What to do about the homeless?

Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?

Well, obviously the only sensible thing to do is to ensure that they don't have any access to publicly funded benefits, so they stop leeching off of good Christians who hold down jobs.

Most of them are secretly millionaires, so if we give them any help at all it only encourages them.

The USA has a surplus of land, a surplus of building materials, and a surplus of qualified builders. If the laws of supply and demand were allowed to operate freely, we would have an abundance of affordable housing. It is only the crooked money-lending class that keeps housing unaffordable.

But that's the thing R1 and R2 and R3 and R4-- yes the Republicans are pricks, but they are mostly hurting the homeless who are still together enough to seek help.

But talk to anyone who works in social services, and there are a growing number of "chronic homeless" who are mentally ill and/or addicts and don't want any kind of help.

They would not live in government run free housing of the sort R4 proposes. And if they did they'd scare the kids and families because they're insane and often violent.

They will not accept help from social workers unless it's life or death and even then

Most of them have some sort of drug addiction or mental illness and don't want to take medications for it

It is God's will that they be homeless, so to give them any help at all would be going against God's will, which would be a sin. I know because Jesus tells me so.

So now you want the mentally ill in free housing living in your neighborhood? Gross. Let's all put them in low income housing together away from us and create a dirty festering crime ridden hellhole!

Realistically, they are never going to be self supporting so we should house them. If we can afford missiles we can afford that.

None of you are addressing the problem: there are thousands of homeless who do not want to be helped.

They are not going to live in any sort of free housing R8 no matter how nice it is

And they're not going to see drug counselors or psychiatrists and take the medicine that can make them better. Which is how many of them wound up on the street. (Refusing to take meds for schizophrenia, etc.)

Yeah but realistically.. where will we house them? Nobody wants them in their neighborhood to constantly look after and rounding them all up together is a disaster

I saw a scraggly guy the other day. He was pretty-well bundled up (thanks church) but his face was beet-red.

I think the public library is tired of them sitting in there all day.

I hear Alcatraz has empty beds.

Nature is brutal, and the welfare system is unnatural.

When natural selection goes out the window, you get much higher rates of inherited mental illness.

Mentally ill welfare brats are getting impregnated by mentally ill scumbags, neither of which has any motivation to find a mentally fit partner to procreate with.

In fact, getting pregnant is the best thing a mentally ill girl can do, and she has big financial incentives to have more than one or two or three mentally ill babies. Not only will she get more money for each baby she has, but if the babies are defective, she'll get a much bigger welfare payout for each defective baby.

OP, the main reasons for homelessness are relationships breaking down, loss of rental accommodation and friends and family being unwilling or unable to help out. Around a quarter of all homeless youth are also LGBT. They don't all have mental health issues, but even if they do a lot of people with mental health issues also do have permanent housing, so it's complicated.

There is of course a link between mental health and being homeless, but it's complex; poor mental health can exacerbate the reasons for becoming homeless in the first place, but being homeless can also exacerbate poor mental health. The best thing to do is recognise that homelessness is a public health issue and fund it accordingly.

Eugenics got a bad reputation, but this is a perfect example of where eugenics makes perfect sense, and is the humane solution.

Any attempt to address mental illness and homelessness begins with sterilizing the dysfunctional mentally ill.

That cunt at R11 is too much. And I don't believe he was homeless for seven years.

Honestly (and I'll be hated here for saying this despite my Democrat/liberal bonafides), we need to bring back forced incarceration when it comes to the chunk of the homeless that are mentally ill and incapable of helping themselves. In an ideal world, it would be well funded, well run, and responsible to help these people recover and re-enter society, but we don't live in an ideal world. I don't have the answer, but unlike the republicans, I'm willing to give some new ideas a try, even if it means higher taxes (which should fall predominantly to the 1%, but that's another hopeless crusade).

r17 yes, he was homeless for 7 years. He lived in vehicles, didn't do drugs, and wrote books about how to deal with his rare nerve disease which left him unable to walk for a while.

He just moved into a studio apartment a month ago, but he's already bored and sick of paying rent, so he's going to get another RV. He has a lot of money in the bank because his illness taught him to be extremely frugal and to save for disasters.

My best friend is homeless. He's handsome as hell, intelligent, and a trained electrician. But he is also an alcoholic. He stays with me when he is sober, but I have a rule: he has to be home by midnight, and, if he drinks, he can't stay here. It is 11 degrees where I live. He stayed out past midnight twice this week, and came home drunk or high as fuck the other night. Despite the bitter cold -- and the fact that he had to be at work in less than five hours -- he chose to be on the street than not drink or come home at a reasonable hour. I used to be more lenient with my rules, but I don't want him coming home and waking me up at three in the morning, nor do i want to deal with him when he's drunk. So...he has a free place where he can stay, someone who loves him, and emotional support, but he won't live responsibly. My point here is that he is not mentally ill, he is not unemployable, and he is not without people who are willing to help him. He just won't be responsible. That is not something you can erase or fix. No matter what you do, there will always be people who choose the streets over responsibility. There will always be homeless.

