Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good posts folks...
Nice to see people express themselves from the gut with passion... Our life experiences shape our viewpoints indeed...... Moving beyond the puppet masters talking heads, liberal/conservative BS is how we make a better society. Start to look into the eyes and hearts of humanity around you... Which I will admit is easy for me, because I have control over the amount of interaction I want... Living in desolate remote places has it's advantages..
I distinctly recall one "bum" from 20+ years ago. I was traveling for work in Jackson MS, a "bum" approached me for $5 to buy gas because he said his car ran out... LOL... It was obvious he had no car, and that was not the "tank" which was empty... So I bought a six pack of beer and drank it with him behind the gas station, while he told me how he got into his situation of living on the street. Anyway, after drinking the beer, I let him use the shower in my hotel, and gave him socks which he did not have.. He wanted out of his situation, society had him beaten down... I lost track of him, don't know if he made it out of his situation... But at least for a few hours he got to be treated as an equal, with respect, with the cast system of society set aside.
My point here is you treat someone like an animal then they will act like an animal.... Treat a fellow human being with respect and compassion and it is more likely you will get a positive response.
We pay Phil, to deal with with the ones seeking attention, wanting to be noticed... The system does not seem to be working to well, as we reward them for bad behavior... Yes getting arrested with two cop cars, a fire truck and an ambulance is quite the attention!
What we are doing does not work.... We choose to throw money at a situation because few of us are willing to donate what is more valuable... TIME
If each and every one of us adopted a "bum", had a conversation with them, while buying them lunch... I suspect not as many would be seeking attention, and Phil could eat donuts all day long then..
You got to give people the chance to earn something worth not loosing... and it is not related to money..
I am not arguing that people at the top of the food chain steal from the public. But to say that is the cause of homelessness is simply ignorant.
The wealthy have always stolen from the public, and it is not a new phenomenon, sh*t bums lying in their own vomit on public sidewalks is a fairly new phenomena. It is phenomena that did not exist prior to the 70's, and the escalation of the welfare state.
Like most *******s you have a tendency to equate correlation with causation because you have no real understanding of why things happen. This is a result of trying to think with your feelings instead of your mind. In fact you have been taught to do so by the socialist educational system, but that is another issue.
The homeless problem is not a byproduct of people at the top stealing money, it is a byproduct of the liberals stealing money from the productive class and rewarding people in the non-productive class for failure.
A perfect example is the black family, who survived centuries of slavery and generations of Jim Crow,
but was disintegrated in the wake of the liberals' expansion of the welfare state.
Most black children grew up in homes with two parents during all that time prior to welfare, but most grew up with only one parent afterwards due to the "pseudo compassionate" after the implementation of the welfare get paid for failure scheme.
The effects of this catastrophic failure can still be seen in the ghettos and projects of the liberal cities of the northeast today.
And yet liberals continue to ignore the fact that you cannot help people by enabling them to live succumbing to their own degradation. You help people by making them stand up and fight to survive with dignity.
If they refuse to do so, then yes you let them die, because death is surly preferable to a life of self-loathing and humiliation.
Hello. I'd like to suggest a book for you to read, regarding the history of Homelessness.
I am trained to seek the proximate cause of an event. But to do that I must do it on an individual basis, because homelessness has a myriad of causes. And of course correlation does not equal causation.
But I shall list some causes for you.
1. Loss of Job. Might be the workers fault, might be the because the whole company rightsized or went under.
2. Alcoholism. A legal drug. A disease however, beyond the control of many people.
3. Illegal Drug Abuse. A disease. One hit of meth is reportedly many times more addicting than cocaine. Submit to peer pressure once, and it has it's hooks in you.
4. Prescription Drug Abuse. A disease, a simple prescription from a Doctor and you might be hooked.
5. Psychiatric disability. A disease. Treatment options are available, better for people with cadillac insurance policies, but the Counties of CA run treatment centers as well, just not that great.
