PDA

View Full Version : Re: National Parks Being Ruined By Illegals


MJL
July 6th 04, 12:49 AM
On 5 Jul 2004 09:05:18 -0700, (Tom) wrote:

>"stvfrmco" > wrote in message et>...
>> Washington is allowing our national parks to be destroyed by illegals and
>> budget cuts.
>>
>> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C124637%2C00.html
>>
>>
>> The national parks' budget and staffing restraints have been capturing
>> public attention in recent years, especially after one young ranger was shot
>> and killed in 2002 by drug smugglers crossing the Mexican border into
>> Arizona's Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument (search).
>>
>> That same year, another ranger was gunned down by a national park visitor on
>> Hawaii's Big Island when the ranger asked the man to leash his dog.
>>
>> The Organ Pipe Cactus incident was indicative of a larger problem the scenic
>> site - identified by the Fraternal Order of Police as the most dangerous
>> national park in the U.S. - has been having with rampant border jumping and
>> drug smuggling.
>>
>> In April 2004 alone more than 200 illegal aliens were arrested as they tried
>> to enter the U.S., the northeastern park superintendent said.
>>
>> Organ Pipe visitors Helga and Rich Foulk, of Ambler, Pa., found themselves
>> right in the thick of the border-crossing phenomenon in April when they
>> visited the preserve for the second time in three years. The couple was
>> camping in one of the designated areas when the trampling of footsteps woke
>> them up about 2 a.m.
>>
>> "In the middle of the night, a group of 20 immigrants walked up to our tent.
>> Our tent was right in the path of their trail," said Helga Foulk, a
>> 32-year-old engineer. "Both of us were very surprised. Once they figured out
>> we were tourists, they walked on."
>>
>> That same trip, the Foulks were dismayed to find piles of trash that
>> appeared to be left from the illegals along the way - thousands of empty
>> water bottles, bits of paper, medicine vials, electrolyte packages and other
>> garbage.
>>
>> The National Park Service says it's particularly worried about the problems
>> at the border and is doing what it can to get them under control.
>
>It would be hard to disagree with that slogan, "a good illegal alien
>is a dead illegal alien."
>
>Tom

That is just sick.

America gives Mexicans every incentive to come here. They are allowed
to work and live essentially unobstructed for as long as they like.
And to add a little more incentive there is talk of an amnesty for all
illegals. As someone who lived in an area with a very large
population of illegals I think one of the more worrisome things from
an American culture perspective is that if they can stay here long
enough to procreate then that thar is an honest to goodness American
citizen.

Personally I think Bush ought to quit focusing on gay marriage and
change THAT little bit of the Constitution. It is a small lever that
is allowing huge influxes of illegals that we'll never be able to
deport because their child is a US citizen. That is the dirty
not-so-little and not-so-secret thing that does not seem to get much
air time.


--
Live each day as though it were the first of many more to come.

Donovan Rebbechi
July 6th 04, 05:34 AM
On 2004-07-05, MJL > wrote:

> Personally I think Bush ought to quit focusing on gay marriage and
> change THAT little bit of the Constitution. It is a small lever that
> is allowing huge influxes of illegals that we'll never be able to
> deport because their child is a US citizen.

But why not deport them anyway ?

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Proton Soup
July 7th 04, 01:51 AM
On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 00:52:02 GMT, MJL > wrote:

>On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 04:34:50 +0000 (UTC), Donovan Rebbechi
> wrote:
>
>>On 2004-07-05, MJL > wrote:
>>
>>> Personally I think Bush ought to quit focusing on gay marriage and
>>> change THAT little bit of the Constitution. It is a small lever that
>>> is allowing huge influxes of illegals that we'll never be able to
>>> deport because their child is a US citizen.
>>
>>But why not deport them anyway ?
>>
>>Cheers,
>
>Because the "them" includes an honest to goodness US citizen.

Nonsense, the child can stay.

-----------
Proton Soup

"Homo sapiens non urinat in ventum."

