39% of American homeless are kids.

Well... Obama now has a near 96% chance of winning the election according to 538.com.

I've been a Obama supporter for quite a while now, and am happy to see him pull away.

Tonights debate will be interesting, especially if McCain goes for the trap of "Ayers" that he says he will.

Look for Obama to take this one as well.. I'll be busy playing drinking games to the debate again... I hope I don't draw the phrase "My friends"

Who are mostly homeless with their parents?

Aside from which... America doesn't have anymore of a problem with homelessness then Canada.

Despite the fact that it should be easier for Canada to deal with homelessness... and they "spread the wealth" around more.

Homeless people don't pay taxes... and the money Obama plans to take from the rich isn't going towards anything to help the homeless.

A large part of the homeless can't be helped... unless you institutionalize a lot of them.  If you count a mental hospital a home...

Another part can be helped, but won't be.  (Because their parents don't want to give away their kids... even for a short while)

Another part really don't want to be helped. (Drug addicts.)

Yeah I haven't come up with a good solution for it yet either.  (But I do think there are more people in prison for drug possession than there are homeless people, and I'd rather legalize the drugs and convert some prisons to homeless shelters and mental institutions, which would cost less.)

I just think the whole free market idea in America grew out of an outdated Puritan work ethic with an awkward reverse predestination argument that rich people are going to heaven and you can already tell because G-d made them rich because they were good people, and the poor are going to hell and you can already tell because G-d is already punishing them, so making rich people share is making G-d's chosen share G-d's rewards with sinners.  In fact, the way some free market people (like an old roommate of mine) blame the homeless for opting out of capitalism because they're lazy and greedy almost sounds like a religious argument.

I think pure capitalism is impossible because it's unethical to force everybody to compete for everything, and I think pure communism is impossibe because it's unethical to force everybody to share everything, but if I had to pick between 2 impossible ideals, I'd pick the one based on sharing with the community over the one based on greed and individualism.  I think a healthy blend of competition and sharing is better for everybody.

I'm just in a bad mood, 'cuz some LaRouche assholes cornered me at school today and tried to tell me they could solve the financial crisis.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081015/ap_on_el_ge/voter_registration

hey, who is trying to cheat here?

is McCain's group getting desperate?

Or Obama group trying to prevent 2004 result?

I agree with that.  I don't think the lack of homeless shelters are much of a problem though.  I mean we have them here.  I know plenty of homeless people who have used them.  People are still considered homeless if they use homeless shelters. The larger problem is that the permanent homeless are by and large unhelpable... while the ones who largely can be helped... aren't homeless for very long.  I'm just glad are homeless shelters are free.  It was probably just a scam to get money but when i was in montreal a guy said it cost them a dollar to use their shelters.  I mean what's that about?  Montreal was depressing that way.  Probably spent more giving money to the homeless then I did everything else.  Every corner downtown there was a homeless person.  Then some punk kids with dyed hair too... yeah i'm going to give YOU money when there is a starving guy one block away.  What douchebags.

See I don't think you understand the arguement.  The general arguement is

A. that the most important thing is that everyone is treated equally.  When you tax someone a higher % because they make more money it's just another form of discrimination. 

B. Those who don't have serious problems do get out of homelessness because of their ability to work hard.  That part actually is true, those who stay chronically homeless aren't there by chance more often then not it's because of some kind of mental disease or other problem of which they should be cared for.  Not because of the homelessness though, but because of the problem.

The arguement though is what is healthy... and what is fair.  Making everyone compete over the necessities of life.  Food, Healthcare, shelter etc... is wrong.  However taxing people unequally is also wrong.  Taking care of these needs and taxing everyone equally... now that is fair.

As for the LaRouche guys.  Tell me about it.  Every freaking day I would buy something to eat so i'd have a built in excuse to not deal with those dicks who park themselves outside of the main campus every day when i was leaving school.  Every day they try and harrass you and go to one of there meetings and join their email list.

Even a man who is so down on his luck that he sleeps in a public rest-room can turn his life around ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Gardner )

Homelessness is not an easy problem to solve, and a laissez-faire approach will not work, but it is not a failure of capatalism ... every society known to man has had a serious homeless problem. Part of the problem is that no society has ever been able to handle people with mental, emotional and drug problems (in fact, from what we know exorcism was as effective as clinical psychology when treating schizophrenia)

Interesting - this just in - Kids across America picks Obama.

Move over, pundits. Kids across America have got the 2008 presidential election all figured out.

In a poll of a quarter of a million students who are too young to vote, Democratic nominee Barack Obama sailed to victory with 57 percent of the vote while Republican nominee John McCain received 39 percent.

In 40 years, the Kids poll has never been wrong.

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27172326/

So Kasz216, you favor a Flat Tax?

I would argue with this characterization of what happened, but I think it's clear you're abandoning our exchange, so never mind.