Discussion
  • Read More
    cepalgHamilton Nolan
    12/07/15 1:06pm

    Reality-based community nonsense. The effectiveness of a technique is wholly secondary to whether I find it acceptable to my personal moral narrative of how the world should work.

    Crime, homeless people, torture, gun control. Doesn’t matter that the right’s preferred strategies have been conclusively shown not to work. Effectiveness is not what is being discussed. Moral rectitude is.

    What’s the Achewood line? “They got out the twister mat and you trying to play whack-a-mole.”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      toothpetardcepalg
      12/07/15 1:08pm

      They’re probably not even working on the great wall that will make us great again, either.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      benjaminallovercepalg
      12/07/15 1:12pm

      But how can I sleep at night knowing that some stranger who needed something I didn’t need actually got it, without suffering for it, without paying for it, or without being otherwise punished for it?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    IskaralPustHamilton Nolan
    12/07/15 1:32pm

    If we give homeless people jobs, won’t they just use the money to buy homes? What will we even call them then? This is why liberal logic is confusing and makes no sense.

    If we give homeless people guns and private school vouchers, on the other hand, they can eat rich kid food all day and then warm themselves with their 2nd Amendment rights at night.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      King_jaffe_jofferIskaralPust
      12/07/15 2:06pm

      *note to self... Eat rich kids...*

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      IskaralPustKing_jaffe_joffer
      12/07/15 2:09pm

      It’s the Kobe beef of the 99%.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    smrknd2Hamilton Nolan
    12/07/15 1:13pm

    Giving them homes might also be pretty effective. Just spitballin’ there.

    I was in a city this past weekend that seems to have a way worse homelessness problem than my own (matter of scale I’m sure—mo’ city, mo’ problems) and I’m not real sure how ready for employment most of the people on the street I saw were. Getting the employable into jobs is a start, but it’s not going to do anything for the vast numbers of homeless who struggle with serious mental illness and addiction. I applaud the effort, but this seems to be putting the cart before the horse.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Indeed456smrknd2
      12/07/15 1:20pm

      From the linked article, part of the purpose of the program is to get people to a position where they can effectively reach out for help. There is no amount of mental health or addiction intervention that will help someone who is not willing or able to make the investment in change themselves. Obviously there are people who can’t handle working even for a day (that is the nature of this program, FYI), but it’s quite plausible that a large portion of the homeless population can work, but can’t hold down a job due to mental illness or addiction. This provides them with money, a sense of accomplishment, and perhaps a step towards seeking the help they need.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      barebranchsmrknd2
      12/07/15 1:22pm

      I’m by no means a homeless expert, but I think that although there is a large percentage of homeless who have mental health issues that need to be addressed as part of a long-term strategy, I also think that there are probably a signficant portion who could benefit from some form of gainful employment - even if it’s not necessarily teaching them the skills of tomorrow, etc - just to break the cycle of no-job/no-money. It would be great if there were a comprehensive all-of-the above approach but absent that, this seems like the kind of straightforward program most people can wrap their heads around. I’d like to think that even the most rabid boot strap conservative could look at a program like this and see the benefit of it - even if “government” is the one doing the employment.

      ETA - to be clear I also agree that actually giving them a stable home of some sort would be even more effective. Just saying I can see your average hard-core teabag relative being more likely to support a program like this instead of having to make the mental leap of connecting lack of a stable domestic situation with the inability to remain gainfully employed.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ThrumbolioHamilton Nolan
    12/07/15 1:19pm

    Works for me. At the end of the day, you’re dealing with a collection of people who live on the margins of society and basically exist as the ultimate underserved population (particularly those laboring under a mental illness). If you can give them a nudge toward functionality (and show them that someone gives a shit whether they live or die), that’s a hell of a start.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ThenSAHamilton Nolan
      12/07/15 1:07pm

      What’s next? Homes for jobless people?1?

      What is going on around here?

      Did I wake up in Crazytown?

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        The ever-present football-player rapistHamilton Nolan
        12/07/15 1:06pm

        Arm the homeless.

        Reply
        <
        • Read More
          RegretsalotThe ever-present football-player rapist
          12/07/15 1:12pm

          Home the armless.

          Reply
          <
      • Read More
        Tom JopsonHamilton Nolan
        12/07/15 1:06pm

        So the homeless people get paid to clean up their own mess?

        Sounds like a great deal.

        Reply
        <
        • Read More
          CleisthenesTom Jopson
          12/07/15 1:15pm

          “I don’t care if it works and creates a net good for society because of my moral outrage”

          -you

          Reply
          <
      • Read More
        GregoireHamilton Nolan
        12/07/15 1:12pm

        First Mexicans are taking my American jobs, now the homeless. WHY ARE YOU TAKING MAH AMERICAN JOBSSSS?

        GIF
        Reply
        <