Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site mtuxn.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!mtuxo!mtuxn!gdf
From: gdf@mtuxn.UUCP (G.FERRAIOLO)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Children, Hunger and School Lunches
Message-ID: <739@mtuxn.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Mar-86 13:50:57 EST
Article-I.D.: mtuxn.739
Posted: Wed Mar 19 13:50:57 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Mar-86 18:08:34 EST
References: <358@ihnet.UUCP> <28200625@inmet.UUCP> <363@ihnet.UUCP> <1029@whuxl.UUCP>, <14@vaxb.calgary.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 36
Xref: lsuc net.politics:3778 net.politics.theory:1003

>Summary: How can the majority be poor?


>In article <1029@whuxl.UUCP>, orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:

>> ...
>> But for many poor children (who are incidentally the majority of
>> the children in this country at this time) ...

>This illustrates how ridiculous this debate can become. By what possible 
>standard can the majority of the children in one of the richest countries
>in the world be poor? I don't doubt that Sevener has read some study that
>reached this conclusion, but its definition of "poor" must have been 
>designed to ensure a scathing report decrying the lack of social programs
>under Reagan...

>Are these children poor compared to those in Bangladesh? If not, perhaps
>it would be best to cease using words like "poor" that fail to communicate
>anything but emotional bias.

>     Radford Neal

Thank you for having the wit to respond to Tim's posting in a rational way.
A clear understanding of what words actually mean is sorely lacking in
many postings in this newsgroup.  

Be prepared for a response that will 'prove' you wrong.

Good Luck

Guy

PS I posted this rather than mailed it since I think it reveals the major
problem with this newsgroup.