Home | About | Donate

At Least 9 Million US Households With Children Are 'Not At All Confident' They'll Be Able to Afford Food Next Month, Census Survey Finds

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/05/29/least-9-million-us-households-children-are-not-all-confident-theyll-be-able-afford

We will help them, won’t we. Locally or otherwise.

3 Likes

Trump is salivating at all these folks going hungry. The riots and looting that will follow will allow Hair Furor to declare martial law and suspend the election and thereby make him the DICKtator he was born to be. I just hope the we the people wake up enough and learn to take care of each other as things continue to deteriorate. My partner and I donate as much as we can to local organizations that help those who are down and out. Massive general strikes and boycotts will be needed as well.
This quote from Mario Savio from a speech in 1964 is just as relevant now:
There’s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part! You can’t even passively take part! And you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels … upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop! And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!

3 Likes

33 million people are expected to face malnutrition in the wake of the locust swarms.
Nature always has the last laugh.

Suicide as cause of death will be climbing the charts in this country.
And we’re just getting warmed up.

But hey, the stock market had a good month and Jeff Bezos made another few billion, so…

3 Likes

From the lines of cars waiting for their weekly allotment of free food I would have expected it to be higher. It probably is, doubly so since this poll is just on households w/children.

Bankruptcies are on the rise. Evictions are occurring. Homelessness, hunger and destitution will increase. Corporate layoffs are just around the corner as airlines, Boeing, etc prepare to put out to pasture (layoff) thousands of “human capital stock,” many permanently – all a devastating toll for those in the crosshairs.

Welcome to Trumpworld, STB Bidenworld.

2 Likes

Only one in four households make less than $150,000? It seems that figure should be more like three out of four. I’d like to know where and how that former number came about.

1 Like

Just a quick google shows that about 70% in the US earn less than $50,000/year. Many, if not most, households have two incomes. Godforbid they try to live on one.

2 Likes

I volunteer at a community food bank—we’re trying. What I worry about is what will happen when our donors can’t afford to support us any more, as the number of people we serve rises.

2 Likes

Oligarch World. Or in honor of the movie It’s A Wonderful Life why not rename the USA to Pottersville.

1 Like

I just heard Abigail Disney (on Seat at the Table) say there are 600 billionaires in the US today. (600 too many)

Abigail Disney hits out at ‘feral’ billionaires, saying Bezos has transformed into Darth Vader, Elon Musk is a narcissist and Peter Thiel is a menace.

~https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8362429/Abigail-Disney-says-Bezos-Darth-Vader-Elon-Musk-narcissist-Peter-Thiel-menace.html

If we want to, we should be planting seeds now.

I think the author is trying to say that out of the people who make at least $150,000, 1 out of 4 of even them, lives paycheck to paycheck. It is worded in a kind of confusing way in the story, and I’m assuming these people ($150,000 earners) live in very expensive cities like San Francisco to be living paycheck to paycheck.

It should be a crime to throw away perfectly good food.

Good food should go to food banks, NEVER into the trash or plowed into the ground.

2 Likes

The problem goes all the way up and down the supply chain. The vagaries of the money system will stop farmers from planting and will pressure farmers to destroy product, but it will not itself create food.

One thing that this headline suggests is that local sources have to plant seeds and raise food for at least 9 million American households. A large percentage of these households are urban or suburban. So a lot of the sources should be urban, suburban, or greenbelt.

No large entity is poised to direct this. People will have to do it themselves. There is a bit of time in turnaround, generally. Whom do you trust enough to consider sharing resources?

He’s a real estate developer. he is thinking of all of the housing he plans to tear down by eminent domain, and replace with huge million dollar condo developments.

Large scale displacements of working families in cities.

An end to rent stabilization and rent control laws. This will have the same effect of a gerrymandering and its intended to nullify voters by forcing them out of metro areas - many of these families dont even own a car or drive. So losing their affordable homes will literally kill poor people.

