> Dear List:
> I really have no interest in taking EITHER side of this issue. However, I
> notice if I wait long enough, the statistics come to me without my even
> having to search for them. Bear in mind I have no emotional or other
> attachment to either side of this issue. But I must point out that
> statistics like those below:
> The March 1998 Current
> >Population Survey clearly states that the number of individuals living
> >in poverty and receiving Federal and State economic help is 24.4 million
> >for your so-called “Whites”, and 8.3 million for “Hispanics”. So my
> >tax money is mostly going to be spent, not in “Hispanics”, but in
> >losers like you.
> while helpful in many ways, do not show us the entire picture. Especially
> when there are so many MORE "whites" in the US than Hispanics. Viewing the
> percentages below:
> >White ............ 80%
> >African-American ............ 11%
> >Hispanic ............ 6.2%
> >Asian & Pacific Islander ............ 1.6%
> >Native American ............ 0.7%
> The next question that must be asked is what percentage of the 80% white
> population is on welfare?
> What percentage of the 6.2% Hispanic population is on welfare?
> And if Hispanic tax dollars are being spent on welfare for whites, what
> percentage of the white population pays taxes to support welfare (for both
> hispanics AND whites)?
> Statistics in and of themselves are a helpful tool. But they do not provide
> full information unless placed in proper context.
> There are probably even better issues to address with this (such as what IS
> the total population of the US right now, so someone anal enough to wish to
> determine how MANY people these percentages represent in order to compare
> these numbers to the 24.4 M and the 8.3M provided above) but this is it for
> I don't even DO math.
Pamela makes a very interesting point ... it is the same made by people who
note that Black people are considerably over-represented in the american
prison-system. The problem is that both sides of the argument can use these
statistics, and that makes their usefulness questionable. An racist may claim
that Blacks are inherently violent and lazy by nature, so they commit more
crimes than the peaceful, hardworking white majority (pardon me for a moment, I
feel ill just typing such nonsense), and that is the reason that they are
over-represented in jails. On the other side of the coin, someone may argue
that blacks are not only over-represented in jails, but also in any census
involving poverty. Since all are not created equal in the US (how does someone
whose parents, growing up in the age of segregation and therefore uneducated and
underpaid, afford the 22,000US$ a year tuition at Cornell, for example), the
poor have a much harder time becoming successful than someone whose mommy and
daddy pay for Princeton. Similar circumstances, I am sure, hold back many
Hispanics. Statistics are always shady, because they show only one facet of a
problem which has many, many different sides.