I agree.
Ehh…it’s hard to do much more than has been done.
Such as?
The government will find a way to spend, I mean do, more.
1 Like
Yeah, on wars.
Like the ones on poverty, white supremacy, the patriarchy and heterosexuality.
1 Like
You mean where the government gives enough money to people so they don’t suffocate? But simultaneously strangles them? Recently the government passed a 95 billion dollar “aid” package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. I also read where it would cost 11-30 billion a year to end homelessness in this country. So homelessness is a choice our lousy government chooses to do. Forget about the people of this country, focus on foreign wars. FOH.
I’ve never understood that. That’s not me saying I disagree with it, but I just don’t get it. If the government spent 11-30 billion…how does that solve homelessness? What do you spend all that money on? You’re not just going to build a new house for everyone, right?
No. So they don’t feel like getting a job and having a sense of accountability with regard to their, or their children’s, lives and outcome.
To end it, or to a wage war on it that will never end?
1 Like
No. And it wouldn’t matter if you did. The vast majority of them are mentally ill, mentally challenged or addicts.
I suppose the mentally ill could be rehabilitated with medication and support, assuming they stay up to date. Some sympathy could be warranted here as they likely came from unsupportive or absentee families and don’t have the faculty to maintain on their own.
Addicts will tear the house apart selling what they can for drug money. And they did it to themselves, even if rehabilitated I don’t see how consequence of personal choice is societies burden.
Can’t really do much for the mentally challenged. To really keep them on track you’d have to not only house but even institutionalize a little. Unpopular opinion but do they really know the difference between a bed in a provided home vs. existing shelters, or even sleeping outside, as long as basic survival needs are met?
For the true down and outs dealt a devastating bad hand, support via programs getting them back on their feet would go further. The whole give a man a fish thing.
2 Likes
All true.
I’m all for ending homelessness but there are factors that exist that can’t be solved by throwing money at it. Addiction can be “cured,” sometimes, but some mentally ill are never going to get it together, as unfortunate as that is. Then you’re left with essentially locking them up or leaving them on the streets. People get squeamish about both options.
In addition the question of who is responsible and why surfaces.
Traditionally the debate is charity vs govt.
I personally err on the side of charity. I may feel bad for mentally challenged people without a support structure and choose to help where possible but it wouldn’t be fair for me to force you to do it through taxation and a legal system as an example.
2 Likes
Jello Biafra had a pretty solid plan for dealing with the homeless, almost 50 years ago.
I prefer to think of it as the greater good rather than charity. It’s better for the nation to spend wisely on “charity” issues than it is to rely on charity as there is a public safety aspect. But the caveat is spend wisely.
I also believe there is a moral component to this. I would like to live in a nation that is moral and values life rather than some godless, even in a figurative sense, nation like North Korea or the Soviet Union where life is/was cheap.
2 Likes
I find it particularly amusing that the dystopian picture Jello Biafra painted of California actually came true, but only because the politicians he supported came into power.
The Suede Denim Secret Police are here and they are, in fact, coming for your Uncool Niece. Come quietly to the camp, where your child will be given cross-sex hormones without your knowledge.
He parodied the idea of zen fascists coming to control you and, lo and behold, they are here, and disaster follows everywhere they gain power.
Meanwhile he’s still pretending he’s anti-establishment by acting exactly like every other out-of-touch Hollywood weirdo and pretending that Trump is Hitler. It’s kind of pathetic, from a punk rock point of view.
1 Like
Fix homelessness by bringing back Arkham Asylum
1 Like
What’s that?
Any proof of this?
And why does the Housing First Program in Norway and the city in Utah which adopted this practice work so well? It works better than all the other social programs and is less expensive. Even if those people were addicts and/or mentally ill.
Absolute bullshit! I’m not saying this never happened but overall this program works and it’s naive people like you who believe in this stupid shit-addicts tearing down the housing-that are somewhat of a roadblock to this type of program. Dumb enough to believe some vote starving politician who talks about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Start reading and quit letting the politicians lie and manipulate you.
I think it depends on the subset for paragraph one.
Mentally challenged people will never contribute to society in a meaningful way. Supporting them is charitable considering, it won’t uplift or maintain the greater good. Maybe Musks Neuralink is on to something, I guess we will see.
Addicts maybe, if they can/will clean up and become productive and independent. Case by case.
Mentally ill is probably case by case with support as well.
This still leaves a question of who should be responsible and why, leading to your point of morality.
It’s none of my business to tell you how to define or exercise morals and vice versa. Charity will allow you to make that personal choice.
Fuck the citizens of this country, just give money to foreign countries for wars. Sounds so much better. And I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free.
Agreed. How can one be so gullible?