Trump to tackle homelessness

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Trueman
a reply to: JAGStorm
According to your source :

“We’ve never had this in our lives before in our country,” President Trump said.

Twisted media said 2 years, he didn't.

He said two years. I watched the video and saw and heard him say it.

Trump: "It's a phenomenon that started two years ago..."
But go ahead and make # up if you want.

I didn't see any video. Just read the article.

As much as I liked to disagree with Trump on this issue, I think I see where he's coming from. I don't think he's talking about the Homeless crisis per-say, but rather the HomeFree epidemic we currently have as well. The difference between the two is important. Homeless people for the most part didn't choose to be in the situation they're in. It could have been because of drugs, abusive relationships, cast out by medical issues, or even issues like bad planning. These people will usually if given a hand up, will gladly move out of the situation they are in to get a house, or even just a roof over their heads.

HomeFree people are completely different. They use homelessness as their chosen lifestyles. They live off of the programs that are suppose to be there to help the homeless, and take bribes to hide illegal activities. These people also push real homeless people into situations were they get exploited by local politicians (I've provided links to this stuff before). HomeFree people are more likely to commit crimes knowing full well that sanctuary cities will just let them go, and most police in liberal leaning cities have their hands tied when dealing with them.

Trump could create guidelines for federal funding that limits funds to cities were HomeFree people leach off the system. He could also address many of the perceived advantages of these people, by exposing the politicians that use them for personal gain. It will be interesting to see what he has in mind. I think he should have stated HomeFree instead of Homeless, but maybe he isn't aware that many Americans know the difference between the two groups.

If trump can't even lock Hillary up, I don't think he has to power to take on homelessness.

i will be interested to hear/see just how much Trump will mobilize the effort to curb 'homelessness' among the current Citizens...

the free ride for supposed 'refugees' or 'oppressed-claiming-sanctuary' will truly get axed (finally) in the process

ADD


in my near future I will require a 'Divorce' to be able to access about $250. month in justified VA Disability Pension payments which were suspended 3 years ago because the 'wife' income put our combined income above $19k limit

try to find a place under $1200 month for 2 grandparents paying for a shelter for a 21 yo grandson along with his Mother and boyfriend... all of whom pay $0 for shelter/utils and do-not fix house problems or do yard work...
I Welcome the point I become homeless to rid myself of these Parasites, living off the fixed incomes of the old (70+) people...

I can see him tackling homeless people as a sport, in his daily cocain high. But that's about it.

a reply to: St Udio

try to find a place under $1200 month for 2 grandparents paying for a shelter for a 21 yo grandson along with his Mother and boyfriend... all of whom pay $0 for shelter/utils and do-not fix house problems or do yard work... I Welcome the point I become homeless to rid myself of these Parasites, living off the fixed incomes of the old (70+) people...

21yr old ok maybe help out, but the mom and boyfriend??? c'mon

a reply to: JAGStorm

Trump will probably issue the poor sods a spade each and tell them to dig there own grave.

Especially if they are brown homeless souls.

Here's one possible solution Trump could try to fix the homeless issue (not the mental health issue, that's a different problem)

Someone (the government or government/private joint venture or simply some entities) can create not for profit companies to buy up apartment buildings to be used to house the homeless.

These not-for-profit companies of course enjoy tax exempt status while funneling some of the profit to the "CEO" that runs the company.

The profit side of the equation would come from the apartment buildings being a coemingal of homeless units and "for rent" units. However the "for rent" units would not be for rent in the traditional sense; instead those living in the "for rent" units would be allowed to live in the units if they make a large enough donation to the not-for-profit organization. Just like you might get a wind up radio if you make a donation to a charity; in this case you get to use an apartment for a month if you make a donation to the charity. The charitable donation could than also be used as a tax deduction.

You could even have the non-for-profit accept charity donations in the traditional manner as well to also off set the costs of the homeless units and pay the administrative salaries.


But I'm sure their is something I'm missing I've haven't given this much thought. The point is to try to make it advantageous for those with means to help the homeless rather than just really on altruism.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
My ex-wife had what I thought was a pretty good solution except for it not being exactly legal. It would involve rounding up the homeless people who are messed up on drugs, shipping them to one of the many closed and partially abandoned army camps in the country, and essentially giving them all the free drugs they want (along with food, a place to sleep, etc.) until they either die - if that's what they want to do - or decide to leave. They can pick their poison -- heroin, coke, meth, whatever -- all nice and clean and manufactured and provided by the government. Doctors would be available to monitor dosages, as well as offer support and advice to those who want to kick it.

And if you want to leave, all you need to do is pass a drug screen for three months in a row, and you can go home. Anybody who can do that in an environment where the drugs are literally free will probably be okay on the outside. Along with the free hard drugs, anti-depressants and anti-psychotics would also be available for those who need them.

