KamaAina (55,065 posts)
Kids from poorer neighborhoods keep coming to trick-or-treat in mine. Do I have to give them candy?
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/dear_prudence/2014/10/dear_prudence_on_halloween_poor_kids_come_to_trick_or_treat_in_my_neighborhood.html
Dear Prudence,
I live in one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the country, but on one of the more “modest†streets—mostly doctors and lawyers and family business owners. (A few blocks away are billionaires, families with famous last names, media moguls, etc.) I have noticed that on Halloween, what seems like 75 percent of the trick-or-treaters are clearly not from this neighborhood. Kids arrive in overflowing cars from less fortunate areas. I feel this is inappropriate. Halloween isn’t a social service or a charity in which I have to buy candy for less fortunate children. Obviously this makes me feel like a terrible person, because what’s the big deal about making less fortunate kids happy on a holiday? But it just bugs me, because we already pay more than enough taxes toward actual social services. Should Halloween be a neighborhood activity, or is it legitimately a free-for-all in which people hunt down the best candy grounds for their kids?
—Halloween for the 99 Percent
Dear 99,
In the urban neighborhood where I used to live, families who were not from the immediate area would come in fairly large groups to trick-or-treat on our streets, which were safe, well-lit, and full of people overstocked with candy. It was delightful to see the little mermaids, spider-men, ghosts, and the occasional axe murderer excitedly run up and down our front steps, having the time of their lives. So we’d spend an extra $20 to make sure we had enough candy for kids who weren’t as fortunate as ours. There you are, 99, on the impoverished side of Greenwich or Beverly Hills, with the other struggling lawyers, doctors, and business owners. Your whine makes me kind of wish that people from the actual poor side of town come this year not with scary costumes but with real pitchforks. Stop being callous and miserly and go to Costco, you cheapskate, and get enough candy to fill the bags of the kids who come one day a year to marvel at how the 1 percent live.
—Prudie
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025703898Oh brother. As if Slate wasn't full of shit enough, they have to make up stupid bullshit like this. OK, let's do this:
1. The "rich" people in this pantload of a scenario do not live in tract homes. This means that (a) their homes are far apart, (b) they are usually behind gates, (c) indeed, their entire communities are often behind gates, and (d) often people who are filthy rich do not pass out candy.
2. In view of the challenges inherent in (1) above, the less-privileged are unlikely to knock on doors in Beverly Hills, Bel Air, Paradise Valley, Preston Hollow, Montecito, Greenwich owing to the time it takes to merely go from one home to another.
3. To the degree that litmus tests are difficult to apply when a costumed youngster rings the bell in the dark, discrimination is nearly impossible.
4. It is not necessary to refer to "billionaires" when making this shit up, DUmmies (and Slate). "Well-to-do" will suffice, and as a poor youngster I did indeed conspire with my friends to be dropped off in "well-to-do" areas. We quickly realized that "working class" neighborhoods were FAR preferable, as they were built on flat land and the homes were built close together.
You have FAILED, Slate (and DU) because you have applied an adult moonbat's sense of inequality and their odd sensibilities to an inherently childish enterprise. Said differently: kids know where the candy is, and it ain't at a "billionaire's" house, nor is it at YOURS.
