# Being Poor is NOT a Crime



## RLF (Oct 29, 2006)

In Las Vegas, bringing food to the park and handing it out to the 
homeless is punishable by six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. 

In Dallas, only approved churches, charities and individuals can serve 
the homeless only in approved locations. If not approved, you so much 
as offer a biscuit to a hungry person, you are subject to fines up to 
$2,000. 


Now in Redding if you are one of the more than 2,000 homeless men, 
women, and children in Shasta County caught by a small campfire trying 
to keep warm within Redding's city limits, you can receive up to six 
months in jail, and a $1,000 fine. 


Many more Cities are doing the same....... 


God, from one end of the Bible to the other, expresses his desire for 
us to care, uphold and provide for the poor. Is it God's will that 
poverty should be a crime? Is it not written, "He who oppresses the 
poor, reproaches His Maker?" Didn't Jesus say, "Assuredly, I say to 
you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, 
you did it to me?" 


Mental illness does not respond to increased fines and jail time. Home- 
lessness does not respond to tearing down their temporary shelters, 
throwing away their possessions, and driving them out of town. A lack 
of hope does not respond to a lack of love. 


We must constructively address the plight of the homeless, and its 
multifaceted causes, 
before its to late....... 


http://reddingloavesandfishes.com/


----------



## arlekin_m (Aug 5, 2006)

how can you fine the (clearly) homeless?

that's one of the most outrageously stupid things i've ever heard, not to mention inhumane


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

These measures aren't about hurting the poor. They're about keeping things orderly for everyone. Measures like this keep our parks available for the rest of us. 

They should allow alternate locations of course. Soup kitchens play a vital role.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

_"These measures aren't about hurting the poor. They're about keeping things orderly for everyone"_

Baloney. They are discriminatory toward the poor, and done by self centred people who pretend they are not hurting the poor. Shameful.


----------



## Chicagoago (Dec 2, 2005)

Yeah, It's all so weird. I see the point of the whole thing - trying to clear out areas in the central cities and urban parks where homeless people have basically set up shop 24-7. There are many areas I've been to where people don't rationally go to relax in these public areas because they have turned into squatting grounds. I think these laws are trying to clean out people who have just taken over public space, but of course there are the other people who are really out of the public way and just trying to keep warm with a fire. There needs to be better access to shelters, more beds in the shelters, and more comforting and inviting shelters for people that need help. Otherwise you're just driving these people from one point to another without actually helping to extinguish the problem.

in the end, as our country works....easier said than done.


----------



## futureproof (Nov 2, 2006)

thats pretty stupid 

seems like they think poor people degradate completly a city´s landscape

pathetic


----------



## ThePhantomReturns (Nov 6, 2006)

futureproof said:


> thats pretty stupid
> 
> seems like they think poor people degradate completly a city´s landscape
> 
> pathetic


poor people? Different than bums. You people do not know the entire story. Las Vegas is infested with lowlife bums.


----------



## FREKI (Sep 27, 2005)

I hate voluntary poor people ( homeless, addicts, gamblers and the likes ) so I find it just fine to take such messure..

Beggin is btw illegal in Denmark... and we don't have poor people ( except for the sad fu**ers I mentioned earlier )

And ofcause the tons of Romanians who come to beg despite the law each summer


----------



## RLF (Oct 29, 2006)

If you put in dallas, lasvegas, orlando, denver homeless laws in google news, I think you would be in for a real eye opener, plus many other cities following suit....its a shame


----------



## ThePhantomReturns (Nov 6, 2006)

RLF said:


> If you put in dallas, lasvegas, orlando, denver homeless laws in google news, I think you would be in for a real eye opener, plus many other cities following suit....its a shame


maybe the bums should find jobs at the rodeo, casino, Disney Land, and shoveling snow?


----------



## jmancuso (Jan 9, 2003)

...and stop taking a shit in the isles at the public libraries. yeah, thats a problem here in houston.

most legit homeless are the mentally ill who should be institutionalized, while some are just worn out from life while the rest, the majority, are hustlers and bums who don't want to work.


----------



## Chicagoago (Dec 2, 2005)

I agree with that ^

I truely feel sorry for the mentally ill and people who NEED help to live on their own.

I'm REALLY annoyed with some of these "professional" homeless people who stand outside all the Chicago train stations each morning and just get right in people's faces and speak like they were actually "working" trying to make people feel bad and guilty for not shoveling over money each morning.

There are maybe 12-15 people I see on my way to work who are homeless and there EVERY SINGLE DAY. Without fail, I notice right away if one of them isn't in their specific place while I walk to work I actually wonder where they went.

These people move around and speak fine and have conversations with some people who stop to chat with them in the morning/evening. I really wouldn't mind as much if they didn't get RIGHT in your face talking directly at you as if you owe them something. I know some of them recognize me, I've been seeing them daily for 5 years. Yet every day they say the same thing over and over yet I've never talked to them once. It gets creepy.


----------



## clam_dude (Oct 19, 2003)

jmancuso said:


> ...and stop taking a shit in the isles at the public libraries. yeah, thats a problem here in houston.
> 
> most legit homeless are the mentally ill who should be institutionalized, while some are just worn out from life while the rest, the majority, are hustlers and bums who don't want to work.


Are you being sarcastic or serious?


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

As this help is voluntary, which is better than what govt's can provide with tax money, I am against these laws. However, I am also deeply concerned that poor people, homeless or not, aren't working their way out of poverty and instead choosing a life of begging on the streets. That's where things need to change. Some ideas:

1) Stop using wasteful (to say the least) amounts of tax money to pay for welfare benefits. This encourages irresponsibility and discourages hard, honest work. It also pays for the shameful elements in society, like drugs and smoking.

2) Slash down regulations to work permits. A bum should be able to walk right off the street to a place where his/her services may be needed, and get a job there in the first 5 minutes. No red tape required. The pay may be low, but it's a start, and also encourages responsibility and hard, honest work.

