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.
There's not even any way to know how many homeless people there are. Most homeless people like to 'stay gray' and not draw attention to themselves.
A lot of them are what used to be called derries. That was short for derelicts. Old people who could no longer afford a home and were too old to work. They would stay gray in more ways than one. But now they get SS or SSI. They can afford a home if they move to a cheap enough neighborhood, and/or tolerate roommates. But a lot of old homeless people have given up and don't even try to find an affordable room. They spend their SS or SSI on booze and worse. They know they have nothing to look forward to but getting older and sicker, and eventually dying. Is it any wonder they just want to bury it all in booze etc.?
We need strict vagrancy laws. When people aren't motivated to do what's right, nor even what's best for themselves, we need to motivate them with the right laws. A county poorhouse may seem cheap, rude, and cruel, but it's not nearly as bad as the gutter. And it forces them to get sober, which can give them hope.
I was briefly homeless in Denver, back in 1972, and it was a cinch to go from homelessness to employment, but times have changed, way too may barriers in place.
Desperate for a job, I applied for a job at a nursing home as a nursing assistant, and perhaps they were as desperate as I was, and I started out as an apprentice, and after a week I had my own patients to tend to, pay was very low, as expected, but enough for me to rent a room in someone's house.
Today, that would be absolutely impossible, as you'd need to have your CNA license (schooling), a CPR card, undergo a background investigation, fingerprinting, a TB test and drug test.
I'm sure, among those homeless, there's a number of them that could give a darn good massage, but today, even that field requires going to massage school, up to $14k in tuition to complete a year's program. And a massage license, in the end, at $300.
So let's remove some of those barriers, one way of reducing the high cost of homelessness.
You don't think those things could be necessary to work in a nursing home? Makes sense, though. Most people think elder abuse is phony or exaggerated until they see it happen.
The solution is to have more mental health facilities. Very few longterm homeless people are mentally stable. Honestly, even with this, the majority of homeless people are a burden to society.
$Millions are wasted on the "homeless" that could instead be used to help those trying to help themselves.
When we speak of "shelter" we are, for the most part, assuming that an overnight in a Spokane shelter is also welcoming for those super cold days--not so. People in those overnight shelters are there for the night, they must keep moving their stuff on a daily basis from a backpack to the shelter floor and then load up in the very early AM, and out on the streets again.
It's no wonder they'd rather have a more permanent place under the freeway than living like a wandering bum and risking confrontation with the police. Spokane is very cold in winter and the fact that these people are expected to find shelter during the day clashes with the fact of their presence being intolerable in public spaces.
Our homeless population is growing in most cities, and I'm not certain that night shelters are the answer to this growing army of the poorest of the poor. Looking for support for one's ideas of this not being a real problem, has added to the problem and adds little to answering the question of how to minimize the risks of allowing this problem to escalate.
The numbers matter because that's what the OP started this thread off. That's what you quoted me on, and then tried to turn it all basing your argument off of a "we need to do everything to help them attitude". IMO that's crap. You want to keep adding in costs of jails, (which again people do NOT go to jail for being homeless), so then you try to assume a round about way of calling it there fault. Your argument is an unrealistic tangent to base it off of. I'm not saying it has never happened, I'm saying it doesn't happen enough that you should come up with a better argument than that.
And, No you can't assume the rest of that either; We may disagree on definition here, but if we are paying for there housing, care, other needs, etc... there not homeless. There is a difference between a bum and someone homeless. Homeless (to me,) implies trying to get back into a place for them to live, where a bum is someone who is content with not having a place to live. Homeless make an effort and need a temporary hand to get back on there feet. A bum takes what they can get, and don't make an effort. Neither one means they are a criminal.
You're not looking hard enough. Rooms can be had for half that, and when you figure that a cheap hotel still includes all utilities they run about the same price, (trust me, I know. I was just staying in a few different ones for what ended up being almost 3 years).
