To the Woman Behind Me in Line at the Grocery Store

by Guest Sat Jan 02, 2016 10:33 am

First topic message reminder :

Dear woman behind me in line at the grocery store,
You don't know me. You have no clue what my life has been like since October 1, 2013. You have no clue that my family has gone through the wringer. You have no clue that we have faced unbelievable hardship. You have no clue we have been humiliated, humbled, destitute.
You have no clue I have cried more days than not; that I fight against bitterness taking control of my heart. You have no clue that my husband's pride was shattered. You have no clue my kids have had the worries of an adult on their shoulders. You have no clue their innocence was snatched from them for no good reason. You know none of this.
What you do know is I tried to buy my kids some food and that the EBT machine was down so I couldn't buy that food. I didn't have any cash or my debit card with me. I only had my SNAP card. All you heard was me saying "No, don't hold it for me. My kids are hungry now and I have no other way of paying for this." You didn't judge me. You didn't snarl "Maybe you should have less kids." You didn't say "Well, get a job and learn to support yourself." You didn't look away in embarrassment or shame for me. You didn't make any assumptions at all.
What you did was you paid that $17.38 grocery bill for us. You gave my kids bananas, yogurt, apple juice, cheese sticks, and a peach ice tea for me; a rare treat and splurge. You let me hug you and promise through my tears that I WILL pay this forward. I WILL pay someone's grocery bill for them. That $17.38 may not have been a lot for you, but it was priceless to us. In the car my kids couldn't stop gushing about you; our "angel in disguise." They prayed for you. They prayed you would be blessed. You restored some of our lost faith. One simple and small action changed our lives. You probably have forgotten about us by now, but we haven't forgotten about you. You will forever be a part of us even though we don't even know your name.
You have no clue how grateful and embarrassed I am that we pay for all our food with SNAP. We eat well thanks to the government. I love that. I love that the government makes sure my kids are cared for. It is one less worry for us. I also struggle with pride and embarrassment. I defiantly tell people we are on SNAP. Daring them to judge us.
Only those closest to us know why we are on SNAP. They know my husband is a hard worker who was laid off after 17 years in a management position with his former company. They know we were moved from our home to a new state only to be left homeless since the house we had came with the job he lost. Only those closest to us know my husband works part time while looking tirelessly for more; that he has submitted more applications than he has received interviews for. Too many jobs are only offering part time work anymore. It is not easy for a 40-something year old to find a job that will support his family of five kids.
You know none of this but you didn't let that stop you from being compassionate and generous to someone you have never met.
To the woman behind me at the grocery store, you have no idea how much we appreciate you. You have no idea the impact you had on my kids. You have no idea how incredibly thankful I am for you. Your action may have been small, but to us it was monumental. Thank you.
Thank you for not judging us. Thank you for giving my kids a snack when they were quite hungry. Thank you. Just thank you.
Forever,
Andrea, the woman in front of you at the grocery store with the cart full of kids who are no longer hungry

To the Woman Behind Me in Line at the Grocery Store - Page 7 2014-04-03-20140319_114558

This post first appeared on Andrea's blog truestoriesofamidwestyankee.wordpress.com

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrea-gardner/to-the-woman-behind-me-in_b_5082769.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

The more people in the world who are this kind, the better it will be.

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:00 pm

Richard The Lionheart wrote:
Irn Bru wrote:
Richard The Lionheart wrote:

You either did talk rubbish or you lied:

And just for the record welfare payments always go up under the Tories and down under Labour by providing more better paid jobs that make people less reliant on benefits.

ALWAYS?

Do you wanna retract now?

See last post

Sorry buddy, you sank faster than the HMS Hood with your last feeble reply..
\

The figures in the table don't lie Didge. Shame you messed up Laughing

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:03 pm

Irn Bru wrote:
Richard The Lionheart wrote:

Sorry buddy, you sank faster than the HMS Hood with your last feeble reply..
\

The figures in the table don't lie Didge. Shame you messed up

The figures do not lie Irn, what is important is that you do not lie when the evidence proves your claim was false to always.
So do you stand by your claim, or go further defklect away from your huge errror?

