So What Would You Do About the Homeless?

[want2know]

Inspired by this thread.

Here in Las Vegas (and probably every other major city), the large number of homeless people is a problem of some concern. A local advocacy group for the homeless was feeding them in one of the public parks, was prevented from doing so by the police, but have resumed since a judge decreed that the local law regarding the feeding of the indigent was unconstitutional.

I have to admit that I'm on the fence here. On one hand, many homeless are alcoholics, drug addicts, or mentally unstable; I can't say I'm comfortable with the thought of these types of people gathering in parks where our children play. OTOH, I feel some measure of empathy whenever I see people living on the sidewalks, pushing grocery carts with all their possessions, or even begging. I mean, I don't know whether they are there through their own actions or a series of mishaps or what. For whatever reason, it breaks my heart to see anyone living like that.

The person who solves this problem would probably win a Nobel Peace Prize, but so far no one seems to have a solution. Some sort of public works project like the WPA during the Depression could more than likely take care of those who are able to work, but what about the rest? It just makes me sad that one of the richest nations in the world, a country with so much in the way of opportunity, can't come up with a viable way of ending, or at least significantly reducing the magnitude of, this situation.

I'm sure that there is enough blame to go around; finger-pointing will certainly not solve the problem. My question to my fellow Dopers is: What ideas do you have? Any practical ideas? Impractical ideas? That Peace Prize is waiting!

[sqweels]

Feel free to file this under Impractical Ideas, but I think we should bring back the poor farm.

[Sarahfeena]

This is a very very tough question, and living as I do where there are a lot of homeless, I wish someone COULD come up with an answer. Unfortunately, as you point out, many homeless (I would venture to say most?) have problems that extend far beyond the problem of poverty that Gorsnak mentions in post #50 of the thread you linked to. I do think that one of the main problems with solving the problem is a lack of cooperation by the homeless in terms of working within the system that we already have in place to help people in need (not that this system is perfect by any means). Many, many people avail themselves of this system, and therefore have a place to live and food to eat...certainly not high living, but at least not out on the street. Why do some more or less choose to reject these opportunities? Are they not aware of how to get help? I doubt that is the case for many, because when necessary, they will go to shelters, and the shelters would certainly hook them up with social services if desired. I suspect for most of them it's because they have problems that cause them to find it very difficult to live within any system, or even with what we would consider to be "normal" society.

An even more important question might be what can we DO about the fact that these opportunities are rejected? Can we force people to live in public housing, or force them to go to some kind of institution where they could get help? I don't see how that would be constitutional. We have an organization in my area where various churches take turns hosting a shelter for the homeless, and many people show up consistently to warm up or get something to eat, and I suspect it is such a successful program partly because of the fact that it is so informal...the churches will help the folks further if they want it, but what it really seems that they want is to get the immediate need fulfilled, and then move on. It's really, really sad, but it is reality. I guess I can't see the law being able to step in and say "we are going to be sure you have a place to live for your own good."

[Mr. Moto]

And when Jesus was in Bethania, in the house of Simon the leper, there came to him a woman having an alabaster box of precious ointment, and poured it on his head as he was at table. And the disciples seeing it, had indignation, saying: To what purpose is this waste? For this might have been sold for much, and given to the poor. And Jesus knowing it, said to them: Why do you trouble this woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always.

Matthew 26, 6-11.

Not that I'm saying the problem in insoluble, mind, but it hasn't been solved yet. At least, not here.

[An Arky]

1. A not-insignificant number of the homeless are mentally ill and should be in an institution. Sorting this out would be problematic. I blame Reagan for this problem.

2. Folks that are homeless due to circumstances other than mental illness should be able to more easily access help. I believe that we, as a society, should provide more assistance to homeless folks in the areas of drug/alcohol addiction treatment, job training and placement, and temporary food/shelter/healthcare. That is, for the ones who are willing to use these tools to improve their situation.

3. Once we've done the best we can for numbers 1. and 2., those remaining (the ones who refuse assistance or opportunities to get off the street) should be subject to vagrancy laws that are rigidly enforced.

4. Poor farm/workcamp for the 3 time losers on vagrancy laws.


I realize some of this is pretty impractical...

[Will Repair]

Originally Posted by sqweels

...I think we should bring back the poor farm.

This is about the only solution for some. There are homeless in the local churches' coalition center that have lived there since it opened, 11 years ago. These long termers have reached their comfort zone, free food and dollar a day shelter. Some are on disability and some work at a day labor agency for drug money.

But the problem, for most homeless, is the cost of housing.
Back when minimum wage was $1.75/hr houses rented for $50/month.
Now the wage is $5.15 and renting an apartment is $600/month.