3) As a long term solution, replace most workplace regulation with work contracts where elements of work (pay, safety, hours etc) are negotiated by both employer and employee. If either party steps outside these guidelines, the offender would be forced to restitute the victim's losses.


----------



## clam_dude (Oct 19, 2003)

jmancuso said:


> ...and stop taking a shit in the isles at the public libraries. yeah, thats a problem here in houston.
> 
> most legit homeless are the mentally ill who should be institutionalized, while some are just worn out from life while the rest, the majority, are hustlers and bums who don't want to work.


Are you being sarcastic or serious?


----------



## guinessbeer55 (Jul 25, 2006)

I hate what homeless people do to the character of a city. There are so many druggies and alcoholics who walk around the city begging for your money and then they go and do all sorts of nasty things to the facilities built from your taxes. I think you should just kill em all if theyre gonna act like that!!!!!


----------



## nothingman (Jul 3, 2005)

Many people in the US have a horrible attitude towards the poor. Being poor here is almost a crime...and if you're homeless, god help you. True, there are some people who beg, but are perfectly capable of working, but they are in the minority in my opinion. It's sheer and utter bullshit that people are forced to live this way in a developed country when there should be help in place for them as many of these people simply cannot care for themselves.


----------



## Manila-X (Jul 28, 2005)

nothingman said:


> Many people in the US have a horrible attitude towards the poor. Being poor here is almost a crime...and if you're homeless, god help you. True, there are some people who beg, but are perfectly capable of working, but they are in the minority in my opinion. It's sheer and utter bullshit that people are forced to live this way in a developed country when there should be help in place for them as many of these people simply cannot care for themselves.


Unfortunately, not everyone benifited from the economic boom.

When I was in LA, I met alot of homeless especially in Santa Monica and in Westwood. Some of them are Vietnam War vets. I remember the old Rambo movies when they complained that the government didn't give them the benefits when they fought for their country.

As for me, I see these homeless but I don't give them anything whether food or money. I might have a feeling that they would spend it on their vices.


----------



## miamicanes (Oct 31, 2002)

A *huge* number of "hardcore" homeless people in most American cities are individuals with schizophrenia who don't want to take medication that makes them feel like $hit, but would enable them to lead a functional (if miserable) life. So instead, they drink lots of alcohol, which reduces many of the worst symptoms they experience and leaves them fairly happy (if dysfunctional and incapable of working anything resembling a normal job) instead.

It's one of the tragic outcomes of a free society. If we could legally force them to take medication, lots of them would be able to work, get off the streets, and live semi-functional lives. The problem is, we can't force people to take medication, nor can we lock them in mental hospitals anymore unless they're clearly a threat to others. But on their own, unmedicated, they're incapable of fitting in to American society, holding a job, and paying their bills. So they end up homeless.

Of course, there are other reasons for homelessness... someone who's poor might literally lose their place to live and be unable to afford to go somewhere else... but most of the people who fall into THAT category don't stay homeless for long. They end up temporarily living with friends, family members, or find a charity to help them. Lots of "hardcore" homeless people DO have families. Some have families that are outright wealthy, and tormented by their loved ones who might disappear for weeks, months, or even years... possibly never to be heard from again unless a police department in a distant city tracks them down to notify them of that loved one's death.

With the "hardcore" group, all the donations in the world won't keep them off the streets for more than a day at a time as they drift around trying to silence the voices, hide from the secret agents from the UN trying to remote-control their brains with hacked microwave ovens, or whatever it is that torments them. Someone who genuinely wants to help the hardcore homeless get off the streets would probably do more good funding research to find newer and better drugs to effectively treat the organic causes of schizophrenia than funding a hundred soup kitchens. The soup kitchens will give a few thousand of them their next meal. Research into brain disorders, on the other hand, might someday save _millions_ of future people from the same fate.

The homeless, particularly the homeless with schizophrenia, are a tragedy... but nothing short of honestly addressing the REAL causes of their homelessness (the underlying disorder) is ever going to make any meaningful difference. The sad truth is, right now, medical technology doesn't have a whole lot to offer them. We can preach the virtue of taking major tranquilizers living a life of unhappy pseudo-normalcy, and criticize those who choose drunken contentment instead... but how many of *us* would make the same choice if we ever found _ourselves_ in the same predicament?


----------



## mhays (Sep 12, 2002)

The ones who can't function (or "can't") should be in institutions. 

Those who can support themselves with moderate assistance should be helped with housing, etc. Kitchens are great if they're not in the public square. 

The rest should be held to the same standard as the rest of us. No sleeping in parks, etc. Anyone taking a crap in a park should be institutionalized. I also support the concept of roving vigilantes. (Only slightly exagerating on that last bit.)


----------



## Vanman (May 19, 2004)

Bikkel said:


> That's a heartening reply, vanman. What angered me was the fact restrictions were imposed from filthily rich cities like Las Vegas and not from a poor city in Latin-America.


Well the rich should not have to pollute their minds with such street trash.(sarcasm)

Barbara Bush's comments on the victims of Hurricane katrina:

"Almost everyone I've talked to says, 'We're gonna move to Houston.' What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas... Everybody is so overwhelmed by the hospitality, and so many of the people in the arenas here, you know, were underprivileged anyway. This is working very well for them."


----------



## FallenGuard (Nov 2, 2006)

Metropolitan said:


> Don't ask this question to Europeans. Especially in latin countries, being rich is more seen as a crime than being poor. Let's assume that this is a religious matter.


Less Religious, more Realistic. Latin Countries often tend a bit to the left side of the Political Spectrum. Besides that, they had their share of Dictators that slept in Golden Beds while the People were dying in the streets. I guess that makes People have their own Opinion about Division of Wealth.

(That is of course IMHO)

Besides that, people that are insanely rich, but have not earned it, are not welcome anywhere, take the trouble about Mr. Ackermann in Germany for example. 



> Don't tell me about Europeans or Asians. Aside from the poorer countries, their cities don't have the street people problem we do.


