I just want to say that I haven't read the article (phone won't let me) but I have read some of the comments. I'm in the UK and I really don't see much difference. In the UK, the 'good hair' concept is an issue in the black community, and so is beauty in general (not just in the black community) so ppl spend loads on it. Those who are on benefits in the UK are not, by any means, living on the bread line. They are not in 'poverty' at all. Because of taxation, it is often better for someone on benefits to stay there, as they bring in more money this way (this is a well known flaw of our system). Pls excuse my post not being so relevant to the pastor article, but I thought I'd shed some light...