6. Actual loss of home. Includes fraud during the home implosion, and lending habits of RE types. This cause has pending litigation, at present. And is evidence of Nullgeo's theory of people effectively stealing from others by making loans that should not have been made.
7. Don't want to work. Well then your reward is homelessness in this society.
8. Anything else you can think of...
I do not consider a base subsistence life on welfare as a "reward" for failure. Rather it is an attempt to keep society as a whole functional by having less homeless about doing such things as spreading disease, committing crimes, etc. This was a response to the wave of Homelessness in the 1930's.
I also do not know why you consider the black family a perfect example. Divorce cuts across all demographics, as do unmarried pregnancies. And there are just about as many whites on welfare as a percent than black people, within 1%. Hispanics are doing quite well at 15.7%, and Asians lead the category at 2.4%.
Your byproduct theory is the same as not treating a cancer because you fear the discomfort of chemotherapy. I consider legions of homeless worse as a blight on society, health risk for others presented by homeless which spread disease, etc., worse than someone who might decide to make the most of the welfare lifestyle. Which I am dead certain includes people of all races. It's not a race thing as you imply.
Quote:
Source: US Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Commerce,
CATO Institute
Thank you to the CATO institute (libertarian thinktank) and US government for the statistics.
I am trained to seek the proximate cause of an event. But to do that I must do it on an individual basis, because homelessness has a myriad of causes. And of course correlation does not equal causation.
But I shall list some causes for you.
1. Loss of Job. Might be the workers fault, might be the because the whole company rightsized or went under.
2. Alcoholism. A legal drug. A disease however, beyond the control of many people.
3. Illegal Drug Abuse. A disease. One hit of meth is reportedly many times more addicting than cocaine. Submit to peer pressure once, and it has it's hooks in you.
4. Prescription Drug Abuse. A disease, a simple prescription from a Doctor and you might be hooked.
5. Psychiatric disability. A disease. Treatment options are available, better for people with cadillac insurance policies, but the Counties of CA run treatment centers as well, just not that great.
6. Actual loss of home. Includes fraud during the home implosion, and lending habits of RE types. This cause has pending litigation, at present. And is evidence of Nullgeo's theory of people effectively stealing from others by making loans that should not have been made.
7. Don't want to work. Well then your reward is homelessness in this society.
8. Anything else you can think of...
I do not consider a base subsistence life on welfare as a "reward" for failure. Rather it is an attempt to keep society as a whole functional by having less homeless about doing such things as spreading disease, committing crimes, etc. This was a response to the wave of Homelessness in the 1930's.
I also do not know why you consider the black family a perfect example. Divorce cuts across all demographics, as do unmarried pregnancies. And there are just about as many whites on welfare as a percent than black people, within 1%. Hispanics are doing quite well at 15.7%, and Asians lead the category at 2.4%.
Your byproduct theory is the same as not treating a cancer because you fear the discomfort of chemotherapy. I consider legions of homeless worse as a blight on society, health risk for others presented by homeless which spread disease, etc., worse than someone who might decide to make the most of the welfare lifestyle. Which I am dead certain includes people of all races. It's not a race thing as you imply.
Thank you to the CATO institute (libertarian thinktank) and US government for the statistics.
What you "consider" or "feel" is irrelevant to facts. Charity does not eliminate poverty, it causes it.
There is, and always has been a segment of society who seeks little more from life than to survive with the least amount of effort on their part. Given the opportunity they will take any handout and live their lives in squalor and in most cases in a drunken or drugged state.
They do this for the same reason a dog licks his balls… because they can. The reason they can is that misguided people believe that enabling them by giving them money they have not earned is somehow helping them. It is not.
The way you help people is to force them to do for themselves in order to instill the self-respect and dignity needed to break the chains of depression. Your books are garbage, and your list is simply excuses and not reasons.
I know people who are physically disabled to the point where most in society would assume they had no choice to survive other than accept free money for their disability. They instead choose to work despite the fact that they are missing legs and arms, because they understand that accepting charity is the first step to losing their self-respect and the beginning of self-loathing, which begins a downward spiral.
