Homeless people down town (insurance, house, to live)

[citizenkane2]

Originally Posted by MortonR

It's a valid point, however. If you're going to challenge others to offer a solution, it's assumed that you have one of your own.

We can go back to the Reagan administration to see how public mental health resources were dismantled and led to the much of the current homeless issue we have now. Many, not all, of these people are in need of mental health resources that simply don't exist today. While I'm not keen about the institutional approach to mental health, it was certainly far better than abandoning a part of society that could otherwise be housed safely and humanely as well as treated for their needs.

I used to do work at Central State, and while I was never keen about being there, it served a purpose. I've dealt with mental health issues in my family that included institutionalizing people, and I will say that the resources available today are almost nonexistent, public or private.

RM

Why were those facilities dismantled?? What was Regans reason??

[citizenkane2]

Originally Posted by missik999

Cincinnati is dealing with this problem right now. Approximately 40 people have set up a tent city downtown and the city has declared it to be a public health hazard due to the drugs, hepatitis, urination and defecation, etc.

There is available space in homeless shelters there but they don’t want to leave their tents, and they have resisted efforts to be relocated to shelters.

The reason they don’t want to move to shelters? They say they want a place of their own, which they consider their tents to be. But they are trespassing on city property, it is not their own. You can’t pitch a tent anywhere you want and claim squatters rights.

Business owners are complaining because customers are staying away. They say the camp is filthy and the area reeks of urine and feces.

Yesterday one of the men from the camp was arrested for selling heroin and fentanyl.

One if the men was interviewed on local news saying he had been set up in an apartment but he got kicked out because it was a “no smoking” apartment and he refused to stop smoking in his own home. Said he wasn’t going to walk outside every time he wanted to smoke. So he got kicked out and now had “his own place” which was a tent in the camp.

Smh

[MortonR]

Originally Posted by citizenkane2

Why were those facilities dismantled?? What was Regans reason??

https://www.quora.com/Did-President-...ime-in-America

https://sites.psu.edu/psy533wheeler/...omment-page-1/

Did Reagan’s Crazy Mental Health Policies Cause Today’s Homelessness? – Poverty Insights

In fairness, understand that there was a great deal of pressure on Reagan while he was President to allow people to more or less "choose for themselves" and not have government be a "nanny state" in a sense. I'm not using these terms specifically, just trying to explain that there was a movement in the public to empower individuals that more or less suggested that if someone needed mental health care they would realize it and ask for it, rather than having it thrust upon them by society.

Unfortunately, Reagan's policies took it to the other end of the spectrum, pretty much eliminating publicly (Federally) funded mental health services.

RM

[ImmerLernen]

Originally Posted by MortonR

In fairness, understand that there was a great deal of pressure on Reagan while he was President to allow people to more or less "choose for themselves" and not have government be a "nanny state" in a sense.

<snip>

Unfortunately, Reagan's policies took it to the other end of the spectrum, pretty much eliminating publicly (Federally) funded mental health services.

Yes. And historically, there were abuses within the system (which will never be 100% wiped out from any "system") and instances of people who shouldn't have been institutionalized being locked up against their will.

So, the pendulum swung the other direction, and the result is what we're seeing on our streets. It's time to have it swing back to some sort of happy medium.

And, as annoying as some people's responses can be, it *is* the job of the government (funded by our tax dollars) and elected officials (who we've voted into office) to recognize this problem and do something about it, complex and overwhelming as it is.

Individuals, organizations, and agencies trying to "help" by being welcoming and/or accepting of people living on the streets (even the mentally ill) are actually exacerbating the problem. Yes, a certain percentage of people will *never* comply with laws/regulations, but that doesn't mean you continue doing what obviously is not working by supporting their lifestyle, be it directly or indirectly.

[Ivory Lee Spurlock]

It was most definitely under Reagan that beggars started showing up at busy intersections in big cities with signs that would say something like, "will work for food". A lot of people were shocked and could not believe that kind of thing was happening in these here United States of America. They could not believe what they were seeing, people begging for work instead of money to get food. You never use to see people resorting to that type of begging in the 50's, 60's and 70's.

[W & C]

Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock

It was most definitely under Reagan that beggars started showing up at busy intersections in big cities with signs that would say something like, "will work for food". A lot of people were shocked and could not believe that kind of thing was happening in these here United States of America. They could not believe what they were seeing, people begging for work instead of money to get food. You never use to see people resorting to that type of begging in the 50's, 60's and 70's.

How then to explain the homeless in Canada ? You go to Vancouver and it's worse than Seattle. I dunno if Reagan is responsible for that.

[ImmerLernen]

Originally Posted by W & C

How then to explain the homeless in Canada ? You go to Vancouver and it's worse than Seattle. I dunno if Reagan is responsible for that.

I'm gonna take a wild guess that the problem in Vancouver stems from similar policies in Canada and probably that city's being one of those more "welcoming/accepting" locales.

[ImmerLernen]

Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock

They could not believe what they were seeing, people begging for work instead of money to get food. You never use to see people resorting to that type of begging in the 50's, 60's and 70's.

Don't believe everything you read. Even way back when this first started, everyone knew the sign was just a more polite way to ask for a hand-out than truly asking for work.

[W & C]

Originally Posted by ImmerLernen

I'm gonna take a wild guess that the problem in Vancouver stems from similar policies in Canada and probably that city's being one of those more "welcoming/accepting" locales.

Policies similar to Reaganomics ? I'm guessing not, as Canada boasts universal healthcare as well as a broad social safety net that provides a variety of services including - in comparison to United States, that is.

Your second point - pretty true. Vancouver's mild year-round climate (in comparison to the rest of Canada) doesn't hurt either.

[Ivory Lee Spurlock]

Originally Posted by W & C

How then to explain the homeless in Canada ? You go to Vancouver and it's worse than Seattle. I dunno if Reagan is responsible for that.

I don't know about Canada but I do know that in the mid 80's, there was a time when the economy got real bad in the United States and unemployment was hovering between 12 and 25% in some cities, many in the Midwest, including Indiana. Many people who did work had their hours cut. It was a bad time for the American economy. That's around the time Reagan cut out enough funds that would have went for mental health programs that resulted in many "borderline" patients being released from mental hospitals that really needed to be in a mental hospital. Alot of them folks ended up on the streets. That was also around the time when people who looked to be perfectly respectful honest family type people who were down on their luck standing at busy intersections holding "will work for food" signs. Pretty soon after that was when actual panhandlers started panhandling at busy intersections. You never use to see panhandlers of any kind with signs at busy intersections before the Reagan years. I don't think it was even allowed to panhandle at busy intersections. Going down the line of backed up traffic at the red light with hat in hand. That started in the 80's during Reagan.