View Single Post
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 01-22-2007, 11:08 AM
raytri's Avatar
raytri raytri is offline
Site Moderator
Guru
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minnesota
Age: 41
Posts: 18,489
usa us minnesota
raytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 115,531
Default dgdgdg

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth-Bringer";p=&quot View Post
No. I'd say there's a conflict of interest if they're statists. They want a problem that they can demand higher tax revenue for in order to allegedly fix. Mayors: "The welfare roles are increasing, we have to raise taxes and regulate industry or people will starve without our benevolence!!!!"
Now you mistrust mayors. Which essentially means you distrust all government, which means you won't accept government statistics. I don't know if any source exists that you would call unbiased. Hence your demand for "unbiased" sources is empty.

Quote:
I'd like to know how they arrived at their conclusions.
Read the link. They describe their methodology. Basically they surveyed their members -- who are, after all, mayors.

Quote:
I'd also like a filter to show which of the people applying were (1) UNABLE to work and (2) that there isn't any type of fraud occuring.
You think people would *fraudulently* ask to sleep in a homeless shelter?

As for food shelves, most serve a specific geographic area to avoid overlapping. And they generally require identification and proof of need. So they know their clientele. Besides, food-shelf fraud would be seriously penny-ante stuff.

Quote:
ONE NIGHT OF HOMELESSNESS? Are you kidding? From 1 percent of the population? And that's a crisis???? Hardly.
It is, of course, your right to ignore the "at least" qualifier, or the notation that it only counts those people who sought help from an established assistance provider.

Quote:
I was homeless for 3 months - you didn't see me running to the government to come save me.
Good for you. Did you have small children at the time?

Quote:
Taxes are the cause of this anyway.
LOLOL.... So if we didn't have taxes, we wouldn't have homelessness? Is that what you're arguing?

Quote:
LOL. On any given night... Exactly what critieria are they using to determine this? There is no hard evidence. This is just guess work.
Survey work, actually. About the only feasible way to get a grip on a population that is very hard to measure.

Quote:
You gotta skew... Please note what I said again, A LOT OF PEOPLE DECLARING BANKRUPTCY SIMPLY SPENT BEYOND THEIR MEANS. I didn't state these people were the largest percentage of filers. It's true that they are a small percentage of overall filers, however, nationwide, that still equates to what I said - A LOT OF PEOPLE.
You said it as if that was somehow relevant to addressing the bankruptcy problem, or the significance of rising bankruptcies. It's not.

Quote:
Again, I'd want to know the incomes of the parents whose children are applying.
From the same web site, you can find that free meals are available to those with household incomes of up to 130 percent of poverty level, and reduced price meals are available for those up to 185 percent of poverty level.

The increased use of the program, therefore, suggests that over the last 15 years a higher percentage of family incomes have fallen within that range.

Quote:
I'd also want the whole thing checked for fraud.
You use this mantra as if that refutes all other claims. Yes, of course, be vigilant for fraud. But like chanting "government waste" when asked how to cut taxes without cutting services, fraud doesn't constitute an actual answer. It's really incumbent upon you to show that fraud exists.

Quote:
I know quite a few kids when I was in high school who were on the program that didn't have an actual need. They had nicer cars than I did, yet were on the free lunch program. Go figure...
Even if we take your anonymous anecdote at face value, do you know for a fact that they were getting the meals for free or reduced price? Because that's what determines whether you're actually "on the program." When I was in school, anyone could buy the government lunch. And some who didn't "need it" did, because it was cheaper than the other options.

Quote:
I would say it's fair for anyone living in a such an area is to have a plan in place in case of a hurricane or flood.
Agreed. But if I live in NYC, what should my plan be? When you're talking about the emergency movement of millions of people, government must necessarily be involved. Your personal plan won't count for much if the government has a poor evacuation plan.

Quote:
If you don't want to deal with it, then don't live there. And don't complain if anything happens and you weren't prepared.
Every (wo)man for h(er)imself!!
__________________
Man up.
Reply With Quote