Homelessness is not a condition of economics; it is a state of mind.
Enablers reinforce this state of mind by believing that the homeless need help in order to survive. If someone tells you that you cannot do something, it is going to have a detrimental effect on your ability to do it.
Immigrants flood into this country by the 10's of millions with nothing more than the clothes on their backs and find work, survive, and build lives despite all the odds because they see opportunities that were not available in their own countries. Those same opportunities and more are there for the homeless, but they will not make use of them without the motivation to do it. Charity simply removes their motivation.
It's not what I "feel", it's what I know. You can happily ignore historical lessons, I suppose.
You simply ignore the facts to arrive at your conclusion. I cannot so easily ignore reality to arrive at a political theoretical conclusion.
Most Americans value charity, and do not wish to discard those who are unable to provide for themselves.
Homelessness is a state of mind is so much claptrap. If you lose your house and job through no fault of your own you will be homeless unless you are lucky to have friends or relatives to take you in. Not everyone has the ability of education to be an entrepreneurial success, and the government stopped giving away free land for development long ago.
You seem to be a strict Libertarian individualist. That's ok for you I suppose, but you are losing at the polls across the nation.
If charity caused poverty, can you please tell me at what percent it equalizes? Charity helps people when they need assistance. As previously stated most people on welfare get off it before 5 years are up. And that's the time limit in California now without a waiver.
Quote:
California passed its version of welfare reform in 1997. When Congress
changed the law, 21 percent of all Americans on welfare lived in California.
Democrats in the state Legislature resisted reforming welfare in a way that
emphasized work requirements. The notion that mothers with children should be
responsible for their children was a new concept for many California
legislators. The resulting bill - a compromise forged by two Democrats, Senator
Mike Thompson and Assembly Member Dion Aroner, and two Republicans, Senator Ken
Maddy and Assembly Member Roy Ashburn - was more paternal and lenient than many
welfare reform programs in other states. Republican Governor Pete Wilson signed
the compromise into law in August 1997.
The results of the changes in the federal program so far have been dramatic.
Nationwide, the number of Americans on the welfare rolls declined by 50 percent
since Congress "ended welfare as we know it."
I am not arguing that people at the top of the food chain steal from the public. But to say that is the cause of homelessness is simply ignorant.
The wealthy have always stolen from the public, and it is not a new phenomenon, sh*t bums lying in their own vomit on public sidewalks is a fairly new phenomena. It is phenomena that did not exist prior to the 70's, and the escalation of the welfare state.
Like most *******s you have a tendency to equate correlation with causation because you have no real understanding of why things happen. This is a result of trying to think with your feelings instead of your mind. In fact you have been taught to do so by the socialist educational system, but that is another issue.
The homeless problem is not a byproduct of people at the top stealing money, it is a byproduct of the liberals stealing money from the productive class and rewarding people in the non-productive class for failure.
A perfect example is the black family, who survived centuries of slavery and generations of Jim Crow,
but was disintegrated in the wake of the liberals' expansion of the welfare state.
Most black children grew up in homes with two parents during all that time prior to welfare, but most grew up with only one parent afterwards due to the "pseudo compassionate" after the implementation of the welfare get paid for failure scheme.
The effects of this catastrophic failure can still be seen in the ghettos and projects of the liberal cities of the northeast today.
And yet liberals continue to ignore the fact that you cannot help people by enabling them to live succumbing to their own degradation. You help people by making them stand up and fight to survive with dignity.
If they refuse to do so, then yes you let them die, because death is surly preferable to a life of self-loathing and humiliation.
jim, this is really, truly interesting. You, and some others posting here, present a view that homelessness is a "choice" lifestyle -- one encouraged by handouts. Now I propose to you, all, that your ignorance of the issues is a "choice" as well. The information refuting every one of your points is readily available on the internet. There is help for you. But you clearly prefer to remain angry and in the dark about this problem when you could step into the light of understanding -- and help with the solutions.