[Polycarp]

Well, first is making decent affordable housing available to those who can live in it. When it is financially more profitable to tear down decent old apartment buildings and houses and build malls and high-end condos, one cannot fault the private sector venture capitalist for putting his money where it will make the most.

Meanwhile, the low income folks live in poorly-insulated, poorly-maintained expensive-to-operate dwellings (apartments or cheap cottage-style houses) and often in more than ought to be accommodated per dwelling.

HUD programs have been massively unhelpful in combatting that problem.

And if one loses one's dwelling -- say if the owner decides to sell it to be torn down for the above-mentioned construction -- one may well end up living in an old car, or taking shelter in an abandoned building, or whatever.

Once you have addressed that problem, you've cut the number of homeless and ill-housed by a large percentage. Then you can tackle the mentally ill, etc.

And don't forget that "mentally ill" =! crazy. We have bipolar members here and one schizophrenic, all living stable healthy lives under medication (so long as they're able to keep getting that medication, as people "reform" programs by making them all private-sector voluntary efforts that you pay for yourself). I will lay odds that members in each of our large cities who want to try the experiment can within three days find a homeless teenager who left an abusive home and has not found any legal way to survive -- and is probably technically "mentally ill" from the anger and self-hatred the abuse caused in him/her.

[monstro]

I think many homeless people are invisible. That is, they don't look any different than you or me. They work real hard to maintain their clothes and physical hygiene. They may live in cars, at cheap motels, or shelters. They spend the day at work or looking for work, perhaps using the resources at libraries. They aren't the ones begging on street corners and doing crimes. They're just normal people trying to survive.

I think these people can be helped with affordable housing. People seem to think there is an infinite number of public housing units. In some areas, there are long waiting lists and it can takes a very long to get housing assistance. Other areas don't have public housing, so even if you're lucky to have a job in these areas, you may be SOL when it comes to finding cheap housing. In Miami, a public housing scandal has greatly contributed to the homeless problem. So public housing in its current form needs to be improved before we start talking about all the help that's out there.

I think much more drastic legislation will be needed to deal with the more visible homeless people. As liberal-leaning as I am, I think it should be against the law for people to take up residence on sidewalks and parks (although I am in favor of intown public campgrounds, where people can pay a small fee to live outdoors, if they wish). I think homeless people who are arrested for breaking vagrancy laws should be given a choice: jail time or rehabilitation. And if they keep falling off the wagon, they should keep getting arrested.

I know it sounds harsh, but I really don't think it's fair that people should be accosted by aggressive beggers or have to deal with public nuisiances associated with unbridled homelessness. We will always have poor people amongst us, but I think we're selling our society short if we don't think we can improve things.

[Czarcasm]

A major part of the problem is that, even if you're not mentally ill to begin with, living on the streets for an extended period of time can screw with your thought processes in a big way.
1. Because you can't cook food, you are reduced to eating cheap fast food and candy/cookies when you can afford it, and three-day-old bread donated to the local shelters when you can't. Stick to this diet long enough and the mind dulls, believe me.
2. I've lived in shelters(it was a while ago, and I'm doing much better now, thankyouverymuch), and I can see why some people would rather sleep in alleys. To get sleeping space in most shelters, you have to stand in line outside for hours sometimes for a chance to sleep on a dirty pad next to people you don't know and certainly don't trust. The time spent in line for that chance is not spent in rehab training or looking for programs that might help you, even if you could get bus fare to where these programs are(usually in some industrial area due to the NIMBY factor.)
3. If a person who lives on the street somehow manages to beat the odds and finds a semi-permanent shelter, he is probably afraid to leave that situation. He has seen so many programs either get their fundings cut or been shut down that he isn't willing to trade a semi-sure thing for a slim chance for betterment.
4. Since any application for a job will be sent directly to the round file if the applicant doesn't give an address and/or a phone number, some shelters allow their residents to the shelter's address and phone number for job application purposes. This is mostly useless, because most businesses have a list of the local shelter's addresses and phone numbers, and round file those apps anyway.

[Agnostic Pagan]

This thread from November is relevant I think. And I still stand by what I said in that thread.

Unfortunately, I think there will always be some form of chronic homeless. There are adequate resources and assistance out there for those that experience acute homelessness and want to remedy that situation - but you have to earn that assistance by proving that you can be reliable and willing to help yourself as much as the agencies and shelters help you back up also. I do grant the lack of affordable housing is increasing the numbers of acute homeless, but the vast majority of those are just that - acute cases.

I do think that more resources need to be devoted to those that want to end their homelessness but cannot due to mental illness and/or substance abuse. There are several excellent programs throughout the nation that can serve as role models for this effort, and in reality, it is lack of funding, not know-how that prevents assistance from being delivered.

