It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fighting homelessness by giving homeless people houses

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   

OrphanApology
reply to post by Advantage
 


What an evil man. I hope he falls down a well.

I have seen the same thing happen in pretty much every city.

People are evil and heartless even though they will say otherwise at dinner parties. They also have the reasoning capacity of an inch worm in regard to what is needed to really help people.

The tent city idea is the best one because it eliminates the moral hazard that would come along with just giving away free housing. It would also mean people could get back on their feet and have access to showers and mail. It would also mean that those who worked wouldn't be punished but actually rewarded for working(saving up is a reward). Meaning, even minimum wage workers(or anyone) could choose to rough it to get back on their feet and save money.


Yeah, mail was the main thing for obvious reasons and the piece of land being privately owned would have allowed that.. wasnt good enough for our mayor, I guess. He made panhandling legal to throw a bone.... but wont let them LIVE and choose where they live on their own! Its pretty amazing. There have been shanty towns and tent cities forever.. they work. Well, they work when you dont have a govt that wants homeless folks to die off or make it so they can be controlled and basically owned by them. IN the new America, you are not allowed to choose how you live your life and get on your feet. They want you caught in the welfare trap where you dont have enough to live.. and you better not get a job of any kind or they make sure you starve by cutting your benefits. Sick stuff IMO.




posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Advantage
 


Exactly, your whole post is spot on.

It's a sick system of control set out to make people slaves with no choices or self respect.

Imagine the beaming self-respect of someone living in a tent city who has saved up 10k roughing it and working 12 hour days compared to a person who can't work because they will lose their government apartment.




edit on 26-1-2014 by OrphanApology because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   

OrphanApology
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


People absolutely would choose to quit jobs to get the housing.

You honestly think someone who is working two minimum wage jobs and working 10+ hours wouldn't choose to just quit to get the free apartment?

This solution is not going to last long. Like I said, it's a great idea but it is not feasible in the long term for a variety of reasons.

I just wish more cities had tent cities that people could go to without having to go through massive government bureaucracies.


Then there's the checks on if how long the people have been transient/homeless. Perhaps long term will only qualify? So, far as the article states the qualifying people had been homeless for many years.
If they had seen the apartment in question they may not want it. Two hundred square foot room, dingy, one window? Share your kitchen and bathroom with others? To enjoy that, they would have to be awfully lazy. The future outcome to climb out of the situation would be at least one job to have a better living situation. Might as well keep one job, live in a lower income area.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
First off let me apologize for the off topic reply. Sorry.

Now, it has come to my attention (and I firmly believe this after having read a majority of the replies on this thread) that given the opportunity the fine members of ATS could revolutionize the way our society operates.

Kallisti




posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 





Really though I find it a bit sad that the motive behind this is economics. Maybe it is about time we started measuring our values a little differently. If we did we would see some very different effects..


The financing of a home makes the intended free man a slave. A society that raises
humanbeings up under such rigid conditions of ultimatum i.e. the position most
home owners find themselves in. With stiffled or dwindling wages and higher
mortgage payments. But make that payment come hell or high water, every month,
for thirty years, don't get sick or have family problems, don't die or lose it all?

Is indicative of a society that is run by a bunch of greedy morons.
A society that can at least provide a net, of bottom line shelter so that
no one goes homeless, would truly be a great society. And the US was so
closed to it.

