Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Feds Raid Million Dollar Home of Welfare Recipient in Washington State
The Blaze / King 5 News ^ | 12/05/2011 | Christopher Santarelli

Posted on 12/05/2011 10:01:30 AM PST by thefoundersrock

Residents of a wealthy lakefront community near Seattle are surprised to learn that one of their neighbors, who has lived in a $1.2 million home for the last 8 years, is the recipient of more that $1,200 a month in public housing vouchers, federal and state disability, and food stamps.

Video at link

(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: corruption; fraud; occutards; seattle; washington; welfare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 12/05/2011 10:01:37 AM PST by thefoundersrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

bump...


2 posted on 12/05/2011 10:02:32 AM PST by pgkdan ("Make what Americans buy, Buy what Americans make, and sell it to the world" Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

I’d vote for the candidate promising Welfare Reform.

But there ain’t one.

So this sorta stuff just goes on and on and on....


3 posted on 12/05/2011 10:05:49 AM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS! This means liberals AND libertarians (same thing) NO LIBS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

$1,200/month, or $300/week - just isn’t that much.

Consider, he had a business and likely had his business buy his home. That isn’t unusual, then the business ‘rents’ the home to the business owner for $1/yr. This is perfectly legal. Perhaps the home was fully owned by the business; but thanks to the Obama Recession we now enjoy, the business goes bankrupt.

We have the business owner, now without a business; living in a home he earned and paid for; and is living on welfare. So, now we are faced with a quandry - do we expect every unemployed welfare recipient to sell their home before we give him Welfare? Or, do we only get to pick on those people who were once successful before their business failed?

I sincerely doubt he’s happy living on $300/week (food, utilities, gas, insurance, car repairs, ect); when he was likely having disposable income that is several orders of magnitude greater.


4 posted on 12/05/2011 10:08:48 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

Somewhere in Kirkland maybe?


5 posted on 12/05/2011 10:10:28 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bfl


6 posted on 12/05/2011 10:10:40 AM PST by lonevoice (Klepto Baracka Marxo, impeach we much. We will much about that be committed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

Note to self - read the story .... ugh!

Cheats are cheats, throw the book at them.

But, not everyone who is getting welfare is a bum ...


7 posted on 12/05/2011 10:10:59 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
(Document presented in language of applicant).....Public Assistance Implementation and Usage Contract. This contract, entered into on (date) and expiring on (18 months from implementation date) by the (state agency) and applicant(s) listed herein (must submit names of applicant and children born to her via birth records),allows for the provision of food,housing allowance,child care and education for the purposes of job placement during the contract period,and is understood by all parties concerned that the provision of aforementioned assistance is on a one-time basis,not to be repeated or reinstated at any time for any reason between the applicant(s) and the agency named herein,and is for the aforementioned time period only,and can only be implemented following presentation of documents proving legal citizenship status and a drug screening process,both of which are to be conducted by the agency. Once legal citizenship status and drug screen results are known by the agency and the applicant and found to be favorable,this contract can then be implemented.The following covenants hereby apply and are agreed upon by both the named agency herein and the applicant(s) seeking assistance (failure of any one of these covenants will be considered a contract breach on the part of the applicant,and will result in immediate termination of the contract;assistance will be terminated immediately and can never be reinstated at any time in the future for any reason: Applicant MUST disclose the name(s) of the absent parent of applicant's child/children so that an attempt to obtain monetary support for those children can be made through DNA analysis. Failure to disclose the absent parent's name will result in automatic immediate cessation of benefits. applicant will submit to random home visits which will be unannounced and will occur during the 5-day work week,normally during the early afternoon hours; applicant will submit to random drug testing as directed by the agency; applicant must not conceive,adopt (formally or informally,including family members,immediate or extended) marry or cohabitate during the contract period; applicant must attend a one-year vocational program via a voucher provided by the agency;applicant must attend each class ( two absences will be allowed during the contract period and a doctor's note must be submitted upon returning to class for each absence) and a transportation voucher will be provided by the agency for transportation during class hours;child care will be provided by the agency during class hours only. Once applicant graduates from vocational training, a two-month job-placement period will commence,with child care provided by the agency; Upon applicant's employment,there will be an additional 4 months of ongoing assistance to allow applicant enough time to establish themselves in their occupation and to make child-care arrangements for after the contract period. Once this contract has reached its expiration date,the assistance provided,all provisions and covenants and financial considerations as well,will cease and terminate permanently.The applicant is barred from any and all future assistance. I,________________ hereby agree to adhere to all covenants,rules,etc of this contract. I realize and fully understand that I am bound by this contract in order to receive assistance in any form,and that any violation or breach will result in my not receiving any form of assistance any further. I agree further that this contract was fully explained to me by the agency caseworker and that I will fully comply. (sign & date here)____________________________ Agency hereby agrees to and will implement to the best of its ability and obligations,all covenants of this contract. (agency sign & date)_______________________
8 posted on 12/05/2011 10:13:20 AM PST by gimme1ibertee ("Criticism......brings attention to an unhealthy state of things"-Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