#15, you don't mention "burning all your bridges behind you". No good landlord references; bad employment record; no savings to afford first, last, security deposit... and all the other expenses involved in moving.

[quote] OP, the main reasons for homelessness are relationships breaking down, loss of rental accommodation and friends and family being unwilling or unable to help out. Around a quarter of all homeless youth are also LGBT. They don't all have mental health issues, but even if they do a lot of people with mental health issues also do have permanent housing, so it's complicated.

You're missing the point R15

The system is severely flawed but works for the people you describe. Most manage to escape from homelessness.

It's the chronic homeless, the ones who don't want any sort of help but are also most likely to die on the streets and to menace others who are the issue and we don't seem to have a plan to help them (or us)

Why not just ship them off to the colonies?

Yes, forced incarceration is the answer. It doesn't even need to be inhumane conditions. Let the churches bring delicious meals for the inmates. But get these people off the streets, and change laws so that they get more than a slap on the wrist when they commit 50 petty crimes a year.

R20 here again. I forgot to mention that my friend has been arrested over 50 times in the last year. I live in a tourist town, and the police are very aggressive about arresting people for public intoxication, lest it interfere with the tourist business. He gets put in jail, and then released 8 hours later, every single time. WHat's the point? Despite the fact that he's my friend and I don't want to see him in jail, why spend all that money just to release him? If someone is a repeat offender, keep him longer, for crying out loud. The cost of his going in and out of jail a few times a week is money that should not be spent. The cops would be better used doing something else.

r25 the cops wish they could be doing something else. But the cops don't write the laws. The Jews do.

There's no way the guy in the video at #11 could survive a week on the streets. I don't know what his story is, but he's lying. Do homeless shelters give out Crest Whitestrips? He would have lost those teeth either to bad dental hygiene- or someone would have punched them out of his smart-alecky mouth.

Besides, he would die without tweezers and moisturizer.

r27 he lived in vehicles, not on the sidewalk, and he never did drugs.

The One Ticket Program has destroyed the Southwest. States like New York to West Virginia send their homeless to the Southwest and there is nothing the West can do about it. Unless it is deporting them back to their home state.

He did stay in homeless shelters at first, until he saved enough money for a car to live in. Then he kept saving and got a VW Bus, then he kept saving and got an RV.

"He would have lost those teeth either to bad dental hygiene"

Homelessness doesn't cause automatic bad hygiene. You're confusing homelessness with drug addiction and/or mental illness.

If YOU were homeless, you'd take good care of yourself.

So true R26!!!

As I write this, I'm sitting with my friends Mendel Rabinowitz, Chaim Lefkowitz, Dylan Schwartzbaum and Moishe Feigenbaum writing the new laws for the city of Lexington, KY. The International Zionist Conspiracy that we work for doesn't recognize New Years' as it's a goyische holiday, and so we work.

Lexington? Feh! Kentucky? Double feh!! Wait till they see the laws we have in store for them!!! Then we'll use our traditional control of the banks and the media to make them think those laws are good for them!!! Oy veyz mir!!!

Of course we'll have to run these laws past our ally Lilach-Bet (you all know her as Queen Elizabeth II) -- she always has such good insights into what will oppress the masses!!!

"or someone would have punched them out of his smart-alecky mouth."

Now you know why he doesn't have delusional views of the lazy drug addicts who ask for money on the sidewalks.

r32 Louis Brandies's grandfather moved to Kentucky with an official agent of the Rothschilds.

Look it up. They bought up control of the state way back.

Look at how the Jews kick and scream and stop any sensible solutions to these problems:

Judge Offers Inmates Reduced Sentences in Exchange for Vasectomy by KALHAN ROSENBLATT

A judge in Tennessee is giving inmates a unique way to reduce their sentences: Have a vasectomy.

The program is voluntary. However, the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee has condemned the program, calling it "unconstitutional."

“Offering a so-called ‘choice’ between jail time and coerced contraception or sterilization is unconstitutional," Hedy Weinberg, ACLU-TN executive director, said in a statement. "Such a choice violates the fundamental constitutional right to reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity by interfering with the intimate decision of whether and when to have a child, imposing an intrusive medical procedure on individuals who are not in a position to reject it."

What kind of work does your friend do R20?

So many homeless are ending up in Hawaii too.

You're telling me R34?

All day long we have to listen to Feivel Brandeis talk about how clever his great-grandfather was to take control of Kentucky. You goyim have no idea how good you have it though-- the IZC team in charge of Tennessee- balabustas of the first order!!

TBH, if I were you, I'd move to Ukraine now. That's the only place we don't have influence. Putin? Careful crossbreeding to ensure Slavic looks on one of our best agents.