(What few case workers there are now are severly overworked and have to fight battles both with uncooperative clients and uncooperative/financially strapped bureaucracies. Throwing 20,000 more 'troops' at this effort would reap greater rewards than anything we hope to accomplish overseas.)

In regard to the chronic population that simply refuse to be part of the system, I dont know of anything that can really be done without major violations of civil liberties, and as much as I disagree with the choice, I think choosing to be homeless is a 'liberty' in our society. We can certainly enforce laws concerning public drunkenness, sanitation and trespassing, but forcing anyone to work against their will was outlawed a while back.

I think the core of the problem is just the law of numbers. .1% homeless in a population of 1000 can go unnoticed, or its just the 'village drunk', but .1% in a nation of 300 million....

AP

[BrainGlutton]

[monty python]

I would attack the unemployed, first by shelling their homes with artillery, and then, when they run out into the street, mowing them down with machine-gun fire. And then, releasing the vultures.

I know these views are unpopular, but I have never courted popularity.

[/mp]

[OneCentStamp]

Originally Posted by An Arky

1. A not-insignificant number of the homeless are mentally ill and should be in an institution. Sorting this out would be problematic. I blame Reagan for this problem.

Why, for giving them hope that they might become President in spite of their mental shortcomings?

[FRDE]

It can happen

Snakes and Ladders is for real
- but what they don't tell you is that the snakes are greased.

[ralph124c]

Well, I am of the opinion that the mentally ill homeless should be confined 9against their will, if necessary). having a mentally ill person freeze to death (because he/she will not go to a shelter) is unaccepatble. as for the homless degrading the cities; this should NOT be allowed. there is NO reason why people should be allowed to camp out on sidewalks. sorry, but being compassionate (ala san Francisco) doesn't work-you just get more homeless. As for chronic alcoholics and drug addicts-these people are breaking the law-put them in rehab, and jail 9if they reoffend). Oddly enough, if high standards of personal behavior were observed, we probably would have much cleaner cities. of course, people who lose all self respect are a proble, as V.S Naipaul obsereved "the world is what it is. Those who are nothing or allow themselves to become less than nothing, have no place in it"

[Contrapuntal]

Originally Posted by ralph124c

Those who are nothing or allow themselves to become less than nothing, have no place in it"

What about those who are worth nothing?

[gigi]

Originally Posted by ralph124c

As for chronic alcoholics and drug addicts-these people are breaking the law-put them in rehab, and jail 9if they reoffend).

How are alcoholics breaking the law?

[ralph124c]

Originally Posted by gigi

How are alcoholics breaking the law?

A: Public drinking and intoxication are misdemeanor crimes in the USA.

[Odesio]

Originally Posted by want2know

I'm sure that there is enough blame to go around; finger-pointing will certainly not solve the problem. My question to my fellow Dopers is: What ideas do you have? Any practical ideas? Impractical ideas? That Peace Prize is waiting!

Pointing fingers might not solve the problem but if you understand why people are homeless you can address the problem. We have all sorts of programs designed to help people who have lost their homes. I would venture a guess tht those folks we see who are habitually homeless for years at a stretch are simply beyond our ability to help. That is, we're never going to be able to help them find stable jobs or housing and maybe the best thing we can do for them is help get them hot meals and a safe place to sleep once in a while.

Marc

[chowder]

I'm not for one second saying that there are no homeless people in the UK, I'm sure there are but I don't think I've ever encountered one.

What did amaze me was the number of homeless I saw sleeping under bridges when I was on holiday in Boston and later on in Chicago.

I don't know what the solution is, I only know that when a policeman saw me giving money to a homeless person one morning he told me not to do it as I would be hounded every day by the same guy.

I wasn't, I never saw him again but every day I gave money to at least one homeless person, sometimes I bought a pizza and took it to them.

Yeah I'm soft.

[Freudian_Slip]

Originally Posted by ralph124c

A: Public drinking and intoxication are misdemeanor crimes in the USA.

Actually, that's not a Federal law.

Vermont has no laws against PI (public intoxication), for example. It's only if you're doing something else that is against the law that you can get arrested (and most likely jailed overnight for protective custody).

(/nitpick)

[Kalhoun]

Not that this is a solution, but if you get a chance, rent Dark Days http://imdb.com/title/tt0235327/. It is a documentary that chronicles the lives of people near Penn Station who live underground (some of them for years) in the tunnels of New York. It is a dark, depressing look at who the homeless are, how they got there, why they stay. It is fascinating.

The solution, if there is one, will be complex. There are lots of agencies in place to help them, but as others have said, you have to get them to want to change their lives. That seems to be the biggest hurdle to overcome.

[RTA]

St. Petersburg, FL came up with an interesting solution to the homeless problem last Friday.