MJL
July 7th 04, 01:52 AM
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 04:34:50 +0000 (UTC), Donovan Rebbechi
> wrote:

>On 2004-07-05, MJL > wrote:
>
>> Personally I think Bush ought to quit focusing on gay marriage and
>> change THAT little bit of the Constitution. It is a small lever that
>> is allowing huge influxes of illegals that we'll never be able to
>> deport because their child is a US citizen.
>
>But why not deport them anyway ?
>
>Cheers,

Because the "them" includes an honest to goodness US citizen.


--
Live each day as though it were the first of many more to come.

John Hanson
July 11th 04, 07:41 PM
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 10:23:19 -0600, bowman > wrote
in misc.fitness.weights:

>John Hanson wrote:
>
>> There is also a history of Indian governments being corrupt as hell.
>
>The is a history of governments being corrupt as hell...

Not nearly on the scale of Indian governments.

John Hanson
July 12th 04, 04:45 AM
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:26:41 -0600, bowman > wrote
in misc.fitness.weights:

>John Hanson wrote:
>
>>
>> How do you consider this help? I was referring to financial help.
>> Having said that, there is nothing stopping states from allowing
>> gambling.
>
>How about some examples of non-subsidized capitalism in action that do not
>involve gambling?

How about the millions of Americans that have pulled themselves up by
their bootstraps and were better people because of it. People with
self worth, a sense of rugged individualism who never had to rely on
handouts from people who confiscate other people's money.

bowman
July 12th 04, 04:50 AM
John Hanson wrote:

> Not nearly on the scale of Indian governments.

While Tammany was supposedly named after a Delaware chief, it was not run by
Indians.

Timberwoof
July 12th 04, 05:54 AM
In article >,
John Hanson > wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:26:41 -0600, bowman > wrote
> in misc.fitness.weights:
>
> >John Hanson wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> How do you consider this help? I was referring to financial help.
> >> Having said that, there is nothing stopping states from allowing
> >> gambling.
> >
> >How about some examples of non-subsidized capitalism in action that do not
> >involve gambling?
>
> How about the millions of Americans that have pulled themselves up by
> their bootstraps and were better people because of it. People with
> self worth, a sense of rugged individualism who never had to rely on
> handouts from people who confiscate other people's money.

"Millions." What a joke. The right wing is banking on the idea that
people believe that myth.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html

Erythritol
July 12th 04, 06:33 AM
Timberwoof > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> John Hanson > wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:26:41 -0600, bowman > wrote
> > in misc.fitness.weights:
> >
> > >John Hanson wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> How do you consider this help? I was referring to financial help.
> > >> Having said that, there is nothing stopping states from allowing
> > >> gambling.
> > >
> > >How about some examples of non-subsidized capitalism in action that do
not
> > >involve gambling?
> >
> > How about the millions of Americans that have pulled themselves up by
> > their bootstraps and were better people because of it. People with
> > self worth, a sense of rugged individualism who never had to rely on
> > handouts from people who confiscate other people's money.
>
> "Millions." What a joke. The right wing is banking on the idea that
> people believe that myth.

except it isn't a myth

if you check the stats for income quintile mobility, you will realize that
MILLIONS of americans pull themselves out of poverty

whit

>
> --
> Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
> http://www.timberwoof.com
> Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html

Lucas Buck
July 12th 04, 10:50 AM
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 17:18:03 GMT, Timberwoof > wrote:

>In article >,
> John M. Williams > wrote:
>
>> Timberwoof > wrote:
>> >
>> > John M. Williams > wrote:
>> >
>> >> "DRS" > wrote:
>> >> >"Bownse" > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >[...]
>> >> >
>> >> >> It's all lip service anyway. I and another Native American were
>> >> >> attending a mandatory diversity class. After the initial introduction
>> >> >> where a lot of minority races were mentioned, the rest of the day was
>> >> >> spent talking about blacks and Hispanics. The other guy (who is full
>> >> >> while I am only quarter, so he looks the part more) raised his hand
>> >> >> and asked the question I'd been thinking. Where's all this talk about
>> >> >> diversity? All you're talking about are the 2 major minorities. We
>> >> >> were told by the national rep (regional HR honcho) that "Native
>> >> >> Americans are statistically insignificant; they have been assimilated
>> >> >> into the major culture."
>> >> >
>> >> >Has anyone told all those folk on the reservations?
>> >>
>> >> Doesn't matter. The American left designs it's social programs around
>> >> how many votes it will get in the elections. Native Americans don't
>> >> form a big enough voting block for them to care.
>> >
>> >The American right designs its industrial programs around how many
>> >financial supporters it will get for the elections.
>>
>> By that logic, liberals should be winning all the elections. Surely
>> it's simpler to buy votes with social welfare payments to low-income
>> people than to placate a few wealthy people, who still only have one
>> vote each.
>>
>> The one-person-one-vote scenario pretty much debunks the classic
>> liberal fallacy that rightist politicians only favor a few wealthy
>> elitists. If they offered nothing to the middle- and lower-income
>> members of society, then they would get no votes from those sectors.
>> Were that the case, they would never win an election.
>
>It's not as simple as you'd like it to be.
>
>The so-called "liberal media" is owned by conservative rich people, and
>it slants its news coverage in favor of right-wing policies and
>candidates. This has been demonstrated by numerous studies from
>independent and well-respected research groups.

Name five.

Alan Moore
July 13th 04, 02:06 AM
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 05:33:40 GMT, "Erythritol" > wrote:

>
>Timberwoof > wrote in message
...
>> In article >,
>> John Hanson > wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:26:41 -0600, bowman > wrote
>> > in misc.fitness.weights:
>> >
>> > >John Hanson wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>
>> > >> How do you consider this help? I was referring to financial help.
>> > >> Having said that, there is nothing stopping states from allowing
>> > >> gambling.
>> > >
>> > >How about some examples of non-subsidized capitalism in action that do
>not
>> > >involve gambling?
>> >
>> > How about the millions of Americans that have pulled themselves up by
>> > their bootstraps and were better people because of it. People with
>> > self worth, a sense of rugged individualism who never had to rely on
>> > handouts from people who confiscate other people's money.
>>
>> "Millions." What a joke. The right wing is banking on the idea that
>> people believe that myth.
>
>except it isn't a myth
>
>if you check the stats for income quintile mobility, you will realize that
>MILLIONS of americans pull themselves out of poverty

Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
does that say for the state of the nation?

Al Moore
DoD 734

Bownse
July 13th 04, 06:02 AM
Alan Moore wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 05:33:40 GMT, "Erythritol" > wrote:
>
>
>>Timberwoof > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>In article >,
>>> John Hanson > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:26:41 -0600, bowman > wrote
>>>>in misc.fitness.weights:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>John Hanson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>How do you consider this help? I was referring to financial help.
>>>>>>Having said that, there is nothing stopping states from allowing
>>>>>>gambling.
>>>>>
>>>>>How about some examples of non-subsidized capitalism in action that do
>>
>>not
>>
>>>>>involve gambling?
>>>>
>>>>How about the millions of Americans that have pulled themselves up by
>>>>their bootstraps and were better people because of it. People with
>>>>self worth, a sense of rugged individualism who never had to rely on
>>>>handouts from people who confiscate other people's money.
>>>
>>>"Millions." What a joke. The right wing is banking on the idea that
>>>people believe that myth.
>>
>>except it isn't a myth
>>
>>if you check the stats for income quintile mobility, you will realize that
>>MILLIONS of americans pull themselves out of poverty
>
>
> Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
> ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
> who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
> greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
> does that say for the state of the nation?
>
> Al Moore
> DoD 734

"more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?