“do we expect every unemployed welfare recipient to sell their home before we give him Welfare?”

If it’s a million dollar home - I would say yes, we do.
Welfare should be only for those who have no other recourse - widows and orphans, as the bible says.

A better question would be should someone who works the b_tt off to make ends meet be forced to subsidize someone who’s living in a million dollar home on the water?

Not even government money grows on trees - that money comes out of working people’s pockets (both present and future.)


9 posted on 12/05/2011 10:17:33 AM PST by thefoundersrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

Why is he being unfairly picked on? Obviously, he’s one of the 99%.


10 posted on 12/05/2011 10:22:52 AM PST by C210N (zer0 - a Marxonist spreading the flames of obamunism wherever he goes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

wow


11 posted on 12/05/2011 10:24:25 AM PST by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

Nice. But if we want to eliminate far more common (but high taxpayer-expense) welfare cheats I’d suggest the feds work up the courage to not just invade mansions in cushy neighborhoods, but focus on the ghettos too, where there is no shortage of fraud being aided & abetted by guilty white liberal “social”(ist) workers.

It seems like the majority of “repamarations” welfare animals drive down to the local luxury grocery store in their Cadillac Escalades (handicapped parked spot of course) to purchase filet mignon and — of course — mac & cheese at our expense and then hurry back to plop their fat asses on the couch to watch Oprah on the 60-inch plasma TV.

If that’s “poverty”, I gotta get me some because it sure beats the hell out of working....


12 posted on 12/05/2011 10:25:46 AM PST by PermaRag (the stock market will stop bleeding when those who manipulate it START bleeding)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

This dude took lavish trips to foreign places, I highly doubt he was able to afford them on $300/week buddy.


13 posted on 12/05/2011 10:27:21 AM PST by thesaleboat (Pray The Rosary Daily (Our Lady, July 13, 1917))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

I guess this is part of the millionaire tax Obama keeps talking about.


14 posted on 12/05/2011 10:28:30 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

I guess I disagree with you on this.

The man who was once successful, and built a company; and is now bankrupt, at one time contributed heavily to our tax burden. I would say that his contribution is typically going to be far greater than his load on the system. Making him sell his home, and start from utter bankrupcy and no home is an unfair burden.

Now, compare this to the bum who has no intention of ever getting a job, and has been on welfare his entire life. The bum is starting off with a substancial advantage, never having tried, he hasn’t filed for bankrucy; and he gets to keep his home.

Whereas, I believe, the man that tried and failed once, is likely to attempt to try again - and perhaps this time he will be successful on a longer term.


15 posted on 12/05/2011 10:30:13 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
We have the business owner, now without a business; living in a home he earned and paid for; and is living on welfare. So, now we are faced with a quandry - do we expect every unemployed welfare recipient to sell their home before we give him Welfare?

yes. welfare should be based on assets as well as income.