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:05 pm

Irn Bru wrote:
Richard The Lionheart wrote:

Sorry buddy, you sank faster than the HMS Hood with your last feeble reply..
\

The figures in the table don't lie Didge. Shame you messed up

Again lol

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:06 pm

Again
Nice try at helping Irn, try and worm out of an inescapble hole he dug for himself

Laughing

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:08 pm

He don't need any help, unlike yourself lol

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:12 pm

See when ever the left screw up, they call 999 and sadly get Bungle.

Laughing

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:12 pm

Richard The Lionheart wrote:Again
Nice try at helping Irn, try and worm out of an inescapble hole he dug for himself

Your upset Didge and I can understand that but if you keep leaving these little gems for me than that's your own fault.

The figures in the table don't lie bud. Get over it and move on Laughing

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:14 pm

Irn Bru wrote:
Richard The Lionheart wrote:Again
Nice try at helping Irn, try and worm out of an inescapble hole he dug for himself

Your upset Didge and I can understand that but if you keep leaving these little gems for me than that's your own fault.

The figures in the table don't lie bud. Get over it and move on

Irn seriously buiddy, I am pissing myself laughing mate

Again, one last chance, did the welfare bill go up under labour, as your claim would make that impossible?

Laughing

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:19 pm

Richard The Lionheart wrote:
Irn Bru wrote:
Richard The Lionheart wrote:Again
Nice try at helping Irn, try and worm out of an inescapble hole he dug for himself

Your upset Didge and I can understand that but if you keep leaving these little gems for me than that's your own fault.

The figures in the table don't lie bud. Get over it and move on

Irn seriously buiddy, I am pissing myself laughing mate

Again, one last chance, did the welfare bill go up under labour, as your claim would make that impossible?

Check the table Didge and then go and change your underwear or your legs will get all scabby with your urine. Try and control that as I'm sure it must be very uncomfortable.

Come back with anything you want that disputes the ONS figures and I promise to have a look at them.

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:21 pm

Irn Bru wrote:
Richard The Lionheart wrote:

Irn seriously buiddy, I am pissing myself laughing mate

Again, one last chance, did the welfare bill go up under labour, as your claim would make that impossible?

Check the table Didge and then go and change your underwear or your legs will get all scabby with your urine. Try and control that as I'm sure it must be very uncomfortable.

Come back with anything you want that disputes the ONS figures and I promise to have a look at them.

Check out my table, from fullfacts?

29percent increase.

How many millions Irn?

Never seen such a poor liar try and hide from his mistake

Bless

Laughing

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:30 pm

Richard The Lionheart wrote:
Irn Bru wrote:
Richard The Lionheart wrote:

Irn seriously buiddy, I am pissing myself laughing mate

Again, one last chance, did the welfare bill go up under labour, as your claim would make that impossible?

Check the table Didge and then go and change your underwear or your legs will get all scabby with your urine. Try and control that as I'm sure it must be very uncomfortable.

Come back with anything you want that disputes the ONS figures and I promise to have a look at them.

Check out my table, from fullfacts?

29percent increase.

How many millions Irn?

Never seen such a poor liar try and hide from his mistake

Bless

THe figures I quoted aqre from the ONS and cover the entire welfare bill. It's all laid out there for all the spending and not just social security.

Come on mate. Own up, your figures were just for one element of welfare spending.

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:31 pm

ONS have nev er been wrong have they?

Ha ha second fail

Are my stats from fullfact lies Irn?

Lat chance to redeem yourself

Did spending go up on welfare under Labour?

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:34 pm

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:35 pm

lol even the graph backs my point up

Thanks sassy

Rememeber 1997 to 2010 lol

So funny how they rreally are not that bright lol

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:38 pm

Better go to specsavers, going down when Labour in power, sad, really sad.

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:39 pm

Told you lol

Some people seriously cannot read graphs or remember what a personsaid in always lol

Night

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:41 pm

The dark red is total incapacity benefits - going down

The dark blue is total unemployment benefits - going down

You are making yourself look a tit

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:42 pm

'selected' out of work benefits.

