Seattle Parks and Recreation has canceled its annual Old Timers Picnic at Woodland Park Zoo because of budget cuts. This would have been the 39th year of the Old Timers Picnic, which brought senior citizens to the zoo for a special day.
From the press release:
Co-sponsored by Seattle Parks and Recreation, the Human Services Department’s Mayor’s Office for Senior Citizens, and Senior Services, the picnic provided a hot dog lunch, an outdoor experience at a park, live music and entertainment, information from the Mayor, civic leaders, and service providers, and a social experience on an August day almost guaranteed to bring fair weather.
In recent years the picnic has taken place at the Woodland Park Zoo, where picnickers could wander the exhibits after lunch. Each agency brought in-kind resources to the event, so the only real expense was the food. In 2010, the sponsor providing funding for the food ended its support, and the cost of the food fell to Parks. Parks has experienced a 10% reduction in its operating budget in 2011 and can no longer support the event.
“I’m terribly disappointed to have to end this great tradition,” said Acting Parks Superintendent Christopher Williams, “but we just don’t have the funds to pay for it. When financial times improve, we’ll try to put together another event that celebrates the energy and wisdom of our seniors.”
76 responses so far ↓
1 Elizabeth // May 25, 2011 at 10:02 am
For some reason this makes me really sad! I wonder if the Parks Department could take personal donations or something and still make this happen…
2 Jenny // May 25, 2011 at 11:12 am
Wow finally a common-sense decision. I think we can “celebrate the energy and wisdom of our seniors” without having the taxpayers foot the bill.
3 chrisd17 // May 25, 2011 at 11:52 am
Wonder how much the food costs? Putting it out the community to see if anyone wants to save it wouldn’t seem like all that much trouble.
4 PJM // May 25, 2011 at 12:00 pm
Could a small part of the money generated by the concerts (what the heck do concerts have to do with the primary mission of a zoo?!) be used to treat seniors to a day at the zoo?
As a taxpayer I’m glad to treat them to a day at the zoo. (The expected response will be ‘go ahead and spend your money, not mine!’ Whatever. What is the point of a community when you can’t do things like this?)
5 PhinneyRidgian // May 25, 2011 at 12:52 pm
So, they can spend money on dinosaurs, but not on food for a senior day at the zoo? That’s just wrong.
6 SPG // May 25, 2011 at 1:01 pm
It’s not a question of animatronic dinosaurs vs senior citizens, or giraffes vs hot dogs, but a problem in that somebody else pulled their sponsorship of the food. The zoo was donating the space, some labor, and waiving the admission fee, so they were already doing their part.
7 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 1:04 pm
@PJM
I quite agree with your statement about community, so if you feel so passionate about this PJM, why not organize a drive from people in the neighborhood? Your implication is that community-based projects are impossible without the forceful coercion of taxation.
Some may feel EQUALLY as passionate about NOT having their tax dollars used for a senior party in the park or at the least, want to be able to choose what they fund through their own charity.
We all have had to cut back in our everyday lives. The excesses of government should be held to the same, especially when it is OUR money that fuels their spending. Maybe if our legislators weren’t consistently birthing new spending projects to pander to voters, they would have been more fiscally prudent & planned better for “rainy days”. Just a thought.
Community-driven charity is the way to go. Maybe instead of sounding so defeatist because the nanny state can’t hold your hand, use that energy to formulate a game plan.
8 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 1:18 pm
“As a taxpayer I’m glad to treat them to a day at the zoo. ”
So send them a check. I, for one, don’t think a picnic at the zoo falls under ‘essential services’. When my elderly parents want to go for a picnic at the zoo you know what I do? I take them myself.
9 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 1:20 pm
“they can spend money on dinosaurs, but not on food for a senior day at the zoo? That’s just wrong.”
They’re not spending money of the dinos, they’re making money on the dinos. Maye you don’t understand the difference?
Now, if you could get people to pay to come watch the old folks pull out their dentures and eat cucumber sandwiches at the zoo, you’d have a point. Otherwise, you just show you don’t understand simple cash flow.
10 PhinneyRidgian // May 25, 2011 at 1:26 pm
Whopper, you never cease to amaze me with the depth of your rude, insulting and demeaning language.
Yes, I understand the difference just fine, thanks. I understand cash flow, too.