Or, do we only get to pick on those people who were once successful before their business failed?

no, i'm also just as adamant that we pick on *anyone* with assets receiving government aid. If you can afford a big screen tv, game systems, smart phones, ipods, and all the other popular electronic gadgets; drive a new car, live in a nice house, get your hair/ nails done every couple weeks, wear designer clothes, afford your smokes/ alcohol/ drugs, etc.. sell your crap and pay your own way.
16 posted on 12/05/2011 10:30:36 AM PST by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock
Last year I had a prospective tenant tell me that he makes his living off of government grants. He researches grants that are available from the government and applies for the ones he may be eligible. For instance his wife (40 years old) goes to college under some sort of grant. They were driving a brand new Mercedes (it was filthy) which he bought with grant money. He used to be a college professor but prefers this life style because it gives him more time with his wife and two children.
17 posted on 12/05/2011 10:34:35 AM PST by oldbrowser (They are Marxists, don't call them democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
Did you read the story? They travel to choice luxury locations, give to charities, etc. Clearly they have other income or resources. When I was growing up in NYC, you could not register a car if you were on welfare. Certainly lots of couples had a mother on welfare and a drop in "husband" with a welfare Cadillac.

BTW, welfare was once considered a loan, not a gift, hence the stories (in NYC, at least) of welfare recipients hitting the State lottery and having to fork over all their winnings. Only to be back on welfare.

18 posted on 12/05/2011 10:35:27 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PermaRag
If that’s “poverty”, I gotta get me some because it sure beats the hell out of working....

In Idaho, a family of 3 can expect food stamps amounting to $900/month! My wife and I are spending close to a third of that much, and we eat pretty well. I can't imagine spending $900/month on food. And we are talking about Mom, Dad and a 2 yr old.

19 posted on 12/05/2011 10:36:18 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

You can’t even say “unbelievable” because it’s very, very believable.


20 posted on 12/05/2011 10:36:32 AM PST by denydenydeny (The more a system is all about equality in theory the more it's an aristocracy in practice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
You may be right that there are people that meet a wierd criteria of living in a big house and need assistance because the economy is so bad. These folks are not it. There is a huge boat out back that looks maintained and this part of the article clues us in to the fact that they were not cutting back if they were in economic troubles.

King 5 says that records show that the cheats have truthfully provided their address when applying for benefits. In addition to a lavish residence, court records indicate that the couple gives money to charity and has traveled to Turkey, Tel Aviv and several resort towns in Mexico.

21 posted on 12/05/2011 10:37:10 AM PST by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

22 posted on 12/05/2011 10:37:30 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

It just shows what careful budgeting can do for a person.


23 posted on 12/05/2011 10:42:35 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Republicans have no interest whatsoever in winning any majority or control. We are all duped with the good guy, bad guy routine by our elected officials.

It's always about growing government, getting seats on powerful committees in order to gain insider information for financial gain, and the promotion of your friends interests.

Who spends $30,000,000 to secure a job paying $160,000 per year? The answer is, Someone who must obtain by any means whatsoever, $29,840,000 in order to break even.

24 posted on 12/05/2011 10:44:09 AM PST by blackdog (The mystery of government is not how Washington works but how to make it stop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0

Then we have to do this across the board - to everyone.

Sometimes companies fail, sometimes it’s through mis-managment, sometimes through changes in laws, other times due to circumstances outside of the company’s direct control.

If we are going to force Peter to sell his home, then that same law should apply equally to everyone. If we are basing Welfare on CURRENT INCOME, then if you earned a home, and own some nice things; you can leverage what you own in order to re-start your business. Home ownership (and existing home values) will remain more static, and there is an incentive to build and grow.

However, if you punish the achievers more than the unachievers; you will not only quash busiensses, you will quash their motivation to try. If I don’t try, and stay on the Gov’t dole; I have nothing to lose. However, if I tried and my company fails, my punishment is greater than those who have never tried; why should I even try?

I submit that basing Welfare on your current income, is the fairest way to do this. This allows me a safe harbor if my business fails; but also allows me the opportunity to re-start my business after the ash has cleared; and isn’t the reason we are enjoying the current economy is due to Obama’s war on the small businesses?


