Officials want to clear a mile-long homeless camp on a Sonoma County bike trail. Some

Not all the homeless are mentally ill but there is a fair number of them. I thought this interesting why there could have been less homeless on the street way back when. They were living in hospitals.


""Deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill has roots in the civil rights and civil liberties movements of the 1960s, which envisioned more fulfilling lives for those who had been languishing in understaffed psychiatric hospitals through new medications and robust community-based services. The number of patients living in state hospitals dropped from 535,000 in 1960 to 137,000 in 1980.""


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519584/

You can dial the roots back before that...


Beginning in the late 1950s, California became the national leader in aggressively moving patients from state hospitals to nursing homes and board-and-care homes, known in other states by names such as group homes, boarding homes, adult care homes, family care homes, assisted living facilities, community residential facilities, adult foster homes, transitional living facilities, and residential care facilities. Hospital wards closed as the patients left. By the time Ronald Reagan assumed the governorship in 1967, California had already deinstitutionalized more than half of its state hospital patients. That same year, California passed the landmark Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act, which virtually abolished involuntary hospitalization except in extreme cases. Thus, by the early 1970s California had moved most mentally ill patients out of its state hospitals and, by passing LPS, had made it very difficult to get them back into a hospital if they relapsed and needed additional care. California thus became a canary in the coal mine of deinstitutionalization.


https://www.salon.com/2013/09/29/ro..._legacy_violence_the_homeless_mental_illness/
 
Hell, I lived in Sonoma County(Santa Rosa)in the 90's and I NEVER saw a homeless person.

that was before the demmycrats built the bike path........the county calls it a bike path, the homeless call it Main Street.......I bet its a faster commute than the freeway......
 
Officials want to clear a mile-long homeless camp on a Sonoma County bike trail. Some don't want to go

I get tired of public officials with their, out of sight and out of mind policies, making the homeless move?!!

If I was homeless, my main concern would be bathing and clean underwear to put on afterward?!! I take showers everyday, a habit I kept from the army?!!

Santa Rosa, California (CNN)The globs of peanut butter were evenly applied. But this was no sandwich.

Pest control workers were using the spread as bait as they installed rat traps -- 340 of them -- throughout the mile-long homeless encampment after infrared video from a sheriff's helicopter revealed a major rodent infestation.

"I think it's sad and overwhelming," said pest control technician Matt Dougherty of the conditions for more than 200 homeless residents. "We're here just to make it better for them."
The rat problem could hardly have been a surprise. Trash and human waste had been piling up for months along the Joe Rodota Trail, nestled behind neighborhoods in the heart of Northern California wine country.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/18/us/santa-rosa-homeless-camp/index.html

I think it's a damn shame we even have homeless in this country?!! Coming up in the 50's, 60's, and 70's, I never did see any homeless people?!!

100520181612037792597_2.jpg


Coming up in the 50's, 60's, and 70's, I never did see any homeless people?!!

They were in places called skid row.

What have you done to ease the problem? I donate to our local homeless charities and rescue mission.
 
What city or local government could possibly afford such a thing? Should they provide free heat and electricity? It would also have the unintended consequence of people seeing an opportunity in ‘becoming homeless’ in order to qualify for free housing. It could be as simple as living in a tent for a few weeks and filling out some papers.

I told you that the human mind rebels against the only answer we have. I agree with your feelings, and do not want to accept the things I am about to post.

It turns out that Housing First saves money. You end up paying for housing for a short time, which is less expensive than dealing with the homeless people on the streets. The huge cost saving is in reduced crime. Remember dealing with crime involves much more expensive subsidized housing called jail.

Sure you could quit your job, be homeless for a few weeks, then get free housing, and finally get a new job and start paying rent again... But why? You sort of end up in the same place as you started. You are going to lose a lot of your possessions along the way. As part of the free housing, you are getting locked in to programs that will help you get fit for a job, and to accept a job.

I used to give financial advise to the poor as part of a charity, and I can tell you that people want jobs. They may not always want to work, but they always want the extra income that a job gives, and the feeling they are doing something. It keeps them stable, and is a general benefit.
 
Or fiscally responsible lol.

What city or local government could possibly afford such a thing? Should they provide free heat and electricity? It would also have the unintended consequence of people seeing an opportunity in ‘becoming homeless’ in order to qualify for free housing. It could be as simple as living in a tent for a few weeks and filling out some papers.

That said, I don’t have an answer for it either.

Actually Utah and Salt Lake City were one of the first to do the Housing First policy and they had a lot of success with it. And we all know Utah is a pretty conservative state. We can look at their results vs the billions we spend on homelessness in California and the results we (don't) get.
 
I told you that the human mind rebels against the only answer we have. I agree with your feelings, and do not want to accept the things I am about to post.

It turns out that Housing First saves money. You end up paying for housing for a short time, which is less expensive than dealing with the homeless people on the streets. The huge cost saving is in reduced crime. Remember dealing with crime involves much more expensive subsidized housing called jail.

Sure you could quit your job, be homeless for a few weeks, then get free housing, and finally get a new job and start paying rent again... But why? You sort of end up in the same place as you started. You are going to lose a lot of your possessions along the way. As part of the free housing, you are getting locked in to programs that will help you get fit for a job, and to accept a job.

I used to give financial advise to the poor as part of a charity, and I can tell you that people want jobs. They may not always want to work, but they always want the extra income that a job gives, and the feeling they are doing something. It keeps them stable, and is a general benefit.