See what you do is, send in a gang of cops with box cutters to grab and drag people out of their beds, then slice up their tents and other shelters, and then make them get up and start walking, like so many Navin Johnsons at the end of The Jerk.

www.tbo.com/news/metro/MGBAXYYK5XE.html

Not what I would do, of course.

[Czarcasm]

Originally Posted by Kalhoun

The solution, if there is one, will be complex. There are lots of agencies in place to help them, but as others have said, you have to get them to want to change their lives. That seems to be the biggest hurdle to overcome.

I think that getting them to want to change their lives is the second biggest hurdle. The first is getting them to trust that these methods will work. The turnover rate for social workers is high, the funding for most programs are tight and are almost always at risk, the programs change locations or are even shut down without almost no prior notice, etc. It's hard to look to the long term when your stomach is empty, the weather is crappy and most people avert their eyes when you walk by.

[Shodan]

But we already know the causes of most chronic homelessness - alcoholism and schizophrenia.

We don't have a reliable cure for either. We can either warehouse them, or leave to their own devices as we do now.

Sometimes, you can't fix someone's problems for them.

Regards,
Shodan

[Shagnasty]

Originally Posted by chowder

I'm not for one second saying that there are no homeless people in the UK, I'm sure there are but I don't think I've ever encountered one.

Honest question: Where do they go? I would think that any country that has severely mentally ill people (aka all of them) would have to deal with people that can't maintain a normal life but can still move around and survive would have a visible homeless population somewhere. Do they get put in asylums or something like that? We don't have many of those left in the U.S.

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by RTA

St. Petersburg, FL came up with an interesting solution to the homeless problem last Friday.

See what you do is, send in a gang of cops with box cutters to grab and drag people out of their beds, then slice up their tents and other shelters, and then make them get up and start walking, like so many Navin Johnsons at the end of The Jerk.

www.tbo.com/news/metro/MGBAXYYK5XE.html

Not what I would do, of course.

This sounds like an excellent idea. For Chief Harmon and his goons, and those who came up with the idea and supported him, that is.

Then give their homes to the people whose dwellings they trashed.

[Valgard]

Originally Posted by Shodan

But we already know the causes of most chronic homelessness - alcoholism and schizophrenia.

We don't have a reliable cure for either. We can either warehouse them, or leave to their own devices as we do now.

Sometimes, you can't fix someone's problems for them.

Regards,
Shodan

That may be true however the vast majority of homeless people are not chronically homeless:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeles..._United_States

***

Duration[17]

* 80% of those who experience homelessness do so for less than 3 weeks. They typically have more personal, social, or economic resources to draw upon.
* 10% are homeless for up to two months. They cite lack of available or affordable housing as responsible for the delay.
* 10% are so called “chronic” and remain without housing for extended periods of time on a frequent basis. They typically struggle with mental illness, substance abuse, or both.

***

The people we tend to think of first (crazy, drugged out, etc) make up a small portion of the homeless. I've read many articles that claim that the vast majority of homeless people are simply the "working homeless" - they just can't afford a place to live, at least for some period of time.

So yeah we need to provide more treatment and rehab for people with mental problems and substance issues, but I think a lot more of the problems is that folks are just poor and living is just expensive.

Long term fixes? Hm - better education, better job training, maybe public sector programs like the old WPA, or AmeriCorp, the military - they can certainly use large numbers of people.

[AHunter3]

I've been homeless.


a) Fund an org that provides services to the homeless; all employees of the org shall themselves be homeless, and shall serve in office a maximum of 3 years, and shall be chosen via a rigorous candidate search looking for the most qualified people. Give them a budget and a set of objectives and outcome goals, geared towards the maximum number of people successfully located outside of supported programming and verified to be doing well without support/assistance at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years.

b) Fund a separate org to provide drop-in user-run mutual-support counseling, place to sleep, and voluntary/optional psychiatric consultation to those designated as homeless mentally ill and/or chemically addicted (MICA). 75% of staff @ minimum shall be composed of people who have a history of homelessness and psychiatric diagnosis and/or alcohol/drug addiction. Among the remaining 25% of staff, focus on employing people with demonstrated skills at providing vocational and educational counseling, negotiation of service-provider red tape, and general advocacy.

c) Pass local ordinances and state laws that effectively state that you can't punish the homeless for bieng homeless. You can arrest people for being belligerent, for disrupting the peace, for being violent or threatening violence, or for indecent exposure or even public intoxication or public health risk due to lack of hygiene, but not for not having anywhere else to go. Bathed people in adequately laundered clothing who aren't through any actions of their own causing a public disturbance cannot be dispersed from public space if they have nowhere else to go.