--

Mark Johnson, Ft Worth; IBA#288; CM#1; EOB, DoD#2021; LPR#50
2003 FJR1300 "EČ"; http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org

John M. Williams
July 13th 04, 06:30 AM
Bownse > wrote:

>Alan Moore wrote:
>>
>> Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
>> ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
>> who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
>> greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
>> does that say for the state of the nation?
>
>"more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
>of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?

A chicken in every pot and premium channels for all.

Erythritol
July 13th 04, 06:46 AM
Bownse > wrote in message
m...
> Alan Moore wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 05:33:40 GMT, "Erythritol" > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Timberwoof > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >>>In article >,
> >>> John Hanson > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:26:41 -0600, bowman > wrote
> >>>>in misc.fitness.weights:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>John Hanson wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>How do you consider this help? I was referring to financial help.
> >>>>>>Having said that, there is nothing stopping states from allowing
> >>>>>>gambling.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>How about some examples of non-subsidized capitalism in action that
do
> >>
> >>not
> >>
> >>>>>involve gambling?
> >>>>
> >>>>How about the millions of Americans that have pulled themselves up by
> >>>>their bootstraps and were better people because of it. People with
> >>>>self worth, a sense of rugged individualism who never had to rely on
> >>>>handouts from people who confiscate other people's money.
> >>>
> >>>"Millions." What a joke. The right wing is banking on the idea that
> >>>people believe that myth.
> >>
> >>except it isn't a myth
> >>
> >>if you check the stats for income quintile mobility, you will realize
that
> >>MILLIONS of americans pull themselves out of poverty
> >
> >
> > Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
> > ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
> > who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
> > greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
> > does that say for the state of the nation?
> >
> > Al Moore
> > DoD 734
>
> "more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
> of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?
>

it's a ridiculous claim. during the depression, poverty meant LITERALLY not
having enough to eat.

now, poverty means a much higher chance of obesity than middle class. so it
does NOT mean the same thing.

do the math

whit

> --
>
> Mark Johnson, Ft Worth; IBA#288; CM#1; EOB, DoD#2021; LPR#50
> 2003 FJR1300 "EČ"; http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org

Erythritol
July 13th 04, 06:56 AM
Alan Moore > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 05:33:40 GMT, "Erythritol" > wrote:
>
> >
> >Timberwoof > wrote in message
> ...
> >> In article >,
> >> John Hanson > wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:26:41 -0600, bowman > wrote
> >> > in misc.fitness.weights:
> >> >
> >> > >John Hanson wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >>
> >> > >> How do you consider this help? I was referring to financial help.
> >> > >> Having said that, there is nothing stopping states from allowing
> >> > >> gambling.
> >> > >
> >> > >How about some examples of non-subsidized capitalism in action that
do
> >not
> >> > >involve gambling?
> >> >
> >> > How about the millions of Americans that have pulled themselves up by
> >> > their bootstraps and were better people because of it. People with
> >> > self worth, a sense of rugged individualism who never had to rely on
> >> > handouts from people who confiscate other people's money.
> >>
> >> "Millions." What a joke. The right wing is banking on the idea that
> >> people believe that myth.
> >
> >except it isn't a myth
> >
> >if you check the stats for income quintile mobility, you will realize
that
> >MILLIONS of americans pull themselves out of poverty
>
> Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
> ever have been before?

i'm talking about income quintiles.

by definition only 20% can be in the bottom quintile. so, your point
(regardless of it's veracity or lack thereof) is irrelevant

i am talking about income quintile mobility.

please note,. for example, the # of fortune 500 members who have at one
point in their life been int he bottom quintile.

might surprise you, and others who claim it's all about "privilege"


Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
> who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
> greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
> does that say for the state of the nation?
>
> Al Moore
> DoD 734

the state of the nation is quite good. bush's economy was SUCKING major,
and he has spent money like a bored housewife with a Visa (which disturbs
me, as a fiscal conservative) , but it has turned around rather nicely. not
great. but good

whit

Timberwoof
July 13th 04, 08:03 AM
In article et>,
"Erythritol" > wrote:

> i'm talking about income quintiles.
>
> by definition only 20% can be in the bottom quintile. so, your point
> (regardless of it's veracity or lack thereof) is irrelevant

What percentage of the nation's wealth is owned by each quintile?