WOw, so many missing posts in this thread. Is there one poster talking to himself?

Jews everywhere, interfering with common sense and the maintenance of a functional society:

The ACLU countered, saying a judge shouldn't play a role in birth control decisions.

"Judges play an important role in our community — overseeing individuals’ childbearing capacity should not be part of that role," Weinberg's statement said.

Glenn Cohen, a professor at Harvard Law School, said the program was a "bad policy," and pointed to prior court rulings, which set a precedent that could make Benningfield's order unconstitutional.

"The approach of this judge is constitutionally questionable. In Skinner v. Oklahoma, the Supreme Court indicated it violated the Constitution to impose sterilization as a punishment for a criminal," Cohen wrote in an email. "This case is slightly different, though, in that it involves sentencing."

Cohen said some states acknowledge that an inmate could waive his or her constitutional rights as a condition of parole, adding birth control is not a topic on which many lower courts have issued rulings.

The ones that have, Cohen said, have been deemed unconstitutional.

You should only know how controversial that was R35

We need you goyim to be slaves and do our bidding. With the Hershkowitz Vasectomy Program there will be fewer goyim whose money we can steal and whose lives we can make miserable.

I agree with you-- it is a terrible plan!!!

Mass steralizations are our only hope for sustainability. Having a child is NOT a right. It is a privilege.

They know the mistakes of older mental hospitals. They should put some in mental institution style housing if they cannot take care of themselves and/or are a danger to themselves and others.

I think they could have another institution that tries to get people off of drugs or alcohol and see if they can make it or not in the real world. There should be more drug dealer arrests.

And some smaller percentage might just need job or financial help to get back on their feet.

And there should be decent, not ghetto, low income, even single room accommodations available.

To keep ignoring it is to ruin cities and libraries and public spaces for everyone. But I know the rich that run everything are physically and mentally away from it all and do not care.

r37 now you know why Putin is so hated by Jews. He took away Jewish domination of Russia.

In fact, the Jewish neocon coup in Ukraine was partially about squeezing the rope tighter around Putin's neck, to get him back under control.

Victoria Nuland is the wife of one of W Bush's top Jewish neocon warmongering aides.

Even under Obama, these Jew neocons were still running our foreign policy, and orchestrated the Ukraine coup.

Now these same Jews are running Trump's foreign policy.

This is the wrong answer. You want your tax dollars going to this?

Free nembutal for all!

"And there should be decent, not ghetto, low income, even single room accommodations available."

LOL. It will be ghetto the minute you move the vagrant criminals into any building, even The Plaza.

I've seen the same homeless man on my way home from work every day for months. I just wonder how he and so many don't die from dehydration or starvation within a few days.

"Free nembutal for all!"

Or fentanyl.

They are very grateful when you take them home for food, a shower and sex.

[quote]LOL. It will be ghetto the minute you move the vagrant criminals into any building, even The Plaza

They won't be allowed in.

r50 that kind of housing already exists.

Season them heavily and bake at 350°.

[quote]that kind of housing already exists.

A lot of people have noted that the decline in rooming-house type accommodations has certainly added to the homeless problem.

Drug addiction and mental illness dumped on the street is the other problem

Where are all the homeless women? I see a few bag ladies here and there, but they are vastly outnumbered by the guys. No way women have less mental illness than men. They must be clear enough to know they will be destroyed on the streets and look at other options.

There are also way less homeless Hispanics and Asians. Again, where did the mental illness go. I think it’s not the whole story, but is about the breakdown of family ties culturally, both on the part of the black/white men who are homeless and refuse to accept help and their friends and family who refuse to give help on a long-term basis. Single people used to live with family - now they don’t except within some ethnic subgroups, immigrants, etc.

My own experience with homelessness: my father who at one point was VP at Bechtel drank himself to ruin. He was a completely emotionally and physically abusive asshole so fucked his marriage. He ended up passed out on the street at times and taken to ER. We had no contact after the divorce. He was NOT mentally ill, he was a hardcore asshole.

But we (siblings) sought him out at one point. I don’t know if he was on the street but he was living in basically a flop house on his SS with some street guy bringing him booze and taking his check. We found him a senior center home that was okay and did the paperwork to get him in there. He remained off the streets.

Brother has extremely high IQ which actually makes him quite weird at times. He def lives according to his own internal compass not societal or corporate norms. Never has drunk. He keeps very few societal ties being unable to bear them. He is a wonderful individual. Now when he got hit by a car, we moved heaven and earth for him, forced him to stay with us, found him a new apartment and furnished it - even though we’d had no contact in years.

Point being, like it or not, community and family ties forestall disaster - constraining as they sometimes are. And they work from both sides. And government programs are just a form of com unity tie with people either offering or refusing to help.