If you are talking of "agressive begging", then you are probably right. Most homeless in our city are sitting in Corners somewhere, or playing music etc. I've been asked for money only twice, and when I said no they accepted that.
Don't know about how it is elsewhere.


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

jmancuso said:


> like it or not, a good bulk of the homeless in THIS country are mentally ill. that is not being crass or distasteful, that is just a fact and i would rather have them in a facility where they would at least be looked after and not on the streets fending for themselves and wondering where they are going to sleep that night. we can thank the reagan administration for shutting down mental facilities but that's for another debate. and yes, a lot of homeless are also hustlers and lazy; they are able bodied but refuse to find a stable job because it does not fit their routine. i crack up when i see 30-something vietnam vets on the corner begging for change.
> 
> of course, there are also plenty who are just genuinely down on their luck and law in vegas is arcane.
> 
> ...


I have lived a few years in the US so I now what I am talking about thanks, and it's not like Paris doesn't have it's share of homeless people.

True, there are maybe many people who appear mentality ill on the streets, but one question, what came first, this supposed mental illness, or poverty and homelessness (which can lead people to drink)?

The U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) estimates that functional illiteracy affects 24 million Americans.

Isn't this a huge problem? Instead of twisting your mind to find psychological reasons as to why some people are on the streets (if one third of homeless are mentaly ill, that is huge, but what about the other two thirds?), a more social approach to the problem would prove much better to understand it.

And lazyness is not an explanation, nobody prefers sleeping in the streets and begging in trash clothes for a few dollars all day long while being extremaly exposed to crime, than working and having a home.

Some just need to accept that society has it blame on these people's situation.


----------



## FallenGuard (Nov 2, 2006)

jmancuso said:


> i crack up when i see 30-something vietnam vets on the corner begging for change.


There was this interesting Article on DER SPIEGEL on War Veterans ending up on the Street: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,446469,00.html (German)

Says there that the Homecoming Veterans get almost nothing, no Houses, no Psychological Support, etc. "War changes people", meaning it fucks up their minds. And the soldiers get no help to reintegrate into society, what do you expect to happen.

In a few Years, the Vietnam Veterans will be replaced by Irak Veterans. Then the People will complain, and it starts all over again.


----------



## Bikkel (Jun 8, 2005)

Metropolitan said:


> Don't ask this question to Europeans. Especially in latin countries, being rich is more seen as a crime than being poor. Let's assume that this is a religious matter.



Vanman and me=NL, Kuesel=Swiss. Latin? Your claim applies to calvinism actually.


----------



## Maltaboy (Apr 15, 2006)

These measures should be opposed tooth and nail 100 percent of the way !


----------



## Bikkel (Jun 8, 2005)

Shame the US aren't an EU member state. We could then have taken those cities into court.

It's a human right to give money to the homeless.


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

It's a right to give money to the homeless, and it is a duty for the community as a whole to take care of them


----------



## vox20 (Jun 27, 2006)

virtual said:


> I am sorry but the people who think the majority of homeless and beggars are such as a choice and not because of social determination (exept for maybe a very small minority of them) are seriously either idiots or ill educated


In StPeterburg, Russia, streetcar depot made a try to pick some homeless people and give them job of tram conductor. They provided them with dorm, comparable wage, but the last kept working for one month and then returned to streets. Other escaped even faster ( with daily takings of course ).


----------



## jmancuso (Jan 9, 2003)

virtual said:


> I have lived a few years in the US so I now what I am talking about thanks, and it's not like Paris doesn't have it's share of homeless people.
> 
> True, there are maybe many people who appear mentality ill on the streets, but one question, what came first, this supposed mental illness, or poverty and homelessness (which can lead people to drink)?
> 
> ...


i am not going to to back and forth and argue with you over this. you lived in the US for while, good for you but that doesn't mean you have full knowledge of the dynamics of the homeless situation either. 

more than 1/3 of the homeless are mentally ill; probably closer to half. and they were mental ill before they hit the streets. also, you are born with disorders like schizophrenia or psychosis. like i said in my previous post, the reasons for the high percentages of mentally ill among the homeless was the systematic shutting down of psychiatric facilities throughout the country in the early 80's. 

as for the rest, the only thing you can do is make available opportunities to get off the streets. many will and many will not. those who do not may not do so out of laziness but unwillingness to break out of their lifestyle which would requires structure and responsibilities. "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink."

as for paris, you guys have your own problems to deal with (yeah, you do have a bad homelessness problem) instead of looking at how often the US fucks up with theirs.


----------



## jmancuso (Jan 9, 2003)

FallenGuard said:


> There was this interesting Article on DER SPIEGEL on War Veterans ending up on the Street: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,446469,00.html (German)
> 
> Says there that the Homecoming Veterans get almost nothing, no Houses, no Psychological Support, etc. "War changes people", meaning it fucks up their minds. And the soldiers get no help to reintegrate into society, what do you expect to happen.
> 
> In a few Years, the Vietnam Veterans will be replaced by Irak Veterans. Then the People will complain, and it starts all over again.


my issue isn't with homeless vets. i think it's disgusting that people who serve our country are forced onto the street. my issue is with frauds passing themselves off as vets when they are not...the 35 year old on the corner with a sign: homeless vietnam vet". think about it, how many 30-somethings fought in vietnam?


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

jmancuso said:


> i am not going to to back and forth and argue with you over this. you lived in the US for while, good for you but that doesn't mean you have full knowledge of the dynamics of the homeless situation either.
> 
> more than 1/3 of the homeless are mentally ill; probably closer to half. and they were mental ill before they hit the streets. also, you are born with disorders like schizophrenia or psychosis. like i said in my previous post, the reasons for the high percentages of mentally ill among the homeless was the systematic shutting down of psychiatric facilities throughout the country in the early 80's.
> 
> ...




I will not get in a debate neither over a subject as blatantly obvious as this on a question it seems you don't know that much about.

