I’m asking you this in the Pit so as not to ruin an MPSIMS thread for everyone else. You noted, in the thread titled, “If you’re going to San Francisco…” that it “makes you laugh” that so many of the city’s homeless “sleep right out in full view of the city government”.
Many (certainly not all, but many) of the homeless in San Francisco, are living how and where they because they don’t hate it enough to change. SF has always been a destination for runaways and drifters. Since the late sixties, and steadily since then, there have always been homeless waifs and wasteoids in SF. They arrive with no plans and few, if any possessions, get drawn into the thriving street culture, and just stay. There was a big wave in 1995; people who came out to honor Jerry Garcia and didn’t have the money or the motivation to leave. You ever notice how much body art the panhandlers have? They don’t mind spending money on that. And they’re not necessarily peaceful, either; my friend who lives in the Haight witnessed a street fight that left one participant without the use of his legs. Yes, they were young, 18-21 or so. The homeless person you see in SF is probably not someone who once had a home and a job but lost them despite his best efforts. He’s much more likely a modern-day lotus eater, who just wants to avoid responsibility.
Now then, I’m amazed that you have such a deep-seeded resentment of the homeless. Sure they’re not all lovable teddy bears that you can pick up and squeeze, but most non-homeless aren’t either. Here’s a nice little story about some non-homeless getting into a fight–killing a guy * at his wedding reception! * Geez, all us non-homeless must be awful people because some of us are :rolleyes:
But that’s beside the point.
My point was just that it’s an amusing situation. It has nothing to do with the individuals, state, of government involved. * It’s just funny to me. * Moreover, I think that in some ways it’s a good thing; remind people that there are homeless out there.
But then, you’d rather they go hide out of sight. And you obviously have some problem with “freaks”, since anybody who pierces their body and likes Jerry Garcia is bound to end up a bum in San Francisco. But then, it doesn’t occur to you that somebody could get pierced, then become homeless. Or tha the cost of piercing (or were you including tatoos as well?) is often very little, compared with, say, the price of a place to live. All the piercings on all the bums in SF probably don’t add up to the cost of two month’s rent.
I hope I never have to rely on your sense of charity.
Freak, I believe you missed the point of the OP. It’s only San Francisco hobo’s that are the irresponsible druggies. Everywhere else, they’re kind, considerate vessels of wisdom and humanity.
That would be “deep-seated”, except I don’t have a resentment of any caliber. I’m just describing a pattern.
I wasn’t denigrating all homeless, or even all the homeless in SF. I’m just saying that there are people who go to SF planning to live on the streets, or planning to have a nominal residence but not much beyond that.
Yes, it is.
To what purpose?
No, I’d rather they get it together and get a job or leave, instead of taking a free ride.
I do not.
Don’t put words in my mouth. I know not everyone who is both those things is going to become a street person in SF, but I have noticed that street people in SF tend to be both those things.
**
Fair enough. But body art is not a great hobby to pursue if you don’t already have a job. If you do, great, pierce and dye what you want. But don’t complain, if you’re supposedly looking for a job, that “nobody will hire me”.
You bet’ not.
And again, I was not denigrating all homeless anywhere; I was making a direct response to your post about homeless in SF. Not any other city, since you also weren’t talking about any other city. Just San Francisco.
You basically just bitched about the homeless, and used my comment as an excuse to bring it up. Nothing you’ve said directly adresses my post at all.
What does them being slackers (:rolleyes:) have to do with the humor value of the homeless sleeping in the aforementioned location? If you want to rant about the homeless, don’t drag me into it. I’m like to take it personal…
Still doesn’t change anything. Now if you want to continue to complain about them, please feel free to start a new thread without my name in it, since my comments have no bearing on your complaints.
The reason I posted in response to you, Myrr, was to get a response from you as to why you thought it was funny that SF’s homeless slept out in the open. I got the impression that you thought SF’s city government was insufficiently sympathetic to their plight. Or maybe that you thought they were admirably bold in their defiance of vagrancy laws. Just wanted to know what you meant. I didn’t “bitch” about the homeless; what I said was just FYI.
Well, poot. I trudged all the way over to the link, just for this, the “Firestarter”:
This is worth an entire Pit flame thread? Sheesh. Myrr says, “Ain’t it a hoot that the government is alla time making noise about getting the homeless off the streets, and there they are, sleepin’ right in front of City Hall?” and Rilchiam interprets this to mean, “All hail the vampire homeless who are sucking the life’s blood, not to mention the tax dollars, out of the San Francisco community.”
About what I would expect from a “middle of the night” Pit thread. Don’t you people ever sleep? Well, I’ve got work to do, I’ll leave you to it.
Duck Duck Goose: damn straight it isn’t worth a thread at all, much less a Pit thread. Therefore, unless Rilchiam has something to say other than “the homelss are a bunch of bums” :rolleyes:, this can just die a slow slow death.
Wow, the extrapolation from Rilch’s comments about a specific class of homeless people to the general population of homeless is a staggering display of the propensity of a stubborn few to simply refuse to read or comprehend. Please, please, I beg of you, read what she said and stop arguing about what she didn’t say.
As someone who worked with and around homeless people for a while, I can personally attest that maybe one-fifth of them do fit this description. I can’t speak for anything but my own experience where I was at though. And the majority of homeless people I saw were either mentally ill or addicted to drugs, or both. Most of the time when they’re asking for money it’s so they can buy booze or drugs.
But there is definitely a percentage that would rather be homeless than work. It may seem cold to say it that way, but it is true. I saw it for myself. I never give homeless people money anymore. Nobody who doesn’t want to live on the street has to for very long, at least they didn’t in the city I was in. There were literally DOZENS of services and charities devoted to helping the homeless. Most of them didn’t have enough to do, even though there were hundreds (maybe thousands)of homeless people in my town. The people who stayed on the street either wanted to be there (because they were/are “lazy” or because they don’t know any other life) or mental illness or addiction made any other kind of life impossible for them. The vast majority were in the latter category. These people never did have homes and jobs, but that’s usually because they were born into the worst of circumstances and just sank lower.
Hey, what about runaways? Do you think it’s done for fun, or as a lark? What about all the kids that get thrown out of their home by a sorry excuse of a parent? I suppose you think they sleep on the cement by choice too. :rolleyes:
As has been mentioned, anyone who really wants out can usually find a way. But whatever time you spend living like that is surely no “free ride”.
*Aenea, who was a teen on the streets of LA long enough to know how bad it sucks.
I lived in SF for 2 years and found the homeless there (and I do believe they are a special type) to be anywhere from annoying to severely irritating. But when I returned several years later, I could see why Dirty Harry was so cranky.
