Jeremy Keith Hammond

Recent Activity

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | over 1 year ago

  Should Poor Couples Have Kids?

  The question in the title doesn't quite address the nature of the scenario discussed in the post. Whether poor people should have children is a separate issue from whether someone of limited means in the United States should adopt an Ethiopian child.

  
  

  Arguably, those who are "poor" in the United States are considerably more wealthy than those in Ethiopia and the child's prospects are much greater by just being here. 

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | almost 2 years ago

  Should Law and Medical Schools Urge Students to Help the Poor?

  I'm working with a professor at a local university interested in having his business/economics students intern at nonprofits (I work for a food-bank.) His goal is to teach his students that they don't have to get a job at a for-profit business and/or run to Wall Street after graduation, but that their skills can go a long way in helping better our world. 

  
  

  I hope it will be a fruitful partnership.

  
  

   

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  Public Housing: Easy to Get In, Hard to Get Out

  My mother and I had this problem when I was a child. It wasn't public housing, but it was designated low-income housing with income-based rent. It's a real trap. 

  
  

  I have to plug "Habitat for Humanity." As I entered my teens, my mother was successful at getting approved for a habitat house. It was a dream come true. Habitat is a great organization that is cognizant of this dilemma.

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  Meet the 99ers: "I'm Scared"

  This 99 Series is great. Many studies have concluded that stories do more for cause advocacy than statistics. 

  
  

  Also, I found her comment about "conservatives" and her "own Democratic Party" very interesting. She's not the only disenfranchised Democrat. I've written many times before about the impotence of the Dems and how Federal Congressional leaders on both sides ignore party lines all the time if it means favoring corporate interests. (Just look at the bailouts.) I hear left-wingers complain about this and right-wingers complain about that, both blaming each other for the turmoil our country faces. The fact is both sides are - at the fundamental level - complaining about the same stuff: Inefficient government bureaucracy, excessive special interest money,  greedy financiers, etc... At the root of it all is systemic corporate greed.

  
  

  I would ask people to step up and recognize our system needs drastic change - not the kind "promised" by Obama, either. Cast aside partisan jingoism and take the time to find and vote for congressional leaders who can stand up to corporate interests which are antithetic to our own. It's dangerous to get sucked into voting Democrat or Republican (or any party) because you always have and it appears their ideology is aligned with yours. 

  
  

  Mindful of my own warnings, and at risk of being labelled a hypocrite - I strongly suggest people try to learn more about the Green Party. While just as susceptible as other parties to corruption - right NOW it hosts many candidates, brave enough to step outside of conventional politics and really improve our country (and our world.)

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  California Soup Kitchen Will Offer More Than Free Meals

   

  
  

  The food-bank I work with is actually in the beginning stages of partnering with a nationwide organization to do just this state-wide. Each class will be hosted by a nutritionist/dietitian and a chef. Not only does it help people improve their diets - increasing their chances of getting out of poverty, but it also helps prevent the waste of food and increases the amount of food our food-bank can distribute to its member agencies. The thing is, there are a lot of obscure-ish foods that people receiving food assistance don't know how to cook (or in some cases don't have the means to.) By teaching them how to use foods they've never cooked before, we're able to push more food out the door and prevent these unknown foods from going to waste.

  
  

  At the same time, I have a personal issue with the "teach a man to fish" analogy. It's based on the assumption that there are fish to catch in the first place and those in need don't know how to catch them. Change.org has cited several times the fact that there are 6 unemployed people for every job available in our country right now. The problem is primarily economic/systemic. We've got to stop blaming poor people for their condition. That's not to say cooking/diet classes aren't a good idea, but we need to approach this problem collectively at the government level and deal with the fact that the cost of living is too high, unemployment is rampant and our food system is flawed, compelling us to eat unhealthy food that is straining our medical system.

  
  

   

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  Should Food Stamps Buy Organic Salmon?

   

  
  

  Complaining about people buying healthy food with food stamps is absolutely absurd. It's a good investment every tax payer should approve of. First, with a healthy, whole-foods diet they have the energy and motivation to compete in our restricted job market. Those who are employed (and most people with food stamps are*) will see productivity improvements as there are strong correlations between adequate nutrition/caloric intake and output. By eating healthy food, they're stimulating the healthy food industry, increasing demand (stoking supply) for food we need in our system, nation-wide to battle our obesity, heart-disease, diabetes and cancer epidemics. It's a long term investment in their individual health, helping to ensure that they don't have to tap into our obviously strained medical system down, which is extremely costly and might put them back into poverty (read: on the government dole). By consuming healthy food, pregnant mothers also put their unborn children on a path away from poverty as eating habits are influenced by the mother's consumption - healthy or not. Healthy eating habits are correlated with success in school, especially at early ages. Likewise, success in elementary school tends to put students on "tracks" towards success in later years of middle and high school. This is particularly important considering a majority of those in poverty in the US are victims of "intergenerational" poverty.

  
  

  *Also, I think a lot of people forget that food stamps are not welfare. Those receiving them are not (in a large majority of cases) "lazy." Food stamps are defined by the government as "work assistance" and to receive them you must either be employed or recently laid off and actively searching for a job. Also, many people confuse laziness with lethargy. Remaining inactive is an instinctual coping strategy humans - and just about every other living creature on our planet - employ when receiving inadequate amounts of food. 

  
  

   

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  Can Social Media Really End Hunger in America?

  I'm also skeptical about it. That may simply be because I haven't taken the time to really check it out.

  
  

   

  
  

  @Jan - I think a livable wage has been tried - just under a different name: "minimum wage." It could certainly help, but it's not silver bullet. It could also have detrimental effects. By raising wages, you raise the costs of goods (maybe less so since a lot of our stuff is imported, but it would still affect services.) This could make it more difficult for the unemployed who are struggling with no income already. None-the-less, increasing the assets and income of the poor should be a component of battling poverty.

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  Beyond the Red Carpet: America's Avatar Problem

  Oh gosh! I hope I didn't spoil the movie for anyone. It would be really helpful if we could edit our posts. I would add a "SPOILER ALERT" to the top of my message.

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  Beyond the Red Carpet: America's Avatar Problem

  Did anyone else grimace when the marine convinces the Na'vi population to respond to the usurpation/colonialism with violence? I - now, remember, they're fake - felt a bit better when they failed, thus illustrating the fallibility of violence as a means of conflict resolution. Only "divine" intervention saved them - which I would normally have a problem with except that the intervention was granted thanks to the Na'vi's close relationship and respect (reverence) with nature and their natural resources.

• 

  Jeremy Keith commented on the article | about 2 years ago

  The Human Brain Hates Inequality

  Well, they were asked in the study to distribute $50 that was JUST given to them - so perhaps in their mind there was no net loss/gain at all. Whereas the money they'd be taxed to feed the poor is money they worked to get.

  
  

  Also - the decision NOT to tax the wealthy to benefit the poor doesn't just come from the wealthy - but poor, aspirant, libertarian/conservatives who hope to later benefit from tax breaks when they finally succeed in attaining that "american dream." 

  
  

  Regardless - I do think the findings are significant. Though I'm more shocked that the scientists were surprised by the results than by the results themselves. Clearly the researches haven't read Robert Wright's book, "Non-Zero" or anything explaining the evolutionary trend towards altruism.