I just suggest you read this
http://www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/facts/Why.pdf
(where it is shown, as an example, that many homeless do actualy work)

Or even try this book 
http://www.amazon.com/Visible-Poor-Homelessness-United-States/dp/0195083539

As for lazyness, nobody likes to be a homeless, I know someone who has been homeless for a few months, and he said it was hell. The problem is that there are a lack of opportunities to get off the streets and, as the working homeless statistics have shown, what can be seen as an opportunity (cheap work) at first sight isn't. Meaning that as long as the housing prices and working poor problems will not be solved, you cannot use the "lazyness" aproach to explain the problem.

And as for France, thanks, but you don't know me, so there is no way you can know what I do militate for and against here.


----------



## RLF (Oct 29, 2006)

Wonderfull link from National Homeless .org virtual, very informative, I will use it at my homeless forum @ my town meeting. To bad others would not read it, and not go by their perceived notions. Hate never solved anything, homelessness can happen to ANYBODY.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

Bikkel said:


> Shame the US aren't an EU member state. We could then have taken those cities into court.
> 
> .


they would simply ignore rulings that did not suit them. 


_"It's a human right to give money to the homeless"_

And more importantly, *it is a human right to ask for help.*


----------



## Chicagoago (Dec 2, 2005)

Clearly we have much different homeless problems between the US and Europe. I've been to Europe 12 times the past few years to all different countries and cities, mostly alone wandering around neighborhoods and central cities. I've noticed in every one of these cities that the homeless problem seems much better, you don't have the dozens of people like in some US cities who are unstable, just screaming and talking to themselves right outside a train station door. I've seen homeless in Europe, but I've never been harassed or been witness to as much deeply disturbing behavior as in some US areas. Europe takes care of its homeless and mentally ill much better than we do.


----------



## Küsel (Sep 16, 2004)

Well, I also never made bad experiences in the US to be honest - in the 90s the beggars in Zurich were much more annoying than in NY, but maybe that changed. The situation got better here as well. But I realize how many homeless and beggars there are now in Germany, even in extremly rich cities close to Switzerland like Freiburg or Konstanz.

I think the problem was the early 90s when unemployment rates suddenly exploded in western Europe and the state couldn't deal with this problem... til now! Before about 91 unemployment was inexistent in Switzerland and then within a few months suddenly 5%. That sounds a ridiculous number for many countries, but what if you suddenly have to deal with unemployment and povertry even in the cities? In Germany it was even much worse and about France we better don't talk... Even though our economy recovered in the meantime the poor ones stayed poor - about 1mio, means every 7th is living under the povertry line and here in Zurich it's about 15%. 

So what can the state do with the laws and institutions they have. Bureaucracy is a big obstacle and so is direct democracy and authorities that are just not able to deal with new challanges. At least there are institutions and stately support, not like in the US and maybe therefore you could be right with your statement - there no one cares about the homeless and poor and they have to survive by themselves while here there is at least a little support. 

For most important is social networks, integration and giving them hope and a place in a society. I saw that in a project in Sao Paulo where homeless are integrated in a recycling project - like that the city could deal with different problems:
- Recycling of PET and glass and a growing industry in these fields
- Cleaning of the streets and rivers from bottles that were blocking the sewer system and was leading to permanent floodings after rain
- Integration of the lowest part of the society by giving then not only some money but especially a job and responsibility that they feel usefull again.


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

virtual said:


> It's a right to give money to the homeless, and it is a duty for the community as a whole to take care of them


However, contradictory to what most lefties believe, it is *not* a right to force money from the productive to give to the unproductive. Policies like the such are actually the reason why North American poverty statistics are stagnant. The best way to get these people out of poverty is to give them the freedom to produce. We need only to look to Asia today to see the wonders which have happened.


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

Your post doesn't have any link with urbanism whatsoever.

Unemployment has structural causes, not individual ones. When one doesn't work it is because of very deep social and economical facts.

Just like with children, retired and handicaped people. The collectivity has to find a sollution to this holist problem, until then, it'll have to take care of them. 

And production is not a goal in itself. We do not live in society to produce, production is only a mean to:
_Produce the necessary goods to our survival and beyond
_Give decent lives to people through their earnings in working.

The point of society, the goal is that most people live good lives, and not to produce just for the sake of producing. As such, those who don't produce have to be taken care of.

Now back to homelessness and URBANISM.

To sum it up using your vision of things, the unproductive (at least their overwhelming majority) are not so out of choice and as a consequences, they should be taken care of.


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

virtual said:


> Your post doesn't have any link with urbanism whatsoever.
> 
> Unemployment has structural causes, not individual ones. When one doesn't work it is because of very deep social and economical facts.
> 
> ...


And what, as we have witnessed from thousands of years of human history, is the best way to increase productivity-and thus, have a higher standard of living? It is freedom.

Although economic freedom as a means to produce originated many hundreds of years ago, it only came about when such freedoms were applied, such as during the industrial revolution, when human welfare increased tremendously, or the industrial revolution of today's Asia, and what has already been witnessed by many other nations in East Asia.

However, such revolutions have been experienced in socialist nations, like the Soviet Union's first five-year plans, and China's "Great leap Forward". What seperates such revolutions in these nations to revolutions in capitalist ones is free choice. If you didn't like a job, you could go to another one pretty easily, which makes for more efficiency in the market. Therefore, people could be happier in their jobs, making for more production and a higher standard of living. In socialist nations the government decided what sector you'd work in, regardless of if you liked it or not. The result was less effieciency, and a not-so happy workforce, which resulted in a lower standard of living.

I shouldn't have to explain what effects the notion of being watched 24/7 had on the workforce.

Therefore, a lack of economic freedom actually creates poverty, not reduces it. That is why, after half a century of welfare, poverty levels haven't gone down a bit.

BTW, if anyone gets confused by this post, it is explaining how freedom is better at increasing human happiness than lack thereof.


----------



## rocky (Apr 20, 2005)

yes, america should try to copy the fantastic nigeria welfare system. at least in nigeria theires no poor.