d) Fund scholarships and tuition assistance for GED programs and colleges that are earmarked for currently homeless people, including offset of housing costs for students maintaining a GPA at or above 2.0

e) Enact municipal and state tax cuts for developers building low cost housing in the form of decentralized buildings of a limited number of units. Develop a formula that kills the tax cut for a given block of city once a threshold of such units within that block has been reached, balancing desire for maximum number of low-cost housing units against desire to avoid funding the construction of a "project" or ghetto.

f) Enact federal subsidies for states that show a net increase in the number of formerly homeless residents being housed, and for states that hit target points of the number of empty living units available at a rental cost of below some "$X" determined by formula that takes into account local statistics (percentiles, average) for housing costs.

g) Enact Federal tax incentives for companies that kick in per each formerly employee employed for 2 years and beyond.

h) Create and fund via joint state/federal initiatives programs for people who have lost housing due to criminal arrest (without subsequent conviction) or psychiatric commitment/incarceration, with grants for first month plus damage deposit towards housing comparable to that which was lost as a consequence of incarceration by itself and/or in conjunction with related job loss; also tie in with job placement, vocational counseling, etc, services for those who have lost jobs as a consequence of arrest or psych incarceration

i) Overhaul public assistance and food stamps (WIC) programs to accomodate otherwise-qualified people who have no permanent address at the time that they apply; create emergency/prioritized channel for handing such applications by homeless persons rather than disqualifying them for being homeless

j) Enact federal legislation that lets one invest up to 4 times one's monthly rent or mortage + bldg maintenance cost, up to a ceiling per expense locale, determined by formula re: percentile, and ignore the income so diverted when considering taxable income. Also for the lowest percentiles, actively reimburse a sliding-scale percentage of money thusly invested, as such people will not be paying taxes anyhow.

k) Extend the New York City model of residents' rights to due notice of eviction proceedings, allowances for Motion to Show Cause orders, etc, for any building with more than "x" number of units and/or for corporations and/or demonstratably linked corporations with more than "x" number of units in total.

[Kalhoun]

Originally Posted by AHunter3

I've been homeless.


a) Fund an org that provides services to the homeless; all employees of the org shall themselves be homeless, and shall serve in office a maximum of 3 years, and shall be chosen via a rigorous candidate search looking for the most qualified people. Give them a budget and a set of objectives and outcome goals, geared towards the maximum number of people successfully located outside of supported programming and verified to be doing well without support/assistance at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years.

b) Fund a separate org to provide drop-in user-run mutual-support counseling, place to sleep, and voluntary/optional psychiatric consultation to those designated as homeless mentally ill and/or chemically addicted (MICA). 75% of staff @ minimum shall be composed of people who have a history of homelessness and psychiatric diagnosis and/or alcohol/drug addiction. Among the remaining 25% of staff, focus on employing people with demonstrated skills at providing vocational and educational counseling, negotiation of service-provider red tape, and general advocacy.

c) Pass local ordinances and state laws that effectively state that you can't punish the homeless for bieng homeless. You can arrest people for being belligerent, for disrupting the peace, for being violent or threatening violence, or for indecent exposure or even public intoxication or public health risk due to lack of hygiene, but not for not having anywhere else to go. Bathed people in adequately laundered clothing who aren't through any actions of their own causing a public disturbance cannot be dispersed from public space if they have nowhere else to go.

d) Fund scholarships and tuition assistance for GED programs and colleges that are earmarked for currently homeless people, including offset of housing costs for students maintaining a GPA at or above 2.0

e) Enact municipal and state tax cuts for developers building low cost housing in the form of decentralized buildings of a limited number of units. Develop a formula that kills the tax cut for a given block of city once a threshold of such units within that block has been reached, balancing desire for maximum number of low-cost housing units against desire to avoid funding the construction of a "project" or ghetto.

f) Enact federal subsidies for states that show a net increase in the number of formerly homeless residents being housed, and for states that hit target points of the number of empty living units available at a rental cost of below some "$X" determined by formula that takes into account local statistics (percentiles, average) for housing costs.

g) Enact Federal tax incentives for companies that kick in per each formerly employee employed for 2 years and beyond.

h) Create and fund via joint state/federal initiatives programs for people who have lost housing due to criminal arrest (without subsequent conviction) or psychiatric commitment/incarceration, with grants for first month plus damage deposit towards housing comparable to that which was lost as a consequence of incarceration by itself and/or in conjunction with related job loss; also tie in with job placement, vocational counseling, etc, services for those who have lost jobs as a consequence of arrest or psych incarceration

i) Overhaul public assistance and food stamps (WIC) programs to accomodate otherwise-qualified people who have no permanent address at the time that they apply; create emergency/prioritized channel for handing such applications by homeless persons rather than disqualifying them for being homeless

j) Enact federal legislation that lets one invest up to 4 times one's monthly rent or mortage + bldg maintenance cost, up to a ceiling per expense locale, determined by formula re: percentile, and ignore the income so diverted when considering taxable income. Also for the lowest percentiles, actively reimburse a sliding-scale percentage of money thusly invested, as such people will not be paying taxes anyhow.

k) Extend the New York City model of residents' rights to due notice of eviction proceedings, allowances for Motion to Show Cause orders, etc, for any building with more than "x" number of units and/or for corporations and/or demonstratably linked corporations with more than "x" number of units in total.

