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.
Are you saying that Freebird is a troll? I think that's a bit harsh, though I have seen some people troll their own threads. But for sure, saying that Ira was jacking the thread for posting a relevant comment, was definitely over the top. It didn't even meet the criteria in the Urban Dictionary definition he posted!
I'd agree that street people ought to be evaluated somewhat as Elle said, if they're mentally ill they should be treated (even against their will if necessary). Addicts should at least be offered treatment, which should be mandatory in a locked facility for longer than a jail sentence, if they've committed so much as a misdemeanor.
There's only so many times you can do that with a chronic addict though, it just costs too much to do it over and over again for years.
People who are down on their luck should be offered a way back, starting with a decent clean, comfortable homeless shelter with two squares a day. Then move on to transitional housing, job placement (no, telling them how to write a resume isn't enough to get a job), etc.
There are MANY young people now who run in small packs and don't really fit the above categories ..... they seem to prefer squatting or whatever, which is understandable considering that most of any money they earn would be blown on rent alone in typical apartments. One of them told me once, "Paying rent is like THROWING AWAY most of your money!"
There used to be affordable rooms to rent in Seattle and in most cities, small rooms that had everything needed in a sort of efficiency apartment. Those were called SROs, Single Room Occupancy. I lived in one in San Diego that had a bed, desk, TV, phone, microwave, toilet, and shower - all in one small room. Single working people, or those on disability, could afford to get such an SRO (usually with shared bath) - the rent was low and the deposit was low.
If the homeless didn't have to squander their bit of income on an expensive apt that demands $2500 up front, if there were an affordable SRO option, I think most of them would choose that.
Another idea is check to see what other countries around the world are doing. I don't think there's much of a homeless problem in Europe, for example ...... maybe we could look to them for answers.
Are you saying that Freebird is a troll? I think that's a bit harsh, though I have seen some people troll their own threads. But for sure, saying that Ira was jacking the thread for posting a relevant comment, was definitely over the top. It didn't even meet the criteria in the Urban Dictionary definition he posted!
I'd agree that street people ought to be evaluated somewhat as Elle said, if they're mentally ill they should be treated (even against their will if necessary). Addicts should at least be offered treatment, which should be mandatory in a locked facility for longer than a jail sentence, if they've committed so much as a misdemeanor.
There's only so many times you can do that with a chronic addict though, it just costs too much to do it over and over again for years.
People who are down on their luck should be offered a way back, starting with a decent clean, comfortable homeless shelter with two squares a day. Then move on to transitional housing, job placement (no, telling them how to write a resume isn't enough to get a job), etc.
There are MANY young people now who run in small packs and don't really fit the above categories ..... they seem to prefer squatting or whatever, which is understandable considering that most of any money they earn would be blown on rent alone in typical apartments. One of them told me once, "Paying rent is like THROWING AWAY most of your money!"
There used to be affordable rooms to rent in Seattle and in most cities, small rooms that had everything needed in a sort of efficiency apartment. Those were called SROs, Single Room Occupancy. I lived in one in San Diego that had a bed, desk, TV, phone, microwave, toilet, and shower - all in one small room. Single working people, or those on disability, could afford to get such an SRO (usually with shared bath) - the rent was low and the deposit was low.
If the homeless didn't have to squander their bit of income on an expensive apt that demands $2500 up front, if there were an affordable SRO option, I think most of them would choose that.
Another idea is check to see what other countries around the world are doing. I don't think there's much of a homeless problem in Europe, for example ...... maybe we could look to them for answers.
That's right. It was the YMCA. They no longer provide this service, which was the whole purpose of the YMCA to begin with.
Then there was the 'flop houses', where you could rent a bed for 25 cents a night. They once were lined up all along First Ave., Pioneer Sq. and Alaska Way. This is where the sailers, loggers and transient workers stayed. The city closed them all down, they felt they were a fire hazard. However, in those days we never had the homeless problem we have today. I think you can say, our city government is greatly responsible for our problem.
If the homeless didn't have to squander their bit of income on an expensive apt that demands $2500 up front, if there were an affordable SRO option, I think most of them would choose that.
While I may not currently live in Seattle, I used to live there 10 years ago. From the sounds of it, the homelessness problem has grown quite a bit. I remember when I used to live there, there would be squabbles over which corner was owned by which homeless person.
Some are there because life has dealt them a bad deck of cards, some are there by choice, some are there by addiction.
I used to be a huge advocate for the homeless problem, but my views have changed in the last 10 years. I've found that even when help is provided, they (the homeless folks) often prefer to stay in their current position. They are more than willing to take your cash, your food, and your shelter, but only if it allows them to continue their self-destructive lifestyle.
When we lived in Groton, CT there was a homeless person who lived on the street corner. A social worker in her spare time helped this man get social security benefits and food stamps. Pre-paid his low-income housing unit and got him a PO Box for his benefits.