25 posted on 12/05/2011 10:44:18 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

How does he pay the taxes on a million dollar home with a welfare income?


26 posted on 12/05/2011 10:51:00 AM PST by Lady Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

So, how many days *did* this joker spend at Occupy Seattle?

Thanks thefoundersrock.


27 posted on 12/05/2011 10:55:16 AM PST by SunkenCiv (It's never a bad time to FReep this link -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blackdog

Well, blackdog, guess this just proves that we have the best politicians money can buy! lol


28 posted on 12/05/2011 10:57:27 AM PST by Guardian Sebastian (If voting made any difference, they wouldn't let us do it. Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Guardian Sebastian
Why do you think a governor would want to manage an investment fund firm? It's all he knows how to do so badly and get the same results when in private industry as compared to government.

Poof! It's all gone and nobody can find where it went.

29 posted on 12/05/2011 11:00:27 AM PST by blackdog (The mystery of government is not how Washington works but how to make it stop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

i think that allowing the person with assets to retain their assets gives them more incentive to stay on the government dole. hey, he has his toys now, so why go back to working when the gov’t pays him to do nothing?

but it’s the across the board thing that is more my intent, if we make welfare unattractive- like i said, take away the incentive to have the gov’t pay for everything- people will try harder to get off it.

also, so here’s a scenario for you. if you want it based solely on income, then the unemployed guy who won a couple million dollars in the lottery should be allowed to keep his food stamps, since lotto winnings are not considered income, correct?


30 posted on 12/05/2011 11:02:29 AM PST by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock
A better question would be should someone who works the b_tt off to make ends meet be forced to subsidize someone who’s living in a million dollar home on the water?

Even better why should someone who "works the b_tt off to make ends meet be forced to subsidize someone" who’s done nothing but make repeated bad life decisions? Why should you or I be FORCED to pay for someone else's children?

31 posted on 12/05/2011 11:16:54 AM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0
also, so here’s a scenario for you. if you want it based solely on income, then the unemployed guy who won a couple million dollars in the lottery should be allowed to keep his food stamps, since lotto winnings are not considered income, correct?

Not necessarily, depending upon how he collects, it will be far from zero. If he gets a lump sum, then this year his income is $'x' Million, if he chose over time, then it's a yearly income. Then, there are income from interest or investements that he will receive. Now, if he's a tard and blows it all in one year; he will be on the dole from the next year forward. You just can't fix "stupid".

32 posted on 12/05/2011 11:22:10 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

Yeah. Something large is missing from this story.

“King 5 says that records show that the cheats have truthfully provided their address when applying for benefits.”

Sounds like the Feds should raid the welfare office instead.


33 posted on 12/05/2011 11:25:26 AM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

He’s a chiropractor on the south side of Seattle. He has his business right next to the Kollel in Seward Park not far from the Sephardic synagogue down the street.


34 posted on 12/05/2011 11:33:05 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

I was wondering that too (grew up there), but the PI source article says it’s in Seattle, right across from the south end of Mercer Island.


35 posted on 12/05/2011 11:34:38 AM PST by GATOR NAVY ("The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." -Dennis Prager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

And his house is in the Dunlap neighborhood a little further south on Island Dr. South. north of Cloverdale Street.


36 posted on 12/05/2011 11:38:35 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
I'm sure you saw Someone's gotta pay for my children...
37 posted on 12/05/2011 11:43:09 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
I can't imagine spending $900/month on food

If I spent $900 a month on food, I'd not be cooking much of it myself.

My family is in the $400-ish/month range. We use coupons and shop the sales, but we don't skimp, either.

Looking forward to grilled chops and baked potatoes tonight. MMMMMMMmmmmmmmmm.

38 posted on 12/05/2011 11:45:48 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: moehoward

I’ve related this before, but it sure is apropos here...

I was talking with my libinlaw about what Sowell had to say about welfare fraud.
Sowell said that the left couldn’t care less about fraud and that their primary goal is that everyone who needs welfare gets it.
She vehemently denied that liberals don’t care about fraud.. [2 second pause] ... “but it’s more important that anyone that needs help gets it”.