People should plant their own gardens in their backyards or even on balconies.

I’m starting one.

One big problem is a change that occurred 25 years ago that in essence, prohibits governments from helping people if any corporate seller of that product or service exists. This is a real problem because people don’t know about it, they think nothing has changed. So for example, the government now cannot build public housing as it used to, there are a plethora of rules that kick in whenever subsidies are involved. The government is only allowed to help in a permanent, sustainable way when there literally is no entity involved in something except the government, and it provides it as part of its function, for free. And of course food is a good, a commodity, so there are all sorts of obscure internatiopnal rules on agriculture and agricultural subsidies. Thats an area I know nothing about but it seems to me that countries should have freedoms to feed their poor, that international organizations should not be involved.

How dare we tell people in other countries what to do, in order to have the ‘privilege’ of trading with us?

If they or we, want to stockpile food in case of a famine,or to feed our poor people if they cant find work because of outsourcing or coronavirus or anything, let them.

Let us! Also, if communities want to promote farmers markets for organic local foods, thats not discrimination against factory farming, from the other side of the world, its common sense.

Well observed. Applause and congratulations for putting the garden in motion.

I agree that governments should be able to help their people, though I would say that the tendency you’re talking about went back further, a prime feature of empire itself and of what was called “anticommunism” very specifically.

Local production and distribution is probably the best response to what are called “sanctions,” The military assaults are terrible, though. We are going to need to see some solidarity, but I think the local economies will have to go up before that is well in line.

In the mean time - Spain has implemented UBI, like rational civilized adults

1 Like

It is likely for a limited time, because of the lockdown. If people literally cannot work, are prevented from working 24/7 this is a very genuine emergency, the Spanish government cant be accused of ‘protectionism’ for helping people survive-- instead of banks. Good for them- I hope they continue it and if they get pressured over it, bring the issue out into the open.

You see for a very long time they had a plan- the WTO was created to do this, to facilitate it - to shift jobs to lower priced workers, from the developed world, even for jobs sited in developed countries, because it can be much cheaper, a fraction of the cost…Its findable under thr phrase “movement of natural persons” and it undermines immigrants and working people alike, by replacing immigration and skilled work with a new program of non-immigration, basically intra corporatetransfer, which alows people to be paid in their home country’s wages, under some conditions. Its not something peope expect, because it really is a big change. “Social dumping” - on a large scale. It will also undermine Social Security because most of those working will be foreigners, and emplyed for foreign firms, as subcontractors- Intra corportae transferees.

on a massive scale. This will be very disruptive, so coronavirus is likely seen as a godsend for the people pushing this scheme because it will give companies and countries cover, an excuse - an excuse to outsource millions of jobs, one sector after another. Right now this is limited to a fraction of its anatural amount by quotas. Which may be illegal - the WTO will decide that case soon, probably in the next term, so Biden will probably approve funding for them and judges so the WTO can go ahead. Or maybe not. But I think he most almost certainly will. It will help the owners of firms based in the poorest countries. Replacing affirmative action with new preferences for the poorest countries corporations.

Otherwise they might be required to do it, but be hated for allowing it, because it will be a huge disaster to working families, a total sea change. Imagine having to train replacements and then have your entire profession precariatized. Will it be mre profitable as they say? I dont think so because it totally discounts large intangible losses like the total loss of trust that will inevitably occur. Trust is worth a great deal financially, for example, imagine how things would be here in the US if people did not think that improvements were right around the corner, Medicare for All, etc. instead realizing that the intent was in fact to outsource jobs and basically do everything the GOPS way, forever with no possibility of reversing it, without paying a kings ransom. Social Security for example, made people much more willing to work for a low wage, because they thought they would be cared for in old age. Of course most countries dont have anything even remotely like it, except the rich countries that created it before the WTO was created blocking more and more new services like that.

We lived on one income for twenty years after my wife became disabled. It isn’t much fun.

2 Likes