the homeless

in my view this problem needs to be tackled as fast as possible
these are human beings and need a chance.

1. i would open up new shelters which not only allow them to stay out the cold but are able to get some training so they can get a job.

training would envolve the following

a. maths and english (compuslery subject in almost all sectors)
b. temp jobs in local business's if they have the quilifactions (they can stay perm if the business discretion) they will get the same wage as other employees so business's cant exploit this.
c. they will be given the opertunity to have their kids educatied at local schools.

this would give them a chance to get back on their own feet!
if they are old (over 65+) or unable to work because of medical problems then they would be cared for by the state


2. those people that are homless because of drug abuse will be reabilited as best as possible and given a second chance in society by been given the same chance as 1.

as a nation you have to take care of your people no matter what the cost

by doing this we will not only improve their lives but the econemy as more people will be in the work force creating revenue which will mean more money coming into the econemy.

how would i afford this?

not by raising taxes and not by cutting back on other sectors but by using money confiscated drug dealers,smuglers and other crimes.
this money would be used to improve the society that we live in and not just for some but for all


[edit on 23-4-2007 by bodrul]

Well said. Sometimes people just need purpose. What you propose is "spot on". Hopefully some presidential contenders will read this.
"A small step for man, a giant leap for mankind."

Agree strongly. I have some experience of working for the homeless in the UK,
I thought I`d elaborate a little bit on the topic.
Contrary to popularly held beliefs, a lot of homeless people are well qualified and educated sometimes. A significant proportion are ex-military here too. Yes, many of them have substance misuse(inc alcohol) problems and some of them wound up homeless after not being treated for (or treated effectively) for this. On the OTHER hand, many turn to drugs and alcohol after finding themselves on the streets.
Really, it`s hard to draw the line here, but what we do know is that treatment is useless unless you house people when they come out of treatment, and address other needs, financial, mental health problems etc.
In the UK, there has been a "revolving door" type of treatment for years, which is a waste of money in the long term, as same clients get fed thru the system again and again, which in turn makes it harder for people to access treatment who are not homeless, and then often by the time people get treatment, they will be homeless.
All in all, it`s a complex issue and cycle, but we do know that in order to help people with Sub. Mis. or Homeless problems. you have to address all areas of their life roughly at the same time, or else one aspect will lead them back into a cycle.

By the way, the Government figures on homeless people in the south of England from 2 to 3 years ago were completely fabricated. One example, No rough sleepers in Portsmouth (Popn 300000), when there were clearly at least 9. I knew at least 9 myself. Apparently, at least one year, on the night of the data gathering, the "Day Centre" for homeless people opened at night and had a party with free food and Drink!! Go figure...

Sounds good bodrul.


The homeless don't just need a place to stay, they need a (temporary, hopefully) home. A place where they can learn and get back on their feet would be a great thing. They then could become productive members of society.

One of the best way to fight the homeless problem is to teach them some kind of technical skill, or some other education, where they will be able to find a job. If we could open a shelter, and teach them, then it would give them much greater chances of pulling themselves out of the poverty loophole.

This is an excellent thread. It would be the first step to a better world. The first hand being held out in offer of support. Here is what happened when I helped a homeless man.
Bill, the homeless man.

Makes for a nice story but most in this area just want their 3 meals a day at the salvation army a rock and a cool 40 ouncer. I personally have had enough of helping fellow man because now I'm involved in a law suit because one of the so called local homeless was fired for not coming to work. His reason for not coming to work!!! It wasn't none of my business why he didn't come in. If he was at work fine but if he didn't feel like showing up it was none of my business. How long did I try ??? 1 year because I made someone a promise. How many days did he miss 56. 56 days off and got mad because I didn't give him a pay raise so he didn't show up for another week and had been replaced by someone who hasn't missed a day in 4 months. I know I'm only paying 18$ an hour with pretty much unlimited overtime and full bennies. I told his lawyer he wasn't fired he quit simple as that. You all can wast all the time you want but don't expect taxpayers to foot your little fantasy.


mikell

mikell

My biggest concern is the funding idea. That's not extra money on the sidewalk you're talking about. It isn't sitting in a closet somewhere in Washington going unused. Only so much is being seized, and it's already being divied up by law enforcement and other programs.

In Colorado two counties saw the record for seizures in a year for their area set at $350,000 in 1999. Those two counties combined had 1855 homeless people as of 2006 (click into Adams and Broomfield counties respectively).

That's only $188 a year per homeless person even if the money was free to be allocated.


Nation wide, it's about a billion annually now, although it is noteworthy that this may be in part the result of overzealous enforcement which was encouraged when the feds started giving up to 80% of forfeitures to the local departments behind them. Drug-related forfeitures

According to a report prepared for the Senate Judiciary Committee, at least 90 percent of the property that the federal government seeks to forfeit is pursued through civil asset forfeiture. And although forfeiture is intended as punishment for illegal activity, over 80% of the people whose property is seized under civil law are never even charged with a crime according to one study of over 500 federal cases by the Pittsburgh Press.

