What are we going to do about the homeless?

Once again, you miss that there isn't good enough transit, because our Republicans aren't interested in that. And, you keep missing that cities need that work done. So, cities are involved whether they want to be or not.

As for your food nonsense, you need to try to make sense.

As for your 3, who is making this profit and control you talk about?

 

Let's remember most of these problems are in Democrat areas.
Even if sometimes in Republican states, then in totally Democrat-run cities. (And things like buses and trollies are normally a city decided thing)

I'm not aware of one major city or high population density area in the U.S. that is run by a Republican-dominated city government. (Maybe there is one, but they are pretty rare)

 

... almost as "impressive" as the way you spell "vile"....

BTW, what's so vile about able-bodied people who aren't stricken with disease, debilitating injury, or other verifiable, REAL problems, being expected to provide for their own needs and wants in life...?! Would you prefer that we just abandon personal responsibility altogether and instead develop a nationwide population of lawless, useless parasites...?!

 

Woops!! The problem isn't inside the city.

The whole point of the idea being discussed is having people live far enough outside the city that rents are low, and then being able to transit from there.

 

Something tells me you don't have any idea the distance you have to go to be able to get outside of a city area into Republican territory.
It's not as if Republican territory begins right outside the limits of the city.

 

Then you are observant and thinking it out. I once went to a store in very cold weather, and saw a young woman putting oil in the engine of her car. She had a broken side window, and two kids in the car. Appearances said they were living in the car. I had friend that runs a salvage yard and does some repair work, so I wrote down the address and who to see- handed her the card and $50, told her that would get her window replaced and a meal. She grabbed the money and quickly left; not a word.

Inside the store- a clerk asked if I gave her money, and I said yes. He said- you just paid for her next fix. I fixed- nothing. Decided to learn, and in the future do as you did, for instance I could have told her where to go, and paid the bill directly.

 

It certainly does in Seattle.

 

I thought America was allegedly the Land of the Free and what's the other American slogan, The American Dream.

Yes, install Socialism, make 99% of people homeless.

 

I imagine the Left would like to give the homeless a roof over their heads and welfare money, but obviously not at their cost.

 

Another curious factor is culture.

I do some charity work in Vietnam, and I've notice that the homeless there are often hesitant to take hand outs because they don't want to lose face. There have even been cases of people dying of starvation even having been offered a hand out. Others will accept it if it is done discreetly. And many create work for themselves, doing things like collecting scrap metal and cardboard and selling it to recycling centres, etc, making hardly anything but saving face. Some of these people are the hardest workers I've ever met, and if they were local to me in Canada and I had a business I would hire them immediately.

The Philippines (my birth place and early family experience) is a weird hybrid in which often one or two family members work their fingers to the bone, even leaving the country to work in menial jobs overseas, sending all their pay back to the family, while other family members sit at home doing very little and leeching off of these workers.

 

I keep hearing that word in US media: American Exceptionalism.

That means nationalist bigotry, right? Its the USA USA #1 #1 people who pretend ONLY America has X, Y and Z good things? Or do I have that wrong?

 

"We shall be as a city on a hill." --John Winthrop, 1630

 

That shining beacon on a hill saying I thought was about aspiration towards being good to your people and setting an example to the world, moreso than claiming America is number one.

 

To many, yes.
To some, Nope.

 

The companies left because of all the regulatory costs they had to bear - that's government (democrats) saying, "get the he!! out!!"

The Republicans played their role perfectly with all the "capitalism, global market, free trade" rhetoric, but it was the excessive cost of doing business in the U.S. that drove them out - the Republicans just greased the skids.

EPA, OSHA, Worker's Comp, Social Security, Medicare, inflation, permitting, zoning, etc...

China offers near slave labor and cheap energy - from the standpoint of money, it's an easy decision. Ethically and morally, that's another animal.

Very few people understand that this was done deliberately by the Republicans and Democrats working together.

Because it was done deliberately, no amount of bright ideas, remedies, or good intentions is going to undo any of this mess.

