news-record.com

Skip to the site menu
Skip to search

NEWS

Stimulus money buys hot meals for seniors

Monday, November 2, 2009
(Updated Tuesday, November 3 - 5:53 pm)
By Gerald Witt
Staff Writer

GREENSBORO — A month ago, Almeta Whitsett was on the waiting list for Mobile Meals.

With two hip replacements and a husband with Alzheimer’s, the 84-year-old Greensboro woman was finding it harder to cook. She already had someone who came in to clean her house every two weeks.

Now, she has help in the kitchen, too.

The Mobile Meals program run by Senior Resources of Guilford County learned over the summer it received $40,000 from stimulus funding.

But since the agency knew that the funds were coming, Whitsett started receiving two hot meals a day, five days a week, in late September for her and her 85-year-old husband, James.

“I don’t have to worry about preparing dinner each day,” Whitsett said. “I prepare a little breakfast for us, and maybe in the evening get us a little sandwich or something. We’ve enjoyed the meals tremendously.”

Oscar Lowe, Mobile Meals program director for Senior Resources, said the list was needed because the economy had turned bad for many.

“I guess that we had 30 or 40 on the waiting list,” said  “It was pretty sizeable.”

Senior Resources is funded through the United Way, federal Title III grants and private donations.

But before the stimulus funding was announced, there wasn’t enough money to meet the demand for Mobile Meals as well as to feed the elderly who can make it to one of several centers throughout the county.

The stimulus money allows Senior Resources to avoid building a waiting list for a while.

“We will not start a waiting list until Jan. 1,” said Ellen Whitlock, director of Senior Resources, who said the agency’s overall list has had 232 people cycle through since 2008.

Lowe said it feels good to be able to call people such as the Whitsetts to say, “I believe I can get your meals started.”

But it’s even better to be able to handle the whole waiting list at once.

“When we got the word that we were able to eliminate the waiting list,” Lowe said, “we gave lot of shouts of praise.”

Contact Gerald Witt at 373-7008 or gerald.witt @news-record.com

 

Accompanying Photos

Jerry Wolford (News & Record)

Photo Caption: Almeta and James Whitsett have been receiving two meals a day since September, thanks to stimulus money that went to Senior Resources. 

Want to help?

Senior Resources of Guilford is always looking for volunteers or financial help. Information: In Greensboro, 373-4816; in High Point, 884-4816.

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

northoftheboro

November 2, 2009 - 6:45 am EST

But did the stimulus payment to this charity create any jobs or stimulate economic growth? As the answer to this question is probably "no", philanthropic funds or charitable donations could have funded this worthy cause instead of taxpayers dollars that were intended to jump-start the Obama recession, which is having minimal, short-term results, at best, with virtually no net job creation (with over 500,000 new jobless claims each week).

speakup2

November 2, 2009 - 7:56 am EST

Obama Recession???????? Did I miss something? Being a Repub myself, it sure appears to me that this country was in bad trouble BEFORE Obama. Grant it he has not help it , but he certainly didn't Cause it either.

brianpauljaus

November 2, 2009 - 3:57 pm EST

You are right, this is not an Obama Recession, nor is it a Bush recession. Each decade we fund last decades recession on a new bubble, which creates next decades recession. The pattern has been going on for over a hundred years now.

Reagan inherited the 70s mess and the S & L bubble got us out. By the dynamics of free market and bubbles... the bubble will eventuall burst. And how did we pull ourselves out ? The Dot.Com boom !!! Thats how we got through the 90s !! And Bush inherited this broken bubble. How did we fund our way out ? The Housing Bubble ! Then pop. This president's whole job was to figure out the next bubble which is what the stimulus measures essentially (if channeled right) would have done. But to be honest I think they messed it up and there is going be no 2010 - 2020 bubble. The demomcrats that pulled us out of the Great Depression (New Deal) added some socialism but spurred the free market too because they knew what the heck they were doing. I dont think this administration know from a whole in the ground and I now firmly beleive Obama is an idealogical socialist, meaning not only is not just a political thing.. he really really beleives in it and sees himself as the saviour which will bring the "Healing Socialism" in favor of the "Coprrupt Ideals Of Capitalisim". And if that is someones goal then they will spend the money OPPOSITE of the the goals of the free market which is what I think is happening at the same time they pay back all their political capital and strenthen their voting base. And to be honest if this guys presidency starts to go bad and he is even more disliked in the future then I think you are going to see some Orwellian stuff forced on us as fast as possible. I dont think these guys can afford to fail if you know what I mean...

