<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Look to yourself, not the state</title>
	<atom:link href="http://swgapolitics.com/index/2009/09/14/look-to-yourself-not-the-state/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://swgapolitics.com/index/2009/09/14/look-to-yourself-not-the-state/</link>
	<description>Free Thinking for a Free World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 20:58:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: pstudl</title>
		<link>http://swgapolitics.com/index/2009/09/14/look-to-yourself-not-the-state/comment-page-1/#comment-4187</link>
		<dc:creator>pstudl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:50:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://swgapolitics.com/index/?p=2763#comment-4187</guid>
		<description>btw, I&#039;m not sure if those published figures for Dougherty included Albany or not.  

Besides the moral or religious or social commentary which I will not get into, here is how I take these stats.  I&#039;ve commented on this before...

While there is an increase in head count in Dougherty, there was a decrease in productive wage earners (well, that pool includes anyone over the age of 1 who left Dougherty including kids and retirees and money makers).  

In municipal circles, it is considered a fact that kid residents of any income group are a drain on the taxpayer for things like schools, parks departments...everything.  Add that here, a good number of those new births, particularly to unwed mothers, are near or below the poverty level.  

So lets say that this is a normal birth rate in Dougherty and a normal population exit number.  I should use a formula here, but, over the course of 20 years, those kids aged 0-20 will end up being about 30% of Dougherty&#039;s population (including the city), in a rough calculation.  

If these stats do not include the city&#039;s numbers, that percentage in Dougherty County will be much much higher.

To me that means that taxpayers and government services like schools will be quite pressured until this trend reverses, all with a already challenged tax base.

I&#039;m sure a proper statistician, or even I, if I took the time, could pepper my stat extrapolations with holes, but the general conclusions will still hold up....if we don&#039;t do something pretty soon to stem some kind of tide, the next generation is in for a tough time in Dougherty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>btw, I&#8217;m not sure if those published figures for Dougherty included Albany or not.  </p>
<p>Besides the moral or religious or social commentary which I will not get into, here is how I take these stats.  I&#8217;ve commented on this before&#8230;</p>
<p>While there is an increase in head count in Dougherty, there was a decrease in productive wage earners (well, that pool includes anyone over the age of 1 who left Dougherty including kids and retirees and money makers).  </p>
<p>In municipal circles, it is considered a fact that kid residents of any income group are a drain on the taxpayer for things like schools, parks departments&#8230;everything.  Add that here, a good number of those new births, particularly to unwed mothers, are near or below the poverty level.  </p>
<p>So lets say that this is a normal birth rate in Dougherty and a normal population exit number.  I should use a formula here, but, over the course of 20 years, those kids aged 0-20 will end up being about 30% of Dougherty&#8217;s population (including the city), in a rough calculation.  </p>
<p>If these stats do not include the city&#8217;s numbers, that percentage in Dougherty County will be much much higher.</p>
<p>To me that means that taxpayers and government services like schools will be quite pressured until this trend reverses, all with a already challenged tax base.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure a proper statistician, or even I, if I took the time, could pepper my stat extrapolations with holes, but the general conclusions will still hold up&#8230;.if we don&#8217;t do something pretty soon to stem some kind of tide, the next generation is in for a tough time in Dougherty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robin</title>
		<link>http://swgapolitics.com/index/2009/09/14/look-to-yourself-not-the-state/comment-page-1/#comment-4177</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 01:19:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://swgapolitics.com/index/?p=2763#comment-4177</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s pathetic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s pathetic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter S</title>
		<link>http://swgapolitics.com/index/2009/09/14/look-to-yourself-not-the-state/comment-page-1/#comment-4168</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:31:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://swgapolitics.com/index/?p=2763#comment-4168</guid>
		<description>If my stat memory serves me correctly, the population in Dougherty County in 2006 grew by 750 heads.  New births that year were 1500.  Dougherty has about a 70%+ birth to unwed mothers rate. Albany was 75%.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If my stat memory serves me correctly, the population in Dougherty County in 2006 grew by 750 heads.  New births that year were 1500.  Dougherty has about a 70%+ birth to unwed mothers rate. Albany was 75%.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

