What are we going to do about the homeless?

PRS. Problem Reaction Solution. That's the way they (gov.) make friends and money. You scratch, I scratch. everyone's happy but those caught in the middle.

 

Seems to me government transparency is the solution but how can that be pushed when politicians gain riches by pushing against it? It's similar to the question of how do you stop congresspeople from voting themselves a raise.

 

we do not have homelessness because of "socialism." there are few if any homeless in cuba or china. nicaragua, or venezuela. can you imagine homeless camps in sweden or iceland?

 

Um... Where did you get the idea that there are few homeless in China? That's not true.

 

That e-ville word protectionism.

Besides, if we didn't allow and abet the regulatory nightmare in the first place, they wouldn't leave.

If you had any understanding of how the Establishment operates and what their goals are, you'd understand that they are the ones pushing the excessive regulation.

As I said, all this is intentional - for the Establishment, they're far beyond caring about something as pedestrian as profit.

Everything playing out today is about power.

 

Yes, setting an example. "We shall be as a city upon a hill, the eyes of all people are upon us."

 

Why wouldn't they? They can get slave labour elsewhere and sell their goods to Americans. That's an obvious choice to make, with or without government intervention.

 

I just explained it. If energy and other overhead costs are relatively close, it wouldn't make fiscal sense to move.

That said, the country should have every motivation to facilitate a company's success. For the most part, that means as little regulation and governmental interference as possible.

Of course the Establishment has an entirely different agenda.

 

Why not? Why would you not take advantage of global work force and slave labour? How would you make it more cost effective to get this work done in the US than overseas? Given very large items and expensive shipping, maybe. Otherwise, I don't see it. Especially for services that don't need any sort of shipping, like call centres.

WIth no government interference, the companies can do whatever they want, so why stay?

 

I hate to pee in your cheerios, but everyone from the small business to the MNC is the establishment. The only question is, to which degree. Globalism has brought more good than anything else. YOu can get avocados, for instance, year-round, in your grocery store, or plenty of other fruits and vegetables that are not native or grown here in the US or vice versa. Globalization encourages trade with other countries and it helps with inflation here in the US. It does this by allowing countries to maximize their economies of scale unique to their country. China's economy of scale is its people and they have a ton. India has not done that with their version of bureaucracy which can be mindboggling at times, especially to westerners who are not familiar with their culture. Trade also allows to break down stereotypes and helps prevent war. It has a lot of benefits and some drawbacks.

the other problem is that most jobs did not "go to China or Mexico." They are replaced by technology. The ATM, for instance, has replaced most bank tellers in the past. Robotics has made assembly lines more efficient, and so forth.

 

Another word.

Huh???

 

1) No, cities don't. Since it's ALWAYS a personal choice to live beyond your means (when you could either commute, share with family, or simply not live/work where you can't afford), a city has no responsibility for being 'unaffordable' to some people. How could it? The very idea is preposterous. No given location has an obligation to be affordable to everyone who feels like living there.

2) I'm saying 'helping' those currently in self-inflicted distress, while ignoring the root cause of the problem, creates many more distressed people tomorrow. It's cruel and thoughtless.

3) The global elites. The corporatists, technocrats, and bankers angling for maximum wealth transfer.

 

Sorry, but that's just silly. Commuting means being about 50km or so outside the city centre. You seriously think that means the City/State's predominant politics stop applying?

 

Never give a homeless person money. But I guess you know that now

 

No cost, no effort, and no consideration AT ALL of the fact that the homeless rarely genuinely want a roof over their head. They certainly want free money though.

 

Wanna bet?

Of course the 'socialism' they're talking about is more akin to medievalism, but hey .. they can LARP!

 

Sadly, that is the right choice. I had a friend who stopped at a guy holding a "Will work for food" sign and offered him a few days work. The guy turned him down. Some people take the "will work" part as indicating genuine need and character- and give cash since they aren't in a position to hire someone. The pan-handlers know their trade.

 

People thinks trains are socialism?

 

The reason a society doesn't have homelessness, has NOTHING to do with politics.

It's because the social structures which maintain individuals remain intact. Family/community/obligation.

 

You're just not connected with the issues in the US.

Those outside our major cities are not necessarily politically aligned with those cities. For example, Houston and Dallas Texas vote for Democrats while the state has a Republican majority.

There are plenty of examples of the communities outside of cities being strongly opposed to transit that could mean that city workers will live in those communities.

Also, to build transit to locations outside the city requires state cooperation with funding, etc.

 

Bull.

Nobody in America is interested in Socialism.

And, pretending it means some definition you want to define is preposterous.

You need to stick to Australia, as you are WAY off the mark in everything you have said about the USA.

 

Why would they want to go to Texas? They enforce laws against drugs and shoplifting there.

 

So Klepto Joe had it right?? Laid off coal miners need to learn how to code??

You think like a collectivist, because collectivism is what you've been indoctrinated into. The future is global serfdom - it's what you're fighting for.

I suppose someone like you will be content to languish in that condition, but that doesn't work for an old-school libertarian like me.

 

You don't understand these subjects very well - actually, not at all.

Good luck to you.

 

public buses and other forms of free public transportation... yes