WhitemoonG

November 2, 2009 - 4:10 pm EST

No, Obama only started with a legitimate problem and intentionally, arrogantly, stupidly and needlessly made it FAR WORSE, setting in motion more debt in his first year than all previous 43 Presidents combined.

speakup2

November 2, 2009 - 7:54 am EST

It is a shame that many people have no family or Good Neighbors to help them out anymore. I can remember as a young child carrying food to a neighbor because she had lost a leg due to diabetes. We never gave it a thought, it was just something that you were supposed to do as a neighbor. People are no longer like that. Most don't even know their neighbors names.

rckmom

November 2, 2009 - 8:27 am EST

Too bad that people are now scared of their neighbors...our society has changed for the worse...

GoldStarDad

November 3, 2009 - 8:15 am EST

You're absolutely right about how neighbors used to help neighbors. Not any more. It's not uncommon to live next door to a neighbor for years & not even know them. The people who work for a living are completely immersed in it. They are so busy with their trying to make it that they could really care less, or even notice others. That's a real shame. I might add, they didn't start feeding senior's because Obama became POTUS, this is something that has been done for years, they call it "Meals on Wheels". Obama has done nothing but severe damage to our Country...In a decade when there will be another POTUS, you Liberals just remember the damage being done today...

jlocke

November 2, 2009 - 8:20 am EST

If the Stimulus Bill was intended to be a Social Welfare Bill then why did Congress and the President not tell us the truth? This is why so many have lost trust in Government.

onno

November 2, 2009 - 9:20 am EST

Ya'll ain't so bright, are you? I understand it's hard to think with all this socialism bailing out banks and providing subsidies to oil companies. Stimulus just means putting money into the economy, $80,000 isn't very much but here's how it goes.
Meals on Wheels buys more vegetables, meat, bread and little plastic serving trays, the wholesalers who sell these things make a little money and don't cancel their contracts with the folks who make them, the folks who grow the veggies, cows, chicken and pigs don't lose their farms because old folks are getting free food and they go out and buy new tractors, the people who work at the wholesalers don't get fired and they go out and buy lots of useless consumer goods, whose agents also don't lose their jobs and go out and buy more stuff, even them old folks with just barely enough money to buy food to survive now have enough left over to go splurge on some wanton consumer goods.
We call this an ECONOMY. What were you expecting, free vibrators?

tdavis212

November 2, 2009 - 9:41 am EST

Well said onno!

lighthouse

November 2, 2009 - 11:25 am EST

But onno aren't you describing Trickle-Down Economics? I thought that was discredited by Pres. Bill Clinton. No one believes in that OLD Regan economic theory. Where is that new economic theory that Pres. Bill Clinton and the Liberal Economists have been telling us is the only thing that TRULY works?

kellmenj

November 2, 2009 - 1:04 pm EST

onno, you've totally ignored the opportunity costs -- the money being spent on the additional federal debt (and servicing the debt) is significant, and will cost someone more than the present dollar value at some point.

If merely "spending" was a genuine way to improve the economy, then I'd recommend everyone torch their houses -- it makes work for firefighters, home builders, insurance adjusters, furniture manufacturers and retailers -- the economic benefits would be endless if we all just burned our houses down!

onno

November 2, 2009 - 1:35 pm EST

Yes, economically speaking you're right--just look at New Orleans. Disasters are great for the economy. Practically, I wouldn't recommend such tactics with winter coming on, and of course our insurance companies are a hogs breath from bankruptcy.

patriot 2

November 2, 2009 - 1:41 pm EST

onno,

The John Deere tractors are rusting back on the farm and the stock is at $46.00 down from $98.00 last year.(ethanol scam)
The fishing fleet is tied to the dock due to the excellent managment and stock recovery plan of the last fifteen years.( Magnuson Fisheries Conservation Act)
The dairy farmers sold the cows due to low milk and high feed prices.There goes their cut of FY2010 Agriculture Appropriations bill, which included over $350 million in aid for dairy farmers.

Ca'nt wait for"Health Care Reform!"

If you like Washington State Appels or Nantucket Bay Scallops,we can import them from China.

brianpauljaus

November 2, 2009 - 4:11 pm EST

Gentlemen, any economics professor can tell you why those disasters and war are good for the economy. It is because of the true laws of the free market we do not completely follow in America. When production outpaces demand, surplus is stock piled driving down prices. And here is what sounds odd to the non-economic scientist but is simple math... the only ways to fix the problem are to A.) increase consumption to lower surplus or B.) decrease production to lower surplus or C.) (and the hardest to fathom) DESTROY the surplus !!! Even though destroying something of value seems assanine... if A & B are not feasible C is the only option to put the production-consupmtion relationship back in whack. This was easy back in the old days. When the price of apples got too low. The farmers let them rot on the trees. It simply wasnt worth it to harvest them. Thus produced goods were actually destroyed, surplus removed, and demand revived. By the next season the price was back up, and farmers could afford to harvest them again. The market fixes itself. War is even better. The work force is getting paid and jamming out products, but the products are not consumed in the market but rather explode in a fire blast somewhere else in the world or on a target range. That will fix a jammed up economy in jiff !!
The problem is our elected officials dont want to tell you that this how it really works in capitalism therefore we are always going through cycles. Sometimes it is good and sometimes it is bad. The artifically try to make it good when it should be bad to get themselves elected or keep themselves in office. In reality we should keep politicians away from the economy as much as possible as it was originally intended.