(Told ya it'd be complex.)

I think AHunter3 has some excellent ideas here. The "no permanent address" roadblocks are criminal, if you ask me. Not to mention stupid.

[gonzomax]

Detroit Free Press said today that foreclosures Wayne County Mich. are up 121 %. Macomb a higher scale suburb is up 197 % . Oakland County a high scale suburb is up 94 %. In Macomb it is 1 in every 38 homes. There are apparently a lot of drunken .dopers about to hit the streets.

[Bobotheoptimist]

Originally Posted by chowder

I'm not for one second saying that there are no homeless people in the UK, I'm sure there are but I don't think I've ever encountered one.

Who were all those people covered with cardboard sleeping in doorways that I saw every morning in London? I'm not doubting you, I just don't understand what they were doing.

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by Bobotheoptimist

Who were all those people covered with cardboard sleeping in doorways that I saw every morning in London? I'm not doubting you, I just don't understand what they were doing.

Probably the greatest political snark ever written, and one that matt_mcl and I have come to love:

Originally Posted by Antatole France

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.
[from The Red Lily, 1894, chapter 7]

[Quartz]

There are plenty of homeless in the U.K. Beggars / the homeless have been a problem for thousands of years.

I have no answer, but when I see them, I think: "There but for the grace of God go I."

[monavis]

There are many reasons for being homeless,and one would first have to find out the reason why a person (or family) is homeless.I am afraid there is not one cure- all for every homeless person.

If a person is homeless because they lived beyond their means is one thing being mentally ill or having an addiction is another.

During the depression there was many so called hobo's who rode the trains and worked for food.

Our family was given help from the government we were given canned meat,dried fruit,flour, rice and powdered milk. We didn't get to eat what we wanted but were happy for something to put in our somachs and people were ashamed to have to accept charity.

My father and brothers worked for the WPA digging drainage ditches etc. We slept 5 to a bed and were grateful to be out of the cold.

I wouldn't trade that experience for anything as my husband and I learned that no matter what one's income was, to get ahead you had to live under it.Not just break even, or charge and jepordize our future; we lived a frugal life but now in our old age when many of our friends are ekeing out a living we have secured our future.

Oprah had a show a few years ago where a woman was living in her Mercedes,she and her husband earned over a 100,000.00 a year,but lived beyond her means. Oprah had a man on at the same time who had children earned $25,000.oo a year, owned his house, a travel trailer,and a boat.and had a savings account.

Perhaps we should have a course in school to teach people who are healty to buy only what they could afford,not what they want. If it is not paid for it is not owned.


Monavis

[Annie-Xmas]

I work in property management and have had to deal a lot with homeless people. I'd say at least 30 to 50% of them just don't understand how to fit into society; specially, obeying the rules. They get a one bedroom apartment and sign a lease that they will be the only person living there and will obey the quiet enjoyment of the building and have no pets. A month later they have their lover, two kids and a dog in the apartment and we're getting calls at midnight about the noise. "I can live how I want in my apartment." No, you can't and you're back on the street.

Some people will no accept any boundaries, and you cannot hold onto an apartment and a job when you think like that.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Valgard

That may be true however the vast majority of homeless people are not chronically homeless:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeles..._United_States

***

Duration[17]

* 80% of those who experience homelessness do so for less than 3 weeks. They typically have more personal, social, or economic resources to draw upon.
* 10% are homeless for up to two months. They cite lack of available or affordable housing as responsible for the delay.
* 10% are so called “chronic” and remain without housing for extended periods of time on a frequent basis. They typically struggle with mental illness, substance abuse, or both.

***

Yes, but part of my point is that, in the majority of cases, we don't need to do anything different about the homeless - they find housing on their own in less than 3 weeks.

Long term fixes? Hm - better education, better job training, maybe public sector programs like the old WPA, or AmeriCorp, the military - they can certainly use large numbers of people.

I kind of doubt if the military can use an influx of homeless alcoholics and schizophrenics, and the same goes for your other suggestions. The basic problem for those that are chronically homeless is that they can't/won't/don't meet the basic requirements of adult life - either feeding, housing, and clothing yourself, or forming a stable relationship with someone else who will. Even, it seems, if that "someone else" is Uncle Sam. We don't have a practical cure for substance abuse or serious mental illness. That is the cause of homelessness that doesn't fix itself. More government spending does not address the root cause.

