PDA

View Full Version : The majority of "homeless" children live in homes



Little-Acorn
03-10-2009, 03:38 PM
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:

"These kids are the innocent victims, yet it seems somehow or other they get left out," said the [National Center on Family Homelessness] president, Dr. Ellen Bassuk. "Why are they America's outcasts?"

The report analyzes data from 2005-2006. It estimates that 1.5 million children experienced homelessness at least once that year, and says the problem is surely worse now because of the foreclosures and job losses of the deepening recession.

"If we could freeze-frame it now, it would be bad enough," said Democratic Sen. Robert Casey of Pennsylvania, who wrote a foreward [sic] to the report. "By end of this year, it will be that much worse."
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.

The remaining "homeless" children are either "unsheltered" (3%) or "unknown/other" (10%). Among these are children "abandoned in hospitals," "using a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings," and "living in cars, parks, public spaces, abandoned buildings, substandard housing, bus or train stations."

People in most of these categories are plainly homeless--but note how the center slips "substandard housing" in there between abandoned buildings and bus stations. A child should not have to live in substandard housing, and maybe one who does deserves help at the taxpayer's expense. But a lousy home doesn't make you homeless any more than a lousy marriage makes you single.

The AP story is the work of four reporters: David Crary, who gets the byline, plus Linda Stewart Ball in Dallas, Daniel Shea in Little Rock, Ark., and Dionne Walker in Atlanta, who "contributed to this report." Despite all this manpower, it is nothing but a work of stenography. A group whose raison d'être is homelessness has an obvious interest in exaggerating the extent of the problem. The press's complicity is harder to explain.

-Cp
03-10-2009, 04:14 PM
Direct link:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123670421128385079.html

Mr. P
03-10-2009, 04:48 PM
They use this same liberal lack of fact dribble when they write about kids being hungry too.

The survey shows 5 of 10 kids say they went to bed hungry..So THAT means kids are not getting enough to eat, right? WRONG!

How many times have you heard a kid say "I'm hungry" before bed? ALL parents have. That's the BS type research/data these liberal MORONS use in their articles..they just don't tell ya so.

I'll bet they surveyed many in this report that were moving...Where do you live Johnny? I donno, nowhere now. BINGO a homeless kid cuz he hasn't been to the new home yet. It fits the liberal agenda though so GOooooo with it.

Trinity
03-11-2009, 06:57 AM
They use this same liberal lack of fact dribble when they write about kids being hungry too.

The survey shows 5 of 10 kids say they went to bed hungry..So THAT means kids are not getting enough to eat, right? WRONG!

How many times have you heard a kid say "I'm hungry" before bed? ALL parents have. That's the BS type research/data these liberal MORONS use in their articles..they just don't tell ya so.

I'll bet they surveyed many in this report that were moving...Where do you live Johnny? I donno, nowhere now. BINGO a homeless kid cuz he hasn't been to the new home yet. It fits the liberal agenda though so GOooooo with it.


That's a typical response in my house...I say it's bed time, and the kid's say I'm hungry.


It's called delay bedtime.

Trigg
03-11-2009, 03:23 PM
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."


By this definition my children and myself were "homeless". We were living with my mother after hubby switched jobs and moved us to another state. We couldn't afford rent because we were still paying our mortgage while trying to sell our house in Michigan.


Asinine to include that group of people. Unless I'm living in a shelter or a box I wouldn't consider myself homeless.

avatar4321
03-11-2009, 03:27 PM
I wonder if they are also using the CHIP bill's definition of a child which is anyone under 30.

glockmail
03-11-2009, 03:30 PM
That's a typical response in my house...I say it's bed time, and the kid's say I'm hungry.


It's called delay bedtime. I have the opposite problem with my son, who's a distance runner in HS.