Well, let’s give them jobs lol.

Let’s do everything we can to keep the economy going. Any homeless people that are looking for work should be able to find it.

And my ‘feelings’ have nothing to do with it. Even modest housing is expensive to construct and the money has to come from somewhere.
 
Actually Utah and Salt Lake City were one of the first to do the Housing First policy and they had a lot of success with it. And we all know Utah is a pretty conservative state. We can look at their results vs the billions we spend on homelessness in California and the results we (don't) get.

Didn’t know that.

I’ll venture to say Salt Lake City isn’t strapped for cash like lots of liberal run cities are.
 
Didn’t know that.

I’ll venture to say Salt Lake City isn’t strapped for cash like lots of liberal run cities are.

San Francisco, LA, Portland and Seattle aren't strapped for cash. They spend hundreds of millions annually on the homeless. In SF we spend that amount and don't get results so we raise taxes then we spend that additional money and still don't results.

It's about how you spend the money. And in Utah the program seems to have had good success which makes it a potential model for others to follow. It sure beats the "we spend and a lot and say we care thus we're emphatic" approach that doesn't get results.
 
San Francisco, LA, Portland and Seattle aren't strapped for cash. They spend hundreds of millions annually on the homeless. In SF we spend that amount and don't get results so we raise taxes then we spend that additional money and still don't results.

It's about how you spend the money. And in Utah the program seems to have had good success which makes it a potential model for others to follow. It sure beats the "we spend and a lot and say we care thus we're emphatic" approach that doesn't get results.

If SF is in the Black why do they keep raising their taxes?

Doesn’t make any sense. They probably have good cash flow [with their tax rates I don’t know how they could keep from it] but you can still be underwater with good cash flow.
 
Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
This is on California, not the federal government. Liberal states are the only ones with huge homeless problems.

This class is a fine example of complete horse shit. You must live in a bubble if you think there isn't bad homeless issues in red states. Try not being such a biased hack. At least in California you can help them. In places like Houston an ordinance was put in place that makes it near impossible for the heartfelt to help the homeless.

https://www.texasobserver.org/citin...llenges-houstons-ban-on-feeding-the-homeless/
 
If SF is in the Black why do they keep raising their taxes?

Doesn’t make any sense. They probably have good cash flow [with their tax rates I don’t know how they could keep from it] but you can still be underwater with good cash flow.

Just because you spend a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean you are going to get good results. We take the attitude that our approach is correct and thus if it is not working we simply need more money. Therefore no matter how much we spend it is never enough.
 
Or fiscally responsible lol.

What city or local government could possibly afford such a thing? Should they provide free heat and electricity? It would also have the unintended consequence of people seeing an opportunity in ‘becoming homeless’ in order to qualify for free housing. It could be as simple as living in a tent for a few weeks and filling out some papers.

That said, I don’t have an answer for it either.

Did you see the news articles where 3 or 4 women were squatting in an empty house, the person who bought it, wanted them out, the women went to Court, the Judge said get out, they wouldn't leave, and the Sheriffs made a forced eviction.
 
Did you see the news articles where 3 or 4 women were squatting in an empty house, the person who bought it, wanted them out, the women went to Court, the Judge said get out, they wouldn't leave, and the Sheriffs made a forced eviction.

That was in Oakland. I think the women got the idea from watching Eddie Murphy's SNL Mister Robinson's skit on squatters rights.
 
Officials want to clear a mile-long homeless camp on a Sonoma County bike trail. Some don't want to go

I get tired of public officials with their, out of sight and out of mind policies, making the homeless move?!!

If I was homeless, my main concern would be bathing and clean underwear to put on afterward?!! I take showers everyday, a habit I kept from the army?!!

Santa Rosa, California (CNN)The globs of peanut butter were evenly applied. But this was no sandwich.

Pest control workers were using the spread as bait as they installed rat traps -- 340 of them -- throughout the mile-long homeless encampment after infrared video from a sheriff's helicopter revealed a major rodent infestation.

"I think it's sad and overwhelming," said pest control technician Matt Dougherty of the conditions for more than 200 homeless residents. "We're here just to make it better for them."
The rat problem could hardly have been a surprise. Trash and human waste had been piling up for months along the Joe Rodota Trail, nestled behind neighborhoods in the heart of Northern California wine country.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/18/us/santa-rosa-homeless-camp/index.html

I think it's a damn shame we even have homeless in this country?!! Coming up in the 50's, 60's, and 70's, I never did see any homeless people?!!

100520181612037792597_2.jpg

If you think it's such a shame, you should prove you care by taking them into your home. You can claim it's a shame all you want. Until you personally do something about it, the number of homeless won't change.
 
This class is a fine example of complete horse shit. You must live in a bubble if you think there isn't bad homeless issues in red states. Try not being such a biased hack. At least in California you can help them. In places like Houston an ordinance was put in place that makes it near impossible for the heartfelt to help the homeless.

https://www.texasobserver.org/citin...llenges-houstons-ban-on-feeding-the-homeless/

If there are homeless where you live, apparently your heartfelt concern is only in words and not actions.
 
Hoovervilles all over again!
I guess the stock market isn't helping homeless much

Maybe they're not investing the right stocks.

If there are homeless where you live, apparently you personally aren't helping them much. Talk is cheap unless it's back up by actions. When are you going to invite the homeless to live in your home?
 
Back
Top