R36. R20 here. My friend is an electrician. He also helps build the stage sets for the large tours that come to town. He can make money if he wants to. Once he is on a job long enough to get some money, he fucks everything up by getting drunk and then either not showing up to work, or showing up drunk. He thinks life is one big party and will not be responsible for anything. He is divorced and has a 15 year old kid, and he's only 36. He hardly sees his kid because he will be arrested for not paying child support in the state where his son lives, so he can't go there, and his ex won't let the son travel to where he is. He is bi -- we are friends with benefits -- which I think might add to some of his issues, but it is mostly that he thinks he can do what he wants and get away with it and won't be responsible. he is incredibly charming and smart and model handsome, so he is able to get away with stuff others wouldnt be able to.

The clear connection between drug abuse and chronic homelessness brings to mind the story of a friend of mine from over a decade ago. He injured himself on the job, but due to some clever manipulation of the system by his employer (giving his employees the option to be exempt contractors, meaning they would take home slightly more in pay, but lose out on the potential benefits of an employee, and paying higher taxes), he was denied workman's comp. His injury wasn't severe, but did mean that he couldn't continue in the line of work he enjoyed. Being unable to perform that, he was let go with some minor severance and good wishes/recommendations.

Then the recession hit, unemployment skyrocketed, and he was unable to find work for several years doing anything, no matter how menial. However, he did qualify for some state aid. One of the items that the state provided was a membership to a gym where he could sit in a hot tub, which he had been given to relieve the back pain from the injury. This cost the state about $25 a month, which was far, far less than the costs of traditional rehab, which ran about $150 per visit. The new governor decided that they had to crack down on this rampant fraud and abuse, and despite the fact that the gym membership — for the year — cost the same as two single visits to a rehab clinic, they discontinued the benefit. Fraud and abuse and all. Hey, who wants to hear about some freeloader getting a free gym membership when *you* have to pay for one? So, he was sent to a pain clinic, but the cost of that exhausted the meager state benefit pool in short order, so that ended quickly.

Now, meanwhile, because he had been out of work for so long, he lost his apartment and was living in his car, short term shelters, or crashing on friend's sofas, using the gym's showers to maintain his appearance so he could continue to look for work. He did find odd jobs, and with the help of friends, was getting better. But, without the gym, hot tub, and facilities, his pain became worse and worse, and he ended up seeking help via federal and state Medicare programs; translation: drugs. A judge ruled that the state could not deny him fentynal, which was his downfall, to be honest. And at a much higher cost for a single dose than an annual simple gym membership.

We lost touch when he succumbed to drug addiction so severe that neither he nor I could cope with it. I caught him stealing from me to feed his addiction, and after trying and trying to help him recover, I finally had to consider myself and my family's need to live safely and securely and stopped allowing him to stay in my home. The last I heard, he was living on the street — the car was long gone, and not one of our mutual friends were allowing him near their homes — hopelessly addicted to drugs, alcohol, and/or anything that would numb the pain.

Over $25 a month in gym membership. Let that sink in for a moment, and think about it the next time you hear some politician bloviate about the wanton fraud and abuse in our system.

r57 your friend could have found a way to pay for that $25 gym membership. He chose drugs instead, even after being fully aware of the therapeutic qualities of that hot tub.

SF has THE WORST homeless problem and it broke my heart. THAT BEING SAID...Trying to get to work, dodging human feces, having a mentally ill asian woman lift her skirt and finger herself screaming at you as you try to pass her, young “crusties” calling you an asshole because you DONT give them 5 dollars. THE WORST CITY IN THE WORLD, FILLED WITH IDIOTS

R24. Is an idiot. Why do I want to throw a bread stealer in prison for getting something they need. I ain't paying for that. I would pay for a prison for thug cops but not for a bicycle thief. Even if it is my bicycle. A schizophrenic should be in a mental institution, or someplace where they take their meds. By the way, crazy people should be fixed, both male and female. It is absurd that we allow druggies, alcoholics and nut cases to have children. Why do we allow it?

r60 wants to keep violent drug addicts on the street so they can keep stealing "bread", aka money for drugs and drink.

Euthanize the bottom 1% and the top 1% of society. Repeat as necessary.

R58: not really. After a certain point you are unable to function at a level necessary for whatever reason even if you give it your all you go down. I have zero problem giving people long-term assistance. It is much better than “ haha look at your choices LOSER” and having a street population which leads to hep A outbreaks and the skirball/ bel air fire that burned into Murdoch’s property. ( In addition to being the right thing to do.)

This American proud to be an asshole mentality is just insane and morally substandard. What kind of society thinks that way?

Sure he could, R58. I even offered to pay for it, although because I wasn't the state, it would have cost what a gym membership really costs, about $75 a month. For someone struggling with just staying warm, $75 a month was out of reach. He demurred as would I in this situation. It was one thing to crash on my sofa once in a while; it was another matter altogether to admit his dependency on his friends' largess no matter how many hypothetical payment plans or promises to repay me when he could. I even contacted his social worker and told her that I would pay for the gym membership if she could somehow make it look like it was coming from the state. Her answer was an unequivocal impossibility.

