Most "homeless" children live in homes

[Little-Acorn]

Another example of Democrats twisting and lying about their interests, to try to make them seem more desperate than they are. It's getting almost routine now. But here we seem to have the media backing them up and apparently backing them up... something else that isn't quite so routine, though in the last year it's gotten more so.

-----------------------------------------------------

http://opinionjournal.com

from "Best of the Web Today"

The majority of "homeless" children live in homes.
By JAMES TARANTO

"One of every 50 American children experiences homelessness, according to a new report that says most states have inadequate plans to address the worsening and often-overlooked problem," the Associated Press reports from New York:

(snip)

Horrible if true. But is it true? Not so much. Believe it or not, it turns out that the majority of "homeless" children live in homes.

Seriously! The AP link above includes a graphic that breaks down the "living conditions of homeless children." Fifty-six percent of them are "doubled-up," defined as "sharing housing with other persons due to economic hardship." By this definition, the Meathead on "All in the Family" was "homeless."

Another 7% are listed as living in hotels--a category that, in the report itself, also includes motels, trailer parks and camping grounds. We'll give them campgrounds, but when you think of the homeless, are residents of hotels and trailer parks what come to mind?

Twenty-four percent of "homeless" children live in shelters, according to the AP graphic. That would seem to meet a commonsense definition of homelessness--but it turns out the number conflates those who live in two different types of shelters: "emergency" and "transitional." As the report defines the latter:

Transitional housing bridges the gap between emergency shelters and permanent housing--often providing more intensive services and allowing longer lengths of stay than emergency shelters. Transitional housing models arose in the mid-1980s, when communities realized that for some, emergency shelter services were not sufficient to ensure a permanent exit from homelessness. Transitional housing programs often have a specialized focus on particular barriers to stable housing and provide services and supports to address these issues. For example, programs may be designed exclusively for those fleeing domestic violence, struggling with addictions, or working to reunite with children in the foster care system.

It's not clear what percentage of "homeless" children are in emergency vs. transitional shelters, but the report does say that "Nationally, there are 29,949 units (i.e., housing for one family) of emergency shelter [and] 35,799 units of transitional housing." In any case, a substantial number of the "homeless" who are in "shelters" are actually in facilities the center itself calls "housing" and are on track to finding permanent homes.

 

[Pandora]

most hungry people have food too,

I quailfied as in need by a poll I took

it was for a poverty poll in my area

the question was, have you at anytime wanted food but were not able to get it?


I asked the pollster what exactly do you mean? She said have you ever forgotten your lunch for work, or been to busy to stop and get something to eat or just wanted some particular kind of food that you could not get IE steak and lobser exc.

well of course I had to say yes.... so now Im part of the hunger problem in Lane County

 

[Andy]

This isn't much of a surprise to me. How many times I've met poverty level fat people is beyond belief. I have yet to see someone who actually had children and absolutely no place to go.

Most 'homeless', seem to be in that condition by choice, as odd as that sounds. One guy was asked about his parents, his religious affiliation, his friends and neighbors and so on... each time he gave (in my opinion) a lame excuse for why he couldn't ask for help.

What about your parents?

Bum: "oh we don't get along"

0.o So complaining about society, while homeless on the street, is a better option?

What about your church?

Bum: "Well I don't like getting preached at"

o.0 So being broke and starving on the street, while complaining about religious people, is preferable?

What about your friends, co-workers, neighbors?

Bum: "I shouldn't have to ask them for help"

>.< So keeping pathetic pride, which is already gone, is better than getting the help you need?


People in the gutter can come up with the most amazing twisted logic to explain why it's not their fault, and they shouldn't have to do anything. This is why I never support 'out reach' type programs. I always support programs that help people who make the effort to find help.

 

[top gun]

Those belittling and down playing the circumstances of those less fortunate should seriously try and find some remote form of a conscience.

Families and little kids in shelters or in transitional housing or having to use some small space with a relative because they have lost their job or living under bridges... ALL VERY BAD THINGS!

And I know some don't really get into "science" much but those terrible poverty stricken yet "fat people"... quite possibly can only afford things like the cheapest $1 cheeseburgers and quite often are sick with diabetes and other illnesses.

There but by the grace of God go you...

 

[Little-Acorn]

Those belittling and down playing the circumstances of those less fortunate should seriously try and find some remote form of a conscience.

Who's doing that?

BTW, this thread is about people who are exaggerating the plight of the "homeless" and trying to make it seem worse than it is. You might give some thought to directing your conscience-counselling toward them, since you seem to think it's needed.

 

[Andy]

Those belittling and down playing the circumstances of those less fortunate should seriously try and find some remote form of a conscience.

This coming from a judgmental liberal that discounts those who don't earn as much as him. Liberals have absolutely no conscience at all. I would even wager that between the two of us, I have given far more to charity, and people in need, than you have with your business.

Families and little kids in shelters or in transitional housing or having to use some small space with a relative because they have lost their job or living under bridges... ALL VERY BAD THINGS!

So how many times have you opened your home up to a family in need? I have twice.

And I know some don't really get into "science" much but those terrible poverty stricken yet "fat people"... quite possibly can only afford things like the cheapest $1 cheeseburgers and quite often are sick with diabetes and other illnesses.

Um... buying from the store, you can get far more food, and better food, than from a burger joint.

Here's a thought for you. Did it ever occur to you that possibly bad spending habits, and over eating are part of the reason they are poor?