> i am talking about income quintile mobility.
>
> please note,. for example, the # of fortune 500 members who have at one
> point in their life been int he bottom quintile.

How many is that?

> might surprise you, and others who claim it's all about "privilege"

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html

Seth Breidbart
July 14th 04, 02:06 AM
In article >,
Timberwoof > wrote:
>In article et>,
> "Erythritol" > wrote:
>
>> i'm talking about income quintiles.
>>
>> by definition only 20% can be in the bottom quintile. so, your point
>> (regardless of it's veracity or lack thereof) is irrelevant
>
>What percentage of the nation's wealth is owned by each quintile?

What percentage of the nation's wealth is owned by people who were in
each quintile 20 years ago?

If someone was in the bottom quintile 20 years ago, is he more likely
to be in the top quintile or the bottom quintile today?

Seth
--
Of course, common logic fails to hold up here on mfw, as a general rule
of thumb. -- Lyle McDonald

Alan Moore
July 14th 04, 02:09 AM
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 05:02:24 GMT, Bownse > wrote:

>Alan Moore wrote:
>
<snip>
>>
>> Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
>> ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
>> who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
>> greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
>> does that say for the state of the nation?
>>
>> Al Moore
>> DoD 734
>
>"more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
>of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?

There are a couple of definitions of poverty in use. My expression
"more than ever" may have been an exaggeration, the depression of the
mid 1890s was a pretty severe one.

One of the measures of poverty is "food security." A family is said to
be "food secure" if, at all times during the year they had access to
enough food for a healthy active life. In 2002, 11.1 percent of the US
population was not "food secure" up from 10.7 percent in 2001.

http://www.fact-index.com/p/po/poverty_in_the_united_states.html

The traditional measure of poverty, the "poverty line" is a relic of
Johnson's "war on poverty" of the 1960s. It failed (and continues to
fail) to allow for regional variotions in the cost of living, among
other things. A childhood friend of my wife was on food stamps and
various forms of welfare through high school, back in the Johnson era.
They were well below the poverty line. When his grandfater died and
they could sell the orchard, they became multi-millionaires.

Al Moore
DoD 734

Charles Soto
July 14th 04, 03:37 AM
John M. Williams > wrote:

> Bownse > wrote:
>
> >Alan Moore wrote:
> >>
> >> Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
> >> ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
> >> who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
> >> greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
> >> does that say for the state of the nation?
> >
> >"more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
> >of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?
>
> A chicken in every pot and premium channels for all.

Even the Tuxxxedo Network?

Charles

--
Charles Soto - Austin, TX *** 1999 GSF1200S, DoD No. "uno"

("Meepmeep" is "rr," as in "roadrunner.")

Donate to John Kerry's presidential campaign:

https://contribute.johnkerry.com/index.html?source_code=00018096

Seth Breidbart
July 14th 04, 06:30 AM
In article >,
Alan Moore > wrote:

>One of the measures of poverty is "food security." A family is said to
>be "food secure" if, at all times during the year they had access to
>enough food for a healthy active life. In 2002, 11.1 percent of the US
>population was not "food secure" up from 10.7 percent in 2001.
>
>http://www.fact-index.com/p/po/poverty_in_the_united_states.html

How many of those people who are not "food secure" are also obese?