Oh dear not the whole wefare social security bill then.

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:42 pm

Ist that all wlefare benefits sassy?

Fuck me that was epic stupidity ha ha ha ha

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:46 pm

Yes Didge, all welfare benefits - GOING DOWN

Fuck me you must be drunk

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:48 pm

And Didge, the 'selected' means they are itemised out and The dark red is total incapacity benefits - going down and the dark blue is total unemployment benefits - going down

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:48 pm

The only think I am drunk on is laughter sassy at the pair of you so badly struggle lol

Pretty please keep it up

lol

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:49 pm

Didge, suggest you stop playing the Waltons and go to bed, because you will look at this in the morning and cringe.

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:50 pm

Has sasy worked out yet what welfare benefits is,m as she keeps asking me to look at incapacity and unemployment only

One moment

To the Woman Behind Me in Line at the Grocery Store - Page 7 3489511464

To the Woman Behind Me in Line at the Grocery Store - Page 7 3489511464

And even they went up

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:51 pm

Now I'm feeling very sorry for you Didge, cos if you read that as going up you are standing on your head.

I'll leave you to it, you can't get sense out of drunk.

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:53 pm

YOu feel sorry for me?
Thanks That does not change the facts or your graph how welfare spending went up under labour lol

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:54 pm

The ONS figures do not lie Didge. They're feom the government body appointed to do all this..

You'll learn Laughing

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:55 pm

Really Irn, just like the Police ONS ones never did? lol

Anyway, do you need a digger opr a shovel mate to get out of your hole?

Laughing

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:02 pm

Richard The Lionheart wrote:Really Irn, just like the Police ONS ones never did? lol

Anyway, do you need a digger opr a shovel mate to get out of your hole?

Cop out Didge. Massive cop out by you :lol

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:04 pm

Yeah you are a copout mate and the musice will continue until you admit your failings here lol

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:05 pm

Make sure you choose good music then, cos the only copping out is you.

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:08 pm

sassy wrote:Make sure you choose good music then, cos the only copping out is you.

weel as the pair of you have been on the back foot all night and its just me, this is dedicated just for you

Laughing

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:08 pm

What happened to the Sandie Shaw video? Laughing

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:09 pm

Think you really need this one Dodgy Dick

by Irn Bru Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:10 pm

Richard The Lionheart wrote:
sassy wrote:Make sure you choose good music then, cos the only copping out is you.

weel as the pair of you have been on the back foot all night and its just me, this is dedicated just for you

Hit the charts again not all that long ago Laughing

by Guest Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:12 pm

by Irn Bru Sat Jan 09, 2016 12:47 am

Reduced to irrelevant videos now. Classic Didge

by Irn Bru Sat Jan 09, 2016 1:12 am

Anyway. Back to the debate on HB for someone living in a two bedroom house with the rent paid in full with discretionary payments.

by Tommy Monk Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:54 am

Irn... with respect mate... you have diverted the debate... not really added anything to it...

Your point on it being possible for a single person to be housed in a 2 bed place and with HB picking up the whole cost of rent is correct... it is possible now... but only in the rare circumstances you eluded to in the caveat you included in your claim... it is possible in extreme circumstances whereby the council has to house someone as a matter of urgency and where the council are unable to find the suitable one bed place they are entitled to.

Entirely different to the situation discussed earlier where Syl's son was already living in a 2 bed place and when became unemployed, it turned out that the max single persons hb rate payable was actually enough to cover the whole rent for the place because the rent was cheap enough to fall below the threshold!

by Guest Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:04 am

Irn Bru wrote:Reduced to irrelevant videos now. Classic Didge

Classic Irn unable to admit he was wrong, that is what is pathetic and proves how the left are seen by main as a stain on society, becuase at least others admit when wrong the left have a mental breakdown as you do when as seen you were wrong. Never mind I enjoyed watching you squirm so badly last night and your poor side kick who even worse tried to defend your errors whifh just proves how out of touch with reality she is.
Welfare always goes down under Labour Irn claims, one moment.

