"And yet the concluding paragraph of the referenced article states: 'In short, it's pretty hard to get good data on the issue.'"
This is very decontextualized. Your disagreement with Amanda is clearly designed to make her appear wrong. She is not wrong. This Mercury article is indeed poor research, and numerous social science researchers have, in fact, interviewed homeless people, including panhandlers. There is also definitely much data, as good as it gets anyway without doing large population longitudinal studies (a veritable impossibility with homeless people and panhandling), on panhandling income.
Her main point seems to have been based on the fact that even the most amateur Googler could quickly find the source used in the Mercury article. Further, she suggests that it is very unlikely that the Mercury writer did not use the same article she found through such a method due to its similarity with the Sherlock Holmes introduction. Based on her comment, I would guess she thinks that the article she cited is poor research as well, because it is. Her overall message then, as I read it, is that this was lazy research based on one lame article that appears right away from a simple Google search and that it hardly qualifies as research, and I agree. This all seems to have gone over your head.
BTW, it wouldn't have been so bad had the author not taken such an authoritative academic stance. His work clearly does not hold up to the stance he has taken, and anyone who thinks this work cuts it academically is obviously ignorant of how social science knowledge is constructed.
Funny to see this today. I nearly posted an I,A myself on a similar topic after my experience biking up Broadway to PSU this morning. First, some asshole rocking some earbuds and a woman who looked like his mom jaywalked from Pioneer Square directly into my path, apparently not even seeing me until I nearly mowed him down as I went through the green light. Is it that if someone doesn't hear a motor, they don't even bother looking?
Then, when I got up around the campus, I came across two groups of 15-20 students who casually jaywalked into my path, the bike lane, at both Montgomery and Harrison. The jaywalking is not what bothers me most, it's the outright oblivion of these morons, college students no less, who I see jaywalking in front of cars, bikes, and buses every day around PSU. Mommy and Daddy seem to have never taught them to look both ways, or even one in these instances, before crossing. Many seem to not even know what the signal indicates or even if there is a signal. It's only a matter of time before someone gets run over.
And, like you, I also frequently encounter people just standing in that bike lane on Broadway waiting to cross, again totally oblivious to the fact they're standing in a right of way. I almost always tell them as I ride by that they're standing in a bike lane, but they just look at me totally dumbfounded or with some look of indignation. Super annoying.
Wrong, Todd. You've obviously been seduced by the highfalutin vocabulary this prick has used. Pickup as a single word is, at least strictly grammatically speaking, a noun and conveys the idea of connecting with a desired person for sex. The grammatically correct way of expressing the idea of grabbing something, even in a metaphorical sense as expressed in this I,A, is the phrasal verb pick up (two words).
All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
Contact Info |
Production Guidelines |