brianpauljaus

November 2, 2009 - 4:40 pm EST

Actually stimulus money to simply buy products in surplus will emphatically NOT fix the problem we are in. All we did is borrow the money from ourselves down the road at EXTENDED interest rate you would not beleive. Thus the money has to fix the production-consumption relationship. Right now it is broken not because people cant get products.. there is product surplus is everywhere. If used stimulus money is used to purchase surplus, once surplus is gone you are still have production capability which far outpaces demand and the surplus builds right back up but this time there is no stimulus money and we are dead in the water. So no I am sorry but your ideas do not follow sound economic prinicple. Thats the problem, it is not as easy if it looks, It is as hard as rocket science (I am familiar with the math in both fields) if not harder and yet for some reason every tom dick and harry thinks they know how our economy really works. The solution is to increase the ability to consume by adding wages to the markey with production then rising in lock step right behind it keeping them close to parity as possible.

In reality letting surplus food rot will fix the economy faster than using stimulus money to buy it. That is the cold hard fact of the situation and the real math behind the economic problem.

bien

November 2, 2009 - 10:48 pm EST

Now reference the amount of stimulas money that will be availiable next year in order to provide the services you have detailed. Does the food being produced still have a buyer? does the delivery system still have fuel and so on and so forth.

I like the warm fuzzy feel but then reality hits.

FSandlewould

November 2, 2009 - 9:35 am EST

The government shut down "Meals on Wheels" in my father's home town with a flimsy excuse before the stimulus money went out.

Coincidence? I think not. I think Obama and buddies did this where they could in order to prevent non-cronies from getting stimulus money.

nclawkid

November 2, 2009 - 10:50 am EST

I, for one, am thankful that this money has helped such a worthy cause. In the grand scheme of federal spending, $80,000 is nothing. But it has helped improve the lives of some of society's most vulnerable citizens. And the money spent is probably very stimulative. Someone had to grow the food that these people are eating, and someone had to prepare the meals. A lot of indirect jobs are helped by programs like these.

On an aside, just look at the picture. Doesn't it just make you want to smile.

brianpauljaus

November 2, 2009 - 4:17 pm EST

I like the picture too. I want to feel warm and fuzzy too.
That is NOT what the money was for !! We are at the end of the rope and if the money does not do its intended purpose which is ONLY to spur economic growth you wil NEVER SEE PICTURES LIKE THAT AGAIN !! I dotn want to see seniors starve either, I am not a monster... but if the money is not used correctly there will be destitute seniors for a hundred years ! Therefore we have to have the strength to use it the right way and ignore certain needs no matter how hard. A poor person can not help the poor.. and neither can a poor country which is what we could become !

owen2103@yahoo.com

November 2, 2009 - 11:17 am EST

I feel for this couple. What a mixed message. Today they are being fed which is very noble. After Obama care they will be given a sugar pill and told to go home and die.

chuck47

November 2, 2009 - 12:39 pm EST

I live in Greensboro and read this story in today's paper. While it is nice to see people getting fed this is hardly the intent of the stimulus program although it will make these people continue to vote for Obama. Actually, I guess that was the reason for the stimulus; make sure that enough people continue to vote for the democratic party.
The Greensboro N&R is one of the most left leaning papers in the state if not the country. They printed every disgusting cartoon they could find about George Bush. The continue to print any left leaning story they cn find to prop up the man child president. And every article is basically a reprint of the Associated Press, the NY Times or Washington Post. The only thing good about the paper is its overall size which is perfect for paper training a puppy or wrapping dead fish.

Gerald Witt

November 2, 2009 - 12:51 pm EST

Thanks for reading and thanks for your input, Chuck.

For just general information on the waiting list, the agency typically did not have one before the economic meltdown hit really hard.

And as for the future of people on the list, this is a population that is susceptible to changes in living arrangements and other circumstances that would remove them from the list - such as moving into a nursing home, with a family member, going to the hospital or otherwise.

brianpauljaus

November 2, 2009 - 7:55 pm EST

Mr. Witt, what is your opinion on the provision in the new health care bill which forces every single tax paying American to get health insurance or face a fine/tax of 2.5% of gross salary by the IRS ? Outside of everything else in the bill this is the core move towards a socialized structure. And remember any tax can be raised as this one day could be. When combined with a "public option" you have a true move towards socialization. So this bill exteneds FREE health care to only 5 - 6% of Americans that dont already have it but forces every single American to purchase it (even though insurance does not make sense for some people).