My point was, that the actual dollar amount, while it being part of the OP, is not really relevant when looking for ways to reduce that amount as an adjunct to attempts at reducing homelessness in general. It can be likened to an attempt to reduce the cost of cancer care without considering the fact of a need to reduce the occurrence of cancer.
"Why the homeless end up in jail?" I put that in a google search and there was no lacking of stories about the issues surrounding the fact of homeless people spending time in local jails or state prisons,a place from which many of the homeless began their journey into poverty and homelessness. This isn't an exaggerated scenario, the police are confronting the homeless daily over many issues surrounding their presence in public spaces, drug offenses, illegal camping, and other crimes associated with the homeless. Yes, the "exact cost" of these confrontations are very difficult to calculate--but there is a very real cost associated with all of it.
Your opinion of what constitutes "crap" is certainly not the thing being argued, and, as far as your opining on the differences between "bums" and the homeless I can only reply with an observation that neither can be ignored in large numbers in an otherwise decent society. I'm merely sharing my views, you don't agree, that's been sufficiently established, I'm left to wonder if you have any thing to add with regard to what may cut the cost of homelessness while simultaneously advocating for addressing it's causes.
Arguing over the dollar amount spent on social ills usually ends up turning the issues upside down with regard to any resolution of those ills, instead, re-creating the issue as a fiscal matter while diminishing it's causes and, moreover, it's effects. Your personal views on these people are obviously biased, as opposed to others views of this as a real social problem worthy of our attention, the presence of such a large population of these people can, and should be, viewed as a possible manifestation of a much larger problem, one that transcends the housing aspect of homelessness.
My point was, that the actual dollar amount, while it being part of the OP, is not really relevant when looking for ways to reduce that amount as an adjunct to attempts at reducing homelessness in general. It can be likened to an attempt to reduce the cost of cancer care without considering the fact of a need to reduce the occurrence of cancer.
"Why the homeless end up in jail?" I put that in a google search and there was no lacking of stories about the issues surrounding the fact of homeless people spending time in local jails or state prisons,a place from which many of the homeless began their journey into poverty and homelessness. This isn't an exaggerated scenario, the police are confronting the homeless daily over many issues surrounding their presence in public spaces, drug offenses, illegal camping, and other crimes associated with the homeless. Yes, the "exact cost" of these confrontations are very difficult to calculate--but there is a very real cost associated with all of it.
Your opinion of what constitutes "crap" is certainly not the thing being argued, and, as far as your opining on the differences between "bums" and the homeless I can only reply with an observation that neither can be ignored in large numbers in an otherwise decent society. I'm merely sharing my views, you don't agree, that's been sufficiently established, I'm left to wonder if you have any thing to add with regard to what may cut the cost of homelessness while simultaneously advocating for addressing it's causes.
Arguing over the dollar amount spent on social ills usually ends up turning the issues upside down with regard to any resolution of those ills, instead, re-creating the issue as a fiscal matter while diminishing it's causes and, moreover, it's effects. Your personal views on these people are obviously biased, as opposed to others views of this as a real social problem worthy of our attention, the presence of such a large population of these people can, and should be, viewed as a possible manifestation of a much larger problem, one that transcends the housing aspect of homelessness.
Yes I get what you are saying, I am talking the cost of a homeless person, and you are trying to cover all the possible costs of ending homelessness. The OP titled one thing, then said another.
Just because you find a few articles about some homeless people on google doesn't mean anything about to what extent it is actually happening.
Yes I get what you are saying, I am talking the cost of a homeless person, and you are trying to cover all the possible costs of ending homelessness. The OP titled one thing, then said another.
Just because you find a few articles about some homeless people on google doesn't mean anything about to what extent it is actually happening.
I'm trying to understand the reasons behind your assertions of the homeless not being a problem for police and others in the justice system to the extent that news and social services are claiming it to be. I just don't see any thing to gain from arguing about the cost of dealing with homelessness unless our concerns directly relate to an attempt to curb it's causes. One thing is almost certain, not dealing with this problem will greatly increase the cost of it.
