I love the way the writer confabulates out and out abuse with poverty.
“And often, it is children that suffer the most...
A Texas couple kept their bruised, malnourished 5-year-old son in a diaper and locked in a closet of their Spring home, police said in a horrifying case of abuse.
The tiny, blond-haired boy was severely underweight, his shoulder blades, ribs and vertebrae showing through his skin, when officers found him late last week.
You can see some photos of that poor little boy right here.”
There are families in poverty, some not of their own making, and their children do have more difficulty with peer acceptance, hunger, and ability to learn. But this item has zip to do with that.
I read the post and was wondering the same thing. What the heck does flat out abuse have to do with income? These folks were monsters, but what proof does this author have that they’re monsters due to income? Bizarre correlation.
Yes, I found that interesting, as well. The abused 5 year old in TX may or may not have anything to do with “economic inequality” or poverty or whatever.