It is a strange paradox that we've developed as a society, He looked at the state paying for his care as an earned benefit but could not bring himself to accept direct assistance from friends. This story is a specific example of the situation we find ourselves in with regard to the homeless, but it is not unique. Just look at the stories of entire towns in Appalachia that exist on SSDI, acting as though they are entitled to that aid, but refuse to accept the reality that their coal jobs are never coming back, which means that they have to pick up and leave the town in which they grew up.

So, if this is the situation, then the answer is obvious. There are times when the state can provide assistance that works. It's not all fraud and abuse.

The brother, btw, wasn’t homeless, but he was on the margins and could have fallen into the crack.

You're in denial, r63 and r64. You just don't want to blame your friend for his problems.

You don't even blame the corrupt government that was eager to give him more opiods. Instead you blame the opponents of big government.

The government wasn't eager to give him opiods; they had to be ordered to by a judge. But you're damn right I blame the opponents of big government (and you're giving yourself away as one of those people who think it's better to waste money on opiods and SSDI to entire towns rather than common sense, workable solutions because compassion is for pussies, right?).

It's called being penny wise and pound foolish, and an addiction of the right in this country.

r67 was a bad friend and is much more responsible for his friend's drug addiction than a gym membership.

If a simple gym membership would have saved your friend from addiction, just imagine what you could have done for him...

Oh, do tell, troll. You have no idea what I and others tried to do for our friend. But, go ahead and pontificate from your high horse while you deny the basic truth in the fact that common sense solutions are possible, work, and cost the state far less than the drug addiction-homelessness cycle that is making modern cities unlivable.

"You have no idea what I and others tried to do for our friend."

I'm sure you did a lot, and it didn't help any, because your friend chose to be a druggie. If you had given him the $75 for the gym membership, he would have just blown it on drugs.

There are more and more severely mentally ill people on the streets; several powder kegs waiting to explode. They are so ill they are unable to make good decisions for their health and well being. The mental health care system in the US is beyond broken. Is it time for forced institutionalization?

Ship a couple hundred of them off to Chappaqua, they'll love the neighborhood. St. Helena too.

He didn't choose to be a drug addict. That was done for him by the governor who sold his platform of cruelty on the basis of providing cheap, common sense solutions as wanton fraud and abuse, and the rubes — like you, R71 — who voted for him. Of course, when you figured out that this governor was a buffoon, it was somebody else's fault for voting him into office. It always is with people like you.

My friend and I had many discussions about drug abuse and the pitfall of taking pain meds over physical therapy. He admitted that he had an addictive personality and once on drugs it was going to be almost impossible for him to stop, but when you're feeling the pain he was from his on-the-job injury, you'd be willing to take drugs to make it stop, especially when the only other recourse is to try and deal with the pain while being turned away from job after job because you couldn't perform the manual labor tasks for which you qualify.

I also blame the employer who, cutting corners and cheating the government out of his fair share of taxes, tricked his employees into giving up potential benefits for the guarantee of short-term higher pay. Of course, this employer was never held to account, let alone prosecuted, by the government (under Republican control, natch, as regulation is job-killing) for defrauding society of its due and his employees of the security of workman's comp.

It is Republican stock-in-trade to take short term gain over long term security. Anything to make a buck, right? And in the end, the government can just borrow some more money to pay for what could have been easily avoided.

As someone involved in providing care for the homeless, I can say a warm bed and food is available if they want it.

As I have said before in Florida, the is no viable social network. We have newly paved streets, fancy road dividers with new potted plants. And the homeless kids stay in the jails.

But there are church and other groups that mind the homeless. Anyone that wants it gets food and a bed for the night. But a lot of them are screwed up in the head.

[quote]f you had given him the $75 for the gym membership, he would have just blown it on drugs.

You're right. And that's why the offer was contingent on paying the gym directly rather than giving him the cash. He even admitted that he would probably blow the money on drugs or more likely alcohol because, by that point, he'd entered the cycle of addiction. He was, at that point, self-aware enough to say no... to me.

I don't know what it is that makes the difference between people who are responsible and never rely on society for help and those who do, but I do recognize that there is a difference. If I could solve this dilemma, I would; I would hope that anyone would. I don't think we'll ever reach the point where we can determine how and why some people end up on the street and others don't. That does not mean that we can't prevent more people from ending up in my friend's shoes.

Or we can continue down this path of denial and cruelty to our fellow man; after all, that is the Republican way, at least as far as modern Republicans believe.

[quote]. Is it time for forced institutionalization?

Yes. And neither party will do it. The Repubs won't spend the money because it all has to go to the .01% and the military and the Dems think it is progressive to let cities go to ruin with drug addiction and mental illness

r77 and liberals then move into conservative states to get away from the madness liberals created in their own cities. But the liberals don't learn anything, and want to impose their own liberal ideas on conservative cities and states as well.