Seth
--
Don't ever masturbate after getting capsaicin on your hands. -- Patrick Arnold

Bownse
July 14th 04, 11:50 PM
Alan Moore wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 05:02:24 GMT, Bownse > wrote:
>
>
>>Alan Moore wrote:
>>
>
> <snip>
>
>>>Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
>>>ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
>>>who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
>>>greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
>>>does that say for the state of the nation?
>>>
>>>Al Moore
>>>DoD 734
>>
>>"more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
>>of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?
>
>
> There are a couple of definitions of poverty in use. My expression
> "more than ever" may have been an exaggeration, the depression of the
> mid 1890s was a pretty severe one.
>
> One of the measures of poverty is "food security." A family is said to
> be "food secure" if, at all times during the year they had access to
> enough food for a healthy active life. In 2002, 11.1 percent of the US
> population was not "food secure" up from 10.7 percent in 2001.
>
> http://www.fact-index.com/p/po/poverty_in_the_united_states.html
>
> The traditional measure of poverty, the "poverty line" is a relic of
> Johnson's "war on poverty" of the 1960s. It failed (and continues to
> fail) to allow for regional variotions in the cost of living, among
> other things. A childhood friend of my wife was on food stamps and
> various forms of welfare through high school, back in the Johnson era.
> They were well below the poverty line. When his grandfater died and
> they could sell the orchard, they became multi-millionaires.
>
> Al Moore
> DoD 734

There was a depression in the 1890's? I thought it was in the 1930's.

--

Mark Johnson, Ft Worth; IBA#288; CM#1; EOB, DoD#2021; LPR#50
2003 FJR1300 "EČ"; http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org

Alan Moore
July 15th 04, 03:39 AM
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 22:50:53 GMT, Bownse > wrote:

>Alan Moore wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 05:02:24 GMT, Bownse > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Alan Moore wrote:
>>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
>>>>ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
>>>>who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
>>>>greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
>>>>does that say for the state of the nation?
>>>>
>>>>Al Moore
>>>>DoD 734
>>>
>>>"more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
>>>of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?
>>
>>
>> There are a couple of definitions of poverty in use. My expression
>> "more than ever" may have been an exaggeration, the depression of the
>> mid 1890s was a pretty severe one.
>>
>> One of the measures of poverty is "food security." A family is said to
>> be "food secure" if, at all times during the year they had access to
>> enough food for a healthy active life. In 2002, 11.1 percent of the US
>> population was not "food secure" up from 10.7 percent in 2001.
>>
>> http://www.fact-index.com/p/po/poverty_in_the_united_states.html
>>
>> The traditional measure of poverty, the "poverty line" is a relic of
>> Johnson's "war on poverty" of the 1960s. It failed (and continues to
>> fail) to allow for regional variotions in the cost of living, among
>> other things. A childhood friend of my wife was on food stamps and
>> various forms of welfare through high school, back in the Johnson era.
>> They were well below the poverty line. When his grandfater died and
>> they could sell the orchard, they became multi-millionaires.
>>
>> Al Moore
>> DoD 734
>
>There was a depression in the 1890's? I thought it was in the 1930's.

The one in the 1890s was much, much worse, though fortunately not so
long in duration. They used to call it "the great depression" at least
as late as the mid 1930s, to distinguish it from the relatively less
severe one they were then experiencing. That depression was one of the
driving forces behind the Alaskan gold rush and the Spanish-American
war.

Whatever happened to public education. Don't they teach history any
more?

Al Moore
DoD 734

Alan Moore
July 15th 04, 03:40 AM
On 14 Jul 2004 01:30:49 -0400, (Seth Breidbart) wrote:

>In article >,
>Alan Moore > wrote:
>
>>One of the measures of poverty is "food security." A family is said to
>>be "food secure" if, at all times during the year they had access to
>>enough food for a healthy active life. In 2002, 11.1 percent of the US
>>population was not "food secure" up from 10.7 percent in 2001.
>>
>>http://www.fact-index.com/p/po/poverty_in_the_united_states.html
>
>How many of those people who are not "food secure" are also obese?

Beats me. I don't think anyone's searched for a correlation.

During my childhood, however, I was among the "food insecure" and I am
by no stretch of the imagination obese, nor is anyone else in my
family.

