30 replies to this topic

[Bob]

Although he's a bit ideological with his libertarianism, this is a good series. Follow the links to see all the videos. I caught this a few days ago on Fox News.

[Michael Hardner]

Although he's a bit ideological with his libertarianism, this is a good series. Follow the links to see all the videos. I caught this a few days ago on Fox News.

"Lots of America's beggars are not needy"...

How many ?

One could make that claim at any time in history but if that's the metric we use to decide whether to have social services or not, then we basically draw the line and wait for revolution to happen. This is what happened the last time libertarian was tried - Marxism was the result.

[Bob]

"Lots of America's beggars are not needy"...

How many ?

One could make that claim at any time in history but if that's the metric we use to decide whether to have social services or not, then we basically draw the line and wait for revolution to happen. This is what happened the last time libertarian was tried - Marxism was the result.

If you'd simply pay attention to the video, you'd realize he's not specifically talking about social services being available to the poor via the government. Actually, he makes no mention of that - you brought that up. He's simply referring to cash handouts that people give to beggars in the street. If the reward of free money for begging in the street was removed, perhaps these people would be more inclined to seek work.

I know this is certainly true in Jerusalem, as I see the same beggars in the same places all the time. I also admit to giving them money. It's because Jerusalem is always filled with tourists, and there is a lot of free money to be had by looking miserable and begging for money in high-traffic tourist areas. If people stopped giving them money, the reward for begging would be removed.

As far as Stossel's recommendations, he seems to be in agreement with the lady that states it is better to give money to trustworthy organizations than to beggars in the street. I think it's quite obvious that many people who beg shouldn't be begging. In Ottawa I saw it all the time - twenty-somethings begging for money and "squeegee kids". It was really pathetic.

Edited by Bob, 06 April 2011 - 12:42 PM.

[Michael Hardner]

If you'd simply pay attention to the video, you'd realize he's not specifically talking about social services being available to the poor via the government. Actually, he makes no mention of that - you brought that up. He's simply referring to cash handouts that people give to beggars in the street. If the reward of free money for begging in the street was removed, perhaps these people would be more inclined to seek work.

So what ? It's still just story telling and nothing based on numbers, or facts.

Yes, if you put beggars in jail, that's the logical next step for the clamp down. I agree with that much.

As far as Stossel's recommendations, he seems to be in agreement with the lady that states it is better to give money to trustworthy organizations than to beggars in the street. I think it's quite obvious that many people who beg shouldn't be begging. In Ottawa I saw it all the time - twenty-somethings begging for money and "squeegee kids". It was really pathetic.

I would be in favour of that, if we all agreed to increase the level of intelligence of the discussion. Hidden cameras following select beggars around isn't helpful to the discussion - all it proves is that there is a least one person out there who is making a decent living at it.

[Bob]

So what ? It's still just story telling and nothing based on numbers, or facts.

Yes, if you put beggars in jail, that's the logical next step for the clamp down. I agree with that much.



I would be in favour of that, if we all agreed to increase the level of intelligence of the discussion. Hidden cameras following select beggars around isn't helpful to the discussion - all it proves is that there is a least one person out there who is making a decent living at it.

Ever consider the fact that some numbers are difficult to collect? You think Stossel spoke with fifty beggars and only selected the one exception in order to misrepresent the situation? Get real. Stop acting so ultra-scientific, we're dealing with social phenomenons here, which are inherently difficult to quantify. I completely accept Stossel's position, because it is completely compatible with my own personal experience at broad and narrow levels.

Who the hell ever mentioned putting homeless people in jail? The reality is that the homeless people are there because it pays better than jobs they could find, and/or it's simply much easier than jobs they could find. That's the point.

If you've got something specific from the series of videos to comment on or challenge, go for it. I think the point Stossel's making is quite simple and quite legitimate.

[Michael Hardner]

Ever consider the fact that some numbers are difficult to collect?

No.

I do consider the fact that the same governments that do the cuts, also like to cut the statistic gathering so that there's no evidence tying them to the crime.

You think Stossel spoke with fifty beggars and only selected the one exception in order to misrepresent the situation?

No, I don't think they spoke to 50 beggars and that's the point. They found one and did a story on them. Who knows how many there are ?