[quote]Dems think it is progressive to let cities go to ruin

That's a crock of shit, and you know it, R77. Don't cast compassion as a desire to see cities unlivable. Democrats want a strong social safety net. Democrats want to regulate business so that they can't trick employees into giving up security for short term gain. Democrats want everyone to pay their fair share of taxes. Democrats want their to be living wages, affordable housing, and medical care. It is Republicans who fight this tooth and nail.

Yes, correct, R78.

r79 thinks limousine liberals are just like him.

[quote]liberals then move into conservative states

As you can see by the huge influx of population shifts to... where exactly? And if I need to say it... link please.

[quote[[R79] thinks limousine liberals are just like him.

Oh please, you're revealing your conservative bias... again.

r82 liberals are fleeing NYC and NJ and CA for the red states in the Bible Belt. North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, Texas, etc etc.

This thread can be used in Moscow as a case study of how a single troll can take over an entire thread.

[quote][R82] liberals are fleeing NYC and NJ and CA for the red states in the Bible Belt. North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, Texas, etc etc.

Good. They can make the country livable once again. This is a plan I heartily endorse. Liberals, move to conservative states and help them to see the error of their ways!

R79, talk a lot but cave into the Republicans constantly. It has been a weak "safety net" for a long time with a lot of holes thanks to both parties.

Spending resources on drugs, and changing political priorities so they are about drug addiction is a way to increase problems, increase the ruin of cities and communities and a way to neglect cities and communities basic needs as the focus and funding is geared to that, which is actually negative in every way.

Yeth! turn the rest of the country into Than Fran Thisthco, tho ith livable again!

An easy solution: Mar-a-lago becomes a destination for the nation's homeless. Proudly featuring Trump steaks on the menu and all-you-can-golf under warm and sunny skies. A win-win, bigly!

R77 / r77, forced institutionalization isn't a political issue, per se. The biggest and loudest opponent has been and always will be the ACLU-- and other civil rights groups.

r90 they're not civil rights groups, they're fronts for Jewish mafia.

Is there some out of the way place, where no one else wants to live, where we can let them live free range?

Think about how much money the homeless make for the drug traffickers.

The homeless heroin addicts beg for money, then give that money to the drug dealers.

If the homeless are institutionalized, they can't buy and sell drugs for the drug traffickers.

r92 they will immediately return to the big cities where they can beg for money to buy drugs.

[quote]forced institutionalization isn't a political issue, per se. The biggest and loudest opponent has been and always will be the ACLU-- and other civil rights groups

They are political groups. And tend to be connected to politicians and parties as well. And funded by organizations with clear political slants.

Then what you are saying is that the liberals are to blame, r95.

Both parties are to blame, but concerning drugs, yes it is the liberals more.

In years coming up, this will be pushed more as well, as the governments will get in directly on the money as it is legalized. The problem will not be tackled unless the citizens revolt (which doesn't look likely)/.

R97, one of the biggest proponents of deinstitutionalization was JFK. He got the ball rolling and the ACLU picked it up and ran with it.

The mental illness on the streets and drug addiction on the streets and support by govt for this is because of the left.

There were problems with mental institutions from the 1800s-1950s but it has been clear that dumping the problems on the street creates problems and is not a "solution", either.

OP - good question, wrong site. Raise a serious issue amidst "pointless bitchery", you'll be trolled with sick jokes and cynical finger-pointing.

Nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Don't encourage them

Thanks R100

Sometimes we get good and serious conversations going on here, but this particular post got hijacked by R26, who in addition to the Jew-hating blather then pretended to be R20, then started arguing the liberal/conservative thing.

Give it a day or two and we may get some real answers.

Did not realize the extent too, to which people outside of the big cities are not aware of the differences between the mentally ill homeless and the down on their luck homeless.

I hate to say it, but I see no other option than to wipe them all out, and start with a clean slate? :(

I'm the guy who posted upstream about my friends with benefits who drifts in and out of homelessness; the electrician. I had not heard from him in a few days, and he wasn't on the incarcerated list, so I was starting to worry. He just called me. He's been in detox, and the hospital is transferring him to a crisis center to evaluate him. He swears that he is going to stop drinking and act more responsibly in 2018. I hope he does, because he is wasting his life. If you're the kind to wish a stranger luck, please wish him luck.

[quote]The mental illness on the streets and drug addiction on the streets and support by govt for this is because of the left.

Oh, give me a fucking break, R99. Republican Ronald Reagan emptied the institutions and dumped the mentally ill on the streets as part of the first round of austerity/trickle-down economics, which as we have seen over the past 30+ years, has been an abysmal failure. The war on drugs, started under Republican Nixon, was further amped up, criminalizing specific drugs (think: crack) targeting communities of color, resulting in entire generations of minorities unable to obtain gainful employment, resulting in even more people forced into homelessness, dependency and despair.