Jagger
03-11-2009, 03:51 PM
Rush Limbaugh is out of the mainstream and Americans do not share his extremist values.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903110023

jimnyc
03-11-2009, 03:52 PM
Rush Limbaugh is out of the mainstream and Americans do not share his extremist values.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200903110023

Stop posting stuff that has nothing to do with the thread discussion. You have been doing this in MANY threads, rarely leaving citations for the quotes/work you take from other websites. Future infractions will leave your posts/threads removed, thread bans or board bans.

Little-Acorn
03-11-2009, 04:15 PM
And there was much rejoicing.

Trigg
03-11-2009, 04:33 PM
And there was much rejoicing.

:lol: :clap:

Trinity
03-11-2009, 04:35 PM
I wonder if they are also using the CHIP bill's definition of a child which is anyone under 30.

Ok you have peaked my interest would you elaborate on this please. What is this CHIP bill definition of a child?

I am working on something else and wondering if this might be something I will be able to use.

avatar4321
03-11-2009, 06:23 PM
Ok you have peaked my interest would you elaborate on this please. What is this CHIP bill definition of a child?

I am working on something else and wondering if this might be something I will be able to use.

Well, if i remember correctly, about a month or so ago Congress passed some act, probably in the stimulus (I wasnt paying too much attention to it) that provided medical coverage for children up to age 30. Im sure someone who paid more attention would be able to answer more carefully.

Trinity
03-11-2009, 06:36 PM
Well, if i remember correctly, about a month or so ago Congress passed some act, probably in the stimulus (I wasnt paying too much attention to it) that provided medical coverage for children up to age 30. Im sure someone who paid more attention would be able to answer more carefully.

Children up to age 30 really....that's interesting....I am going to have to look into that a little more. That could open up a whole can of worms on this project I am working on. Thank you!

If anyone else has more info on this or a link I would greatly appreciate it. I have some letters, emails, and phone calls to make and I would like to know I have all my ducks in a row.:coffee:

glockmail
03-11-2009, 07:14 PM
:lol: :clap:
2nd that.

Little-Acorn
03-12-2009, 07:57 PM
Children up to age 30 really....that's interesting....I am going to have to look into that a little more. That could open up a whole can of worms on this project I am working on. Thank you!

If anyone else has more info on this or a link I would greatly appreciate it. I have some letters, emails, and phone calls to make and I would like to know I have all my ducks in a row.:coffee:

Nothing new about it. Leftists have often used bizarre "definitions" of children to inflate their statistics, when the real numbers failed to support (or even disproved) their point.

Often people opposing gun rights, will say that umpteen thousands of "children" have been "killed by guns" during this year or that year. They use this "statistic" to insist that we must pass draconian laws restricting guns. They don't mention that most of those "children" are up to age 25, and are gangbangers being shot by other gangbangers, or drug dealers shot by other drug dealers. They have no intention of obeying ANY laws.

What effect these draconian new gun laws we're supposed to pass, will have on these habitual lawbreakers, is never examined very closely... for obvious reasons.

Trinity
03-13-2009, 08:34 AM
Nothing new about it. Leftists have often used bizarre "definitions" of children to inflate their statistics, when the real numbers failed to support (or even disproved) their point.

Often people opposing gun rights, will say that umpteen thousands of "children" have been "killed by guns" during this year or that year. They use this "statistic" to insist that we must pass draconian laws restricting guns. They don't mention that most of those "children" are up to age 25, and are gangbangers being shot by other gangbangers, or drug dealers shot by other drug dealers. They have no intention of obeying ANY laws.

What effect these draconian new gun laws we're supposed to pass, will have on these habitual lawbreakers, is never examined very closely... for obvious reasons.

What I am trying to figure out is how if it relates to guns, drugs, or medical insurance they are classified as children until 25 to 30 years of age. But if it has anything at all to do with sex, they are classified as adults at the age of 18, some even younger depending on the situation.

So if I'm understanding this correctly they are not adults if it involves guns, drugs, or insurance. But if it involves sex, they are adults. WTF :eek:

and to think other country's look to us for guidance!