interesting article in the nyt about hunger among the working poor. it reads, in part:

"Hunger in the suburbs is far from a new phenomenon. But today, those showing up at suburban food pantries and soup kitchens throughout the metropolitan region are more likely than ever to include working families, experts say.

"There's a changing face of hunger, in the sense that more working people need help now than before," said Meara Nigro, a spokeswoman for the Community Food Bank of New Jersey."

the article goes on to describe just who these folks might be: full-time workers, often without benefits, for grocery and retail stores, restaurants and other establishments. while the corporate hierarchy of these organizations rakes in the bucks (think wal-mart's healthy earnings this past year), their workers -- described as "invisible people" by one shelter worker -- go hungry.

in a sense, hungry people in suburban areas are lucky: the food cupboard in the story sometimes stocks meat, as well as fresh fruit and vegetables. i have strong and disturbing memories of cupboards in kensington stocked with entenmann's products as far as the eye could see. hungry people in center cities are often obese, and suffer terribly from dental problems associated with too much sugar and processing and too few nutrients. it's paradoxical, and it's wicked.

and of course -- how could i NOT point this out? -- the sorry state of the working poor, whether in cities or in the suburbs, has much to do with "compassionate conservatism." regressive taxation, the privatization of welfare, the failure of the economy to produce any living-wage jobs...thank you very much, bush administration.