Many years bad there was a guy where I worked that was at least 400 lbs. He was poor as could be. But every day he'd sit in the break room and stuff $5 worth of quarters into the candy machine both of his two 15 minute breaks, and then buy a triple from Wendy's for lunch. Yeah he was flat broke... and he was way fat. Gee... I wonder why. Do some basic math, you'll figure it out.

Moreover, there are plenty of food pantries out there that provide a well rounded diet every day to anyone who needs a meal. I've worked in one. When we hand out free healthy food, there's not much excuse for blowing all your money on doubles from McDonalds, unless you are just making the choice to do so.

 

[Andy]

Who's doing that?

BTW, this thread is about people who are exaggerating the plight of the "homeless" and trying to make it seem worse than it is. You might give some thought to directing your conscience-counselling toward them, since you seem to think it's needed.

You are talking to a guy who openly pre-judges those who earn less than him, as being less important, and their opinion less relevant. Understand he's a hypocritical liberal. He feigns caring about those who are poor, while in reality thinks less of them.

In short... a typical liberal.

 

[Pandora]

Those belittling and down playing the circumstances of those less fortunate should seriously try and find some remote form of a conscience.

Families and little kids in shelters or in transitional housing or having to use some small space with a relative because they have lost their job or living under bridges... ALL VERY BAD THINGS!

And I know some don't really get into "science" much but those terrible poverty stricken yet "fat people"... quite possibly can only afford things like the cheapest $1 cheeseburgers and quite often are sick with diabetes and other illnesses.

There but by the grace of God go you...

I think you make a lot of good points and I think homelessness is real and I agree that many poor people are fat due to the kinds of foods they can afford to eat. Potatoes are an example and fatty meats are much cheaper than lean meat.

But it doesn’t help when groups out to help the homeless distort the facts. It turns some people skeptical. I still donate to missions and sometimes to food for Lane County but I don’t entirely trust the info I get on how many homeless there are or even how many hungry there are since I have been personally a part of bunk polling. I bet I would do more if I felt it was as pressing as the ads make it out to be.

But you really do make good points

 

[top gun]

This coming from a judgmental liberal that discounts those who don't earn as much as him. Liberals have absolutely no conscience at all. I would even wager that between the two of us, I have given far more to charity, and people in need, than you have with your business.

Really Andy? I'm judgmental because I truly don't believe someone who has told me he makes only 13K a year is the economic genius on the national scale he tries to promote himself to be. I don't see that.

And I can guarantee you that I've not only given more money but probably more importantly given more of my personal time volunteering than you have. Because I've had more to give and I'm pretty sure I've been around a lot longer.

So how many times have you opened your home up to a family in need? I have twice.

I've had several people come stay with me that were having financial trouble over the years. I've even paid for a motel room a few times. Plus my wife or I every month or so hit several Big Lots and Dollar Stores loading up on canned food, mac & cheese, cereal, powdered drink mix and the like and donate it to various food banks. Been doing that for years.

And Like I've said before I started off my coaching career coaching football to 4th through 6th graders in a bad neighborhood with many broken homes, gang & drug problems and mentored many of those kids all the way through high school. One who even went pro and played for the Cincinnati Bengals.

Um... buying from the store, you can get far more food, and better food, than from a burger joint.

It's obvious you don't really know many homeless people Andy. It's hard to very consistently prepare food from scratch living on the street. They get by with what they can get cheap and what takes the least amount of effort or equipment to prepare.

Here's a thought for you. Did it ever occur to you that possibly bad spending habits, and over eating are part of the reason they are poor?

Yep you figured it out Andy. Homeless people are homeless because they have poor eating habits.

Good luck to ya Andy and watch out for the Karma train...

 

[Andy]

Really Andy? I'm judgmental because I truly don't believe someone who has told me he makes only 13K a year is the economic genius on the national scale he tries to promote himself to be. I don't see that.

Does my income effect the validity of any particular argument? So if I said that 2 + 2 = 4, the fact my income is lower than yours, means that you can't trust my statement that 2 + 2 = 4?

As it relates to economics, which one of the posters here is an economic genius? Who here is John Adams or Thomas Sowell? Do you think that simply making a large income makes YOU a genius at economics? Because I know a bunch that made far more money than you, who are now bankrupt. Franklin Raines sure wasn't all that good at economics, given how he ran Fannie Mae into the ground.

And I can guarantee you that I've not only given more money but probably more importantly given more of my personal time volunteering than you have. Because I've had more to give and I'm pretty sure I've been around a lot longer.

Well given how you judge harshly those who earn less than you, I'd be surprised. I'll take everything else at face value, but I'm very skeptical. You come across as a judgmental hypocrite most of the time.

It's obvious you don't really know many homeless people Andy. It's hard to very consistently prepare food from scratch living on the street. They get by with what they can get cheap and what takes the least amount of effort or equipment to prepare.

In this specific instance you are likely right. I know people who pretended to be homeless. I gave money to a few. Turns out they were not homeless at all. One walked 3 blocks away to a parking lot, and climbed into a car. Another was seen going into an apartment. The people I thought were homeless, were actually unprofessional actors playing the part on the street.

I've been burned so many times, I no longer hand out money to people I don't know. If I know they are in fact homeless, I'll let them stay in my spare bedroom. Otherwise, I hand out food, and work at the homeless shelter.

Yep you figured it out Andy. Homeless people are homeless because they have poor eating habits.

Poor. Homeless and poor are two different things.

Good luck to ya Andy and watch out for the Karma train...

If Karma exists, then I'm in good shape. I've given away more than my share.