There IS a difference between cash flow and simple charity. And besides, supplying food would have been a tax write off.
11 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 1:31 pm
“There IS a difference between cash flow and simple charity”
So you do know the difference between the dinos and the old folks. Why did you compare them thusly:
“they can spend money on dinosaurs, but not on food for a senior day”
??
Again, either write a check for the old folks or, if you want to compare them to the dinos, find a way to monetize the old folks so 4 years olds will convince their parents to pay to come see them. Maybe have the old folks picnic in the lion park?
Again, want to take grannie to the zoo? Do what I do, take her yourself. Not an essential service.
12 chrisd17 // May 25, 2011 at 1:51 pm
Not every Granny has a Whopper. Elderly people can be very isolated and cancelling a traditional annual event for them seems sad. Plus one for ‘community driven charity’ but it would be good to see a dollar figure.
13 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 2:15 pm
Whopper exhibits the classic, heartless tendency for conservatives to judge the world based solely on their own experience, with a complete inability to show empathy.
Guys like Whopper have no incentive to care about members of our community who may be hurting, lonely, or in crisis, because, hey, Whopper has a nice granny and some money in his pocket, so why the hell should he care about his neighbors? If it won’t allow Mr. Whopper to make a buck, he’s against it, no matter how much good it might do.
Every money-grubbing, anti-social a$$hole for himself, eh Whopper?
14 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Greenridge, in these fiscally hard times, is a picnic an essential service?
15 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 2:56 pm
@Greenridge
(sigh) I’m ticked you’ve put me in the position to defend Whopper, but you’ve blatantly politicized his/her position, passed judgment based on presumptions & even proceeded to display a rather stereotypical view of Conservatism (which also offends people like me who don’t agree with most GOP platforms, but still consider myself conservative)
Your stereotypes are as old school as old school gets.
Whopper is a sensationalist (as most of you know), so barring the “gruffness” of the response, the point is essentially spot on.
If it is important FOR YOU to have seniors experience a party in the park, TAKE a senior to the park and party with them!!! They certainly don’t have to be YOUR grandparent or great-grandparent. There IS such a thing as volunteerism! If you are passionate about this type of thing, stop b*tching and stop depending others and your government to do it for you!!! Either take a stand and take action yourself, or organize a group of people to help you.
What’s with all of the social compassion, yet no respect for others in the community that exercise their rights to not agree with you?
16 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 2:58 pm
@chrisd17
It would be good to see a dollar figure, agreed.
Maybe spur someone on to organizing a benefit.
17 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 3:12 pm
To somebody who has no living family, severe mobility issues, and/or no funds, (unfortunately not a rare scenario among the elderly) a free picnic might be one of few opportunities for them to engage with the world.
So while that service clearly isn’t essential to you, it could be a lifeline for someone else.
Not that you care–as you’ve already pointed out, you believe every senior citizen has a nice grandson to pay them a visit and take them out for a trip to the zoo. (Your worldview is apparently limited to your immediate family and your wallet).
18 Phinney Neighbor // May 25, 2011 at 3:19 pm
All of you who think the zoo should have absorbed the cost, you do understand that the zoo itself is a non-profit? They do not make a profit and therefore do not have money to donate. They have operating expenses and conservation programs that fall directly under their charter. As @SPG pointed out, they were already donating space and admission fees plus some labor.
The dinosaurs are one of the many things the zoo is doing to meet expenses since the city withdrew funding. While I admit that I was a bit skeptical of that particular exhibit, I came away very impressed at how well they integrated the information in that exhibit with the live animal exhibits in the zoo.
19 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 3:30 pm
@Greenwood D:
So should any of us pay anything for services we don’t use? I don’t have kids and drive a car with 4-wheel drive–so all those schools and paved roads are unnecessary for me. Police protection? I have strong locks and could pack heat–don’t need it. Fire protection…hey I believe in God’s will–if the house burns down it was meant to happen.
So pray tell, Greenwood D, why should any of us pay any taxes at all? I think I could make it in a Road Warrior scenario. If it’s important FOR YOU to live in a safe, civilized society, maybe you should quit being such a mooch by relying on fire and police protection. Buy yourself a hose and a gun, and get out there and start volunteering instead of sucking off the government teat like a bloated piglet.