Al Moore
DoD 734

Bownse
July 15th 04, 04:48 AM
Alan Moore wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 22:50:53 GMT, Bownse > wrote:
>
>
>>Alan Moore wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 05:02:24 GMT, Bownse > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Alan Moore wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>>Then how come there are so many more living in poverty now than there
>>>>>ever have been before? Are those of us who grew up "middle class" and
>>>>>who merely work hard and get an education being impoverished in
>>>>>greater numbers than the poverty stricken are escaping poverty? What
>>>>>does that say for the state of the nation?
>>>>>
>>>>>Al Moore
>>>>>DoD 734
>>>>
>>>>"more living in poverty now than ever": says who and by what definition
>>>>of "pverty"? Is it poverty because they only have basic cable and 1 car?
>>>
>>>
>>>There are a couple of definitions of poverty in use. My expression
>>>"more than ever" may have been an exaggeration, the depression of the
>>>mid 1890s was a pretty severe one.
>>>
>>>One of the measures of poverty is "food security." A family is said to
>>>be "food secure" if, at all times during the year they had access to
>>>enough food for a healthy active life. In 2002, 11.1 percent of the US
>>>population was not "food secure" up from 10.7 percent in 2001.
>>>
>>>http://www.fact-index.com/p/po/poverty_in_the_united_states.html
>>>
>>>The traditional measure of poverty, the "poverty line" is a relic of
>>>Johnson's "war on poverty" of the 1960s. It failed (and continues to
>>>fail) to allow for regional variotions in the cost of living, among
>>>other things. A childhood friend of my wife was on food stamps and
>>>various forms of welfare through high school, back in the Johnson era.
>>>They were well below the poverty line. When his grandfater died and
>>>they could sell the orchard, they became multi-millionaires.
>>>
>>>Al Moore
>>>DoD 734
>>
>>There was a depression in the 1890's? I thought it was in the 1930's.
>
>
> The one in the 1890s was much, much worse, though fortunately not so
> long in duration. They used to call it "the great depression" at least
> as late as the mid 1930s, to distinguish it from the relatively less
> severe one they were then experiencing. That depression was one of the
> driving forces behind the Alaskan gold rush and the Spanish-American
> war.
>
> Whatever happened to public education. Don't they teach history any
> more?
>
> Al Moore
> DoD 734

Admitedly it was a bit before my time.

--

Mark Johnson, Ft Worth; IBA#288; CM#1; EOB, DoD#2021; LPR#50
2003 FJR1300 "EČ"; http://www.bikes-n-spikes.org

bowman
July 15th 04, 05:58 AM
Alan Moore wrote:

> That depression was one of the
> driving forces behind the Alaskan gold rush and the Spanish-American
> war.

Nothing like a little war to perk up a sick economy... Right, George?

keith,s
July 15th 04, 03:28 PM
bowman > wrote in message >...
> Alan Moore wrote:
>
> > That depression was one of the
> > driving forces behind the Alaskan gold rush and the Spanish-American
> > war.
>
> Nothing like a little war to perk up a sick economy... Right, George?

This is so sadly true in this day and age. Now how many of you recall
that it was the PRESS(more precisly the Herst organization) that
instigated the spanish-american war?

-----
KtN
Keep piling on the BS and pretty soon people think it's the truth and
a good
thing.

Alan Moore
July 16th 04, 02:05 AM
On 15 Jul 2004 07:28:31 -0700, (keith,s)
wrote:

>bowman > wrote in message >...
>> Alan Moore wrote:
>>
>> > That depression was one of the
>> > driving forces behind the Alaskan gold rush and the Spanish-American
>> > war.
>>
>> Nothing like a little war to perk up a sick economy... Right, George?
>
>This is so sadly true in this day and age. Now how many of you recall
>that it was the PRESS(more precisly the Herst organization) that
>instigated the spanish-american war?

The tale is told of how Hearst sent a photographer to cover the war.
He got a telegram complaining of boredom and a lakc of newsworthy
events to photograph.

Hearst: "You provide the photographs. I'll provide the war."

Al Moore
DoD 734