In the end, the man bought himself a Harley and still went back to begging on that same street corner. This time with newer clothes (still purposefully muddied to look poor) and a newer bike that he stashed in the bushes.
In March 2011, Seattle Housing Authority announced that we will not be issuing new Housing Choice (Section 8) vouchers for the foreseeable future. We are doing this to make sure that we don’t exceed our voucher limit set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
We estimate that we will not again issue vouchers until sometime in 2012.
When we are able to issue vouchers again, we will call in the household that holds Lottery Number 2,026 first.
We do not know when we will again be opening up a new Voucher waiting list. We will post information about any new waiting list on this website and in the Porchlight Building lobby.
Quote:
............When we lived in Groton, CT there was a homeless person who lived on the street corner. A social worker in her spare time helped this man get social security benefits and food stamps. Pre-paid his low-income housing unit and got him a PO Box for his benefits.
In the end, the man bought himself a Harley and still went back to begging on that same street corner. This time with newer clothes (still purposefully muddied to look poor) and a newer bike that he stashed in the bushes.
Yep, some are like that. But I still have to wonder why homelessness is not much of a problem in the other firstworld industrialized nations. It's not like they're a different species.
Yep, some are like that. But I still have to wonder why homelessness is not much of a problem in the other firstworld industrialized nations. It's not like they're a different species.
Maybe homelessness isn't encouraged over there, like it is here. If I can pandhandle making at least 10 dollars an hour, why would I go to McD's and make less than that flipping burgers?
Panhandlers in Seattle ARE annoying. There are many reasons:
1. Other major cities in the country have little or no services for bums, so they come here where there are a few services.
2. Many people here (especially our tourists) aren't assertive enough to say "no" and they know it. Great way to get some spare change.
3. They have vagrancy laws on the Eastside so their bums get shipped over to us.
4. The city basically embraces/enables it.
5. We live in a second-world country with almost no mental health treatment for uninsured people. Funding for that went away decades ago.
6. Seattle has cred for having good drugs and a laid-back hippie-lovin West Coast lifestyle. Bums (and the infinitely more annoying and entitled street kids) love that crap.
I'm not the type of person who would vilify the poor and pretend they're living some lavish lifestyle on my dime (I'll leave that to my Reaganite brethren), but you have to see it realistically. I just don't like how Seattlites have to get so much crap for "causing" such high numbers of homelessness and having to feel guilty like we made it happen. They COME to US in most cases, straining our limited resources that aren't designed to help such a large amount of people (not to mention the costs that our hospitals have to take on every time one of them wants an ambulance ride to the hospital). I think this country as a whole needs to do more to help the homeless get treatment so none of this fallout has to happen. Its expensive, annoying and preventable.
Maybe homelessness isn't encouraged over there, like it is here. If I can pandhandle making at least 10 dollars an hour, why would I go to McD's and make less than that flipping burgers?
Most European countries have a (halfway) efficient social system which, while far from perfect, doesn't just let people rot away in the streets. I've been living in various European cities and of course there are homeless people, like everywhere, but never have I in Europe seen homeless in such a bad shape as in the US. Some of these people in downtown Seattle look as if they would not make it through the night...and that's very sad...considering we are living in one of the richest countries on this planet.
Most European countries have a (halfway) efficient social system which, while far from perfect, doesn't just let people rot away in the streets. I've been living in various European cities and of course there are homeless people, like everywhere, but never have I in Europe seen homeless in such a bad shape as in the US. Some of these people in downtown Seattle look as if they would not make it through the night...and that's very sad...considering we are living in one of the richest countries on this planet.
No, we are not one of the richest countries on the planet. While personal wealth may make us the country with citizens who have the most wealth, this country does not have any money to share. In fact, we're 14trillion (almost 15) in debt.
I have no problem sharing my wealth and knowledge with people who have an interest in improving their lives (I thoroughly enjoy working in soup kitchens to meet people), I don't feel like I should openly hand out the wealth I've earned to people who have no interest in earning their own wealth or improving their social status.
Unfortunately the world isn't fair and not everyone will end up making their way in life.
The problem with the United States in general is that people are lazy and feel entitled. When you hear of politicians reducing benefits the saying is "I'm entitled to that!!!!". The lazy part is easy. People are lazy, and if they can sit on a street corner panhandling for more than what McD's pays and live rent free in a tent, some will do that, BY CHOICE.
The lazy part is easy. People are lazy, and if they can sit on a street corner panhandling for more than what McD's pays and live rent free in a tent, some will do that, BY CHOICE.
You've got a very simplistic view of society...if this is the general view in this country then I am not surprised that there is a problem with homeless people...
You've got a very simplistic view of society...if this is the general view in this country then I am not surprised that there is a problem with homeless people...
There are always exception to the rule, but in general many of the homeless people I've met are there by choice (or repeatedly bad choices they've made), not because they lack opportunities to improve their situation.
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.
'There Used To Be Affordable Housing':
