Poll of the Day > Miami considers paying Residents to Take In Homeless People...

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://news.yahoo.com/adopt-homeless-troll-becomes-formal-231018373.html

Think It's A Good Idea? (Poll Question)

That sounds like it would be a lot of money for a questionable band-aid solution that would be better spent just building and providing the homeless with housing of their own.

---

adjl posted...

That sounds like it would be a lot of money for a questionable band-aid solution that would be better spent just building and providing the homeless with housing of their own.

This.

This seems like a waste of time and money, and not to mention potentially dangerous for all involved. It would be better to build housing and provide training and healthcare for homeless until they get back on their feet.

---

I was just thinking of this the other day. you could provide temporary lodging in your home for people as a sort of security net.

I guess the problem with "help those who need it" is always when they start to rely on it instead of just use it as needed. which is why "help those who help themselves" is a better approach.

I think this (homelessness) could be a problem with too high of a minimum wage. high minimum wage basically says "lower paying jobs aren't allowed to exist" (which is true to some degree but not completely). it seems like maybe what is needed is lower-cost housing and lower-pay jobs; basically, that the minimum state of self sufficiency is lowered. (minimum wage pushes that limit up instead of down).

and then, I guess that turns some areas into "slums"... but are slums better than homelessness, or are there ways from preventing low-cost housing from becoming a slum?

---

providing socialized housing with social workers has proven to be cheaper than simply 'letting it be'. check out studies in medicine hat, ohio, and elsewhere.

https://tinyurl.com/34petdsv

this florida idea is goofy and another ridiculous bandaid solution


---

I lived in Medicine Hat for a year about 6 years ago. There apparently is no homelessness, but the old downtown core was full of people just loitering while high or drunk. Maybe I'm connecting two different issues but it never felt like the social problem was solved.

---

Bringing random homeless people into your home is just asking to get robbed, raped and/or murdered. No thank you. Sure there are some decent, normal folks who ended up homeles. But there are even more who have some serious issues. Whether it be mental or just a total lack of care for the law and society. I'm not bringing potentially dangerous strangers into my home.

faramir77 posted...

I lived in Medicine Hat for a year about 6 years ago. There apparently is no homelessness, but the old downtown core was full of people just loitering while high or drunk. Maybe I'm connecting two different issues but it never felt like the social problem was solved.

I like that this individual goes into more detail than you.

https://tinyurl.com/47e6bxkn

---

adjl posted...

That sounds like it would be a lot of money for a questionable band-aid solution that would be better spent just building and providing the homeless with housing of their own.

TentacleDemon posted...

Bringing random homeless people into your home is just asking to get robbed, raped and/or murdered. No thank you. Sure there are some decent, normal folks who ended up homeles. But there are even more who have some serious issues. Whether it be mental or just a total lack of care for the law and society. I'm not bringing potentially dangerous strangers into my home.

These.

Also, unless the city is smart enough to code a lot of indemnification into the legalese behind the arrangement, the city could wind up potentially being legally responsible for any crimes said homeless commit, which could lead to an avalanche of lawsuits.
---

I remember the era of $7 a day motels...

---

ReturnOfFa posted...

I like that this individual goes into more detail than you.

https://tinyurl.com/47e6bxkn

If I'm reading that correctly: the author is addressing people that are upset about a social center that provides supports for homeless and the addicted, right? It reads as a reply to something else, so the context is tricky to fully understand without that.

If so, I don't have a problem with that at all. My issue was in the old downtown area of the city, which contains various shops, restaurants, and my bank, all on a one way street which encourages you to walk up and down, rather than drive and park (meaning that you'll have a lot more direct contact with other people here). This isn't near where the author described the social support building would be.

Almost every time you go to the old downtown, someone is publicly intoxicated. Often just yelling at people, stumbling on the road, begging for money, etc. The article makes it sound like the author thinks people shouldn't be upset by this. The author definitely implies that if the public wants a right to complain that they should be working to find a solution, which is unfortunate coming from the person whose literal job is to do just that. Both of these suggestions are invalid and don't do anything to solve the problem. People DO have a right to be upset.

I understand that this is a classic case of "not in my backyard". I'm not going to pretend that I have a solution to this. I'm completely in favour of social supports for those in need, but solving homelessness without solving the social issues that lead to it is nothing more than a bandaid.

---

Get one that has no respect for you or your property. Refuses to bathe or clean up after themselves. But they're legally considered a tenant now. You're stuck with them until you can get through the sometumes lengthy and expensive process of having them evicted. Great plan!!


---

adjl posted...

That sounds like it would be a lot of money for a questionable band-aid solution that would be better spent just building and providing the homeless with housing of their own.

---

Sahuagin posted...

I guess the problem with "help those who need it" is always when they start to rely on it instead of just use it as needed. which is why "help those who help themselves" is a better approach.

There's definitely a balancing act, although you're always going to have some people who, for whatever reason, will always need help (even if the programs themselves can inadvertently cultivate those kinds of individuals as well)

---

adjl posted...

That sounds like it would be a lot of money for a questionable band-aid solution that would be better spent just building and providing the homeless with housing of their own.

that would be called 'Section 8' or 'Public Housing'...

But the problem with that is waiting Lists, Crime, etc so IMO, you're just recreating the Problems in those places in newer Buildings.

Really, its something else 'Sinister' going on with this problem...

faramir77 posted...

If I'm reading that correctly: the author is addressing people that are upset about a social center that provides supports for homeless and the addicted, right? It reads as a reply to something else, so the context is tricky to fully understand without that.

If so, I don't have a problem with that at all. My issue was in the old downtown area of the city, which contains various shops, restaurants, and my bank, all on a one way street which encourages you to walk up and down, rather than drive and park (meaning that you'll have a lot more direct contact with other people here). This isn't near where the author described the social support building would be.

Almost every time you go to the old downtown, someone is publicly intoxicated. Often just yelling at people, stumbling on the road, begging for money, etc. The article makes it sound like the author thinks people shouldn't be upset by this. The author definitely implies that if the public wants a right to complain that they should be working to find a solution, which is unfortunate coming from the person whose literal job is to do just that. Both of these suggestions are invalid and don't do anything to solve the problem. People DO have a right to be upset.

I understand that this is a classic case of "not in my backyard". I'm not going to pretend that I have a solution to this. I'm completely in favour of social supports for those in need, but solving homelessness without solving the social issues that lead to it is nothing more than a bandaid.

Fair and measured. I will indicate though, I find it ironic that people don't complain about drunk young people in the evening in a downtown core, but will complain about those intoxicated during the daytime.

---