Kinja reply list

Read More
EasttoMidwestHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 4:48pm

The political difficulty arises when moralizers object that homeless people should not be "rewarded" with subsidies.

But said moralizers get their morals from Jesus and Jesus was always going on about giving stuff to poor people was the most immoral thing you can do...

Or, wait. That's Rush Limbaugh, not Jesus.
Reply
- Read More
  911DucktailEasttoMidwest
  1/16/14 4:52pm
  lately Ive been hearing the "give a man a fish/teach him to fish" rationalization from the jesusfreaks...
  Reply
- Read More
  EasttoMidwest911Ducktail
  1/16/14 5:04pm
  Yeah, well I don't see any of that happening either.
  Reply
Read More
ObliteratiHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 4:47pm
But how can we make this fit with our faux-puritan work fetish?

Instead of just giving these layabouts free stuff, we should turn them into slaves like our Founding Fathers did.
Reply
- Read More
  sheriffjoeObliterati
  1/16/14 4:54pm
  Right now in Japan they are paying the homeless to clean up the Fukushima mess. See not only do you get everything cleaned up but you solve the homeless problem by killing with radiation poisoning. Win win (except it's wasted money if they die)!
  Reply
- Read More
  spanther22aObliterati
  1/16/14 4:55pm
  workhouses! in exchange for a free house you need to work for it (maybe some food to keep you alive but nothing fancy, no ice cream!). the best performing companies can get the most free workers as a reward for their impressive profits.
  
  on xmas day you get a free bottle of beer at the end of your 12 hr shift.
  
  its a win win win win win win situation.
  Reply
Read More
BigSteveHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 4:47pm
It's sad that we have to append the term veteran to the word homeless to make helping the homeless more palatable for people.
Reply
- Read More
  SuperHybridSystem3BigSteve
  1/16/14 4:51pm
  Not to take their side, but I think the implication is that we owe them something — they've done something for society, so society should do something back. It doesn't have to be a zero-sum thing where when we imply that we owe them something, we don't owe other homeless people housing, but it gets turned into that.
  Reply
- Read More
  JinxeSuperHybridSystem3
  1/16/14 5:14pm
  And even then, there are plenty of people who think that because you "volunteer" for military service, you're not owed anything!
  Reply
Read More
La.M.Hamilton Nolan
1/16/14 5:14pm
So this is an interesting trend in homeless housing. There is a push for long-term, permanent (yearly lease) supportive housing. And it is a good idea, it really is. The key is going to be case management and comprehensive wrap around services for these folks to help them keep a roof over their heads. We are exploring options in our area for instituting similar programs. And this model meshes well with other federal housing programs that have dollars for single and multifamily housing, but would not be able to pay for things like shelters.
Reply
- Read More
  twerqyLa.M.
  1/16/14 7:14pm
  It's a nice idea, but I can't see this working on a nationwide basis. A certain percentage of the homeless are in that situation because they aren't good at following societal norms. Taking care of a property is a responsibility that none of us think about because we assume everyone does it. Not everyone does it.
  
  I could see this gaining some steam then falling apart once we found out that 20% of the free homes were needing new pipes and fixtures every month because the tenants kept ripping them out and selling them.
  Reply
- Read More
  La.M.twerqy
  1/16/14 8:02pm
  People who would destroy the homes they live in would not remain in the program. That is a pretty simple fix.
  Reply
Read More
ARP2Hamilton Nolan
1/16/14 5:05pm
sssshhhh, this is also true with welfare. The costs of prisons, orphanages, crime, etc. is much higher than just giving a small percentage of people money. As long as you don't make it too comfortable (and despite the lies, we don't), it's a cheaper option.
Reply
- Read More
  eataTREEARP2
  1/16/14 5:24pm
  Yes, this is something I've always thought: the percentage of the population that are dedicated leeches is much lower than is popularly imagined. Nearly everyone wants to do something productive with their lives and very few are satisfied with remaining at the lowest common denominator — we can safely raise that floor to include such luxuries as "not having to sleep in the streets" without worry that we will make poverty an attractive proposition.
  Reply
- Read More
  RealisticchildmakerARP2
  1/16/14 9:23pm
  What would "too comfortable" be? More than three windows? Heat that goes above 64? Is accepting charity ever comfortable for anyone?
  Reply
Read More
toothpetardHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 4:48pm
What no moralizing or bootstrapping or anything, in Arizona and Utah?
Topsy-turvy world.
Reply
- Read More
  ABD2021toothpetard
  1/16/14 5:12pm
  If I remember correctly from an article I read about this a while ago, it is just a starter program in certain parts of the states. I can't remember if it was limited to cities or counties, but I don't think it was actually state wide.
  Reply
- Read More
  Juan Stoppabletoothpetard
  1/16/14 5:32pm
  Before I clicked through, I assumed they were turning the homeless into chili to feed back to soup kitchens.
  Reply
Read More
in5minuteaHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 6:15pm
As a worker in homeless and formerly homeless individuals social services, I can say unequivocally that the evidence has proven over and over again that you can try all you want to help people living on the streets, but you will not get very far unless they can stop worrying about basic needs like shelter and warmth (and food, although luckily that is somewhat easier to deal with as many services provide meals nation-wide- the one consistency I've seen between the services in ny and ca is that lay people are happy to provide food, which is nice, and means people have a hard time starving if they are actively attempting to keep alive, though mental illness plays a role in that consideration). Homeless services that do not center on housing first basically end up keeping people alive- but little more. No one can become "a productive member of society" when their day-to-day survival is at hand. If you can alleviate that pressure- yes, people can find and keep jobs, find and keep mental health providers, find and keep physical health providers. If drugs are an issue they have a better chance of quitting when they are inside and safe than outside and cold or wet or scared. Housing first works, and we need to make it a priority (which is not to say emergency services aren't great- they are! But if we could eliminate the need for them, the outcome would be greater).
Reply
- Read More
  Max Contrarianin5minutea
  1/16/14 10:38pm
  Posted this in another thread but curious to get your thoughts as someone with experience:
  