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

rocky said:


> yes, america should try to copy the fantastic nigeria welfare system. at least in nigeria theires no poor.


Capitalism?


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

VanSeaPor said:


> And what, as we have witnessed from thousands of years of human history, is the best way to increase productivity-and thus, have a higher standard of living? It is freedom.
> 
> Although economic freedom as a means to produce originated many hundreds of years ago, it only came about when such freedoms were applied, such as during the industrial revolution, when human welfare increased tremendously, or the industrial revolution of today's Asia, and what has already been witnessed by many other nations in East Asia.
> 
> ...


Nice, you recited your neoclassic (or neoliberal) homework, but what is the link with the subject or even with the post you quoted?


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

virtual said:


> Nice, you recited your neoclassic (or neoliberal) homework, but what is the link with the subject or even with the post you quoted?


How economic freedom is better at helping the poor than market regulation (and therefore, solving the problem of homlessness in the long run). At least _that_ part should be obvious.

I refer to the first quote in my signature.


----------



## Taller Better (Aug 27, 2005)

rocky said:


> . at least in nigeria theires no poor.


Do you actually believe that?


----------



## FallenGuard (Nov 2, 2006)

VanSeaPor said:


> Therefore, a lack of economic freedom actually creates poverty, not reduces it.



Economic Freedom helping the poor? Tell that to the Slaves that are laboured to death each day in Countries like China. For almost nothing with no social security, no work hazard regulations etc. And all for the benefit of some Western Capitalist, like Apple

I blame the extreme Capitalism that has appeared since ~95. Rich getting richer and Poor getting Poorer. Nothing matters but getting more,more,more Money each Day, even if you have enough for a nice Life. Maybe Ferengi from Startrek have taken over or something :lol: 

I don't know about elsewhere, but in Germany the Politicians have already made it clear to the companies that they have a "social responisbility" - hire-and-fire tactics are unwelcome. And I agree. Maybe the Companies don't and they go elsewhere, but as soon as more Countries start this, they have nowhere else to go. The Countries of EU agree in that case, so they can go to China, or India or whatever.


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

VanSeaPor said:


> How economic freedom is better at helping the poor than market regulation (and therefore, solving the problem of homlessness in the long run). At least _that_ part should be obvious.
> 
> I refer to the first quote in my signature.


Each of your posts on this thread have been off-topic, either towards the initial subject (homelessness in our cities) or towards the posts you were quoting.

I could very well go in an argument with you and highlight the contradictions in your reasoning but it is OFF-TOPIC and will get this thread closed, so I will stop there. Nobody cares about your vision of things and your philosophical views on the economy. Maybe if it was the subject, but it isn't, so period.


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

FallenGuard said:


> Economic Freedom helping the poor? Tell that to the Slaves that are laboured to death each day in Countries like China. For almost nothing with no social security, no work hazard regulations etc. And all for the benefit of some Western Capitalist, like Apple
> 
> I blame the extreme Capitalism that has appeared since ~95. Rich getting richer and Poor getting Poorer. Nothing matters but getting more,more,more Money each Day, even if you have enough for a nice Life. Maybe Ferengi from Startrek have taken over or something :lol:


You should look up "freedom" in the dictionary.



Virtual said:


> Each of your posts on this thread have been off-topic, either towards the initial subject (homelessness in our cities) or towards the posts you were quoting.
> 
> I could very well go in an argument with you and highlight the contradictions in your reasoning but it is OFF-TOPIC and will get this thread closed, so I will stop there. Nobody cares about your vision of things and your philosophical views on the economy. Maybe if it was the subject, but it isn't, so period.


*sigh* Back to your original reply, I know what you mean by unemployment, and poverty in general, having structural causes, but what I am trying to say is that it is ultimately the responsibility of the individual for his situation, unless he was forced into something (which shouldn't be allowed). Society can only go so far as to provide the means to produce, which can't be done by forcing productive citizens who have already contributed to society to pay for these people. Voluntary efforts are fine. However, the use of force will ultimately always be to the detriment of society.


----------



## Mr Bricks (May 6, 2005)

Freedom doesn´t mean you have the right to do whatever you please, you have to take responsability.

It sickens me how people in this threat find productivness, economic growth and capitalism more important than helping people less fortunate. Money, money, money, that´s everything we seem to care about these days, some people are really in need of a reality check. Have all people lost their moral??


----------



## eklips (Mar 29, 2005)

VanSeaPor said:


> You should look up "freedom" in the dictionary.
> 
> 
> *sigh* Back to your original reply, I know what you mean by unemployment, and poverty in general, having structural causes, but what I am trying to say is that it is ultimately the responsibility of the individual for his situation, unless he was forced into something (which shouldn't be allowed). Society can only go so far as to provide the means to produce, which can't be done by forcing productive citizens who have already contributed to society to pay for these people. Voluntary efforts are fine. However, the use of force will ultimately always be to the detriment of society.


So how is the individual responsible if he was fired by his employers who decided to lay off hundreds of worker even though the company was profitable (hapens all the time, "general electrics" does it all the time as an example). How is the individual responsible if there just isn't enough jobs out there, how is the individual responsible if then the only jobs he can find are precarious limited in time ones where he will be exploited and won't have a chance to stay more than a few months, how is the individual responsible if housing prices are just too high and he can't afford decent housing with the little money he gets from working a few precarious jobs here and there?


And how the hell have "productive citizens" already contributed to society if they haven't paid taxes?


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

virtual said:


> So how is the individual responsible if he was fired by his employers who decided to lay off hundreds of worker even though the company was profitable (hapens all the time, "general electrics" does it all the time as an example). How is the individual responsible if there just isn't enough jobs out there, how is the individual responsible if then the only jobs he can find are precarious limited in time ones where he will be exploited and won't have a chance to stay more than a few months, how is the individual responsible if housing prices are just too high and he can't afford decent housing with the little money he gets from working a few precarious jobs here and there?


