That’s an expensive program. You could buy a house outright for what they subsidize in rent over 10 years. Often wondered if they shouldn’t have the recipients pay more so the money could be spread out more.
Disengenous much?
There are no families, no rat-eating children, the people on the streets are mostly economic migrants from eastern Europe interspersed with a few borderline mentaslly unwell who chose this life, and occasional adventurous teenagers.
There is adequate provision for homeless single people, and there is a statutory duty to house families. These are facts, speaking as a non-hysteric.
So would it be ok if the homeless people in the United States were economic migrants from Latin America?
I’m not trying to be mean to homeless people, I understand some people just get really unlucky, but pretty much every homeless person I’ve ever met in America was
either very intoxicated or rather crazy.
I’m giving the rat eating story a big :dubious:
http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/programs/access/foodassistance.shtml
http://www.michigan.gov/dhs/0,1607,7-124-5453_5527-21832--,00.html
Believe it or not, the barbaric US government does provide free food to poor people.
I’m not sure I follow the logic on this one. The link provided said the Roma had been living there for 40 years before they were driven out. It’s ok that the Roma are poor because they’ve been poor for a long time? How is that different than saying that it’s ok that black Americans are poor because they’ve been poor a long time?
There are a variety of government services availible to the poor in the United States. Including forms of assistance with food, health care, and housing. Generally speaking, these services are not as extensive as those that Western European governments provide. There are, of course, also a wide variety of private charities.
You mean every homeless person that you knew was homeless - if a homeless person was sober, clean, and neatly dressed how on earth would you know that they were homeless?
Three of my co-workers are currently living in shelters. If no one told you that, you’d never know they were homeless. They aren’t drunk, they aren’t crazy (well, no more than the average person), they have good personal hygiene, they show up to work on time… they’re rather ordinary, in fact, which is why no one imagines they’re homeless.
I’m quite sure during the three months one of my sisters was homeless you wouldn’t have guess that about her, either.
If you’re homeless in Florida, sleeping in a tent may seem like a better option than a car (cramped) or a shelter (dangerous).
If you’re homeless pretty much anywhere in the UK I can’t see sleeping in a tent ever being a good idea - you’d freeze and die in winter, wouldn’t you? And I do mean that literally. I’m sure I’ve heard reports of the death rates of pensioners in unheated flats going way up in the winter.
Maybe that’s why there are more homeless in tents in the US? I’m pretty sure not many of them would be in New England…
I’m going with rant since the OP has not returned to defend his thesis.
To be fair, post #42 is from the OP.
On the other hand, I don’t see cites for any of the claims made there, so maybe “rant” is accurate.
Regards,
Shodan
Making a direct personal insult in Great Debates much?
None, whatsoever, living homeless? Not a one? Well, your snide, insulting hand-waving has convinced me!
I don’t give a rat’s ass about that; I never claimed there weren’t options, just as there are differing options in much of the US.
I provided a citation as to the number living homeless in London, and you..well, you provided an insult.
Probably because there are no austerity riots.
Come on. They go on massive car burning rampages* sometimes, too, over unemployment in poor neighborhoods, so it’s not like it’s all austerity riots 24/7.
*Estimated 9,000 cars burned in 2005
Let’s be fair - Americans do that too, only after the playoffs.
Regards,
Shodan
Heck, the reason why the Occupy folks aren’t exactly welcome in some US cities are due to riots and destruction. Granted, we aren’t in the same league as our European cousins…NO ONE riots like a European with a bit in his or her mouth!!..but it still happens here.
Sadly, we just aren’t as civilized, so our riots are pretty ho-hum, by and large. 
-XT
And Canadians, let’s not forget Vancouver.
According to this, approximately 254K residents of Los Angeles County experienced homelessness in the last year; this translates to about 2.5% of the population. Morally, any homelessness is indefensible, but on the other hand, keep in mind that the problem is particularly concentrated in warmer regions of the country as might be expected. Also, remember that this doesn’t mean that those 254K people remained homeless for an entire year, as suggested by this, which asserts a “nightly” rate that is far lower, well under 1%. I’ll say it again: it’s morally reprehensible and a stain on our conscience. But even so it’s not as if our cities are ringed by Grapes-Of-Wrath style Hoovervilles. There aren’t enough people sleeping rough at any given point in time for that to happen.
Voluntarily homelessness is 100% defensible, people have every right to be homeless if they choose.
Unfortunately that is a tiny majority of the homeless population but please do not advocate a system where involuntary commitment is common.
The homeless do not surrender their rights purely because they are homeless.
Correct. I only mentioned it because the OP tried to hand waive away homelessness problems in Western Europe because apparently if your homeless people are immigrants, mentally ill, or members of an ethnic minority that suffered from centuries of exclusion from mainstream society, they don’t count.
Too many posts for me to respond to. I did mean for my question about families to be about different states rather than ‘The States’ (hence the lack of the capital letter), but it sounds like provision is too varied for there to be a good answer. At least not in this thread.
Them being driven out was a racist act that was widely condemned at the time.
Them living in camps is different because they’re Roma - they’re a travelling community. There had been a Roma camp there for forty years, but it wouldn’t all be the same people all the time. There are a lot of settled Roma now, and probably would be more if the govts allowed them to settle in their own way, but it doesn’t make sense to count a traditionally nomadic community as ‘homeless’ because they’re living in a traditional setting (or an updated version of it, like their Roma camp before they got chucked out).
The homeless families in the UK, at least, are provided with temporary homes while waiting for permanent homes - the worst being B&Bs (cheap hotels) or special homeless hostels where they have their own rooms. I lived in one such for about six months as a youth after a couple of months’ rough sleeping. People living in these temporary homes still count towards homeless statistics.
The only families you’ll find living in movable caravans/trailers are travellers there by choice.
Obscenity of poverty and inequality in society?
Who is there to revolt against?
A poor person in the United States is better off than a poor person in nearly any other country in the world.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I keep hearing that: “Poor in America is better than poor anywhere else”.
Really? In Europe the poor can at least get needed medical care.
Of course, there’s poor and then there is POOR. If you’re living in a tent or storm drain I don’t think you can excuse it as being not so bad as somewhere else.
I mean, I’m poor, but I have a roof over my head, a working vehicle so I can get to work, and a decent diet. It’s not wonderful, but I can’t say I’m suffering either.
Then there people living in tents or cardboard boxes with no means to cook a warm meal in the middle of winter - that sucks no matter what country you live in.