What is your view / opinion of this provision and this tax in the health care bill ?

Laura

November 2, 2009 - 1:20 pm EST

It's always interesting to see how the other side thinks -- the idea that social programs for the poor are designed to deliver votes is ludicrous. The poor don't vote. The reason we need social safety nets is to keep crime and disease down. If you don't believe it, go live in Buenos Aires or Calcutta, for a while, where there is no social safety net. See what a wonderful quality of life you will have for your low taxes.

richy

November 2, 2009 - 3:42 pm EST

You are wrong in the statement that the poor do no vote. They VOTE which is why the policticians use our money to BUY thier votes!!!

brianpauljaus

November 2, 2009 - 4:54 pm EST

You are both correct and wrong, and certainly wrong in saying that "the Poor do not vote".

You are correct that 30% more people vote in the upper econmic group per total population than those of the lower economic brackets. So based on that figure alone you could try to make the argument that more rich people vote than poor people.

However the problem is that the upper econmic groups are vastly smaller than the lower econmic groups. So even though 30% more people vote in the upper group... there are 15 times more people in the lower group. Therefore there are far more votes coming from poor people than rich people and a vote counts them same wether you are rich or poor.

Now that this extreme administration is attacking the upper groups on an unprecedented scale in American history... are you telling me that these people are not going to have to depend on the votes of the lower econmic groups ? If you do not understand that then I am not sure you grasp the necessary knowledge to understand this situation.

bien

November 2, 2009 - 10:57 pm EST

This is just to show you how bad it can get. This is the Bio of a candidate for Mayor in New York City. Now she will not win but the idea is scary. Pay special attention to items 1 and 2.

Francisca Villar

Party for Socialism and Liberation

Party enrolled in: Party For Socialism And Liberation

Occupation: Student

1. What is the most important issue in the city you would address if elected?

The billionaires must pay for the economic crisis. A 5 percent tax on all wealth over $100 million would alone raise over $8 billion a year from the city's 55 billionaires alone; if they try to leave the city, their property and wealth should be confiscated. The $5 billion that the city pays every year to the banks for "debt servicing" must go to people's needs.

2. What other important issues would you address if elected?

The NYPD top cops must face charges for the epidemic of racist police brutality.

Housing is a right; rents must be rolled back and New York City should be declared an eviction-free zone with no foreclosures or evictions. The Rent Guidelines Board must be elected by New York City residents, not appointed by the mayor.

CUNY should be free as it once was.

Every New Yorker should be guaranteed a union job with decent wages and benefits.

3. What makes you the best candidate for this office?

I am not a billionaire and I have never been a bank executive. I am the only candidate who has grown up poor in New York City. My candidacy is dedicated to building a movement of poor and working people to put our interests first--the movement we need for the society we deserve.

I marched with 1 million of my fellow immigrants on May Day 2006 to demand amnesty for all undocumented workers. I organized to demand an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and of the occupation of Palestine.

I was an organizer trying to push back the 2008 tuition increases at CUNY. I am a fighter for the interests of poor and working people

onno

November 2, 2009 - 1:23 pm EST

"Trickle Down?" I don't mean to call you stupid, but how could you possible put the recipients of free food from Meals on Wheels on the top, you know--where trickling is supposed to come from. Actually, this is trickle up. It's not physics; it's economics.
One percent of the people in America, the richest, have as much capital as the bottom 95%. What possible good is giving more money to the rich--less taxes to start trickle down. There's only so much milk, cheese, computers, carpenters, plumbers, dog food and TVs one percent can buy. But, if you make sure 95% of the people have cash, they will spend it and make jobs and commerce for everyone. "Trickle Down" is just plain old propaganda---sure sounds nice though; it's a whole lot harder to tell fools that money, unlike water, actually goes uphill. Thanks for playing, next.....

udontgetitdou

November 2, 2009 - 3:41 pm EST

onno - Reading your comments and your personal attacks here on those that you don't agree with, tells me all I need to know about you. Difference is I too attack. So you must be one of the biggest welfare check cashing moron. Trickle down, is what you explained in your comments, trickle down doesn’t mean the top 1% you are so jealous of due to the fact you lack that motivation (get off you lazy ass and contribute). It is everyone who spends money, it trickles down you jacka$$. Also for the companies that failed the others will buy them up let the market work. Ford turning a profit, US Bank turning a profit but yet no bailout. Quit drinking the Kool-Aid.

12next ›last »

eMail Updates

Learn More
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search