in their products. The food industry uses

ammonium hydroxide as an anti-microbial agent in meats, which has

allowed McDonald’s to use otherwise “inedible meat.”



Most disturbing of all is the horrifying fact that because ammonium

hydroxide is considered part of the “component in a production

procedure” by the USDA, consumers may not know when the chemical is in

their food.



On the official website of McDonald’s, the company claims that their

meat is cheap because, while serving many people every day, they are

able to buy from their suppliers at a lower price, and offer the best

quality products. But if “pink slime” was really the “best quality” that

McDonalds can muster in the US, then why were they able do better in

Latin America and Europe? More to the point, why can they apparently do

better now in the United States?



These questions remains unanswered by the franchise which has denied

that the decision to change the recipe is related to Jamie Oliver’s

campaign. On the site, McDonald’s has admitted that they have abandoned

the beef filler from its burger patties.



Source: http://politicalblindspot.org



http://tinyurl.com/nxu9l5x

4 tax liens / 2 bankruptcies / Dr-Dr-Dr

By the way Krausie, you still got that Hatteras?