Me: “That’s what I said.”

She: “um... let me think about it a minute... it just sounded mean when you said it.”


39 posted on 12/05/2011 11:46:20 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

This happens in every city, county, burrough, precinct and ward in this country. Half of the citizens (and non-) are doing this at some level. It will only stop when our economy completely collapses - it will.


40 posted on 12/05/2011 11:48:46 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GATOR NAVY

If you come over from Mercer Island on I-90 just take the Rainier Ave. S. exit and head south. Go all the way down S. Henderson Street and go east until you hit Seward Park Ave. S. Go north from there until you get to S. Cloverdale Street and head east. At the end of it you’ll run into Island Drive South. Turn left and go north. It’s about the ninth house on the right.

His chiropractic business is further north at Wilson Ave. S. and 52nd Ave. S. where that triangle-shaped parking lot is located.


41 posted on 12/05/2011 11:49:00 AM PST by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

well, state of michigan had no problem letting this guy keep his food stamps...

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2011/05/18/lottery-winner-on-food-stamps/

“State Department of Human Services spokeswoman Gisgie Gendreau said under federal guidelines, if a person receives a lump-sum payment, the winnings are not counted as income.”

i was intending to question whether you thought it was right.


42 posted on 12/05/2011 11:51:03 AM PST by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MrB

No actually I hadn’t seen that before. Just wonderful - a glimpse into the entitlement mindset.


43 posted on 12/05/2011 11:53:47 AM PST by from occupied ga (your own government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: MrB
liberals don’t care about fraud

that's about it in a nutshell.

My mom (even more converative than me) worked for various social agencies for 10 or 15 years. Her most common complaint was that the people running the show didn't care about fraud because 1) They were too lazy to bother. 2) They didn't care who they gave money to, as long as it expanded their little empires (and it wasn't their money anyway). or 3) They had their hands in someone's pocket, as well.

Or, it was a combination of the three.

44 posted on 12/05/2011 11:55:48 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: blackdog

“Who spends $30,000,000 to secure a job paying $160,000 per year?”

Dianne Feinstein when she ran against Michael Huffington?


45 posted on 12/05/2011 12:00:57 PM PST by Polynikes (Hakkaa Palle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0

I’ll wager that the IRS looked at the guy’s lottery winnings as income and taxed him accordingly. Michigan state government must be filled with fools and idiots.


46 posted on 12/05/2011 12:05:54 PM PST by RightWingConspirator (Zerobama's bus tour: the Blunder Bus Tour)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MrB

This story sounds like those powerball winners that qualify and get food-stamps.

And I gave up long ago trying to talk sense to my libtard brother.

Me: “I think everyone should pay the same percentage in taxes.”
Him: “Are you crazy!??! How can you expect someone who makes minimum wage to pay the same amount as a millionaire?!??!”
Me: “I said same percentage. Not “same amount”.
Him. Pissed off the rest of the day.


47 posted on 12/05/2011 12:25:39 PM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Polynikes

The Feinsteins’ recouped their ROI about one hour after the election. Same with Pelosi, Reid, and Boehner, albeit Boehner agreed to barter for tanning booth time and emotional counseling sessions on crying outbursts. The rest was monetary in nature.


48 posted on 12/05/2011 12:49:32 PM PST by blackdog (And justice for all.....(Offer not valid in all locations, and prices vary))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

“It will only stop when our economy completely collapses - it will.”

So true Gaffer, and so unfortunate. Every single person in this country could come up with a sob story, my husband and I both have ours - but some of us never got the notion in our heads that that is somebody else’s problem. Some of us were raised to think that you pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and do the best you can with what you have. That used to be called the American Dream.

And some will never realize that there is a tipping point until it’s too late.


49 posted on 12/05/2011 12:52:20 PM PST by thefoundersrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: thefoundersrock

If the stinking govt would quit robbing the producers at gunpoint and handing out the proceeds crap like this would never happen.


50 posted on 12/05/2011 12:57:28 PM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson