Faux compassion is only worsening homeless crisis

kaz Bamboo is an invasive uncontrollable species which is banned in most areas of our country.

 

Another appalling example of blaming the homeless for homelessness, the poor for poverty and the victims of failed policies like the war on drugs and numerous regime changes and covert coups in south and central America for the current refugee situation.

Where I live there is simply a lack of affordable housing and even people with jobs can end up living in their cars or in parks for lack of accommodation. Even if you are not dealing with mental health or addiction issues, once you end up on the street it can be incredibly difficult to get yourself back into having a stable place to live. The police clean up tent cities and move people along but then they crop up again because there is simply no place for these people to go.

Blaming the victims is the lazy, and purposely cruel approach. Finding creative and permanent solutions to the problem is the challenge.

Housing First has been tried in places like Portugal and even in the US. Housing people is way more cost effective for society than having the criminal justice system and health care first responder's deal with what is a systemic societal problem rather than a criminal one.

 

it is simple, however not easy when faux compasionists blockade all avenues to correct it...

gather up all of the illegally entered individuals and send them back across the border, then utilize all the resources & monies that were given to them, for all of our homeless vets and sick and elderly... the beauty of it is, we'd have a surplus of cash & resources afterwards that could actually result in lowering our tax burdens...

alas, dem libbies won't stand for that sh*t, and will call upon every political player judge they hold in their pockets, and spends ooodles more tax dollars just to prevent that from ever happening... it's just as dumb as passing law that we can't use the term 'oriental' on government paperwork (obama's doin)

 

by island, you meant cali, right?

 

The great vanity of the human condition. Citing 'complexity'.

We are animals. We can rise above some aspects of that nature, but herd survival isn't one of them. Because it's SURVIVAL. Ergo, the answer is simple. What would an animal 'herd' do?

 

or a decommissioned oil tanker

 

Not at all. A family can be fed on one quarter of an acre.

 

Are you being serious or kidding?

Most people get angry at the idea of "moving" homeless people even down the street. Here in LA you get groups that will HOOOWWWWWLLLLL and scream if you try.

And you want to move them halfway around the country, for free, give them land, for free, and "livable resources" for free .....

Something tells me this would not be economically viable!

 

There is no shortage of shelter for the homeless. They do not allow drugs or alcohol, so they prefer the street. Is it their fault for being addicts or our fault for not enforcing vagrancy laws?

 

That is very kind of you. Where did you get all that land to give away?

 

A third of the country is Federal land. Hock it.

 

That's a vastly oversimplified and erroneous assessment of the situation.

 

Actually with the very high cost of living in some of these areas where the homeless are, it might actually be much cheaper than other comprehensive solutions.

You could build 1 housing unit for them in an expensive area or 5 housing units in another area of the country for the same price.

 

Yes, anchored somewhere in Greenland

 

Then refute it by showing where shelters are turning homeless away. Here in Los Angeles, we passed measures to increase property tax, sales tax, and even a hotel tax. I was walking my dog in the Sepulveda basin and went through a homeless encampment. Music was playing, empty beer/liquor bottles were everywhere.

 

First of all being in a shelter does not mean you have a home or are not homeless. I've volunteered at shelters and I don't know what they are like where you are but in my experience, drug abuse and violence are rampant. Often the are full so you cannot get in unless the open more beds during extreme weather and the atmosphere is institutional and as depressing as being in jail. Many people avoid shelters for all these reasons and more.

So now you are blaming people for their addictions as well as blaming them for poverty and homelessness. You are basing your opinion on an outmoded model of addiction that blames the addicted rather than addressing the conditions that lead people to medicate themselves to relieve the horror of abuse, poverty, neglect, mental health issues and homelessness. There have been interesting updates on the original studies that provided the models for addiction that we have been labouring under for the last century or so.

As the op suggested, we live in a society and an economic system that is simply unable to acknowledge or address it's own weaknesses and failure to provide a decent standard of living for an increasing number of people. So all that is left for a society that cannot face introspection and look inward and address it's own contradictions and failures, is to scapegoat the victims with blame and derision as we see in great display on this thread.

Even in a economy with a glut of low wage service industry jobs as we have now, I would challenge you to hold down even a fast food job for any length of time living in a shelter.

 

You are incorrect about me blaming them for being addicts. I asked:
"Is it their fault for being addicts or our fault for not enforcing vagrancy laws?"

I have the same experience with helping the homeless. While serving hot food, I noticed the drugs changing hands. After buying drugs, there is very little left for food and shelter.

For many of them, mental disorders are the main factor. The guy talking to himself is not likely to benefit from programs designed to get people back on their feet. Addicts can be rehabilitated, but only those who want to. The question is do we force them into institutions or let them get high in their tent city?

I don't have the answer.

 

mandate that all purchases of alcohol require valid state issued id (valid meaning not expired)...

or:

naltrexone & disulfirum ... mixed in food & water at soup kitchens & shelters... yep, unconstitutional but epidemics require playing hardball...

both...

 

Living on the street, makes the journey to employed almost impossible. And any job that will have you is degrading, likely dangerous, and not appreciated. If you have a disability, you are likely on the street, WITH a chronic life threatening illness, without any income for five years plus.

What we need, are decent jobs, for excons and other hard to employs. Decent jobs would MOAR than pay for themselves.

And give the REAL chance at recovery that some seem to intend.

 

1) Yes, exactly the 'atmosphere' you'd expect at that end of the rental market (ie, free). Unless you think that these people should be given accommodations far exceeding what they can pay for? Cool. When do I get to live in a $20mil house, instead of this crummy $1mil house? The 'atmosphere' here isn't up to my standards.

2) So this revolutionary, 20thC, NOT-blaming-people-for-their-addictions-and-homelessness, how's that working out?

3) Actually, we live in a society wherein families don't take care of their own, and people are no longer required to be responsible. THAT'S the 'weakness' and 'failure'.

 

No, what we need is families who will not abandon their disabled members.

 

Imo, cities create their own problems. The housing crisis in Seattle is the fault of our own city government. This obsession Seattle has with bieng called the "most progressive" city has created so many problems. Elected officials have enacted rules and regulations that make it almost impossible to build affordable housing here. Most people are pretty disgusted and local businesses have had to put up with quite a bit.

That being said, you cant lump all homelessness in one basket and send them away. Id rather have compassion for people until I know their specific circumstances. Shelters are popping up that require all able bodied individuals to not only be drug free but work during doing various tasks assigned to them. Drug addicts who wont accept help eventually seal thier own fate and thats unfortunate. Mentally ill people sometimes cant help themselves...thats a tougher issue. Especially with many hospital psych units bieng full and on a waiting list
The OP who arrogantly babbles on like he/she is above the whole situation needs to know there are very good homeless people who are trying to better themselves and are succeeding at it.

 

They're not the subject of this thread, then.

 

Its still worth saying.