Let's use the USA as the society he lives in, so this doesn't get off-topic as it was before. First off, the individual we speak of can start a business, fairly easily. If he feels like he is being mistreated, why can't he negotiate with his employer? Why can't he join a union? If he wants to, why can't he at least try to prove to his employer that he is a worthy employee? Why can't he look properly into jobs that he could have in the area to find out what the best one is? Why can't he, as a last option, ask private charity to help him be more productive?



> And how the hell have "productive citizens" already contributed to society if they haven't paid taxes?


By producing goods and/or providing services to people.


----------



## FallenGuard (Nov 2, 2006)

VanSeaPor said:


> FallenGuard said:
> 
> 
> > Economic Freedom helping the poor? Tell that to the Slaves that are laboured to death each day in Countries like China. For almost nothing with no social security, no work hazard regulations etc. And all for the benefit of some Western Capitalist, like Apple
> ...


So your "Freedom" includes those Methods of "Work" I mentioned earlier. No thank you, but i don't think I want to be part of THAT uke:

Besides, I know a someone that wants "Freedom" and "Democracy" for the People of Irak... know what im saying?



> Let's use the USA as the society he lives in, so this doesn't get off-topic as it was before. First off, the individual we speak of can start a business, fairly easily. If he feels like he is being mistreated, why can't he negotiate with his employer? Why can't he join a union? If he wants to, why can't he at least try to prove to his employer that he is a worthy employee? Why can't he look properly into jobs that he could have in the area to find out what the best one is? Why can't he, as a last option, ask private charity to help him be more productive?


"Yeah, that lazy bastard should get off his ass and WORK, because its his Fault that he got fired! I mean, the Shareholder Value wasn't high enough!!111" (/Sarcasm off)

Thats exactly what I mentioned earlier where People are driven into near-slavery because of that attitude.

If we look at USA, there are a few Super-Rich who have the "Freedom" to do as they please. On the other Hand you have a ton of "working poor" (?) that work their ass off just to make a living. You can't tell me that this is right, and that it is all only their own fault.

Becuase, if you look at it, it comes down to a single Equation: How do you define "rich"? Because for you to be rich, others have to be poor....


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

FallenGuard said:


> So your "Freedom" includes those Methods of "Work" I mentioned earlier. No thank you, but i don't think I want to be part of THAT uke:


Slavery is freedom?



> "Yeah, that lazy bastard should get off his ass and WORK, because its his Fault that he got fired! I mean, the Shareholder Value wasn't high enough!!111" (/Sarcasm off)
> 
> Thats exactly what I mentioned earlier where People are driven into near-slavery because of that attitude.
> 
> ...


If you look into these rich people, many of them started off with little money, and weren't very good at school (Richard Branson, UK billionaire, dropped out at a very early age). They worked towards their goal. It is a focus on the future, not the present, that helped these people become rich. Of course, if they used illegal means, that's a different matter.

Observe that during the industrial revolution and continuing today (although not on as large a scale) People were getting out poverty. It mightn't have been particularly fast for most people, but it was happening. Once again, it is a focus on the future, not the present, which is essential for getting out of poverty.


----------



## Joey313 (May 2, 2006)

arent most homeless people on drugs and cant stop?


----------



## FallenGuard (Nov 2, 2006)

VanSeaPor said:


> Slavery is freedom?


By the Quotes in your Signature, I see you are referring to Orwell here? I always see that Line as: 
For some People, a Life that is organised, regulated and supervised to the last second, is a happy(free) Life. For others, it is hell.

If i didn't understad that right, please elaborate



> If you look into these rich people, many of them started off with little money, and weren't very good at school (Richard Branson, UK billionaire, dropped out at a very early age). They worked towards their goal. It is a focus on the future, not the present, that helped these people become rich. Of course, if they used illegal means, that's a different matter.
> 
> Observe that during the industrial revolution and continuing today (although not on as large a scale) People were getting out poverty. It mightn't have been particularly fast for most people, but it was happening. Once again, it is a focus on the future, not the present, which is essential for getting out of poverty.


I agree to that, I respect People who have worked hard to earn their Money, they deserve it. Im' talking about Companies who try to squeeze every last Cent out of it. Their only Goal is Money, Money, Shareholder Value etc etc, they will go over (so to speak) dead bodies for it. Customer Support too expensive? Fire all, hire cheap Workers in India or Poland. Workers trying to form Union? Threaten them with loss of Job. Politicians wanting stricter laws for Worker Safety? Threatem them with "a diminishing value in the attractivity of the country to investements" (as all seen in Germany). I'm saying that the Capitalism today has gotten ou of Hand. No Feelings, Remorse, Compassion anymore, just Cold Money. I for one couldn't sleep if I knew that some poor Bastard elsewhere would be laboring for my nice warm Bed... (Remembers me of that Native American Guy who said that you couldn't eat money...)

I see it as two different Philosophies: 
- The "American" Way where "anything is possible" if you succeed you succeed big-time but the People that have faile are doomed.
- The "European" Way with a more social Approach. Failures are dampened by the community.

Guess it depends on your personal Opinion which you prefer - i for one like to have a Net for when I fall, and im happy to pay that. even for others, because I know others pay for me too.

Hm I see this is getting Waaay off topic but it is an interesting discussion!


----------



## Kiss the Rain (Apr 2, 2006)

Freaking newbie making stupid thread like this.........


----------



## Hecago (Dec 1, 2005)

I'm sick and tired of the stereotypical view of what "homeless people" are. As someone who has volunteered at a shelter for many years, i can tell you:

Myth: Homelessness is a problem that cannot be solved.

Fact: Over 80% of the families and 65% of the individuals who complete Shelter Network's programs are permanently re-housed. A solution that works does exist. Most of the homeless families and individuals on the Peninsula are situationally homeless (vs. chronically¹ homeless) due to loss of income, increasing living costs, or a severe financial or medical crisis. Transitional housing with solid support services gives these people the respite and help needed to get back on their feet, and succeed in returning to permanent housing.

Myth: All homeless people are adults.