Then we tried it again in the 'aughts under both Bushes (the "thousand points of light" , followed on by so-called "faith based initiatives" that only served to put public money into religious hands), and again, an abysmal failure.

Now, we're at it again, on steroids, with Trump and the charlatans in Congress, and mark my words, this time it will be a disaster on the scale of a world war... if Trump doesn't manage to start WWIII in the interim. The difference this time is that the drug problem and government policies has been targeted squarely at the people who, for lack of a better word, we call the deplorables. They just don't know it yet, but they're catching on.

Of course you try to blame the problem on liberals. It means you don't have to think about let alone accept responsibility for the laws, problems created, and unfortunate outcomes resulting from backwards conservative policies. I'm not letting liberals and Democrats off the hook here, either; they went along with the incredibly harmful and destructive policy ideas, thinking that if we tried them, there might be better outcomes. Remember, when Reagan took his ideas of emptying mental institutions like he did in California as governor to the federal level, Tip O'Neill was hoodwinked into believing Reagan's promise to develop treatment programs if he went along with the austerity measures resulting in the homeless problem we have seen only get worse since. It was foolish and counterproductive.

The only solution is rehabilitation, and for those who are incapable of recovery, involuntary detainment in institutions set up to deal with the problem. It is distasteful, indeed. I wouldn't want to be institutionalized... but of course, knowing that this is one of the potential outcomes of drug use and ultimately dependency, you'd think people wouldn't imbibe. It's called responsibility, and while you'd think that conservatives (the party of personal responsibility, after all) would gravitate towards such a solution, they won't because it costs a lot of money. Unless, of course, they can find a way to suck money out of the public coffer and put it in their pockets (like criminalizing specific drug use and shuffling the outlaws to private prisons.... sound familiar?).

Just wait until the problems become chronic (meaning white people suffer the same consequences as minorities, and not just the folks hurt by our migration from an economy based on agriculture/industry to information). Maybe then we'll bring some compassion and common sense back into the discussion.

Ronnie dumped out everybody in California first as a cost saving measure for the state only.

[quote] The only solution is rehabilitation, and for those who are incapable of recovery, involuntary detainment in institutions set up to deal with the problem. It is distasteful, indeed. I wouldn't want to be institutionalized... but of course, knowing that this is one of the potential outcomes of drug use and ultimately dependency, you'd think people wouldn't imbibe. It's called responsibility, and while you'd think that conservatives (the party of personal responsibility, after all) would gravitate towards such a solution, they won't because it costs a lot of money. Unless, of course, they can find a way to suck money out of the public coffer and put it in their pockets (like criminalizing specific drug use and shuffling the outlaws to private prisons.... sound familiar?).

Thank you R107 for giving the first real answer. (This is OP)

I'd say that the blame lies in a perfect storm of of heartless conservative cost cutting and poorly thought out liberal civil liberties policies. It seems that after a number of exposure on mental institutions, civil libertarians set to work to prevent forced institutionalization, with the notion that there would be ample money for social services for the deinstitutionalized. That money was then cut by the GOP.

That said, it seems that even with unlimited funds, many of the mentally ill would refuse social services though and thus your plan makes a lot of sense to me--though I'd add that the line between drug addiction and mental illness is fairly porous.

I thought FEMA was stocking up on cheap plastic coffins and 18 wheelers and cargo train cars to deal with this for us?

YES, Ronald Reagand dumped the mentally ill on the streets in the 80s

In the 90s and 2000s , "liberals" allowed cities to be filled with drug addicts

It is both parties. The drug thing is 100% the liberals. The Republicans started dumping out the mentally ill, but the liberals are doing nothing about it it. They encourage addicts and tents and the destruction of cities. No one cares about safe, functioning cities anymore.

[quote]Just wait until the problems become chronic (meaning white people suffer the same consequences as minorities,

There are plenty of white people who are poor or homeless

Vlad III of Wallachia, aka Vlad the Impaler or Vlad Dracula, the inspiration for the legend of Count Dracula the Vampire, had his own solution for the homeless in his country. He invited them all to a magnificent feast in one of his smaller castles. Once inside and feasting, he had the castle enchained, preventing any exit, and had it burned to the ground. No more homeless. Practical fellow.

euthanasia would be a blessing for the poor torn souls in frisco.

horrible zombies wishing for death

naked crackheads in flip flops wearing hospital gowns...

cops do nuthin!

What does Singapore do about its homeless?

eat them.

R62for president! And u can euthanize me too

Schizophrenics used to live out their lives in state hospitals, hardly an ideal situation but homelessness isn't either.

