[Vision2020] Downturn Drags More Consumers Into Bankruptcy

[Tom Hansen]

Arnold stated:

"Geesh, 5 children? Obviously she and her husband had the wrong type of 
surgery. A person should be required to not have any more children after 
they go on government assistance."

This comment extends way beyond ignorance.  This statement is wrong on so 
many levels I do not know where to begin.  Nowhere in the article, Arnold, 
does it even imply that Ms. Marquis is collecting government assistance.  
Yet you automatically assume (without any evidence) that she is.  Probably 
because she is without health insurance and because of her "21 operations 
in the last nine years".  She and her husband are attempting to merely 
survive on his $13.85/hour job.  Maybe she is simply too proud to accept 
government assistance.  If Ms. Marquis is/was collecting government 
assistance, concern over the costs of her 21 operations, related 
to "emphysema and other respiratory diseases, and others related to
accidents and several miscarriages" would not be a major concern of hers 
as it obviously is.

And how about those that are wrongfully "addicted" to SSI?

Hansen
Moscow, Idaho




---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.com/