It would clean up the city streets and be a hell of a lot more cost-effective than having the police chase these guys in an out of public areas. Pennies on the dollar. An added benefit is that it would likely greatly reduce (although not completely eliminate) the market for the drug dealers, driving them out of business.

If we get the hardcore drug addicts off the streets then we can start to work with the clean homeless people who are there simply by circumstance and sincerely want to rejoin regular society.

I agree. The drug war has failed and isn't working.

The famed show The Wire (HBO) had your idea as a story line. Basically, one of the top police commanders decide to cordone off an area in Baltimore where the dealers and users could do what the do. He rounded up the dealers and users and basically told them stay in this special area and the police would leave them alone or else there would be hell to pay. Crime fell dramatically in the city... until the politicians discovered what he did.

I say round 'em up and give them all the dope they want. This would get rid of the dope dealers, gang territories, etc. It would be far cheaper and easier than trying to house them in prison or playing wack a mole on the streets.

The reality though is that it isn't a homeless problem. It is a drug addict / mental illness problem. No amount of affordable housing, etc is going to help these people.

They are on the streets because they cannot function in society because they are a can short of a six pack or they are wacked out on drugs. The only way to help these people is to forcibly remove them from the streets.

a reply to: Edumakated

Well, the fact of the matter is that if you are homeless for any length of time drug addiction thus the mental illness that comes hand in hand with such are apt to become a problem for rather a few of the poor sods.

They cannot function in society, because society has placed them in the scrap heap, some of the poor souls since birth.

Sad state of affairs for any first world nation to be in really.

An one that my own nation shares in spades also with our treatment of the homeless, 300,000+ of the poor suckers and on the rise.

a reply to: DanDanDat


We tried that in Washington State.
Oh so many issues.KING5 investigations on ARCH

You can just start watching want was uncovered as to how the program was used. Unless you might be talking about having tiny house villages.
Then you can read about those here:

KIRO Radio Political abuse of homeless
And KIRO RADIO Nickleville manager punishes residents and screws over low income management team
Also KIRO RADIO holding the homeless hostage

OK,ok now the stories from KIRO RADIO are not the actual titles of the stories, but rather just a one liner summery of the stories. THe idea though, is that unless the Home Free people can be weeded out of the system, then the system will continue to degrade and the people that truly need the help will be restricted from getting due to these HomeFree abusers.

Also from KIRO RADIO more on what a Home Free person is vs a Homeless person

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Edumakated

Well, the fact of the matter is that if you are homeless for any length of time drug addiction thus the mental illness that comes hand in hand with such are apt to become a problem for rather a few of the poor sods.

They cannot function in society, because society has placed them in the scrap heap, some of the poor souls since birth.

Sad state of affairs for any first world nation to be in really.

An one that my own nation shares in spades also with our treatment of the homeless.

People make choices. Sometimes their choices can put them on the streets.

I guess you are trying to argue that being homeless made them drug addicts/crazy while others (me) argue that their homelessness is because they are drug addicts / mental illness.

In my experience, I've found their homelessness is a symptom of their addiction, not the cause.

Most people who can function in society don't stay homeless long. There are all kinds of shelters and services for those who are down on their luck. My town is very liberal and has all kinds of support systems in place to help the homeless. Yet the same exact bums/addicts have been on the same exact street corners for months and even years. They don't want help beyond getting their next fix.

The ONLY solution is to forcibly remove them from the streets.

a reply to: Guyfriday

I was mainly thinking of apartment buildings and complexes where both the homeless and people of means commingle. Where in the people of means have more than just altruistic feelings to incentivise their commingle with their homeless neighborhoods. I'm sure I am missing something, but assuming I am not, the people of means would be a line of defense, along with the administration, to try and curb fraud.

This to me sounds different than the programs you linked to where people are given stand alone and self secluded property and must be watched over by an inadequate administration staff.

The point would be to try to build communal property where the homeless and people of means can live together both for their own personal gain.

a reply to: Edumakated

"I guess you are trying to argue that being homeless made them drug addicts/crazy"

Some of them yes.

It's a vicious circle really.

Poverty being the main contributing factor.

So where would you put these people once you have removed them from the streets?

Streets that they grew up on, areas that they came from, places that are essentially there home without a roof, drug addicted, mental or otherwise.

Homeless people have been around for many years, but there were adequate shelters for them in most places and they did have soup kitchens and places they could get food. It is severely overtaxed now though, it seems like numbers jumped way up. In some places it happened around 08 but that crowd did seem to lessen after a year or so after the big housing bust happened. California always had more homeless people down in the south area, but lately homeless people are popping up all over the place. I think it is more than two years though, more like three years or so that the big jump in street people happened in lots of areas they never were before.

a reply to: Blue Shift

I like it! But can I propose an addendum?