20 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 3:33 pm
…and by the way, when Whopper starts talking about “monetizing” the elderly, I hardly had to fall back on a stereotype to describe Conservatism. Whopper painted that picture all by himself.
21 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 3:47 pm
“Whopper painted that picture all by himself.”
And apparently you don’t have a sense of humor or did you also think my idea of having the old folk picnic with the lions as a monetizer was a straight-up, real suggestions? Because I tell you, my kids would make me pay for them to see that.
“I could make it in a Road Warrior scenario.”
So canceling the grannie picnic and suddenly it’s Barterville on Phinney? I thought you folks preferred to compare cuts in the picnicking budget with Somalia. Now it’s Mad Max?
Nice straw man but sorry, cutting the picnic doesn’t make us Mad Max, or Mogadishu or any other straw man.
So again, why can’t anyone explain how a picnic is an ‘essential service’?
22 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 3:49 pm
“a free picnic might be one of few opportunities for them to engage with the world.”
Maybe you should volunteer to take old folk for picnics or day trips? I do, at least a dozen times a year.
23 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 4:16 pm
@Greenridge
Oh come on, Greenridge. Now you are all over the board. You’re comparing basic city infrastructure and services with a picnic party for the elderly.
No one has made a broad statement like you are implying about taxes and doing away with them in their entirety. Now look who’s being the sensationalist
This is only YOUR warped interpretation of my point (which seems to be more of a distraction from actually addressing the topic at hand)
I don’t profess to agree with Whopper’s methods, but it would be nice if someone in defense of the Zoo’s Senior Party in the Park could answer his question.
And while they’re at it, explain why they themselves choose not to actively lead a charge in uniting a volunteer campaign to raise money/help for something they feel so passionately about!
24 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 4:20 pm
“I don’t profess to agree with Whopper’s methods”
Why? Because I still thinking charging people to watch them have the picnic in the lion’s park and charging the kiddies to watch would be a great way to monetize the event….Greenridge believes me!
25 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 4:23 pm
“answer his question.”
Apparently, some people DO think ‘ending loneliness’ should be an essential government priority.
Maybe we need to call up the National Guard?
26 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 4:23 pm
” I do, at least a dozen times a year”
Well, your name is “Whopper”… I hardly think someone who takes so much joy in mocking and degrading his neighbors on the local blog spends his free time throwing picnics for local grannies. What next, you spend your down time knitting footies for babies in the cancer ward?
Look, I get it, you don’t think helping the elderly to stay engaged and constructive in their twilight years in worth the price of a hotdog lunch. At your next tea party for the elderly, why don’t you bring that up as a point of discussion right before you lead the blue hairs in a rousing version of kumbayah?
27 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 4:33 pm
I already answered the question.
To sum up, what is “essential” to a homeless person or another marginalized population may not be “essential” to you.
To me, if providing a hotdog lunch and a free space to eat it once a year could help stave off loneliness and depression for people who worked their entire lives to help build and perpetuate our society, it is a worthy cause and a small price to repay.
Others’ mileage apparently varies.
28 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 4:44 pm
“his free time throwing picnics for local grannies.”
Nope, my own grannies. I’d be too embarrassed and ashamed to let the government do what is my responsibility and my duty. They’d be mortified too. But they grew up in the Depression and have pride.
“what is “essential” to a homeless person or another marginalized population may not be “essential” to you.”
So that’s your standard? The government should give people whatever THEY think they need? And if they feel ‘marginalized’, they should get even more? Wow, that’ll make balancing the budget easy. You’d be amazed how long my wish list is and how marginalized I can imagine myself.
But apparently we won’t see you stepping up to help fund this ‘essential’ event. Live as I say, not as I do.
29 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 4:49 pm
@Greenridge
You bring a good point up that reflects the importance of local government. In terms of the democratic aspect of it, what’s important to voters in certain cities and counties should be the direction our representative officials go in, as the people’s will is more effective at smaller levels. If you and the rest of the city find it worthy to fight for, your passion will supersede your rhetoric.
But back to the reality and where the conflict is rooted: THERE IS NO MONEY, Greenridge. Budgets have been mishandled, we’re in the middle of a recession & cuts have to made in areas that really aren’t essential (obviously a general term as you pointed out, but safe to say there is some general assumptions we can make about a hot dog party in the park. Just sayin’.)
