What would you do with or for homeless people?

Oh, you mean I have to like... sleep in the park for a few weeks before moving into one of Le Chef's apartments?

I just checked and the average 1 bedroom apartment in downtown san diego is about 2k a month. Hmm, I'll have to check with Le Chef, but it might be worth a few nights of sleeping under the stars. Personally, I'm quite tired of all those pesky bills being in my name. It would be so much nicer if they were in his name.

 

Would it shock you to know they already do this?

 

No, it doesn't shock me. Why do you think San Diego has so many homeless? Do you know why there are no homeless where I live? It's because there is no free stuff for homeless. We have no soup kitchen, no homeless shelter, no free clinics, and no patience for bums.

But wait a minute. Wasn't this free apartments donated by Le Chef idea supposed to remedy the homeless situation? And yet, here on the first page of a google search for san diego homeless...

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-1125-san-diego-homeless-20151125-story.html

 

Without housing. A pilot program can't fix anything.....either can your ideas

 

I employ a combination of charity and tolerance. I do what I can from my own means and tolerate that others don't do the same.

 

Well I don't know about that. The idea of no free stuff seems to be working out pretty well. I'm looking out my window and can't see any homeless. In fact, I can't recall ever seeing any homeless people in my neighborhood. There was one guy that slept in his car at the local little league baseball field parking lot, but it wasn't long before he disappeared. Probably found a place to live, I reckon.

 

I guarantee you do not live in a major city. I'm sure Hooterville is very nice this time of year. Lol

 

Actually, we don't have anything so grandiose as the shady rest hotel, but that shouldn't matter. There's fresh drinkable water in the river, as well as the occasional trout, wild ducks and deer, and plenty of wood for a campfire.

Compare that with your typical major big city. Last time I checked, fishing was only allowed in central park on a catch and release system. How stupid is that when new york has so many homeless!

 

Okay, 1st you'll never get rid of the entire homeless problem, at least not without a draconian police state. Believe it or not, some people actually choose that life style. Now you could reduce it significantly if we would simply restore and expand state mental hospitals and apply common sense reforms to the admission process.

 

I would solve simple poverty and capitalism's, natural rate of unemployment, at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage that clears our poverty guidelines, and call it, compensation for being unemployed in our at-will employment States. With access to a minimum wage even when unemployed, markets should operate normally.

And, if the right wants fewer persons collecting unemployment benefits as a form of minimum wage, they can simply create a Jobs Boom.

Problem solved.

 

Again one of the most expensive and most restrictive solutions

 

So you prefer people running around loose who are a danger to themselves and everyone else?

 

The perfect is enemy of the good, or as Confucius said, Confucius: "Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without."

In other words, I'm not looking for a complete end to homelessness. I'm looking to reduce and to disincentivize it in as humane a way as is possible. But I wouldn't be squeamish about it. The public, the majority, wants safe and clean streets, sidewalks, and parks, and I as czar would put their preferences ahead of the preferences of the homeless to the extent the constitution permitted it.

Doing nothing isn't on the menu.

And if homelessness isn't a crime, well, neither are "draconian measures." Any serious problem requires a serious and sometimes extreme response. So what?

 

According to current law those people can be held against their will. I know....I did it.

 

The perfect is enemy of the good, or as Confucius said: "Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without." In other words, I'm not looking fora complete end to homelessness. I'm looking to reduce and to disincentivize it. But I wouldn't be squeamish about it. The public, the majority, wants safe and clean streets, sidewalks, and parks, and I as czar would put their preferences ahead of the preferences of the homeless to the extent the constitution permitted it. Draconian? Well, maybe. Does the constitution prohibit draconian measures? Does common sense counsel against it?

Doing nothing for fear of a lawsuit isn't on the menu.

 

You mean "cannot," I guess. I wouldn't imprison them for mere vagrancy, no. But I think they can be constitutionally removed from the sidewalks and the parks and can have their makeshift shelters razed in the interest of public health and sanitation.

 

No they currently CAN be held against their will. Actually that is the ONLY criteria for it.

 

Varies bycity and location

 

I don't know why, every urban area doesn't set up something equal to a refugee camp. Tents for the people and allow spaces for eating, even some sort of medical attention, and out houses. It seems to me the cost would be a fraction of what the homeless can cost any urban district business. We spend billions in the US to house dope dealers to murderers, but very little on weak minded humans....

 

We need to set up group dorms with mental health help for most of them.

 

I would leave a trail of heroin leading all the way into the next town.

 

I would take federal lands and build inexpensive military type barracks on them. The best locations would be in states like Nevada, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico and places where you could crete camps that occupy many acres. They would be equipped with kitchens and mess halls like Army bases, but very basic. No luxury accomodations and no luxury foods. The homeless camps would have clothing depots in them where clothing that was donated or recycled by the public could be given to the homeless residents. Absolutely no alcohol or drugs of any kind and anybody living in the camps that violates rules about drinking or drugs would immediately be thrown out of the camp, period. There would be hospitals and dental clinics even though these would be real budget busters. If you house them and feed them, you'll also be forced to give them free medical care of all kinds.

That's it. Food, shelter, clothing, medical care, schools. And they can stay there as long as they want. In return they get no food stamps, no welfare checks, no Obamacare or Medicaid, no free computers or internet or any other free stuff. It would be a very basic and simple kind of life but it would be totally free. All they've got to do is go to places we could set up that would bus them to the camps and yeah, the taxpayers would have to pay for that too. But its better than having them stinking up the all of the cities, committing crimes, spreading diseases and trash and pissing and (*)(*)(*)(*)ting everywhere.

This is what America has sunk to and it is now the "new normal".

 

Would we even have a homeless problem, if Persons who are unemployed could simply apply for unemployment compensation that clears our poverty guidelines in any at-will employment State?

 

It's been attempted before. What happens is as predictable as the tide. It becomes a place known for drugs, vermin, violence, garbage, feces, and disease. The people who own nearby property complain, and the city has to quarantine the place.

Don't you remember the OWS protests? The conditions that fester in those camps are always the same.

 

Make a game show PPV, and let them fight it out to make money. The winners can make enough to make it out of homelessness and the losers are eliminated By the winners. 😀. It's a win win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk