Young family, considering a move from Idaho to Anchorage (Ketchikan: costs, airport)

[Northrick]

Originally Posted by pittsflyer

I agree there is a problem but what i was trying to say is that it makes people more comfortable if they can associate EVERY homeless person as some kind of drug addict. Because then they dont have to deal with the fact that they too are at-will and can just as easily be collecting unemployment, getting rejected for jobs and staring down the homeless (or go live with family) barrel.

You dont have to be on drugs to get laid off and get rejected in interviews, run out of money and be screwed. But if someone can convince themselves that only the looser drug addicts will face homelessness then they can sleep easier ... because they are not one of "them".

Seems like this is in response to my post. What I was trying to say is that I believe the recent INCREASE in homelessness in Anchorage is being caused mainly by opioids and not so much Alaska's recession. I firmly believe that our good friend Alcohol is responsible for most homelessness and always will be. And, neither of that is saying all homeless are drug/alcohol addicts. There is the mentally ill, and yes, the unemployed.


However, people who were working and suddenly find themselves out of a job and then eventually on the streets are much more likely to be receptive to help getting back on their feet. Homelessness for them is much more likely to be short term until the various social services can kick in. I don't sleep easier because I believe all homeless people are drug addicts and beyond help. In fact, we donate a fair bit of money to charities that try to help stabilize peoples lives.

[Frostnip]

The thing is, to get clean after hitting bottom - or to avoid hitting bottom in the first place - a person needs to have some hope, to believe that life has something better to offer. They have to have something to lose, or to gain. In a screwed-up economy, those hopes are a lot more tenuous.

Let's say you could magically snap your fingers and cure every homeless person in Anc of their drug and alcohol addictions - what do they do next? How do they all get from a tent in the park to a safe, stable, pleasant living situation?

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by Frostnip

The thing is, to get clean after hitting bottom - or to avoid hitting bottom in the first place - a person needs to have some hope, to believe that life has something better to offer. They have to have something to lose, or to gain. In a screwed-up economy, those hopes are a lot more tenuous.

Let's say you could magically snap your fingers and cure every homeless person in Anc of their drug and alcohol addictions - what do they do next? How do they all get from a tent in the park to a safe, stable, pleasant living situation?

They get a seasonal job with housing, save every cent, and get a fresh start. Anyone with a pulse can get a seasonal job right now, and wages are reflecting the labor shortage.

Plenty of places with thriving economies right now have more serious homeless issues than Anchorage does.

I'm surprised at Pitts change of attitude toward the homeless recently; he must have seen a white guy panhandling, but it's been about the "worthless Natives" for years.

[Frostnip]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

They get a seasonal job with housing, save every cent, and get a fresh start. Anyone with a pulse can get a seasonal job right now, and wages are reflecting the labor shortage.

Not with a record. And I think you grossly overestimate the availability of those jobs, particularly outside the pre-season hiring window.

[Metlakatla]

There are big and small seafood processors that hire those with a record. Sorry, but I do know this for a fact. It'll be even easier this year for those with a record to get hired since they can't hire foreign labor anymore. Not the best work in the world, as we've discussed, but enough to give someone the money for a place and groceries while getting established. Hospitality jobs are also available; with the economy doing well pretty much everywhere but Alaska, people are traveling more.

I think outside of corporate employees like Princess, background checks on seasonal employees aren't automatic, and with the economy so good in the -48, seasonal employers can't afford high standards. I suppose someone with a really bad record would have a problem, but the average run-of-the-mill felon could find something this year.

It's past the "pre-season hiring window" for much of the state, and I can think offhand of about 10 businesses within a 50-mile radius from me that aren't yet fully staffed.

Midseason is also a good time to get on because that's when a lot of people start to quit.

Or I suppose they could just go back to the streets of Anchorage and blame "this economy" while out-of-staters take the jobs or the jobs go unfilled. It may not be an answer for everyone, particularly those with special circumstances, but it is a realistic option. I've seen a lot of people use seasonal jobs as a stepping stone to a better life.

They could also apply at Alaska Airlines and other companies who've been known to hire felons. They could get a hospitality job in Anchorage, share an apartment with someone to save on expenses, and work toward going back to school (it's my understanding that Natives get a lot of educational perks).

https://www.jobsforfelonshub.com/job...s-with-felony/

ETA I think you underestimate the availability of these jobs because you live in a part of the state and work in an industry where seasonal work is the exception.

The seafood industry alone hires more than 20,000 seasonal employees. It's not all summer work, either. The average seasonal can make enough to rent an apartment somewhere with jobs and schooling opportunities.

[AlaskaErik]

Originally Posted by TheDisillusionist

This might be a solid point, but your use of the term "eco fascist" makes me think that you're a loon - which makes me doubt your point a little more. Can environmentalists go overboard? Yeah - of course. Do the people who refer to them as "eco-fascists" tend to have any intelligent answers to the issue? Almost never.

These people are hard core extremists. Start going to any type of hearing held on any type of project and you see the same faces over and over again. They really are eco fascists. And I'm no loon, I'm a college educated professional. I'm just not a politically correct one. I call things like I see them. It would be interesting to see what kind of terms your liberal friends use when President Trump is the topic of conversation. I'm sure they refer to him in terms that are much worse than eco fascist. Do you consider them loons too?

[TheDisillusionist]

Originally Posted by AlaskaErik

These people are hard core extremists. Start going to any type of hearing held on any type of project and you see the same faces over and over again. They really are eco fascists. And I'm no loon, I'm a college educated professional. I'm just not a politically correct one. I call things like I see them. It would be interesting to see what kind of terms your liberal friends use when President Trump is the topic of conversation. I'm sure they refer to him in terms that are much worse than eco fascist. Do you consider them loons too?

I don't think Trump is a fascist, that gives him way too much credit - I do think he's an egomaniac, and an incompetent boob, but unless he somehow manages to completely dismantle the U.S. political structure, he's subject to the same legal and democratic processes as any other president, though he might whine about it more than most. Besides, "fascist" is a tired, cliche'd political term.

By the way, you can't argue that you're being "politically incorrect" and then point the finger at liberals for saying worse things, ie. being more politically incorrect than you. That's logically inconsistent.

[AlaskaErik]

Originally Posted by TheDisillusionist

I don't think Trump is a fascist, that gives him way too much credit - I do think he's an egomaniac, and an incompetent boob, but unless he somehow manages to completely dismantle the U.S. political structure, he's subject to the same legal and democratic processes as any other president, though he might whine about it more than most. Besides, "fascist" is a tired, cliche'd political term.

By the way, you can't argue that you're being "politically incorrect" and then point the finger at liberals for saying worse things, ie. being more politically incorrect than you. That's logically inconsistent.

Liberals are politically correct about most things. But when it comes to conservatives, anything goes.

[phlinak]

Originally Posted by TheDisillusionist

Idaho has plenty of that too. There is literally a part of this state that is so desolate, they used it to prepare astronauts for landing on the moon. I was born there. So on one hand, I can agree with your point, but on the other hand, my research has led me to believe that Alaska may have botched a lot of opportunities by not investing wisely in infrastructure during the oil boom.

You are correct in your conclusion.

Alaska has squandered countless opportunities to invest in infrastructure.

Two examples.

First, before the late US senator, Ted Stevens, lost his seat and seniority in 2008, he had political clout and used it to leverage a lot of useless pork-barrel spending up here (like the white elephant of a train station at Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport that has no scheduled train service).

https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/arti...ce/2010/03/03/

Second, our only US House Representative, Don Young, has also used his political clout to leverage a lot of useless pork-barrel spending up here (like the bridge to Gravina Island that would regularly serve 50 people).

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...elped-put-end/

How many hundreds of millions of dollars were wasted on just these two boondoggles, money that would have been better spent widening the Glenn Highway, building a light rail line to the Valley or a bridge across Knik Arm?

[TheDisillusionist]

Originally Posted by AlaskaErik

Liberals are politically correct about most things. But when it comes to conservatives, anything goes.

Same goes for conservatives toward liberals. What's your point?