Where are you from?
Lumberton N.C.
What is my expercts with writting?
I didn't like writting till in get into college the teachers I before then really didn't teach what writting is all about.
What kind of pop coutlure?
I like hip-hop/pop/folk/R&B/Jazz/Blues
What do I believe in?
God and Myself
Why am I in college?
To be successful in my life.
Monday, September 12, 2011
Homelessness #3
Homelessness is a very huge problem that America has come to face. Millions of people, including children, families, babies, veterans, and the elderly live day after day without food, water or a roof over their heads. People that are mentally ill also have it tough on the streets, which can be extremely confusing to them, and dangerous to the rest of society. This problem must be solved soon, and therefore should be addressed as a major crisis that is affecting our society.The number of homeless families with children has increased significantly over the past decade or so. They are among the fastest growing segments of the homeless population.
Declining wages and changes in the welfare programs account for increasing poverty among families. Declining wages have put housing out of reach for many families: in every state, metropolitan area, county, and town, more than the minimum wage is required to afford a one or two bedroom apartment at Fair Market Rent. In fact the wages needed to afford a two bedroom apartment is more than twice the minimum wage.(Fox19)
The largest program for the poor was the Aid to Families with dependant Children.While demand for emergency food and shelter is increasing, the supply in both categories has failed to keep up. Over half of the cities reported having to cut back on the number of bags of food provided, and to limit the number of times people are allowed to receive food. In every city surveyed, families and individuals relied on food assistance both in emergencies and as a steady source of food over long periods. Fourteen percent of those asking for food were denied due to short supply.
Poor health can contribute to being homeless, and being homeless can lead to poor health. Limited access to health care can make it worse. That's why the health of homeless people in the United States is worse than that of the general population.
Mental health problems
Substance abuse problems
Bronchitis and pneumonia
Problems caused by being outdoors
Wound and skin infections
Many homeless women are victims of domestic or sexual abuse. Homeless children have high rates of emotional and behavioral problems, often from having witnessed abuse.(L.A. Times)
September 7, 2011/Richard Winton/L.A. Times
Sep 12, 2011 2:06/Amber Stegall/FOX19
Declining wages and changes in the welfare programs account for increasing poverty among families. Declining wages have put housing out of reach for many families: in every state, metropolitan area, county, and town, more than the minimum wage is required to afford a one or two bedroom apartment at Fair Market Rent. In fact the wages needed to afford a two bedroom apartment is more than twice the minimum wage.(Fox19)
The largest program for the poor was the Aid to Families with dependant Children.While demand for emergency food and shelter is increasing, the supply in both categories has failed to keep up. Over half of the cities reported having to cut back on the number of bags of food provided, and to limit the number of times people are allowed to receive food. In every city surveyed, families and individuals relied on food assistance both in emergencies and as a steady source of food over long periods. Fourteen percent of those asking for food were denied due to short supply.
Poor health can contribute to being homeless, and being homeless can lead to poor health. Limited access to health care can make it worse. That's why the health of homeless people in the United States is worse than that of the general population.
Many homeless women are victims of domestic or sexual abuse. Homeless children have high rates of emotional and behavioral problems, often from having witnessed abuse.(L.A. Times)
September 7, 2011/Richard Winton/L.A. Times
Sep 12, 2011 2:06/Amber Stegall/FOX19
No Fly Zone #2
It's dangerous: Like the no-fly zone in Iraq from 1991-2003,the enforcement of such a policy would be run by United States and it junior partner, the British. It means war: a no-fly zone is worthless unless the United States is prepared to back it up with overwheling miliary force.
Obama administration officials held talks with European and other allied governments as they readied plans for the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya to prevent further killings of civilians by forces loyal to Colonel Qaddafi.They were also discussing whether the American military could disrupt communications to prevent Colonel Qaddafi from broadcasting in Libya. In addition, the administration was looking at whether the military could be used to set up a corridor in neighboring Tunisia or Egypt to assist refugees.(CNN)
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy signed Italy's treaty with Libya in August 2008, calls on Italy to pay Libya $5 billion over 20 years. In, Libya pledged to help block the flow of illegal immigrants to Italy. But the treaty also contains clause complicated Italy's position in the event of international military intervention in Libya. In it' Italy pledges not to use "direct or indirect" military force against Libya, or to allow the use of it's territory. There are several United States and NATO bases in Italy. An Italian Foreign Ministry spokesman -noted that Italy had suspended the treaty,not revoked it.
I take arguments for a no-fly zone based on more traditional considerations of national interest more seriously. America does have an important interest in secuing the supply of oil from the Middle East. Libyan oil is not critical to our supply, however, and this operation does not appear to be an attempt to send a signal about the need to stabilize oil flow. We also have an interst in making sure that Middle East governments do not support terrorism, especially if those governments also have active nuclear programs. Most would rather see us convey a clear message that a resumption of terror sponsorship and/or a nuclear program would not be tolerated,than to have us risk a complex intervention.(Time world Magazine)
So I oppose the establishment of a no-fly/no-drive zone, which is tantamount to a commitment to overthrow Qaddafi with grounds troops, if necessary. Shoul air attacks fail to work, we either go in and finish the job with troops, or make ourselves look weak by initiating a military action we cannot or will not carry through to a favorable conclusion. I don't think the risks are worth it.
March 18, 2011|By Paul Armstrong, CNN
Mar. 19, 2011 |Vivienne Walt / Paris ,Time World Magazine
Obama administration officials held talks with European and other allied governments as they readied plans for the possible imposition of a no-fly zone over Libya to prevent further killings of civilians by forces loyal to Colonel Qaddafi.They were also discussing whether the American military could disrupt communications to prevent Colonel Qaddafi from broadcasting in Libya. In addition, the administration was looking at whether the military could be used to set up a corridor in neighboring Tunisia or Egypt to assist refugees.(CNN)
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy signed Italy's treaty with Libya in August 2008, calls on Italy to pay Libya $5 billion over 20 years. In, Libya pledged to help block the flow of illegal immigrants to Italy. But the treaty also contains clause complicated Italy's position in the event of international military intervention in Libya. In it' Italy pledges not to use "direct or indirect" military force against Libya, or to allow the use of it's territory. There are several United States and NATO bases in Italy. An Italian Foreign Ministry spokesman -noted that Italy had suspended the treaty,not revoked it.
I take arguments for a no-fly zone based on more traditional considerations of national interest more seriously. America does have an important interest in secuing the supply of oil from the Middle East. Libyan oil is not critical to our supply, however, and this operation does not appear to be an attempt to send a signal about the need to stabilize oil flow. We also have an interst in making sure that Middle East governments do not support terrorism, especially if those governments also have active nuclear programs. Most would rather see us convey a clear message that a resumption of terror sponsorship and/or a nuclear program would not be tolerated,than to have us risk a complex intervention.(Time world Magazine)
So I oppose the establishment of a no-fly/no-drive zone, which is tantamount to a commitment to overthrow Qaddafi with grounds troops, if necessary. Shoul air attacks fail to work, we either go in and finish the job with troops, or make ourselves look weak by initiating a military action we cannot or will not carry through to a favorable conclusion. I don't think the risks are worth it.
March 18, 2011|By Paul Armstrong, CNN
Mar. 19, 2011 |Vivienne Walt / Paris ,Time World Magazine
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)