Homeless Numbers Simplified so even…….

Approach 1:

A Little Subtraction, a Little Addition and…….

…….the numbers reveal why the homeless population keeps rising despite all the government spent $$$$ ……provided you 1. look at the numbers, 2. can perform and understand basic arithmetic and 3. can process basic thought.

Politicians, pundits, media and the public focus on what they believe they know, wilfully ignoring all the evidence that what they ‘know’ ain’t so, seeming incapable of simple arithmetic and basic thought processes.

Although it does explain why we are in this handbasket and where we are headed.


To help develop basic arithmetic skills and applying thought to solving issues and problems, let us examine the following simple arithmetic/thought exercise,

In keeping with tradition we will start with 100 oranges.

From your 100 oranges you subtract [remove] 55% or 55 oranges; 100 – 55 = 45.

The Salvation Army’s reply to the accusation by Maple Ridge mayor and council that the homeless on the streets of Maple Ridge was prima facie evidence of the Salvation Army’s mismanagement of the Maple Ridge emergency shelter, was that 55% of those accessing the shelter were placed either in housing or in treatment.

After the passage of a period of time you subtract [remove] another 55% or 55 oranges

[100 – 55] – 55 = -10; [100 – 55 = 45; 45 – 55 = -10]

I do not know what a negative orange is, or what it looks like, so when the application of arithmetic results in negative oranges it is [or should be] time to reexamine your assumptions and how you defined the problem to determine why the result is negative oranges.

Or negative homeless people.

In the case of Maple Ridge, subtracting the number of people placed in housing or in treatment by the Salvation Army from the number of homeless people in Maple Ridge [as recorded by the homeless count] one finds that at the time Maple Ridge’s mayor and council were politically pontificating and blaming the Salvation Army for there being homeless in Maple Ridge there were negative 121 homeless people in Maple Ridge.

If a positive homeless person on the streets of Maple Ridge is a BAD thing, then isn’t a negative homeless person on the streets of Maple Ridge a GOOD thing? Shouldn’t Maple Ridge’s mayor and council have been ecstatic about having – 121 homeless people on the streets of Maple Ridge?

Whether Maple Ridge’s mayor and council were simply seeking to ensure someone other than themselves were blamed for the homeless on the streets by baffling voters with BS or the mayor and council are too arithmetically and thought challenged to realize that there were -121 homeless in Maple Ridge or whatever – having -121 homeless on Maple Ridge’s streets brought mayor and council no joy.

Nor did the presence of negative 121 homeless in Maple Ridge cause mayor and council to go HUH?

Approach 2:

50% + 50% = 100% = all, the whole enchilada.

55% + 55% = 110%. While it is not unusual to hear people [particularly athletes] speak of ‘giving 110% it is a little difficult to give [subtract] more than you started with.


So why, with shelters placing in housing or treatment 50+% [55%] of the homeless every year, at the end of two years [50% + 50% = 100%] are there any homeless left on the streets?

Why at the end of two years are there more homeless than before you placed 100+% of the homeless in housing or treatment?

For more than a decade those possessing basic math and thought skills have watched as, year after year, over 50% of the homeless are placed in housing or treatment and yet the number of homeless on the streets continues to increase every year. Watched as the streets were overrun [theoretically] by negative homeless people; left wondering what exactly a negative homeless person is.

Even if being arithmetically or thinking challenged prevented politicians, pundits, media and the public from wondering just what a negative homeless person is, given that fifty percent plus fifty percent equals 100 percent, one would have………..hoped ……….that at least one or two persons among politicians, pundits, media and the public would wonder: if you house more than fifty percent of the homeless every year why, after more than a decade [with 500+% of the homeless having been placed in housing or treatment], the number of homeless continues to go up, and up and up.




Leave a Reply