|
In Reply to: Re: Berg in it for the money? posted by Passing By on April 15, 2004 at 10:08:28:
OK, I remember that time. I was about 9 in a third world country. My parents freaked at the new requirement, because we had little to no cash income (what cash we did get was from us kids' singing and passing the basket or getting a small fee, and a couple english classes taught by the adults. there was ffing too which sometimes paid with a pair of shoes for one of us kids, and, I imagine, more on occasion).
My parents and siblings, or our "Home," lived in a little south amercian homemade trailer that slept fewer than we were, which we parked in parking lots, one rubble-filled lot where a house used to be that had been demolished, and where we froze in the winter and washing of TF-length female hair in a sink was traumatic. The chilblains were rough to handle too. We survived on provisioning 4 eggs here, 1/2 kilo of ground beef there, some potatoes there, etc. When we were asked anywhere to eat, or to a wedding, us kids would pig out and I have some strangely sad memories of siblings getting sick from delicious food that was nevertheless richer and more abundant than what we were used to. To my usually fanatically TF parent's credit, at these "free" meals they did not enforce the no-white sugar rule, since it was free.
My recollection was that they declared the $100 minimum applied to homes everywhere. that is why my parents freaked. TF was their whole world, and it was interesting to see them for once angry to have to "obey." I wish they had become angry at some of the sex doctrines too. Anyway, you *could* fill out a "pauper's plea" that you just could not do the $100. Filling this out was terribly fraught for them, and I did not know how "pauper" was spelled -- I imagined "popper" and wondered what we were popping to be called that -- and the term evoked terrified feelings.