As far as this statement:
“To me, if providing a hotdog lunch and a free space to eat it once a year could help stave off loneliness and depression for people who worked their entire lives to help build and perpetuate our society, it is a worthy cause and a small price to repay.”
Great. So YOU pay it or organize it or find some new donors for it.
Or tell me why the rest of us should be FORCED to pay for a hot dog lunch for seniors.
It seems you are all talk and no action.
30 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 5:05 pm
“YOU pay it or organize it or find some new donors for it.”
Of course he won’t.
31 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 5:17 pm
@Greenridge
Thought I would throw this one out at you since you were so recklessly anxious to throw out the tired ol’ “you conservatives are a heartless, anti-social, money-grubbing bunch without empathy”
>>>>Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.” The surprise is that liberals are markedly LESS charitable than conservatives.
Brooks, a registered independent, found some interesting stats:
– Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
– Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
– People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of FOUR TIMES MORE than people who accept that proposition.
Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and “the values that lie beneath” liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government. >>>>>
Again, you seem to be the one who wants to politicize this issue by making reference to conservatives and “tea parties”, so I thought I would oblige you
32 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 5:37 pm
….and since all of you wanna talk a good little “oh, the poor, poor seniors don’t get hot dogs”-social conscious dribble, BUT DON’T WANNA ACTUALLY TAKE ANY ACTION, I’ll be the first to actually step up to the plate (even though I’m not even passionate about this cause like so many of you seem to be)
I pledge $100 out of my own pocket ( about what I planned on using for food bank food for the month) and pledge to volunteer my time all day (as long as it’s not a Saturday-I absolutely can’t get out of my bartending gig on Saturdays) if one of you BIG TALKERS decides to put your money and your time where your mouths are and get something organized.
33 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 5:40 pm
You’re right, I won’t organize a picnic for seniors. You might be surprised to find out that I am unable to be all places at all times, helping to solve all problems. Hell, there are many problems, I’m sure, that I’m not even aware of. There are others to which I devote a significant amount of time and treasure, and I don;t have a ot of resources left over.
That’s why I believe in fostering a society that takes care of its own without having to rely on hoped-for free time and altruism of random individuals. That’s why I don’t constantly bitch about paying taxes.
The fiscal problems in this country aren’t a result of spending, but of revenue (tax revenue as percentage of total national income is at its lowest point since the Truman administration). Let’s not pretend the current fiscal problems in government are an accident, instead of a heartless and intentional effort to “starve the beast” on the part of Conservatives.
34 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 5:42 pm
Greenwood D:
I have no dount that conservatives give vast amounts of money to their churches, so that missionaries can do “charity work” by thumping bibles at brown people across the globe.
I remain unimpressed.
35 Whopper // May 25, 2011 at 5:52 pm
“why I believe in fostering a society that takes care of its own”
So free government picnics for everyone!
Give me liberty or give me a picnic!
36 Greenridge // May 25, 2011 at 5:58 pm
Ever been to a neighborhood festival supported with the help of a few tax dollars? There’s your free picnic, sparky.
Some might say that providing publicly-supported events meant to strengthen community ties is a worthwhile expenditure for a local governemnt to make. I do not expect that you are one of them.
However, I would like to take a moment to point out that you are an absolute saint for visiting your own elderly family members once a month. Someone should give you a medal.
37 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 6:02 pm
“You’re right, I won’t organize a picnic for seniors”
That’s what I thought.
Get out of here with your bullsh*t if you can’t step up to the plate.
You’re a disgrace.
“That’s why I believe in fostering a society that takes care of its own…”
Yeah, well I do to. And so do a helluva lot of other people out there that may not fall in-step with your politics. That doesn’t give our philosophies any less validity, that’s for sure. Just because we don’t agree with your trust in one-size-fits all coercive taxation, doesn’t mean we don’t feel equally empathetic to other peoples struggles. To assume such a thing is presumptuous and arrogant.
“The fiscal problems in this country aren’t a result of spending, but of revenue (tax revenue as percentage of total national income is at its lowest point since the Truman administration)”
Yeah, just like LBJ’s Great Society showed us. Revenue=end to poverty & inequality. Right.
Rob the middle class to keep the poor dependent and the rich in power.
“Let’s not pretend the current fiscal problems in government are an accident, instead of a heartless and intentional effort to “starve the beast” on the part of Conservatives.”
