Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I do not feel the need to be armed in any neighborhood anywhere in New Hampshire. I cannot say the same for a couple of the cities to our immediate south. The "ghettos" of Nashua and Manchester are not all that bad. One of the places I lived was clean and kept ship shape. It was infestef with gangsters and thugs. I traveled armed even if it was illegal. We moved away a quickly as we could.
I do not feel the need to be armed in any neighborhood anywhere in New Hampshire. I cannot say the same for a couple of the cities to our immediate south. The "ghettos" of Nashua and Manchester are not all that bad. One of the places I lived was clean and kept ship shape. It was infestef with gangsters and thugs. I traveled armed even if it was illegal. We moved away a quickly as we could.
They are not "that bad" now. But that is probably what they said about places like Lawrence, Lowell, Chicago and Detroit before they became what they are. Manchester will probably never sink to those levels but everything is relative.
As far as guns for protection, it is another topic. But I don't think a gun is necessary anywhere in NH to be safe, Yet. As soon as you think you need a gun to be safe is when I think it is time to look for a better place to live. If you live in the rural or secluded parts of NH a firearm for protection makes more sense to me. The cities are not that bad yet, most of the crime is concentrated in the ghetto urban areas so just try to avoid them if you are concerned or to be defensive. There must be a definitive connection of welfare and crime.
More welfare equals more crime. It certainly seems there is more welfare than there was. I mean to the amount of people collecting welfare. Welfare doesn't cover an average home's expenses. The balance has to come from somewhere.
The statement welfare cuts cause more crime I would find questionable and subjective. There is only so much welfare money to go around. It is spread thinly for the most part. More people on welfare equals lower welfare payments which could have the effect of increasing crime over the long term.
Last edited by Know Nonsense; 01-29-2014 at 06:22 PM..
2.7 percent of the NH’s households receive some type of assistance with 60% of the funds coming from the state. On the bright side, that means 97.3% of the state's population don't.
In order to be eligible for any assistance including federally funded food stamps, a mother with two children must be earning less than $675 per month.
2.7 percent of the NH’s households receive some type of assistance with 60% of the funds coming from the state. On the bright side, that means 97.3% of the state's population don't.
In order to be eligible for any assistance including federally funded food stamps, a mother with two children must be earning less than $675 per month.
Households and population are different as there is usually more than one person in a welfare household so the actual percentage of people not collecting welfare would be considerably less than 97.3%. 97.3% is definitely high or low depending on how you look at it. Welfare households usually have at least two kids. The real number of people NOT collecting welfare of some sort is probably in the 80 to 90% range but the amount of people collecting is growing. This economy is only making the middle class less well off and creating less incentive for people to work.
I just googled and saw where you got the info. The 2.7 is for households receiving cash assistance and doesn't include food stamps which is considered welfare.
Don't get me wrong it is tough and people do need help but when you see first hand how some of the recipients use their benefits and have no desire to work it can be disturbing.
There is also section 8 and SSI which is not part of the welfare stats I don't think. Not sure but I think there are people who get section 8 and welfare. So when you add up section 8, food stamps and welfare which some people seem to be able to get it is a considerable amount of benefits. And there are a lot of substance abuse problems in these households.
Last edited by Know Nonsense; 01-29-2014 at 06:56 PM..
The myth of welfare recipients spending their benefits on drugs is just that—a myth. The large majority of welfare recipients are neither drug users nor drug dealers. Drug use isn’t a problem of poverty; it’s found among all groups and classes.
The myth of welfare recipients spending their benefits on drugs is just that—a myth. The large majority of welfare recipients are neither drug users nor drug dealers. Drug use isn’t a problem of poverty; it’s found among all groups and classes.
How do you know it is a just myth? What experience do you have with it? It is not a myth that many welfare recipients have substance problems just like many of them have mental problems as well. Mental problems and substance abuse problems are connected. one can lead to the other. Lots of them are certainly capable of work however.
You distorted the facts on the percentages of welfare recipients and your perception of welfare recipients not having substance and mental health problems is distorted as well. Are you one of those people who truly believes all the statistics you see too?
Seems like you just google stuff and get your info from the first page that catches your eye. Truth and facts are not that easy to find. It takes seeing, understanding and insight to really see what is going on, not just googling.
You can not just read a website and assume what you read is true. Much of the media has an agenda and is not based on real subjective truth. You knew that right?
Last edited by Know Nonsense; 01-30-2014 at 04:00 PM..
"You distorted the facts on the percentages of welfare recipients and your perception of welfare recipients not having substance and mental health problems is distorted as well. Are you one of those people who truly believes all the statistics you see too?"
distorted??? hardly. I wrote population instead of household. big whoop. get over yourself.
All of the states that conducted drug testing on welfare recipients proved it.
On past attempts to drug test welfare recipients, Florida 2.6% tested positive despite a state average of 8.1% Oklahoma - 2.2% tested positive Arizona - testing netted ONE person in 3 years. Michigan - 4.4%
These programs cost taxpayers a LOT more money than they save. Sadly, the majority of people on Welfare are the elderly and children. It's almost as if people on Welfare don't have any money!
Where is your evidence that the large majority of people on welfare are on drugs?
Last edited by buck naked; 01-30-2014 at 04:00 PM..
people who know they are going to be tested for drugs are less likely to use drugs? Shocking. I don't really have a dog in this fight since I'm not sure how cost-effective testing would be, but I would suspect a looming drug test would influence someone's behavior.
"You distorted the facts on the percentages of welfare recipients and your perception of welfare recipients not having substance and mental health problems is distorted as well. Are you one of those people who truly believes all the statistics you see too?"
distorted??? hardly. I wrote population instead of household. big whoop. get over yourself.
All of the states that conducted drug testing on welfare recipients proved it.
On past attempts to drug test welfare recipients, Florida 2.6% tested positive despite a state average of 8.1% Oklahoma - 2.2% tested positive Arizona - testing netted ONE person in 3 years. Michigan - 4.4%
These programs cost taxpayers a LOT more money than they save. Sadly, the majority of people on Welfare are the elderly and children. It's almost as if people on Welfare don't have any money!
Where is your evidence that the large majority of people on welfare are on drugs?
You should really get over yourself before you tell me to get over myself. Where did you get "large majority" from. Can you quote that part?
Your stats seem to mostly come from left wing socialist data which means nothing. People know how to beat drugs tests. Those "statistics" mean nothing. Go spend some time in the inner city for a couple weeks. Then you can come back and and say only 3% of the people there were abusing drugs or alcohol. But you will be lying or you were blind when you were there.
The internet has become a cesspool of left wing socialist propaganda that is anything but the truth.
Last edited by Know Nonsense; 01-30-2014 at 04:22 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
