The Majority of ‘Homeless’ Children Live in Homes

[Revmitchell]

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:..............

...........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.


More Here

 

[donnA]

I've noticed that generally homeless canmean one of two things. One, have no home to live in, no real shelter, lives on the streets, ina box, squatters in an old abandoned building. Two, those who have no home of their own, but live in other peoples homes ( like meathead).
To me not having a home of your own is not homeless. You are living in a real home, real shelter, with a real working kitchen and bathroom(presumely it works I've lived where it didn't.), you have a bed to sleep in, or prehaps even a couch, either way you have a warm (again presumely so, I've lived where it wasn't warm) place to stay. This raises the numbers for homelessness, making people beleive they mean all these epople, all these children live on the street and in cardboard boxes and eat from trash cans. It isn't true. I've been watching this on tv for years and have seen them count homeless both way.
By the usual standards I've been homeless numberous times. but never without a place to stay.

 

[windcatcher]

When a socialist spin is put to a number such as the number of homeless children...... and the media is compliant in this reporting as generally they observe and report from the only foundation that they know...... that of a socialistic education and society heavily propagandise by socialistic instruction...... There is a purpose to their report..... and that is not to have people to THINK through these issues..... but rather accept the report 'straight' as presented and be shocked and allarmed into thinking we really have a terribly big problem..... too big that we're helpless to do anything about it except to ask government to butt in.

Homelessness can be defined so many ways: Nearly 'everyone' when making a move is temporarily 'homeless' but not destitute. Families which live together under the same roof may be cramped, and some may not have share property rights..... but that really doesn't make them 'homeless'. Families have lived that way for years and through all generations...... and some actually find they have the cooperative character for such arrangements that it serves the economic interests of all parties which share the living under one roof........ so it doesn't always mean that its the lifestyle of the poor though it may be stereotyped as such.

So this expose' , when contrasted to the other posted which said that 1 of every 50 children experience homelessness....... means...... that really less than 1 in 100 is 'homeless' and many of these are sheltered. I still feel the allarm and concerned for any truely without shelter..... but I think this number is small enough that now I can or could do something about it and I don't need uncle sam butting in......... even if all I have is a widow's social security.