Who said the fiscal problems were an accident?? You certainly have your Liberal-blinders on though if you truly believe Conservatives are the only ones to blame for the current economic climate. That statement is so utterly politically biased it’s sickening.
“I remain unimpressed”
I remain unimpressed by your pretentious, social-elite attitude that volunteering for a senior party in the park (the same one you were so quick to defend) is beneath you and your daily adventures in “saving the world”.
38 Mo // May 25, 2011 at 6:11 pm
I agree that with the “essential services” angle and I think this event should take a hit just like every other public service.
It’s too bad this thread and many others on PhinneyWood are quickly stained with negative commentary.
39 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 6:17 pm
@Mo
Oh c’mon, Mo.
There used to be a day when citizens weren’t afraid to deliberate and not agree with each other.
We all want a prosperous and great Nation/state/city, but just have different views on how that should be accomplished.
40 phinneyfun // May 25, 2011 at 6:27 pm
After having spent the day assisting a recently widowed elderly woman of great dignity move house, I am somewhat dismayed to see seniors being called ‘grannies’ and ‘old folks’ and ‘blue hairs’ in this animated discussion. Just a thought.
41 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 6:28 pm
@phinneyfun
Agreed.
42 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 6:37 pm
…and BTW, I am all ears for the passionate defenders of this canceled party to lead the charge for a neighborhood fund raiser or grassroots campaign! I have already pledged my financial support and time (even though I am not a proponent of publicly funding it)
43 Mo // May 25, 2011 at 6:54 pm
GD,
I have a respect and appetite for deliberation, disagreement and debate, I even think there is a place for antagonism and in these threads. I just find the tone of some of these comments insulting and rude and loaded with personal attacks. This is becoming an ego fest rather than a healthy discussion.
44 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 7:05 pm
@Mo
Heard and respect your opinion.
45 Rob // May 25, 2011 at 7:06 pm
@ Greenwood D
I will throw in the $100 I made selling some stuff on Craigslist. Anyone know where I can send it?
Anyone else want to send in money? My guess is that you have to use some kind “caterer” who meets health codes and has food handler permits. Which means we can’t just set up our on grills and start handing out hotdogs and pop.
Think how cheap Costco sells those hotdogs.
We could feed a lot of seniors for not a lot of money.
As to seniors – I volunteer at a nursing home and let me tell you there are lots of seniors that have outlived their families.
46 Greenwood_D // May 25, 2011 at 8:00 pm
@Rob
Hold on to your dinero, bud.
There were definitely some previous comments up top from people interested in finding out a cost estimate.
Those that are passionate about this actually happening, can choose whether to lead the charge, and if that happens I know a lot of us would definitely respond with $ and action!
47 SPG // May 26, 2011 at 12:08 am
Greenwood D, This thread has gotten too long to waste my time on but one quip caught my eye. The crap about conservatives giving more to charity…take away the church dues and that number completely falls apart.
My main issue with the alleged charity and wholesome family goodness of conservatives is that it is often completely counter to people’s real needs. Giving a billion dollars to an abstinence program and then slashing child support to teenage single moms is a good example.
Bailing out the banks’ CEOs to the tune of trillions and then crying that there’s no money to give the recently laid off workers unemployment would be another.
48 Whopper // May 26, 2011 at 7:09 am
“Bailing out the banks”
Well, except the banks have paid us back…with interest.
49 dfh // May 26, 2011 at 8:02 am
Good grief! I’m a “senior citizen” (still can’t believe it, in my teens I thought anyone over 30 was ancient and of course part of “the establishment”).
First of all, I think it’s horrid to stereotype a group of people….any group of people.
Secondly, I couldn’t possibly make it to the zoo because of my physical limitations but I sure would like to help out other baby boomers would like to go.
We are “lucky” enough to have a regular income to supplement Social Security, because my husband is a 100% disabled Veteran from the Vietnam war and we get compensation.
Some people, however, rely almost totally on their SS income. There hasn’t been a cost of living raise for years and there’s talk that any modest increase for 2012 will be more than offset by an increase in what we pay for Medicare.
I certainly would also donate for this event. We think nothing of doing something special for children, how about doing it for those who raised those children’s parents?
50 chrisd17 // May 26, 2011 at 8:23 am
The Seattle PI is reporting the cost at $15k for approximately 1500 people.
