No, Carlos, not finally. That was posted early in this thread. You chose not to respond to it. Have all the homeless been removed form the streets of Seattle?
That seems to be something both parties do. If one idiot shots somebody it's proof we need to restrict gun rights for everybody. If you dl are skeptical of 1 of the claims around climate change its proof that you're a climate change denier. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
I'm sure not and assume the homeless encampments are growing like here in California. But making fun of/ ridiculing poor people and then blaming Democrats for the problem is totally disingenuous. A convenient dodge by assigning the problem to others.
You clearly didn't watch the video. Providence Roade Island was doing something that was tax payer funded, compassionate to the people suffering with addiction and not just giving them housing, and it was working. Stupidly hurling money at the problem won't fix it any more than yelling at them from a car window will. Putting them up in tax funded crack dens isn't any better. You have to first year then like people not a stain to be covered up. They need treatment for their addiction first and foremost. And once that happens all other parts of reform are easier. I don't think people turn to drugs because they are homeless. I think in this case they are homeless because they are addicted. You should really watch at least the last 25 min of the OP video. It follows several addicts in Providence that have entered a treatment program. One that was a heroin addict for 30 years. Even though this system seems like something a Democrat government would support it seems to be more of a solution. One I'd get behind. I disagree treating their illness first addiction would involve him going to a rehab facility so that covers shelter and food. And it also gets to the heart of the problem. I don't know how you can look at that guy that they were interviewing and thinks the only problem he has is not having a home. His problem was methamphetamine. And Seattle government is doing nothing. I don't think putting them in a ghetto is a solution. And I commend the way Providence is handling it. I'm pretty sure Providence isn't a red state city.
What you subsidize you get more of. The elitists don't care, they live in gated communities and send their kids to private schools, while opposing school choice of course.
Getting panhandlers off streetcorners and intersections would a good start, but the dumb ACLU won't have that.
We are ridiculing the corrupt DP politicians that are in charge of our Urban Holes not their victims. The political leadership of oure failed cities should be condemned by everyone.
Completely and utterly stupid remark on your part. In fact, beyond stupid. Bombastic hyperbole is not an reasoned argument. It is moronic stupidity at its finest.
It's way too expensive for me. One TDY trip to Ft. Lewis to do some installing was enough. Thank god the army was paying for it. I filled up my vehicle for 1.99 before I flew into Seattle, upon leaving it cost me 3.05 a gallon to fill up my rental car. The lunch I had at Denny's was 13.00 which I could get at home for 8.00. The hotel room charge 120.00 per night plus tax, same hotel room runs for around 70-80.00 at pretty much every place else I've been TDY. Just a couple of examples, of course this was back in 2012 when I was working out of Ft. Bragg. It could have changed, I highly doubt it. I have no desire to return.
No your not because the solution that you finally identified costs money. There's a radio program here on KFI were 2 Republican commentators [Jon & Ken] endlessly criticise the local mayors/ state politicians. Eventually the radio jocks went right down to the Santa Ana river and met the homeless. They were angry that the problem exists and is growing but now are angry because it will cost California taxpayers more $ in a state that already has high taxes. The problem doesn't go away by ignoring reality.
Very well could be. I filled up the other day down here in Georgia, 2.69 a gallon. That's up from around 2.09 a month or two ago. Yes, state and local taxes do make a huge difference.
No. Do NOT give these people homes .. ever. Doing so would compound any and all of their problems, not relieve them. Then they would trash the houses. Then they would return to the streets. They're more likely to actually recover by remaining 'uncomfortable' on the streets. Make it easy for them, and there's zero motivation to change.
Disagree. In New York city and European countries the poor are housed and mandatory counseling/ recovery services are provided.
You don't seem to know much about homelessness, with respect. These people don't reject the shelters 'just cause', they reject them because shelters have RULES. They do not want treatment for the same reason. They don't want to have to give up their vices. ANY forced or even 'encouraged' approach like provision of housing and treatment would necessarily bring with it all the rules they're trying to escape (obviously), and so it will be just another outrageously expensive failure. You need to grasp that these people are the way they are because they are determined to be 100% free of obligation and responsibility. They are failed adults. They cannot make any use of the things of adulthood (a home, sobriety, responsibility, obligation, etc). They reject all the things of adulthood.
In Southern Europe there is far more family involvement in individual poverty, and in Northern Europe there is very little poverty to start with. Very bad examples, sorry.
You can't, and that's what these faux do-gooders refuse to consider. Easier just to throw money at it, than tackle the causes.
Yes, it costs money. But some things are worth it, and I'm a conservative. Seattle should: Get the state to reopen McNeil Island prison and convert it to a rehab center in a prison. Enforce the law and clean up Seattle. No more camping, no more trespassing, no more theft, no more tolerating drug dealing, possession, or use. Portland, San Francisco, and L.A. should follow suit.