So on that side note it should be kept in mind that the fund you're talking about using contains only about 1 billion dollars annually, most of which is already allocated, and that even if it was free, it would probably go down when we reformed our forfeiture laws, which is something I intend to do and will be discussing in greater detail soon.

Now, with that 1 billion dollars, you'd have to provide for somewhere between 700,000 and 2 million people ( source ).
That would get you $1428 per person if you used the lowest number of homeless people. Can you rehabilitate and help someone back to their feet on $1428/year?


I would like to make a counter proposal though, because there have been a few times in my life where I technically did not have a home (although I was fortunate enough to never end up out doors for any serious length of time) and I suspect that my mothers repeated problems with drugs and abusive men will see her homeless yet again in the very near future based on the way things are looking, and that being the case I obviously share you interest in the subject.

I consider myself progressively inclined, but once upon a time I was a Republican, so I am fairly good at balancing my checkbook, and I do believe that its not only fair but also very beneficial for a person to pay their own way whenever possible. Coming from that direction, I suggest we kill several birds with one stone.

Let's get the program going with some startup money, then get a significant portion of the programs support once its going by having an assistance payback program whereby people who successfully come through the program pay 1,000 back a year for as many years as is necessary to recoup the baseline cost of 1 year of treatment as long as they are above the poverty line, and in the cases where they elevate themselves further, perhaps an extra 1% would be added to their tax bracket additionally for each tax bracket above the first that they reached.

This would essentially mean that after paying for the first few batches, we'd be getting that money back to reuse on new admissions again and again, and cost efficiency would be limited only by the effectiveness of the treatment provided.

There would still be some costs, for the permanently disabled and for those who don't complete the program, as well as the overage from particularly expensive cases, such as where medication is needed and the costs become so high that its impossible for the person to repay (and there would have to be accountability to keep that in check- I'm up for a second chance, but there has to be a demerit system in place that determines when we accept that a person refuses to be helped even though they could be if they chose.) but costs would be significantly reduced, making such an ambitious program more realistic.

I also believe we should use small taxes on contributing factors and stronger fines on illegal factors should be used.
Make possession of marijuana a $500 dollar fine and you'd save about 200 million on incarceration of the relatively few people who do end up in prison for simple possession and you could generate tens if not hundreds of millions more in annual revenue to deal with those who have harder drug problems.

Place a small sin tax on cheap hard liquor to both make it slightly less accessible and to finance treatment of those who come into the program with alcohol issues.

There are other things I can enumerate later but I am running out of time to type this at the moment.

Basically I'm up for the idea, but we've got to think about the funding more carefully. There isn't a whole lot of money just sitting around in the gutter or in evidence lockers for us to pick up and throw at a new program.

This is America, if people chose to be homeless that is their right.

But, if a homeless person wants to right himself, he should be able to enter a 6-month program which would include food and shelter, job training, and a monthly allowance that would be stictly budgeted. Weekly drug and alcohol test would be mandatory and after "graduation" they would remain as staff members until a job is procured.

How would we pay for all this? They great thing is we won't have to. Wage Garnishment would be mandatory until a certain sum of money is paid off.

What if the homeless person refuses to enter the program or leaves the program? Leave them alone. Don't give them a dime. No shelter, no food, no nothing. That way people would think twice before choosing to become homeless. I would also make panhandling a crime, not only for the panhandler, but for the people that enable the homeless. Isn't it a crime to feed the bears in National Parks?

The only way to end homelessness is to stop making it so easy to live like that.

I think I'm in a unique position to answer on this subject having been homeless myself for about 6 months, a decade or so ago. During that point in time I usually slept wherever I could make a home for the night, and that was usually outdoors in a box if I could find one.

The biggest impediment towards improving onesself and leave the pit of homelessness, is the lack of a permanent address or phone number. Obtaining a job and then hanging on to your money is nearly impossible. Since jobs won't hire you, and banks won't give you an account without a permanent address or phone number, and nowadays you can't even get a safety-deposit box without a background check, you're forced to keep all your cash on you (which can be lost in mugging), hide it (which can be lost to other scavengers), or trusting it to someone else (who might just not give it back). You can't get approved for hardly anything without a phone number and address.

The second largest impediment towards fighting homelessness is dealing with drug addiction and mental illness. Most of my fellow scabbies during the day were either looking for their next fix, or just flat out too insane to make it through an interview.

These problems must first be satisfied before any real progress can be made in a person's life to escape the pit of homelessness:

A permanent mailing address.

A residence with basic facilities.

A job.

Drug counseling.

Mental health treatment.

Education.

Legal counsel.

Transportation.

Discipline and Self Respect.

This must be done as a complete package deal if the homeless problem is to have any progress made, and will require some funding, but not all. However, one must also be acutely aware that any plan based solely off of moral and ethical imparatives will be ultimately brought to ruin by those with no morals and ethics. Thus, each aspect must be strictly enforced with the threat of being removed from The Plan.