Fact:: The typical homeless person on the Peninsula is just 5 years old. In fact, nationally the fastest-growing segment of the homeless population is families with children. Two-thirds of the people who are homeless in our community are families with children&sup2.


Fact: Most shelter clients are working parents and their children. It is impossible to identify these people as "homeless" by sight because they are typically working in low-income jobs, or looking for work during the day, and their children are in school. At night, they sleep in their vehicles, garages, or motels until their funds are exhausted.

Myth: Homeless people don't have jobs.

Fact: Most parents in homeless families do have jobs, but they are low-paying and don't provide enough income to cover the high cost of housing. Living paycheck to paycheck, one emergency can lead to a financial crisis resulting in homelessness.

Myth: All homeless people are alcoholics or drug addicts or are mentally ill.

Fact: The vast majority of homeless people are hard-working families who have become homeless because of a financial emergency. Fewer than 10% of the families in shelter programs are homeless because of drug and alcohol problems or mental illness. A larger portion of the homeless single adults in our community suffer from substance addition or mental illness. .


----------



## elsonic (Aug 21, 2003)

a factor that may influence the «visibility rate» of the homeless people between North America and Europe is the fact that in some European countries, you are allowed to squat in abandoned buildings or lands. in NA, the concept of private property is 100% sacred, even if the owner don't keep its property clean.

+ downtowns in NA are more dense and compact, and this is where most homeless people «live», (usually in the eastern parts of downtown, don't know why) so the concentration, if not the number, is higher. that important concentration makes the situation looks even worse for the observer.

+ most central areas in major North American cities gentrified a lot in the past few years. these areas were previously poor neighbourhoods. We have seen a «let's go back to town» phenomena recently, targeting these specific centrally-located spots, pushing poor people and families (who had a roof) further away, or directly in the streets. these who were already in the streets were pushed/pulled to/from other residential areas were nobody wants them. their environment has been virtually eliminated, but not replaced. and trust a NIMBY (the real one) the new condo-type yuppie, to complain as soon as he see someone sleeping on a bench. he pays big big taxe$$, so the public administration listens carefully.

+ correct me if I'm wrong, but the Bush administration cut a lot in the funding of shelters and organisations working with poor people, and then transferred most of the funds toward religious groups. many religious groups don't seem to work with or for the poor.


----------



## elsonic (Aug 21, 2003)

my post seems out of nowhere, but I saw a sort of NA vs Europe in this thread, and I wanted to get it back to urbanism.


----------



## Platypus (May 3, 2006)

FallenGuard said:


> Economic Freedom helping the poor? Tell that to the Slaves that are laboured to death each day in Countries like China. For almost nothing with no social security, no work hazard regulations etc. And all for the benefit of some Western Capitalist, like Apple


http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4400


----------



## VanSeaPor (Mar 12, 2005)

Platypus said:


> http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4400


Thanks very much for that. Another excellent site for learning about capitalism is here: http://capitalism.org/index.htm


----------



## FallenGuard (Nov 2, 2006)

Platypus said:


> http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4400


This text is irrelevant. It only sees black & white, capitalism & communism. Not to mention it is biased - just look at sentences like: 



> Men’s choice today is stark: freedom and prosperity – or statism and misery


But aside that, what does this have to do with my points. I already stated that I don't oppose capitalism, I just don't want it on a too long leash. That is not even discussed there!

And Elsonic, I think this is not America vs Europe or something, but more of a economical/political/social discussion.


----------



## Kiss the Rain (Apr 2, 2006)

Essentially the problem lies with the difference with the term "equity" and "equality." IMO, everyone including the poor should be subjected to equity but not equality.

It's also worth noting that people often fight for equality for the poor and not realising that is the very basic ideal of communism itself and yet condemn the word communism the instant the hear it. Ironic, hypocritical or pathetic, i really dont know which one to use.


----------



## RLF (Oct 29, 2006)

Kiss the Rain said:


> Essentially the problem lies with the difference with the term "equity" and "equality." IMO, everyone including the poor should be subjected to equity but not equality.
> 
> It's also worth noting that people often fight for equality for the poor and not realising that is the very basic ideal of communism itself and yet condemn the word communism the instant the hear it. Ironic, hypocritical or pathetic, i really dont know which one to use.


Fighting for Humanity, not Hate, I fight for Communion, not Communism, My Power to do so rests not in me, but in Him,... Who is your neighbor?


http://www.reddingloavesandfishes.com/


----------



## RLF (Oct 29, 2006)

Dont Hate Them Because There Not The "Beautyfull People"


----------



## sotavento (May 12, 2005)

Taller said:


> _"These measures aren't about hurting the poor. They're about keeping things orderly for everyone"_
> 
> Baloney. They are discriminatory toward the poor, and done by self centred people who pretend they are not hurting the poor. Shameful.


Here they "give" housing to poor people (town councils just build some buildings and give them to poor families) ... If you have a crappy job (and pay taxes) and a falling apart house ... you are "rich" so you don't deserve anything ... hno: 

I don't know a single "homeless" in this country who doesn't have a) a pension , b) family ... but they LITTER the parks and sideways ... and this is a "easy going" and "warm" country ... let them be ... if you think YOU have the right to be there in the park ... so does HE!!! 

sidenote: about the "ridiculous" fines and taxes in some us cities ... gimme a break ... some places fine you for walking in the park with joined hands with a man/wooman (and I read one time ... even jail for kissing in public in some towns) :bash: 
sidenote2: "trash over" and "homeless" seem to be the LOOK of the moment in some fashion designers portfolios. :banana:

sidenote3: in the USA the colture is the complete oposite ... if you don't make $$$ for yourself you are lookes as a "regect" ...


----------



## sotavento (May 12, 2005)

Metropolitan said:


> Don't ask this question to Europeans. Especially in latin countries, being rich is more seen as a crime than being poor. Let's assume that this is a religious matter.


Don't blame it on US SouthEropeans ... or "latinos".