Set up a housing system in every city (start with the worst areas and work out from there). You build tiny apartments: one multipurpose room with a hide-a-bed and similar table, a couple of chairs, and a tiny kitchenette (Microwave, sink, mini-fridge, small counter, and pantry), and a small bath with a shower, sink, and toilet. These are stacked around a central lobby in a single building. Each apartment has a phone jack, a cable TV jack, and is internet ready... but nothing is turned on. Families can get units with one additional small bedroom.

Anyone who has not abused the system can stay there. Anyone. No background checks, no deposit, no drug screens, no questions other than who you are to be checked against a list of abusers. As long as you're not on that list, here's your key, your apartment is upstairs to the left, have a nice day. Oh, and here's the house rules; please follow them or we'll kick you out.

A few of the rules:

• No illicit drugs without a prescription, no excuses.
  
• No alcohol allowed on premises.
  
• No loud noises. You will be given one warning if you disturb the neighbors.
  
• No prostitution or pimping.
  
• No criminal activities.
  
• No destruction of property.
  
• Apartment must be kept clean (supplies provided).
  
• Your apartment may be inspected at any time without notice.
  
• You will be called on in rotation to perform 4 hours of maintenance (lawn work, etc.) unless you are disabled.

Here's the thing: it is a last chance. You break the rules, you're out for a year (that's the list I was referring to). That's where your plan comes in: you get caught with drugs, you are shipped off to the camp.

In addition, you have full access to the lobby, which has phones, a single TV, and internet (no porn). There are local newspapers available. Each building has a van and driver that can be used for transportation to and from work, interviews, a store (with scheduling), church of your choice, or school. A counselor will inform you of any government help programs available to you. Instead of SNAP, you are given food applicable to be prepared in the kitchenette. If you want more, you can take the van to the store and buy it.

You have twelve months of free stay, no questions asked. Once that is up, you have to either have some kind of job or be going through a training program to stay. Free programs are available at local schools. So you either have to be disabled or show you are trying to improve yourself to stay.

If you have income, you can have the TV turned on, the phone turned on, the internet turned on... but all at your cost. These are luxuries, as contact is provided free in the lobby. If you get a car, you can park it outside and drive yourself around... but you have to get the car. The bare basics of humane survival are provided, but you pay for luxuries. And as long as you stay there, you are living in a highly restricted environment in a tiny apartment... not something most want. The incentive to leave will be there, if just so you can have a cold beer in the evening. But you will not be homeless unless you want to be.

If you want to move out, no problem. The van will take you to realtors or rental places to check them out. Turn in your key, and we'll even give you help moving out. And if it doesn't work out, well, welcome back.

This opens the door for something that some won't like: actual vagrancy laws. Vagrants can receive a trip to the housing by the police on request, with no charges. Otherwise, vagrants will have a set time, maybe 60 days, to get off the streets or be arrested. Once arrested, they can either still try the housing, go to a traditional rehab facility, go to your camp, go to a mental hospital, or stay in jail. Being homeless will be illegal, but it will carry a series of choices that do not involve prison.

The bottom line is that we have to exercise a little tough love. Some of the homeless just need a hand up. This will give them that hand up with no questions asked. Some are too lazy to work. OK, they can ride the system, but the restrictions will keep them off the streets and out of as much trouble. Some have alcohol or drug problems. This is their last chance to go clean, and if they can't, your option is ready and waiting. Some are just bad apples; they'll wind up in jail either way, but this way we can keep an eye on them.

One problem is that in order to work, the buildings must be open and dirt simple to get into. That means illegal aliens will have to be accepted as well. We can cut down on that simply by not having Spanish-speaking facilities (English only) and allowing ICE free access. Will a few slip by? Probably, but we're not exactly giving them the farm either.

The units I am thinking of would be small, efficient, climate controlled (without an adjustable thermostat) to stay between 70 and 80 degrees, lighted by 100% LED fixtures, and well-insulated. Design is where you save the money on building cost (something I specialized in when I ran my home design service), and energy efficiency means little cost in the form of maintenance. New buildings would be required: no private investment, fenced to control access, and patrolled well with no unlit external areas in which to hide. Using existing areas would keep the crime that already seems to infest them. The units would also have to be inspected every so often by a national review board to ensure that they are kept crime-free and clean. Still, the cost would be far less than anything being done now, and they would be much better at getting people out from under the bridges and back into society.

America was built on second chances. This is a second chance.

TheRedneck

Amusing to see so many SJWs here today proposing the government get involved in what is an economic and social problem.

Trump says black, you say black.

Trump says white, you say white.

A drug / alcohol / mental health problem that has been allowed to spiral out of control. Opiates and meth are destroying america.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
I wonder what is the solution, hide it?

Massive social spending on job training and helping the homeless get back on track with their lives.