At this point the problem is so severe that we either need to lock them up or euthanize them. The ones who are mentally ill and/or drug addicts are especially useless and don’t contribute anything to society. I also strongly believe that our taxes should not help anyone who in turn is not paying taxes. Even if you’re only contributing a tiny amount from a minimum wage job, at least you are being a productive member of society and should be eligible for some aid. The homeless are usually not even worth our time. They are a danger and menace and need to be dealt with swiftly.

Because of the extremely cold weather, there are at least 200 homeless dregs on the E train I'm on in NYC.

They all need to be sterilised.

All people on welfare for 3 generations should be sterilised..

I was thinking of this thread with the cold weather this weekend

I am sure a number of homeless will freeze to death because they are too far gone mentally to go indoors to a city run shelter or a church run one.

They would not freeze to death in a psychiatric hospital

I'm surprised some nut job hasn't tried to make those Purge movies become a reality.

I would build houses for them. How hard is this to figure out people?

R124 That has been attempted before. But dysfunctional people tend to destroy them

R99 That attitude went around the western world as the big Victorian asylums were shut down and all the inmates were told to go out into the scary real world and keep taking the new medication. But, of course, dysfunctional people tend not to do as they are advised.

As the middle class continues to be decimated (rising housing and food costs, job loss, wage stagnation, loss of healthcare, student loan defaults) and the opiod crisis rages on, there will be more homeless. Alzheimer's is on the rise and only a small fraction of the population has saved for long term care for the elderly and or infirm. Prepare for more homeless. The US is in a mental health crisis.

[quote]only a small fraction of the population has saved for long term care

only small fraction of the population has the money to invest and put aside for long term care

R124 Thank you for your offer to build houses for them.

But are you expecting to be PAID to build them?

[quote]Democrats want to regulate business so that they can't trick employees into giving up security for short term gain.

R74, like all libtards, thinks adults are child-like innocent lambs who need to be coddled and told how to live their own lives.

R74, your friend was a free thinking adult who was given a choice. He chose the option, like very many contractors do who are young and single, of making a quick buck. He avoided taxes and spent the extra money his employer would have contributed to health insurance--probably on booz, cigs and party drugs. He chose to gamble that he would remain hale and hearty---as many young people do.

Years ago I was a manager for a company that offered health insurance AND a 100% a matching 401K. I begged young new hires to contribute to the matching savings plan--even a little bit, 50 bucks/mo, and the company would match it dollar for dollar. They refused because their net paycheck would be reduced by $50/mo. These same kids had no problem blowing all their money on stupid shit--- fast food, cigarettes and booz. It was frustrating, but it was THEIR choice to spend their own money as they saw fit.

I always want to make special packs for people, so that even if they don't want to use facilities, they have military level camping gear they can carry with them, like a roll up foam mat to keep from contact freezing and single person tent. I also think we need to set up more areas that are safe for people to start fires in, in public spaces and parks. I know, that's a safety issue but we should have stone fire pits in public areas where it's known to get very cold in the winter or at night, just in case. We have to also consider what people are using to burn but the same laws that prohibit the destruction of property are still in place. People can donate wood and a volunteer can make small piles around these areas at night during the coldest periods. Someone can be given a small stipend -- below tax reporting requirements -- through donations to keep the fire going at night.

This might sound ridiculous to you but I've volunteered in various human services programs my entire life and have extensively worked with people who are either homeless or at risk to be and part of the reason public housing often fails is because of two reasons:

1. Conflicts between people in the population. There are feuds between cliques and individuals who share the same spaces in groups of homeless people, like anywhere else. When people are locked into no freeze shelters at night, some of these same conflicts can arise and some people in this community are also dealing with severe mental health problems that makes it difficult to even take advantage of free, public housing and assistance.

2. Freedom. This is a big one. It's very hard for some people to meet the curfews and other requirements of sharing shelter space. It's hard for staff to strike the right balance between dignity for individuals and safety for everyone under the same roof. Some people take the risk of freezing over having to obey certain shelter rules or for long term stays, the pressures of having someone else sit down with them and manage their resources.

[quote]I always want to make special packs for people

But you don't?

R132 That's what you took from my comment and even after reading everything else, made an assumption? Why would you assume I haven't? I'm talking about a general problem and finding solutions for homelessness in general. Some assume "out of sight, out of mind" is a solution. I think the opposite: See people, find reasonable and humane options based on how people live and accept that these are human beings who are part of the same society we are all part of not blight.

This is DL and I was being pointlessly bitchy, R133. You sound like a good person and you have some interesting ideas.

Thanks R134.

Out of sight, out of mind sounds like the best solution to me. I honestly don't give a damn what happens to them, as long as they stay out of my way and don't stink up the subway cars. Why don't we ship them off to NJ like we do the rest of our trash?

Has anyone seen the documentary 'God Knows Where I Am' about the death of Linda Bishop? She was bipolar and refused follow up treatment after being released from a mental hospital so died alone and homeless in an abandoned farmhouse.