The Establishment is driving this agenda, and they are deliberately killing the United States - for very logical reasons from their perspective.

From the perspective of the average American it is disastrous, but so few are awake enough to understand what is happening.

 

Nobody in the USA is interested in Socialism.

Maybe you got the wrong thread??

 

Yes, individuals giving unknown individuals money is not a good idea.

This is a reason for the vetting done by agencies that provide help.

I'd point out that it is not just the government that does that vetting.

 

Weird if only the US Gov't could have POLICIES that stopped off shoring of jobs and capital? Hmm

Weird how since FDR's "New Deal", workers at the bottom of the ladder saw stability and increasing wages. But since the rights war on the New Deal (and LBJ's 'Great Society"), the US has ONLY seen the richest of the rich prosper? Almost like the US is becoming a Latin America/ Asian country where there is a small "upper class", small middle class and HUGE working/poor class.

I guess when you gut taxes for the richest, who used to invest back in their workplace/workers instead of paying 60%-70% effective taxes, that happens?

Along with the GOP's gutting regulations and regulators on the beat (see Ronnie Reagan's S&L crisis, Dubya's subprime bubble)

Maybe not a good idea to allow Corps to pay executives via stock options, where the goal has been to simply push up stocks, artificially most of the time, IMO, or allow stock buy backs, both these things done in 1982

 

• Jan. 4, 2012

Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs


Former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a Republican candidate for president, warned this fall that movement “up into the middle income is actually greater, the mobility in Europe, than it is in America.” National Review, a conservative thought leader, wrote that “most Western European and English-speaking nations have higher rates of mobility.” Even Representative Paul D. Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican who argues that overall mobility remains high, recently wrote that “mobility from the very bottom up” is “where the United States lags behind.”

“It’s becoming conventional wisdom that the U.S. does not have as much mobility as most other advanced countries,” said Isabel V. Sawhill, an economist at the Brookings Institution. “I don’t think you’ll find too many people who will argue with that.”


One reason for the mobility gap may be the depth of American poverty, which leaves poor children starting especially far behind.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/...t of Americans,and poor families stay trapped.

 

In one word, awareness.

 

Dem run? Oh you mean gutted by 40+ years of GOP policies (gutting taxes, allowing off shoring of jobs, etc), means it's the Dems fault?

Ronald Reagan's first months in office could mark the beginning of a reversal in the role the federal government has played over the last half-century. The changes Reagan is seeking in the name of “new federalism” are part of his announced effort to cut taxes, trim spending and significantly reduce “Washington's influence” over the states.
https://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1981040300

Reagan laid out his New Federalism in his 1982 State of the Union address, portraying it as an effort to return $47 billion in federal programs to state and local control.

 

The problems that are facing big cities, and major metropolitan areas are just the same, except on a much smaller scale, in the midsize cities as well. This is America's problem, not a Democrat vs Republican issue.

As for homelessness, it is complex. Some people who are homeless have severe mental disorders and family members have had their fill and no longer support them or even help them. Some have serious addiction issues and have been in rehab at least once, in jail for vagrancy and other minor crimes, and so forth. Some are veterans who have severe addiction problems and/or severe mental health issues. And the ; list goes on. YOu really can't "put them in a tent" as Trump has suggested, nor you can ignore them either. And there are other factors. You have kids running away from home because they believe the police will believe their parents instead of them because of the abuse. LGBTQ teens who are being kicked out of their homes because of who they are and what they are. You have those with criminal records, released from prison, thought they had a place to stay but didn't, and now they are living in the streets. And the most common, financial, they can afford some things, but not the rent.

IF a big city is in a GOP state, the state can choose to invest more in mental health programs, teaching job skills for free, and not the how to fill out a resume sort of thing, and so forth, but they don't, do they, like in Mississippi for instance.

 

many on the right thinks it's socialism

 

...

Corporations exist to serve shareholders, not to act morally, right? So even without the government issues you mentioned, absent government, wouldn't these companies still exploit that near slave labour overseas?

 

Why did you quote me before writing that? Did you quote the wrong post?