To the Woman Behind Me in Line at the Grocery Store - Page 7 3489511464

by Raggamuffin Sat Jan 09, 2016 6:41 am

Irn Bru wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:Irn Bru talks rubbish as usual... "it was the tory s wot done it".. followed by lies and spin!

No I'm not talking rubbish Tommy and I don't tell lies either. Owing to an acute shortage of one bedroom houses it's not that uncommomn for people to be living in two bedroom houses with the rent topped up with discretionary payments paid for by the council. It's more common in areas where there was a high degree of counciil house being built which was two, three and four bedroom properties for families. Single bedroom houses in council estates were actually quite rare in these areas.

We're not talking about council housing though, we're talking about private rental property.

by Major Sat Jan 09, 2016 9:17 am

I do not understand this much at all.

Can someone explain the maximum payment anyone can get for renting a private property with 1 2 3 bedrooms?

I have read in the media of some horrendous amounts paid out.

Are the amounts paid out the same all over this island?

by Tommy Monk Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:44 pm

Each area will have the max payable rates set compared to local housing costs.

You can look up max payable rates per entitlement grouping... eg a single person will only get the max of the one bed flat rate...

Google "housing benefit rates" plus the area you want to look up...

Sometimes known as local housing allowance now...

Rates vary in different areas depending on local rental costs.

What you are starting to see now is that the local authority will set a max payable rate but it is impossible to find a place in the area that is cheap enough to get it all paid by the benefit.

Here is an example... read the info and it says just that... can touch the map to see max payable rate there...

http://www.rbkc.hbupdate.co.uk/

by Tommy Monk Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:47 pm

In my area the cost of a one bed flat is about £900 a month but housing benefit only pays about £690 as a max.

by Irn Bru Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:43 am

Didge wrote:Has sasy worked out yet what welfare benefits is,m as she keeps asking me to look at incapacity and unemployment only

One moment

And even they went up

Hey Didge. I decided to follow up in more detail about what you quoted from Fullfact and I can see now why you didn't produce a link to it because Fullfact actually rip to bits what you quoted. These were claims made by Iain Ducan Smith and Fullfact as hard as they tried couldn't find any evidence to back them up. They also only included working age benefits not the whole social security bill which the ONS and the peer reviewed Instititue of Fiscal Studies prove that the Social Security bill went down.

Here's a wee clip from the Fullfact article...

These show that in 1997/98 spending on social protection was £114.5 billion, while in 2007/08 it had increased to 187.5 billion, a 64 per cent increase in nominal terms. This translates to a 29 per cent increase in spending in real terms. It is also interesting to note that page 62 has a table showing how expenditure on social protection has changed as a per cent of GDP in the same time period. It actually decreased from 13.6 per cent in 1997/98 to 13.2 per cent in 2007/08.

You really are a sleekit wee devil doing that showing that you can't be trusted in debates with the claims that you make and everything has to be checked out.

Cheers Laughing

by Irn Bru Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:45 am

Irn Bru wrote:
Didge wrote:Has sasy worked out yet what welfare benefits is,m as she keeps asking me to look at incapacity and unemployment only

One moment

And even they went up

Hey Didge. I decided to follow up in more detail about what you quoted from Fullfact and I can see now why you didn't produce a link to it because Fullfact actually rip to bits what you quoted. These were claims made by Iain Ducan Smith and Fullfact as hard as they tried couldn't find any evidence to back them up. They also only included working age benefits not the whole social security bill which the ONS and the peer reviewed Instititue of Fiscal Studies prove that the Social Security bill went down.

Here's a wee clip from the Fullfact article...

These show that in 1997/98 spending on social protection was £114.5 billion, while in 2007/08 it had increased to 187.5 billion, a 64 per cent increase in nominal terms. This translates to a 29 per cent increase in spending in real terms. It is also interesting to note that page 62 has a table showing how expenditure on social protection has changed as a per cent of GDP in the same time period. It actually decreased from 13.6 per cent in 1997/98 to 13.2 per cent in 2007/08.