It’s hard to believe it has to cost $10 per head for a hot dog picnic, even with fresh fruit. I’d love to see Merrill Gardens grocery list…
51 Jenny // May 26, 2011 at 8:58 am
A party for seniors is a good cause.
Fixing potholes in the street is a good cause.
Building a public toilet for homeless people in Ballard is a good cause.
Hiring enough firefighters to protect our homes is a good cause.
Funding after-shcool play programs is a good cause.
The point is, there are so many good causes and not enough money to pay for all of them. As a private citizen I donate to multiple charities, but I have had to cut back because I simply cannot afford to donate to every cause that I would like to support. My employer is not going to raise my salary just because I want to donate to every cause, so I have had to look at my limited funds, prioritize my causes and cut back on what I support. Government has to do the same.
If you look at one good cause (like a picnic for seniors) in complete isolation, OF COURSE it would be nice to continue supporting it, but if you have the brains to look at the vast array of good causes that are all screaming for money, it is necessary to figure out which are the most important, and spend the limited government dollars on those.
52 Whopper // May 26, 2011 at 10:05 am
“Building a public toilet for homeless people in Ballard is a good cause”
Actually, that one is not a good cause unless you want the drug dealing and prostitution that went with their last failed public toilet fiasco.
53 KZ // May 26, 2011 at 11:40 am
I agree with those who reject the frivolous waste of taxpayer dollars to provide a fun summer day for senior citizens. Granted, they were paying taxes before many of us were potty-trained–but what have they done for our Gross Domestic Product, lately? We young and productive don’t need a Nanny State to take care of us now, and we have the foresight to take care of ourselves in the future by becoming righteously rich. Zoo admission and a hot dog might cost $50,000 dollars then, but you won’t hear us complaining about how we saved and saved, and how a dollar just doesn’t buy what it used to. Because this is a free country, and everyone has an equal opportunity to ride the next bubble-train and jump off at exactly the right time.
54 Tahomajim // May 26, 2011 at 2:53 pm
Wow, 54 comments on this subject. I’m staying out of this one.
Not the change the subject but early commentors suggest Whopper is a man.
Can this be confirmed?
I have an aunt who is just like Whopper. Aunt Marge…. are you Whopper?
55 Greenwood_D // May 26, 2011 at 5:42 pm
@SPG
(sigh) since I was specifically addressed, I guess we’ll continue beating this like a dead horse (since everyone that defends it seems to want to politicize it, but not actually do anything about it)
“…. conservatives giving more to charity…take away the church dues and that number completely falls apart.”
The way you imply that giving to a church doesn’t quite count as charity is disturbing to me. Am I inferring wrong here? It seems there is a tone of disdain for the church. As far as I can tell, giving of one’s finances and time is STILL GIVING, right? Don’t the statistics help illustrate the ACT of charity opposed to the individual circles the charity goes may pass through? I only posted those statistics when someone on this board passed judgment on someone else , by politicizing the debate, assuming they were a conservative, and generalizing Conservatives as “money-grubbing, anti-social and without empathy”.
Are you comfortable with this kind of broad stereotyping? That kind of talk is from people that take everything Rachel Maddow says as the Gospel, similar to Conservatives that take everything Rush Limbaugh says as Gospel. It’s just such a reckless assertion and reeks of age-old partisan stereotypes.
“My main issue with the alleged charity and wholesome family goodness of conservatives is that it is often completely counter to people’s real needs. Giving a billion dollars to an abstinence program and then slashing child support to teenage single moms is a good example.”
That’s fair and understandable from my deductions of your perspective. Having said that, I feel like you are honing in solely on one prejudice some may have towards conservatives and their charitable choices. I just don’t think that is looking at the big picture. I think we could both come up with examples of good intentions that weren’t agreed on by the “other side” all day long.
Regardless, there are philosophical differences here. Some may think it is not addressing “real needs” of people by donating to save some whales, but is the act of charity still not prevalent and the intentions still not honorable?
“Bailing out the banks’ CEOs to the tune of trillions and then crying that there’s no money to give the recently laid off workers unemployment would be another.”
See, and here is where I lost you.
Please do your homework- this is just typical finger-pointing partisanship that is just plain void of fact.
TARP I & II had OVERWHELMINGLY bipartisan support from both Democrats and Republicans.