Every humanbeing deserves the dignity of a shower and roof over their ..
And it's doable. A society that makes sure people go homeless and then
designs bus and park benches that can't be slept on. Is brutal and barbaric.
Providing a net would see many more bounces back out of those who get
kicked the curb. Don't see many bounce back from rock bottom.
edit on 26-1-2014 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
People, Humane work camps.
Work Camps that are regulated an supervised.
Think about it, we provide them small dwellings like those fancy little garages you can buy to put lawn stuff in, their perfect for 1 to 2 people, modify them to add a shower, couple of hot plates and basic items like drawers. One solar panel on top for power needs.
They are then out on a work program suites on them, construction, farming, sewing, whatever...
9 hr work days, breaks included, meals for morning, lunch an dinner provided.
You would'nt get paid much, but if you stay for 6 months, itll be enough to get back on your feet, corporations would love the cheap labor and the turn out rate would constantly refresh, you can stay as long as you want, but its not the best solution for permenante parties, just enough of something to help you on your feet and if you really want to get out on your own, work hard, safe up and move out the work camps.
American has done them before, but they were terrible, times have changed and cheap labor is whats needed for a simple roof, plus meals....sure meager pay, but enough of it to save up an move out.
What you guys think?



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
I have no issues with this and think it is great as long as their are expectations for people placed in the free homes.
Training, schooling, job opportunities should come along with this. If all you give someone is a free ride with no expectations then you are enabling them to continue whatever cycle they are trapped in.

I think that you give someone in these homes 2 years and if they are not taking advantage of the chances this affords them then remove them so someone else stuck on the street has a chance to get in there and turn their life around.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


When you work minimum wage to make enough to pay for apartments what you usually get in most cities is an dingy apartment shared with several people that is exactly the same as what you described.

So there are two choices here:

A. Work a minimum wage job or two and have the same living conditions you do now
B. Don't work at all and have same conditions

Let's see....hmmm...that's a tough decision.

Also in regard to verifying if someone's been homeless for years that in itself is a moral hazard. For people who have recently become homeless but have otherwise been contributing to society by working, they are punished.

This whole idea is a mess and will fail miserably to fix homelessness.

The best way to fix homelessness is to create a non-bureaucratic place where anyone can go TODAY without filling out paperwork. Where they can sleep safely(not as comfortably as an apartment, but safely) and shower and get mail. Where they will be rewarded for working(saving with no bills is a reward). Where the government doesn't have it's sticky fingers.

In case you haven't figured it out, the government is not good at doing anything. That includes getting people out of messes by making them reliant slaves to handouts.

edit on 26-1-2014 by OrphanApology because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Arnie123
 


I like the idea of teaching them skills and knowledge to facilitate their ability to provide for themselves. The wages they received would actually be pretty bountiful if you put a dollar amount on the services and resources they would get access to that the working man has to pay for themselves...

Housing, utilities, food encompass the majority costs of a living wage anyway...if those "needs" were taken care of as part of their "employment" the small pay they did receive would probably be more than what the average person is left with after paying for all their "needs". Not saying that's a problem just saying a program like this would setup the homeless in a very good way...

The key factor in this and it would become apparent very quickly...is willful desire to change ones life for their own betterment. Without that factor this program will turn into a ghost-town because it requires one to care for themselves on the most basic and fundamental of levels.


edit on 26-1-2014 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Arnie123
 


Combine what we both wrote and approach a perfect world.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by opethPA
 





Really though I find it a bit sad that the motive behind this is economics. Maybe it is about time we started measuring our values a little differently. If we did we would see some very different effects..



Conditions really? I disagree absolutely, because you're just
talking about regulating peoples lives again under the condition
of ultimatum again and the same result and that would defeat the
whole damn purpose. Bull####. There's just to much of that bull####
go'in around already.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:49 PM
link   

OrphanApology
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


When you work minimum wage to make enough to pay for apartments what you usually get in most cities is an dingy apartment shared with several people that is exactly the same as what you described.

So there are two choices here:

A. Work a minimum wage job or two and have the same living conditions you do now
B. Don't work at all and have same conditions

Let's see....hmmm...that's a tough decision.

Also in regard to verifying if someone's been homeless for years that in itself is a moral hazard. For people who have recently become homeless but have otherwise been contributing to society by working, they are punished.

This whole idea is a mess and will fail miserably to fix homelessness.

The best way to fix homelessness is to create a non-bureaucratic place where anyone can go TODAY without filling out paperwork. Where they can sleep safely(not as comfortably as an apartment, but safely) and shower and get mail. Where they will be rewarded for working(saving with no bills is a reward). Where the government doesn't have it's sticky fingers.