You really are a sleekit wee devil doing that showing that you can't be trusted in debates with the claims that you make and everything has to be checked out.

Here's the lnk which you deliberately left out...

http://beta.fullfact.org/news/did-spending-working-age-welfare-increase-50-cent-under-labour/

Cheers

by Tommy Monk Mon Jan 11, 2016 1:42 am

Is that including the extra 30 billion labour added to the bill in tax credits?

Also it is indisputable that housing benefit bill balloned under Labour. ..

And labour allowed unemployed people to claim up to £100000 in benefits while the average earnings for going to work every day was only around a quarter or that... before tax!!!

by Guest Mon Jan 11, 2016 1:59 am

Irn Bru wrote:
Didge wrote:Has sasy worked out yet what welfare benefits is,m as she keeps asking me to look at incapacity and unemployment only

One moment

And even they went up

Hey Didge. I decided to follow up in more detail about what you quoted from Fullfact and I can see now why you didn't produce a link to it because Fullfact actually rip to bits what you quoted. These were claims made by Iain Ducan Smith and Fullfact as hard as they tried couldn't find any evidence to back them up. They also only included working age benefits not the whole social security bill which the ONS and the peer reviewed Instititue of Fiscal Studies prove that the Social Security bill went down.

Here's a wee clip from the Fullfact article...

These show that in 1997/98 spending on social protection was £114.5 billion, while in 2007/08 it had increased to 187.5 billion, a 64 per cent increase in nominal terms. This translates to a 29 per cent increase in spending in real terms. It is also interesting to note that page 62 has a table showing how expenditure on social protection has changed as a per cent of GDP in the same time period. It actually decreased from 13.6 per cent in 1997/98 to 13.2 per cent in 2007/08.

You really are a sleekit wee devil doing that showing that you can't be trusted in debates with the claims that you make and everything has to be checked out.

Cheers

lol which proves I was right and that it did fo up under Labour, which you refuse to accept this information earlier

So did it go up under Labour?

Yep, you bet bucko lol

You aid it always went down under Labour

You lied and still cannot admit you did lol

by Irn Bru Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:04 am

Tommy Monk wrote:Is that including the extra 30 billion labour added to the bill in tax credits?

Also it is indisputable that housing benefit bill balloned under Labour. ..

And labour allowed unemployed people to claim up to £100000 in benefits while the average earnings for going to work every day was only around a quarter or that... before tax!!!

At least you have tried to offer some sort of response unlike Didge who resorts to posting music videos as a response. Ignore him Tommy as all he brought to the table was an article that ripped his claim to bits and he didn;'t even see it.

The tax credits costs were included in the figures I gave you which came from the ONS and these were peer reviewd by the Institute of Fiscal Studies who produced the table I posted earlier. Certainly benefit payments went up but as there were far fewer people dependent on them due to higher employment rates and better paying jobs on the back of a strong economy that's the reason why the overall social security bill went down.

Remember the Tory motto was that unemployment was a price worth paying under the previous Tory government and as that rose to over 3 million then you can imagine the costs in supporting that from the social security budget. And bear in mind that Osborne and Cameron had both pledged to match Labour's spending plans so there's the rub really.

If you can find an indepent academic study that says otherwise then I'll be happy to look at it.....fair enough?

by Guest Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:33 am

lol talk about now using poor excuses not to admit he was wrong.
Irn its there for everyone to read you claimed that under labour the cosst went Always donw, this was in fact bullshit and you have made the most pathetic attempts to get out of admiting you were wrong

These show that in 1997/98 spending on social protection was £114.5 billion, while in 2007/08 it had increased to 187.5 billion, a 64 per cent increase in nominal terms. This translates to a 29 per cent increase in spending in real terms. It is also interesting to note that page 62 has a table showing how expenditure on social protection has changed as a per cent of GDP in the same time period. It actually decreased from 13.6 per cent in 1997/98 to 13.2 per cent in 2007/08.

Checkmate

That just nicely sums up exactly why you are incapble of being able to reason any points you make.

Next time man up and stop being so gutless by not admitting your error

Thanks

by Sponsored content