I’m always down with some political sparring, but this exchange is really getting pointless now.
It seems people want to argue about how important Senior Day is if the Government pays for it. Not so important if they have to do it.
Let me tell ya’ll, there’s only so long you can spend yourself to prosperity AND sustain this level of social services and entitlements. I have never read one economist that wouldn’t agree to that. Everyone’s gonna have to get use to not getting something for nothing REAL QUICK.
@KZ
Cute.
@Tahomajim
Man, I love that. Whopper AKA Aunt Marge
56 Aunt Marge // May 26, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Tahomajim, cut your hair and get a job. No one likes a welfare queen.
57 JR // May 26, 2011 at 8:44 pm
What’s up with all the trolls migrating over here from fox news? Take your bull some where else please. Doubt any one here has any interest in your one sided political views.
58 Tahomajim // May 26, 2011 at 9:02 pm
Aunt Marge, your two daughters are the wefare queens.
I’ll cut my hair and get a job when you quit smoking and carrying around your whiskey flask.
What do you think of this Whopper guy?
59 Tahomajim // May 26, 2011 at 9:07 pm
JR –
There’s one in every neighborhood.
It’s a shame. Where did we go wrong?
60 JR // May 26, 2011 at 9:46 pm
“What do you think of this Whopper guy?”
A troll, a loser, and a douche. Trying desperately to get his lulz, and he takes himself and this blog way too seriously. Problem is, no one takes him seriously. Just one anonymous annoying guy.
61 Greenwood_D // May 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm
@JR
Watch out, ya’ll!
There’s a new sheriff in town named JR and he’s here to clear out all the riff-raff that doesn’t fall in line with his way of thinking! Durned sure he knows that this comment board is no place for an opposing view! He’s quick-on-the-draw for ASSuming a fiscally prudent view of a budget crisis is most certainly the devious workings of FOX News brainwashing!
Yeeeee–HHHAAAW…..
He’s cleaning up this town and claims he’s gonna stampede us on outta here (at least he asked nicely
Please.
62 JR // May 26, 2011 at 9:51 pm
whatever guy. Maybe its time for you to take a break. Try to find something more constructive to do with your time. Just a suggestion
63 Greenwood_D // May 26, 2011 at 9:59 pm
Ahhh….yes. Nice jab. Or is that a threat? It’s hard to tell with the desperado delivery.
One could argue that 60-some comment hits to this thread could possibly be generating advertising dollars for the blog.
One might also argue that checking in on this thread also gives me an opportunity to come to the aid of any of the passionate Senior Park “big talkers” that may take up the charge to actually put their money/time where there mouth is. As expected, those folks would rather b**ch than be bothered with it.
Thanks for your suggestion, but I didn’t solicit your advice.
64 JR // May 26, 2011 at 10:13 pm
wow. Actually it was neither. It wasn’t intended to be a jab, and I damn sure don’t threaten people. And there is absolutely no reason you should be taking anything I’ve said personal.
65 Greenwood_D // May 26, 2011 at 10:21 pm
I never take things personally on an anonymous comment board.
I carried over your tone from your first comment-my bad; your “constructive” comment was certainly an insult, though.
We got no beef personally, JR.
Let’s squash it.
66 JR // May 26, 2011 at 10:27 pm
Agreed.
67 Tahomajim // May 27, 2011 at 7:14 am
OK geniuses, what about the WPZ senior picnic being canceled?
Let’s start all over.
68 PJM // May 27, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Whoa! Just checked back since my posting on 5/25. As expected it didn’t take long for it to get personal.
I didn’t say “community-based projects are impossible without the forceful coercion of taxation.”
“Forceful coercion”? Lighten up.
“nanny state”? The veins in your neck must have been bulging out by then! Comical.
69 SPG // May 27, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Greenwood_R, I don’t have the time to wade through your trolling so I’ll just address the church is charity question:
For the record I don’t have an issue with the church so I’m sorry to not fit into your stereotype. Giving to a church as your weekly tithe is fine, but you can’t call the entire donation a charitable contribution in my book. The church tithe or regular donation goes more to the upkeep of the church, pay for the priests, funds for the missionaries to convert and recruit more members, payoffs for the sexual molestations, etc before a small fraction even begins to go to help those in need. I’m glad that churches are helping those in need and I know they’re able to organize volunteers as well, but a dollar to a church is not equal to a dollar to those in need. I can’t call a retail purchase charity even when the sales clerk is a minimum wage earner working part time.