On doing research using google: I'm not one who reads an article or two and then offers that as proof of much beyond what the author can offer as his/her research sources. When a ton of supporting articles from valid sources seem to point in one direction I'm going to assume that there is sufficient evidence to support the claims made, that's the most, and best info we have in our immediate reach.
In my hometown we have a fairly large population of the homeless, especially when compared to the overall population numbers. I see the constant police activity in the areas where the homeless camp, constant news articles on the latest policies and debates on this problem of street side camping, our local jail is usually housing more of these people than they should/could be.
This is just a small town's scale of grief with it's population of homeless, the large cities are really beginning to bog down with the cost of services relative to homelessness. It's been a long held belief of mine that our entire aid to people constructs are the result of growing social ills whose causes are being overlooked. On another note, these wandering bands of the socio/economically displaced have far greater problems than the lack of housing.
I'm trying to understand the reasons behind your assertions of the homeless not being a problem for police and others in the justice system to the extent that news and social services are claiming it to be. I just don't see any thing to gain from arguing about the cost of dealing with homelessness unless our concerns directly relate to an attempt to curb it's causes. One thing is almost certain, not dealing with this problem will greatly increase the cost of it.
On doing research using google: I'm not one who reads an article or two and then offers that as proof of much beyond what the author can offer as his/her research sources. When a ton of supporting articles from valid sources seem to point in one direction I'm going to assume that there is sufficient evidence to support the claims made, that's the most, and best info we have in our immediate reach.
In my hometown we have a fairly large population of the homeless, especially when compared to the overall population numbers. I see the constant police activity in the areas where the homeless camp, constant news articles on the latest policies and debates on this problem of street side camping, our local jail is usually housing more of these people than they should/could be.
This is just a small town's scale of grief with it's population of homeless, the large cities are really beginning to bog down with the cost of services relative to homelessness. It's been a long held belief of mine that our entire aid to people constructs are the result of growing social ills whose causes are being overlooked. On another note, these wandering bands of the socio/economically displaced have far greater problems than the lack of housing.
I'm not continuing this, because you have an extremely exaggerated and ignorant perspective on this, no matter how many articles you think/claim you have read, and probably because of it.
I'm not continuing this, because you have an extremely exaggerated and ignorant perspective on this, no matter how many articles you think/claim you have read, and probably because of it.
Well, I'm not surprised, your decision to not pursue your point here seems all to common among those whose vitriolic responses can't measure up to the level of civil discourse. You made it abundantly clear that you prefer the "bar talk" kind of debate to anything resembling a well thought out debate.
why is it that all homeless people need help. i have met many that want that lifestyle, no bills, no responsibilty, no job, just wandering people. they are plain tickled to sleep outside in the woods.
Well, I'm not surprised, your decision to not pursue your point here seems all to common among those whose vitriolic responses can't measure up to the level of civil discourse. You made it abundantly clear that you prefer the "bar talk" kind of debate to anything resembling a well thought out debate.
Vitriolic response?? Where?? Not sure where your feelings got hurt, how, why, or what you found so offensive.. Just because I didn't agree with you after you felt the need to respond when I was asking the OP a question and didn't even respond to my post.
Whatever dude. You think you know everything you need to because you searched and read some articles on the internet. There is a lot more to life, and this topic. As for you thinking I can't keep up with your vocabulary; take the stick out. IF YOU ACTUALLY KNEW WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT; you would be able to make your point as simple as possible so everyone could understand, not as complicated as possible so only those who already know can follow along.
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.
Makes sense, though. Most people think elder abuse is phony or exaggerated until they see it happen. 
Whatever dude. You think you know everything you need to because you searched and read some articles on the internet. There is a lot more to life, and this topic. As for you thinking I can't keep up with your vocabulary; take the stick out. IF YOU ACTUALLY KNEW WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT; you would be able to make your point as simple as possible so everyone could understand, not as complicated as possible so only those who already know can follow along.