Last time I was in UK (last month) my biggest problem was to find a place to do "my necessities" ... as "due to vandalism" EVERY SINGLE toilet on tailway stations was closed at 6pm every day ... and the railway station closed at 11pm ... imagine that wen you are going to catch the 2am train. 

And then they worry about a dozen or two of ppl gathering around the corners in front of the station ... drinking in public (the pub closes as 0:30am) and the "WC" are each and every corner and wall in sight ... got to keep them working (the police). 

About Litter ? open , use , throw in the floor ... and yeah ... gotta luv a free country. :banana: 

hno: had a very great experience of "warm" and "clean" british "rightness". hno:

sidenote: about the "racist" remarcs from US ppl about ppl in europe and asia not knowing about it ... the problem is that "we" do know about it ... and it seem's completely outrageous "your" lack os sight about the real deal. It's your way of putting "poverty" under the rug that creates even more poor/street ppl. 
For an exemple , in a major city a guy without money find's a cardbox in a park as a home ... it's "frowned" as a poor/homeless guy and treated as a menace to society ... if he lives in a town in the middle of "nowhere.usa" he problably buld's himself a hut, his given odd jobs by ppl and nobody gives a damn about his housing problems.
sidenote2: what ppl in europe tend to look down uppon is at ppl kicking and hitting the ones who are down ... and rich people in europe tend to think they "are the world" so they fit the part just right.  
sidenote3: there seems to be a plage of "street.begggers" from east europe spreading across the continent


----------



## sotavento (May 12, 2005)

VanSeaPor said:


> Capitalism?


Nop ... poor racist talk ... wasn't nigeria one of the MANY subsaarian african countries "subtracted" of it's young workforce a century or two ago? 

Wonder where they went ... hno:

freedom means you have the "right" to do as you please ... and so do the others ... freedom without simpaty for/from others means nothing ...


----------



## sotavento (May 12, 2005)

VanSeaPor said:


> Let's use the USA as the society he lives in, so this doesn't get off-topic as it was before. First off, the individual we speak of can start a business, fairly easily. If he feels like he is being mistreated, why can't he negotiate with his employer? Why can't he join a union? If he wants to, why can't he at least try to prove to his employer that he is a worthy employee? Why can't he look properly into jobs that he could have in the area to find out what the best one is? Why can't he, as a last option, ask private charity to help him be more productive?
> 
> By producing goods and/or providing services to people.


And what if he was acstumed to living on wealth and richness ? 

What if he saw his entire world crumble in an instant ? and found himself in the streets ? being born rich doesn't prvide any support net ...


----------



## jacobboyer (Jul 14, 2005)

^^ Yeah it does if your rich you can get into any college you want as long as your parents have the money. Or your dad could pass his buisiness onto you.


----------



## nothingman (Jul 3, 2005)

jacobboyer said:


> ^^ Yeah it does if your rich you can get into any college you want as long as your parents have the money. Or your dad could pass his buisiness onto you.


Too true and very sad indeed.

To call America "The Land Of Opportunity" is a joke really. I love this country, but not in the sense of caring for the poor, sick and needy. This is the land of the free, if you just so happen to be rich and healthy.

This is a country where the cost of tuition is simply ridiculous, so you're correct - unless you're born with rich parents, you're basically f**ked, unless you can get into a good community college.

This is also a country where healthcare isn't about health - it's about making $$$. I'm not a socialist, but I do believe that the ONE thing that cannot be run for profit is healthcare. This is a country where if you're sick AND poor, you're screwed because even if you're lucky enough to have health insurance, often the health insurance doesn't cover that much anyway, so you end up with hospital bills running into tens of thousands of dollars.

The attitude towards the poor here is quite disgusting. The poor are seen as 'losers' and are blamed for their misfortunes. In fact, society as a whole is the 'loser' for putting money ahead of human beings and creating this divided society where the rich are just fine and dandy, while the poor are excluded from just about everything, including getting the healthcare they deserve.

Here in Miami, one minute you see gleaming new condo buildings for the rich, then go a few blocks and you run into areas where you'd think you were in a much poorer country than the United States. The cost of living here is so high that more than 50% of your paycheck will go on rent alone, so no wonder many people simply cannot afford to live here. I'm sure that it's the same in many other US cities too, but it's particularly noticeable here, where people are literally being priced out by greedy developers, eager to build more condos for the rich (rich people who often only live here for 3 months of the year).

So instead of demonizing the poor and blaming them for being on the streets, why not just try to help them out of their situation so that they can lead meaningful lives? Make healthcare affordable too, while you're at it.


----------



## nothingman (Jul 3, 2005)

ThePhantomReturns said:


> poor people? Different than bums. You people do not know the entire story. Las Vegas is infested with lowlife bums.


How do you know they're "lowlife"? Did you take the time to ask them about their life situations or did you look down at them and judge them from inside the safe confines of your SUV?

This is a great example of how many people in America have this kind of attitude!


----------



## RLF (Oct 29, 2006)

*Thank You*

Thank you all for your wonderfull comments.


----------



## Sister Ray (Apr 22, 2006)

This is an interesting thread.

There are 100's (I would guess) of hobos living around Seoul Train Station. Most of them tend to keep to themselves. However, some will make a nuisance of themselves, particularly when they have been indulging in Soju (Rice based liquor costing $1 for a 375ml 25% alcohol bottle.)

I'm not really sure how I feel about them. They make me uncomfortable, particularly when behaving unpredictably. However, I do not know what other alternatives they have. I'm not sure what can be done about them. However it is undoubtedly bad for Seoul's image for people to see these huddled masses in the many tunnels which connect the subway station, Train station and surrounding towers and buildings.

It is a very sad situation.


----------



## *Sweetkisses* (Dec 26, 2004)

nothingman said:


> Too true and very sad indeed.
> 
> To call America "The Land Of Opportunity" is a joke really. I love this country, but not in the sense of caring for the poor, sick and needy. This is the land of the free, if you just so happen to be rich and healthy.
> 
> ...


Great post. Thats one of the main things that piss me off about this country.


----------