We can either marginalize them (or allow them to marginalize themselves, which is what we do now), or treat them as less than fully responsible - which translates to forced treatment and/or institutionalization.

Some people, apparently, aren't up to the tasks of living as an independent adult. Whether or not it is their "fault" doesn't change much about their prospects.

Regards,
Shodan

[Zoe]

Shodan, I have read that about a third of the homeless are children. It's too horrible to even consider.

On the local Nashville news this week, the anchor passed on a message from the local police. It was an advisory not to give the homeless money or even food because it would encourage them to stay in Nashville and we would get the reputation for being a city that's easy on the homeless.

The "story" absolutely blew me away. The anchor appeared uncomfortable in his delivery -- almost as if he hadn't known what was coming. This is the coldest week in the year. I thought the police were supposed to protect all of us.

What are these people supposed to do -- evaporate? Vote to raise their own salaries and adjourn for a five day weekend? Sell their stock?

I saw pictures tonight of a shanty town in Miami. I think there was a Councilwoman who came up with the idea of NOT tearing it down again. Now it is a community of people. There is even a waiting list to get in. These are houses made of cardboard, but at least there is a sense of place.

Maybe in our "nation building" mode, we need to take another look at the poor in our country.

[elfkin477]

Short of involuntary commitment of that last 10% that Valgard cited (since the other 90% are seemingly able to remove themselves from the streets within 2 months), I'm not sure there is a long-term solution. What sort of civil liberties would we be violating if we did round up all the mentally ill and/or substance abusing homeless and forced them into institutions for their own good?

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Zoe

Shodan, I have read that about a third of the homeless are children. It's too horrible to even consider.

Long term, chronically homeless? I don't know, but I tend to doubt it.

Maybe in our "nation building" mode, we need to take another look at the poor in our country.

I wonder if "nation building" for the chronically homeless would be any more successful than for the chronically Islamofascist. IYSWIM.

Regards,
Shodan

[Zoe]

AHunter3, after getting some ink for my printer, I came back to make a copy of your list to put on my wall. Finally, something specific.

Thanks for this. I want to do something.

Shodan: Long term, chronically homeless? I don't know, but I tend to doubt it.

No, the numbers are much worse than that. One-third of all of the homeless at any given time are children.

Have you worked with the poor much, Shodan? Where have you gotten your impressions?

[Zoe]

elfkin: What sort of civil liberties would we be violating if we did round up all the mentally ill and/or substance abusing homeless and forced them into institutions for their own good?

When will somone decide to imprison you "for your own good" even when you haven't committed a crime? Are you sure you want to start down that road? Don't you have the right to refuse treatment if you are sick? Are we letting the government decide those things now? If so, how authoritarian do you want our government to become?

[AHunter3]

Originally Posted by elfkin477

What sort of civil liberties would we be violating if we did round up all the mentally ill and/or substance abusing homeless and forced them into institutions for their own good?

Theoretically mine, since I've been there and last time I was there I had a psych dx history that said I was a paranoid schizphrenic.

What sort of civil liberties would we be violating if we disemboweled anyone trying to force us into incarcerated settings without due process or any allegation that we've done anything wrong, and then stuck such folks' silly red-dripping corpse up on the nearest lamppost for the rats to gnaw upon?

If there's one thing I have zero tolerance for it's people who assert their right to use force on other people "for their own good".

[monstro]

Originally Posted by Zoe

I saw pictures tonight of a shanty town in Miami. I think there was a Councilwoman who came up with the idea of NOT tearing it down again. Now it is a community of people. There is even a waiting list to get in. These are houses made of cardboard, but at least there is a sense of place.

That shantytown is there because the government failed its people through scandal and corruption of the public housing program (cited above). While I'm glad it's there to serve as both an alternative to shelters and as a protest message, I'm angry that people have to resort to living outdoors simply because promises weren't kept.

Originally Posted by Shodan

We can either marginalize them (or allow them to marginalize themselves, which is what we do now), or treat them as less than fully responsible - which translates to forced treatment and/or institutionalization.

There's a guy who runs a non-profit called Homeless Voice that provides housing and serves as an advocacy group for the homeless here in South Florida. Floridians are quite familiar with the people wearing the red t-shirts, soliciting for donations in the middle of the street. I happened to read through one of the newspapers the organization produces, and the main guy, Sean Cononie, said something to the effect that many of the people he helps simply cannot take care of themselves. They are mentally ill or mentally/physical disabled, drug-addicted, and just can't get the hang of living in society, as an independent person. The organization runs group homes where these people can live permanently, provided they follow the rules. Those that are able have to work by soliciting donations on the streets.

