Politics

Have you ever heard the term “lies, damned lies and statistics”?

When I say that 40 million people in the USA live in poverty, is your response going to be “well, that’s only 11%!” And feel good about yourself?

Did you read my actual post? My point is about how actual accurate statistics work and the logical conclusions that must follow from them. Not about whatever particular statistics you've read and chosen to disagree with today. My points still hold regardless of whether we're talking about statistics you agree with or not.

Or are you going to think “shit. That’s more than the entire population of Canada.” And then rethink on these social programs, their cost and their effectiveness?

If you read what I actually said you'll notice part of what I was asking you was what is your suggestion for what to do in place of these programs you're claiming are failures? You disliking a particular statistic doesn't address that question.

It’s fairly clear, when you start digging into these numbers that the more money spent to fight poverty doesn’t correspond to less people living in poverty. And if throwing money at the problem doesn’t help, it’s probably pretty scary for you to try to sus out what the alternatives might be.

Yes, basic familiarity with ratios and the fact that the population is increasing also leads us to this conclusion i.e. basic elementary school math also tells us this. I addressed this in my previous post to you actually.

Why even bother to respond if you're going to address none of my points, answer none of the questions I've asked you and instead whine and moan about statistics that are entirely irrelevant to my point? If you would read what I said you'll notice that my points and questions don't change whether the population is 10 people or 10 million people, or whether the ratio of people living in poverty to the total pop is 100% or 1%.