What should be done about the homeless?

what? not all cops do harass, they only doing there job. Not all cops are nice but if homeless people do not agree to move or whatnot then they can start getting wards from the cops.
 
I've already addressed those. I reiterate, these people want to go home but are too broke to buy their own ticket.,

The solution always isn't to send someone to a different location though. 😛

Cops harass the crap out of homeless people. In that case, that's enough to not want to be homeless.

I haven't really seen that tbh. Cops here are pretty friendly with the homeless.
 
To add to @Empire's post, another thing to donate is tampons / pads because they're important hygiene items that period-having homeless people don't always get access to.

I'm sure some conservatives would think homeless guys use tampons! 😀

No, really the homeless are mentally ill, not lazy or limp-wristed. Note, when they started eliminating care for the mentally ill, the homeless rate went up. So how can right-wingers explain this?
 
I'm sure some conservatives would think homeless guys use tampons! 😀
That would require them to think ayyyyyy.

Even so, the stereotypical homeless person is male but there are many women (and by extension, trans-men) out on the streets as well. Their needs don't often get met until someone points that out even though it should be obvious.

No, really the homeless are mentally ill, not lazy or limp-wristed. Note, when they started eliminating care for the mentally ill, the homeless rate went up. So how can right-wingers explain this?
Tbh I imagine when they removed the mental health care they also removed a number of other resources that also helped the homeless.
 
The idea to just give homeless a place to live and money is nonsense. It doesn't fix the problem at all. If anything it only makes the issues worse. I mean suppose a homeless person is such because they spend all the money they do get on drugs/alcohol. Simply giving them money (via a basic income) isn't going to help them. They're just going to do the same thing they always did. Unless you solve the root problem of why they're homeless nothing will change. Not to mention where is this money going to come from? Taxpayers most likely.
But that tax payer money is already stretched pretty thin and needs to cover a lot. Especially in other countries where they cover healthcare too.

As for where homeless come from, there are many reasons why and it's not always because they're mentally ill. A lot of homeless are former soldiers and military personnel that slipped through the cracks of the systems. Others are drug users who have been kicked out by families after having enough of watching them self-destruct. Others still, and I'd say the smallest portion, are those who's lives suffered catastrophic events (like a spouse got sick, they poured all their money into medical costs and then lost everything). And then of course those who are mentally ill.

There are also a small portion of homeless who are homeless by choice. In my area there were several people who liked being homeless. During the winter they'd go to a shelter (to escape the cold) and stay but in summer they'd just live on the streets. In one particular case this guy, every september, would go into a convenience store and take a chocolate bar set it on the counter and inform the clerk he was stealing it and to call the police. He would then take the bar and go sit outside the convenience store until police arrived. He'd then spend all winter in jail and be released in spring.
 
The idea to just give homeless a place to live and money is nonsense. It doesn't fix the problem at all. If anything it only makes the issues worse. I mean suppose a homeless person is such because they spend all the money they do get on drugs/alcohol. Simply giving them money (via a basic income) isn't going to help them. They're just going to do the same thing they always did. Unless you solve the root problem of why they're homeless nothing will change. Not to mention where is this money going to come from? Taxpayers most likely.
But that tax payer money is already stretched pretty thin and needs to cover a lot. Especially in other countries where they cover healthcare too.

As for where homeless come from, there are many reasons why and it's not always because they're mentally ill. A lot of homeless are former soldiers and military personnel that slipped through the cracks of the systems. Others are drug users who have been kicked out by families after having enough of watching them self-destruct. Others still, and I'd say the smallest portion, are those who's lives suffered catastrophic events (like a spouse got sick, they poured all their money into medical costs and then lost everything). And then of course those who are mentally ill.

There are also a small portion of homeless who are homeless by choice. In my area there were several people who liked being homeless. During the winter they'd go to a shelter (to escape the cold) and stay but in summer they'd just live on the streets. In one particular case this guy, every september, would go into a convenience store and take a chocolate bar set it on the counter and inform the clerk he was stealing it and to call the police. He would then take the bar and go sit outside the convenience store until police arrived. He'd then spend all winter in jail and be released in spring.

This brings up some tough questions. I mean the ideal thing would be to force the homeless off the street, but it would be like some probably ancient custom of enslaving the idle. OK, well, being homeless either by choice or by circumstance is an option in our free society, not Rome or some Communist one or something.
 
Cutting all welfare is bad, because you're also harming those who are genuinely in need of help. Having welfare all the time is bad because people could abuse it.

My plan is similar to China's policies back in the 20th century. Give each poor person 2 years worth of welfare. That should be enough time to find a job if they're actually trying to find a job. Once those two years are up, they are on their own. Exceptions can be made but the case must be thoroughly looked at before giving said person more welfare.
 
Cutting all welfare is bad, because you're also harming those who are genuinely in need of help. Having welfare all the time is bad because people could abuse it.

My plan is similar to China's policies back in the 20th century. Give each poor person 2 years worth of welfare. That should be enough time to find a job if they're actually trying to find a job. Once those two years are up, they are on their own. Exceptions can be made but the case must be thoroughly looked at before giving said person more welfare.

Yeah, that's a nice idea, cause contrary to what libertarians etc. think, private groups usually won't give out anything.
 
More shelters, more money going into such shelters, more food banks for the homeless. Shop's wasted items and food should be donated to the homeless not just thrown away.
People's attitude also needs to change. Because it's not just drunks and addicts that find themselves homeless. It could happen to anyone.
 
More shelters, more money going into such shelters, more food banks for the homeless. Shop's wasted items and food should be donated to the homeless not just thrown away.
People's attitude also needs to change. Because it's not just drunks and addicts that find themselves homeless. It could happen to anyone.
Yeah, but there have also been reports of people abusing welfare, such as a veteran turning out not to be disabled. That's why I think my 2 year welfare plan would work well. It's long enough so that people who actually need welfare can get a job by the end of 2 years, but short enough so people can't abuse the system.
 
Back
Top Bottom