When I read his statement, my first reaction was that the guy was being extremely patronizing. My mother, who advocates for the homeless professionally, brought me up to believe that the homeless are just like you and me. And I still believe most of them are. And I don't think acute homelessness (less than three weeks) is a minor problem that should be ignored. But I also think Sean Cononie is right. The poorest segment of our population is at the bottom for specific reasons--and most of them are clinical. I think long-term and life-long care for these people is the only way to get them off the streets.

[AHunter3]

Originally Posted by Zoe

AHunter3, after getting some ink for my printer, I came back to make a copy of your list to put on my wall. Finally, something specific.

Thanks for this. I want to do something.

::waves once again at Zoe, who always has nice things to say::

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Zoe

No, the numbers are much worse than that. One-third of all of the homeless at any given time are children.

That's what I was asking - is it your contention that, at any given time, one third of the long term, chronically homeless are children? I would expect that dependent children are over-represented in the groups mentioned earlier, that regain housing within a few weeks. If you are talking about runaways, then possibly not, but I rather doubt that mothers with children are a third of those on the street for months at a time.

Possibly some proportion of children are homeless because mommy has a crack habit and no marketable skills beyond fellatio, but then I would expect the same problems addressing the homelessness of those as for adults. If we could cure mommy's crack habit or mental illness to the point that she could care for herself, then presumably she could take the next step and care for her children as well. But if we can't cure either...

Have you worked with the poor much, Shodan? Where have you gotten your impressions?

Relatively little. My church volunteers with the local food shelf and feeding center, and the church I grew up with is now smack dab in the center of the ghetto, and does mostly outreach to the neighborhood. And there were always bums around my last job site, which was the involuntary inpatient chem-dep treatment center for our county. I often went to work as they were dragging in some coked up teenager in handcuffs. They moved the facility to a different site - our printer room was the four-point restraint room for detox.

The rest of my assumptions are based on statistics. I remember Mitch Snyder of late memory claiming that there were three million homeless in America in the 80s - a Harvard study found about 250,000 - fairly substantial, but not even the correct order of magnitude for Snyder's figures, which he later admitted pulling out of his ass.

Regards,
Shodan

[Polycarp]

Shodan, I'll give you this: people are usually pretty good about ensuring that a child who has no place to say, is given one.

But yes, there are a LOT of homeless children. First, there are runaways and street kids, who had good reasons to leave their home, and who make do with what they can get on the street. And I won't ruin your evening by telling you how many of them make do.

Second, there are families in temporary housing, sometimes long term. Not a lot, but any is too many. And when I say "families" I'm talking caregiver adult (parent, grandparent) and dependent children -- not necessarily a whitebread nuclear family of 2 parents, 3.2 children and 1.5 dogs.

But finally and most important to me, there are children who are in institutions, foster care, etc., who have no home. They may have three square meals, a roof over their head, and a modicum of clothing. But they don't have the rest of what a child needs to grow up: a loving home.

And I have only one point to make about the alleged percentage of homeless children: anything above 0,000000% is too much.

[Shodan]

Originally Posted by Polycarp

Shodan, I'll give you this: people are usually pretty good about ensuring that a child who has no place to say, is given one.

But yes, there are a LOT of homeless children. First, there are runaways and street kids, who had good reasons to leave their home, and who make do with what they can get on the street. And I won't ruin your evening by telling you how many of them make do.

Second, there are families in temporary housing, sometimes long term. Not a lot, but any is too many. And when I say "families" I'm talking caregiver adult (parent, grandparent) and dependent children -- not necessarily a whitebread nuclear family of 2 parents, 3.2 children and 1.5 dogs.

Without minimizing the difficulties of people in temporary housing, isn't this an example of moving the goal posts? ISTM that, if I say "homeless" and mean someone living on the street, and you say "homeless" to mean anyone who doesn't own their own home or is leasing month-to-month, then we are not talking about the same set of problems.

But finally and most important to me, there are children who are in institutions, foster care, etc., who have no home. They may have three square meals, a roof over their head, and a modicum of clothing. But they don't have the rest of what a child needs to grow up: a loving home.

Very much an example of the same - "homeless" does not mean "anyone whose parents don't love them" without removing most of the meaning from the term.

If we can't even decide to keep winos off the street, I highly doubt that we can solve the problems of every neglectful parent.

And I have only one point to make about the alleged percentage of homeless children: anything above 0,000000% is too much.

Sounds nice, means (essentially) nothing. No social problem like homelessness can be solved 100%, unless you are willing to accept the much worse consequences of drastic solutions.

"Do it for the children" is a cheap political line designed to stop people from asking hard questions about cost-benefit ratios, no matter who it comes from.

Regards,
Shodan