  There's another version of this in Wyoming that's open to everyone, and is completely unconditional. They'll make an attempt to rehabilitate you, but if it doesn't work out you get to keep the free apt.
  
  Here are my issues with it:
  
  Who do you say no to? Can a recent college grad who can't make rent get free apts? Can I if I lose my job? How many nights do I need to spend on the streets before I qualify?
  
  A majority of homeless people are addicts or mentally ill. How long before these buildings become government funded drug dens filled with untreated mentally ill?
  
  Does this create a disincentive to get your shit together? If you turn your life around, you lose your free apt. Bummer. Especially for people on the cusp of making it and don't have the potential to be big earners, the free apartment and under the table job might be a better solution.
  Reply
- Read More
  in5minuteaMax Contrarian
  1/17/14 8:01am
  So it obviously varies place to place, and I can only speak from my experiences in California and New York. Where i worked in Cali, it was next to impossible to get housing, period. This meant that families were frequently given vouchers to stay in dingy motels known for running prostitution rings out of the front office and then being told they should be grateful that they had shelter when someone complained to a city worker that it was an inappropriate place for a child. We knew a family who's youngest daughter had to use a breathing machine at night due to her asthma, and the motel they had been given a voucher for was so vermin infested that her mother woke up to notice a cockroach crawling through the breathing tubs. That was how little people seemed to give a shit in about the homeless in Sacramento, and it was infuriating and heartbreaking to witness.
  In New York, however, the path to housing is slightly easier because of the right to shelter agreement. So there are many supportive housing units, single room occupancies, usually, that you can apply for if you meet certain condition. Now, usually someone who is homeless will be placed into a transitional housing unit first, and provided with case workers who will work with them to get them "ready" for permanent housing. Then they will be able to apply for permanent housing after a period of time. And given support, many of these mentally ill people are able to get on medication and able to get jobs. These are jobs you might not even think about, by the way: movie theater ushers, warehouse workers, seasonal jobs in big cities that involve helping out stores near thanksgiving and Christmas, helping fed ex and ups pack trucks. But they are jobs and they do matter and it can help hopeless people feel purposeful.
  As far as addiction goes, well, it's hard to say. If you're in housing, you are a lot more likely to be able to have the support around you to stop using, especially because many homeless addicts are actually substance abusers with co-occurring mental illnesses that they are self-treating. Treat the illness, and you can often cut down on the substance abuse. However, obviously addiction is a disease too, and it's not exactly easy to treat. I have many clients who are severe alcoholics, a handful who still smoke crack. The housing unit I work for doesn't tolerate crack inside the building for long, and encourages treatment. Alcoholism is kind of up to you though- its not illegal, and plenty of high functioning people are addicts of that nature. We can try to nudge someone in a direction, but you also have to remember that losing you job and losing your home are two major stressors in life, no matter your situation. Now imaging that in losing your home you have no where to go and are subjected to the elements and also to harassment and sexual abuse (far more commen for men and women on the streets than is usually ever discussed). Did you know that Halloween is the most dangerous night of the year to be homeless? A lot of non homeless people commit violent "tricks" on "bums" on Halloween. It's terrifying and absurd, and the statistics back it up.
  Anyway, there's also a difference between low income housing and formerly homeless housing (at least, rent wise- you could live in the same building but the pay scale would differ). Most housing units look at your income and history to determine ability to pay. So as a broke as recent grad, you could probably qualify for low income, but you'd be paying more than the man with severe trauma in his background who was only able to move out of transitional housing after 18 months in a shelter and 5 years on the streets. And some housing is permanent and you can leave when you want but you won't be forced out for making more money, and some isn't and once you no longer qualify you have to move. Although if you think about it, you'd have to ask yourself what kind of problems someone has that they'd prefer to stay in this kind of housing once they no longer needed it. We're talking one-room apartments for most individuals, with a bathroom and maybe a kitchenette. Not exactly glamorous if you don't need it.
  Reply
Read More
JamesypooHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 4:48pm
for fucks sake.

THANKS OBAMA
Reply
Read More
Steve_Buscemi's_OrthodontistHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 4:47pm
If you object to getting homeless vets off the street, well, I can't think of anything horrific to do to you right now (low blood sugar) but I'm pretty sure it involves getting fucked by a pack of rabid dogs.
Reply
Read More
djbiznatchHamilton Nolan
1/16/14 4:48pm
"Are there no wars?"

"Plenty of wars..."

"And the hospitals. Are they still in operation?"

"Both very busy, sir..."

"Those who are badly off must go there."

"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."

"If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Reply
- Read More
  eataTREEdjbiznatch
  1/16/14 4:50pm
  Preach.
  Reply