Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
Well where are your assumptions coming from?
Your right, 1996.
Explain to me why you used basically the same assumptions to come up with this:
You assume the same as I did.
|
I didn't assume anything.
I used your data along with other relevant data from the US census.
I have experience with this kind of data and I was pointing some things out to you that you missed.
You inaccurately assumed that I was linking the unemployed 30% to the other two figures (subsidized housing and cash welfare recipients). I wasn't, however, I am referring the nearly 30% of the working poor still living below poverty. They are the ones who qualify for government assistance. Now please step back and review the data before accusing someone well-versed in it of assuming things.
EDIT: I looked over my post and see why you made that assumption. You should read my sentence as "not
adequately employed" These people are not the same 30% you cited in your initial post regarding the adult population that is unemployed.
But, regardless of how each of us is going to view this statistical quandry, the fact remains that your position still hasn't come to terms with (ie, explained) the fact that persisitent poverty was a problem for black citizens long before welfare came into existence.