Get real. Stop acting so ultra-scientific, we're dealing with social phenomenons here, which are inherently difficult to quantify. I completely accept Stossel's position, because it is completely compatible with my own personal experience at broad and narrow levels.

Poppycock. Difficult to quantify so we should examine the problem via Fox news hit pieces ?

Seriously.

If you've got something specific from the series of videos to comment on or challenge, go for it. I think the point Stossel's making is quite simple and quite legitimate.

Simple yes. There are people who rip off the system. Big deal. The right has been bleating about this for years.

[Bob]

No.

I do consider the fact that the same governments that do the cuts, also like to cut the statistic gathering so that there's no evidence tying them to the crime.



No, I don't think they spoke to 50 beggars and that's the point. They found one and did a story on them. Who knows how many there are ?



Poppycock. Difficult to quantify so we should examine the problem via Fox news hit pieces ?

Seriously.



Simple yes. There are people who rip off the system. Big deal. The right has been bleating about this for years.

"Fox News hit piece"? Are you serious? Can you make it any more obvious that you didn't watch the videos? Don't waste more time in here unless you actually watch the videos. There's nothing outrageous in there, at all. If you've got a specific point you want to address, go for it. Otherwise save yourself the energy of ranting about nothing.

[Michael Hardner]

"Fox News hit piece"? Are you serious? Can you make it any more obvious that you didn't watch the videos? Don't waste more time in here unless you actually watch the videos. There's nothing outrageous in there, at all. If you've got a specific point you want to address, go for it. Otherwise save yourself the energy of ranting about nothing.

Videos ? There is 1 video linked, and I watched the first few minutes only.

Yes, there is something outrageous - the premise that a single anecdote means anything at all.

I'll be fair and watch the last few minutes now to see what happens at the end.

[Michael Hardner]

So part 4 looked like it was about Government Subsidies.

In any case, the video format doesn't allow for a reasonable evaluation of problems. It's all just shock value, so I reject it.

[Bob]

It's not "shock value", at all. If you suffer from ADD and are unable to watch any video longer than a few minutes, that's fine. But you're continuing to talk about videos you haven't watched. It's ridiculous. John Stossel is hardly just some ridiculous journalist that you can just write off. It's clear you haven't come to this thread to contribute anything. Spare me your little "anecdotes don't equal science" argumentation. We've seen it before, and not every thread can be turned into a game of statistics. You're acting like you just discovered the scientific method and can no longer evaluate anything based on experience and intuition, anymore.

Edited by Bob, 06 April 2011 - 02:13 PM.

[Michael Hardner]

It's not "shock value", at all.

If you suffer from ADD and are unable to watch any video longer than a few minutes, that's fine. But you're continuing to talk about videos you haven't watched. It's ridiculous.

If you can't make an argument in writing, then the argument is pretty much worthless. I have never heard anybody try to claim that a television-based argument is a valid way to make a broader argument of any kind. I have never heard a reluctance to watch TV characterized as ADD.

You have no idea how interesting this discussion is to me.

[Bob]

So here you are, still posting, and still not saying anything specific about the videos posted. Rather, you just babble about generalities (i.e. "Fox News hit piece") and ask for "evidence" to disprove claims that weren't even made in the videos - which you'd have known had you actually watched the videos prior to commenting.

[Bob]

So part 4 looked like it was about Government Subsidies.

In any case, the video format doesn't allow for a reasonable evaluation of problems. It's all just shock value, so I reject it.

Right, which have nothing at all to do with the first part regarding panhandlers. Perhaps you need some medication for your ADD so that you might have the patience to actually watch a full twenty minutes of video before running back in here to comment on something you haven't watched.

[Pliny]

"Lots of America's beggars are not needy"...

How many ?

One could make that claim at any time in history but if that's the metric we use to decide whether to have social services or not, then we basically draw the line and wait for revolution to happen. This is what happened the last time libertarian was tried - Marxism was the result.

Where was libertarianism tried? The closest thing to it was probably under Andrew Jackson in the States.
Oh....I see, the US is a Marxist State....I read ya!

[Pliny]

I liked the videos, thanks Bob!