Rather than link you up, as has already been done and you have willfully ignored, I will list a few points for you to find the answers to on your own. You know, by "choice", jim.
Look up "Welfare queen" ... include keyword "Reagan" if you'd like -- he's the guy who created the fictional character you'll read about ... yes, an intentional fiction on his part.
Research the history of welfare in this country and learn how it is declining as a percentage of population ... note particularly how it has varied with depressions and recessions ... and how it went into strong decline after 1996 -- only to have some upswing in the most recent recession, but still not return to the rates of previous generations.
Read up on the history of black America and the trends in black culture and families ... note especially what happened to black family unit strength as sharecropping fell away when blacks began to integrate into more industrialized economics and careers and lifestyles ... and had to endure the ugly realities of extreme prejudice in every aspect of their lives ... see if you can find information about the strong black family you claim existed in American history. It was destroyed first by slavery and then that destruction was perpetuated by prejudice -- not by welfare.
Also look up the history of homelessness and learn about your "sh*t bums lying in their own vomit on public sidewalks is a fairly new phenomena. It is phenomena that did not exist prior to the 70's, and the escalation of the welfare state." ... I assure you, jim, it is NOT a new phenomena. I distinctly remember the bums on skid row Vine Street in Philadelphia where I grew up, rushing up to our '53 Dodge at the red lights, with their bottles of water and rags to clean our already clean windshield, hustling for wine money to go get drunk and lie in their own puke ... focus on our "'53 Dodge", jim, that's when I am talking about ... and read about skid roads all across the nation's cities since the turn of the previous century and the great Depression.
jim, I was born into these issues. So before you come back to this discussion with me, do come prepared with actual facts and not legendary conservative hyperbole. Think of the most famous names in American civil rights, labor movements of the 40's, 50's, and 60's ... I grew up with those people sharing meals with me in my home. My father was hand picked by Lynden Johnson to work with Hubert Humphrey in committees and councils developing civil rights and fair housing legislation for the nation. I know more about civil rights, black history, the labor movement, fair housing, welfare and homelessness than you want to believe -- but you are likely to find out if you continue to choose to argue ignorantly here. You are out of your depth.
See, the welfare reform reduced the rolls. That's the opposite result predicted by your theory. Your generalization is incorrect.
Point: California TANF is now limited to 48 months, not 60. In some places in the nation it is down as low as 24 months, I believe (but would have to re-research to confirm that).
But YES, to all your rebuttals in this thread. Keep up the excellent work. Facts, indeed!
Point: California TANF is now limited to 48 months, not 60. In some places in the nation it is down as low as 24 months, I believe (but would have to re-research to confirm that).
But YES, to all your rebuttals in this thread. Keep up the excellent work. Facts, indeed!
I stand corrected on the 60 months, thought that was the limit last time I checked and didn't doublecheck to make sure it was still correct.
If there's a time limit to collecting welfare, but the country's in a recession and there's high unemployment, how does that work out?
Heh. Tough. But the statistics on the success of welfare roles reintegrating successfully aren't bad at all. Pretty damn good, all things considered. People need an opportunity to get re-directed and established. Some take it for just that and move on. Others fall into despair ... just not capable of moving forward with their lives ... without safety nets they often turn to activities very costly for society as well as themselves. But the welfare system has been learning over the years and was right to set limits.
What the next levels of safety net need to be is another discussion. Phil306 is right in his observations of the segment of population that is hopeless ... it exists ... and it sucks up money that would be better allocated otherwise ... using expensive emergency resources repetitively for that level of "rescue" is a poor use of them. "Wet" housing is a fairly new concept ... and, sadly, probably will prove to be the best that can be done for this small minority.
P.S. the country has been technically out of the recession since 2009 ... hard to feel that ... but by economic definitions we are maintaining and growing ... ever so slightly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