70 Greenwood_D // May 28, 2011 at 2:11 pm
@SPG
You accuse ME of stereotyping, yet you base your whole opinion of “charitable conservatives” on your assumption that charity is solely for and only through religious affiliations when it comes from a “conservative”.
Not once do you acknowledge the possibility that someone that has conservative political ideologies (especially given the subject of this post and that the conservative opinions exhibited here address are from an economic perspective) may not be particularly religious NOR give only through religious-based charities.
Personally, most of my donations a year are given to the Greenwood Food Bank. I’m sure I’m not the only one that donates solely to “secular” charities.
Go back and read Brook’s findings, if you’re so caught up with them and not the Senior Picnic in the Park.
>>>”Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).”<<>” Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.”<>”Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and “the values that lie beneath” liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government. “<<
This statement isn't even pointed at one group!
It simply states that influences (for both liberals AND conservatives ) are religion and philosophy of government.
This political bickering seems redundant and I accept that you have the opinion that differs from mine when it comes to charity. I just think you leave your deck of cards exposed with your quick-to-assume implications that conservative charity= giving to the church.
You say you don't have an issue with "the church", yet make comments like this:
"payoffs for the sexual molestations"
Uh-huh, SPG. I'm sure buying that one.
Try breaking yourself from the Republican/Democrat paradigm that seems to permeate your opinion. I threw off those shackles long ago. It's all the same sh*t show to me, which is perfectly illustrated for everyone again as you see the current President (the "CHANGE" candidate) perpetuate pretty much everything the last guy did. The "R" next to my name is cute of you, but I certainly don't support any Republocrat simply for their party affiliation and the 2-party duplocracy & the facade it has created for Americans does nothing but sicken me.
In closing, I wish there were more people to back up their passionate outrage over Hot Dogs in the Park with some action and less "Rachel Maddow hates Rush Limbaugh"-regurgitation.
71 Tahomajim // May 28, 2011 at 10:23 pm
Excuse me….
WHAT ABOUT THE OLD TIMERS PICNIC AT THE ZOO?
72 Aunt Marge // May 29, 2011 at 9:51 am
Time for bed, all if you, the government needs to, wipe your backside, tuck you in and read you a book. The picnic has been canceled.
73 SPG // May 29, 2011 at 12:36 pm
Greenwood_R, again…religious donations aren’t the ONLY contributions by conservatives, but they are a large part of it and skew those stats you keep pointing to.
I don’t have a beef with the church, but payouts for sexual molestation settlements and legal expenses to defend them have had a large impact on the finances of a lot of churches.
74 Tahomajim // May 29, 2011 at 2:44 pm
This blog began with the old timers picnic being canceled.
Now the issue has degenerated to liberals vs. conservatives.
Sometimes I wish the two would just pair off like Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton.
75 Julie // May 29, 2011 at 10:12 pm
According to the story, the event was co-sponsored by Seattle Parks and Rec, the Human Services Department Mayor’s Office for Senior Citizens and Senior Services [not to join the political fray but that middle one sure sounds like bloat to me].
It also says that the food sponsor dropped out in 2010. So, I can call Seattle Parks and Rec to see what I can find out about that cost estimate. Anyone know of a business that might donate food?
76 Greenwood_D // May 29, 2011 at 11:50 pm
@SPG
RE: “skewing stats”
Only if you consider giving to anything church-based as non-charity. Regardless, it’s the ACT of giving that the statistic is based on. You seem to have a tendency to downplay the importance of church charity OVERALL by associating it with the minuscule percentage of churches that have caught your attention with sexual molestation legal funding. It’s sort of like “implying” all Islam is evil because of Al-Quaeda, IMHO.
Whatever, though. I hear your church stereotype loud and clear! We agree to disagree.
@Tahomajim
I don’t blame ya for being burnt out on this one.
@Julie
Y’know, Julie. Trader Joe’s just might be the right place to ask. They are probably getting bombarded with donation requests at the Ballard one (being the only location in Seattle until October), but it might be worth a try.
I can’t see how grocery chains wouldn’t be interested. They could be donating their own product for promotion alone.
Leave a Comment