In case you haven't figured it out, the government is not good at doing anything. That includes getting people out of messes by making them reliant slaves to handouts.

edit on 26-1-2014 by OrphanApology because: (no reason given)


If A. means you can save a bit of money with your low pay job to find better employment so you don't have to live in those conditions. Others wise, point made, it's lazy.
Yes, I have figured out the government is not good at doing anything, thanks for being astute.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   

randyvs
Conditions really? I disagree absolutely, because you're just
talking about regulating peoples lives again under the condition
of ultimatum again and the same result and that would defeat the
whole damn purpose. Bull####. There's just to much of that bull####
go'in around already.


So rather than expect people turn their lives around lets just enable them to keep living the way they are which is no means to take care of themselves.

When I said conditions what I meant was something like the following:

1. 2 year term of a free housing
2. During that 2 years free schooling or training for free
3. Drug and alcohol treatment for free
4. Health treatment both physical and mental for free.

At the end of that two years people are reviewed and if they are making an effort to better themselves then they continue living there. If a guy that was a drunk or drug user is doing nothing but drinking or doing drugs everyday then they lose the right to live there for free because for every person like that their are 5 homeless people that would jump at a chance to improve their life.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   
The past has shown that tent cities aren't full proof in helping out: Those in tent city are shelter bound, as one example. Plus cities really hate them. If you could keep your savings from making money at a job living in one, put your money in the bank, but keep that wallet safe.

edit on 26-1-2014 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by mmirror
 


I agree. I consider food, clothing and shelter to be basic human rights. It is absurd that there are more than enough empty houses for everyone and people have to sleep on the streets..




posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamingawake
 


Someone who has been homeless for years is not going to find a better job at least for several years.

Also, many of those homeless for that long have drug and alcohol problems. Again, not likely the jobs would be anything beside minimum wage.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by opethPA
 


Why would you want to exert such conditions on people. In doing so you are forcing them to accept your values in life. Not everyone is the same and there are those that evidently cannot cope with the conditions that are set upon them by society.




posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by OrphanApology
 


There are great elements in your ideas. But it sounds more like work release prison. And safety would be compromised from day three. A suitcase full of cash for a guard barely making more than "tenters" would be too much to turn down for someone to look the other way during illegal activities. Drugs and weapons get into prisons withe help of guards. Seen it too much.
Also, what respectable employer is going to want to hire these tenters after they could move up? The chronically unemployed who HAVE houses and are desperate for work enough to keep that house can't find jobs because they have been deemed unsuitable because of lack of or a gap in work history or even petty misdemeanors. I had to stop an 80 year old man from bagging my groceries the other day. There is no way that man should be working just to keep the heat on and his meds. Knowing that they can't accept tips either, I dropped a fiver where he could see it. He yelled at me that I had left five bucks by the bagging area. "No I didn't...it has to be yours."
I don't even have enough to get by, but he needed it more than I did.
It is called Compassion. It is rare. I was loathe to even include the story because it isn't about what I did. It is what WE can do and should do to help.
edit on 26-1-2014 by the owlbear because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   

999zxcv
in america the empty homes outnumber the homeless it would be better for the goverment to take over empty motels/ hotels factorys and make them livable for the down and outs who could work at some social programme to do up empty or abandoned homes .

but that is way to sensible for our leaders to do


I had thought of these gov. funded




And perhaps add a teaching system to help some learn how to get jobs & pay bills and re enter society after some time. I do however like your proposed idea better...



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Advantage
 


i had a friend like that he wanted to be homeless even when i offered to help him on his feet with a job and money to rent a room he refused it - i would have bit off your hand for that offer if in his boat god forbid but he told me later he could not have earned enough to pay for his drug habbit .

sad world we live in when the law is kicking people out of tents and cardboard boxes but think nothing of spending $ 20.000 on a private jail costs per year



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join