Let's take a city with a massive homeless problem: Seattle. You quite literally cannot walk one side of one city block without having three bums attempting to spange you (spange = "ask for spare change...pandhandling"). None of the "real" homeless will use the shelters because of the serious danger of being robbed, raped, beaten, or killed. So they take their chances elsewhere. However, in order to participate in any recovery programs, you have to use the shelter and check in by a certain time. If you don't stay at the shelter, no assistance, if you do stay at the shelter, you run the risks above.

What to do?

1. Create jobs that may only be filled by homeless citizens. Note citizens. Public works such as creation of botanical gardens and other city beautification projects. As we see the rise in the need for biofuels, I'm sure there will be a lot of menial and dirty jobs that need to be done. Businesses could offer sponsership positions as well for a tax credit. Reserve these jobs for those on "The Recovery Plan". Attendance will be verified by human resources on a daily basis.
   
   
2. Create housing outside of the influence of the worst elements. Many cities put the shelters and projects in the worst parts of the city, as they are NIMBY buildings (not in my back yard) and generally very hideous buildings. The attitude of this needs to shift in several ways. I suggest that a good number of the jobs in Step 1 can go towards building these housing environments in hotel-style. Small, one and two bedroom apartment-style houses could be set up with basic furniture, toilet, fridget, sink, a phone line, and answering machine. To avoid the creation of meth-labs, a communal kitchen will be used in lieu of a personal one, in a "commons" area that has a TV, game room, kitchen, study, and dining area. An on-duty officer would be present 24-hours a day, quietly walking through each room, watching for illegal activity.
   
   
3. Psychological and Physical counseling as well as perscription drugs, if needed, will be provided for those that need it (only for "The Plan").
   
   
4. Likewise with Legal Counsel. Members of The Plan would have access to help with things like past tickets, legal disputes, custody battles, etc, as many homeless already have countless legal problems stacked against them with no clue on how to handle it, assuming they can even read the paperwork.
   
   
5. Mandatory education in reading, writing, math, and finances. Members of The Plan will become literate, able to perform basic math functions, and learn to manage their money, save, etc.
   
   
6. Creation of a Credit Union that offers members of The Plan access to savings accounts and debit cards, with credit counseling as well to assist them in rebuilding a credit line.
   
   
7. If mass-transit is available, each Plan member will be given a daily pass that is good for only as many transits as is neccessary to get to and from their job. If no mass transit is available, and it's too far to walk, bicycles will be provided, or a driver if the job site is too far to ride a bike to. Bikes will be donated, painted a very distinctive color (like the "yellow bike" programs some cities use), and serialized to avoid selling them for cash. Each member will have to check out the bike and check it in, with any use. If they cannot return the bike, and claim it was stolen, they will have to file a police report, and bike and pawn shops will be alerted to the stolen number.
   
   
8. Daycare/Nightcare for those with children will be provided free of charge.
   
   
9. Members of The Plan receive all these benefits provided they agree to the following requirements:
   
   
   
   • They will participate in The Plan for no less than six months, and no more than two years. The general idea is that they will be able to care for themselves by the end, able to obtain their own residence, hold a job, stay off the fix, manage their mental problems and their money, and become a normal, productive citizen again.
     
     
   • Their pay will be divided as follows: 20% for debt repayments (if any), 10% for savings, which they cannot touch until "graduation", 20% to help pay for The Plan. The remaining portion of their money is theirs to use as they see fit, provided they do not violate any of the terms and conditions.
     
     
   • Violation of work attendance, drug rehab, failure to take medication, etc, will result first in counseling and an attempt to get them back on the right path. A second lapse will result in immediate dismissal from The Plan, and their spot given to someone else who needs a chance. In the event of drug rehabilitation, drug tests will be taken on a daily basis via means such as a tooth scrape that cannot easily be bypassed.
     
     
   • Those whom graduate successfully from The Plan may continue to use the counseling and daycare services if they continue to pay 10% of their salary, but their room and board will be up to them at that point.
     
     
   • Their savings account will not be available for them until they graduate from The Plan or two years from the start date of the plan, whichever comes first.
     
     
   • Absolutley no spanging or illegal money generation. Credit union accounts will be monitored for extra income beyond their assigned job, and justification for it will need to be satisfied to remain a member of The Plan.
     
     
   While there will certainly be some cost associated with The Plan, it should be much defrayed by the paycheck contributions of its members and graduates. Additionally, the small remaining cost that is not covered by the garnishing could be considered a long-term investment by the city. The Plan will produce a citizen whom is generally going to be a conscientious worker, responsible citizen, and legal consumer, as well as reducing their homeless problem in a very permanent way other than bussing them to another city or outlawing panhandling.

TheLibra's is one of the most well-considered, well-articulated, thoroughly admirable posts I've read in these forums. I'd like to vote you for WATS, but I can't find the button.

Amazing post ! I'll read it again soon, because every time I do, I find something else of value. If only someone such as you were in a position to implement the plan you've set forth !

Originally posted by Dock6
TheLibra's is one of the most well-considered, well-articulated, thoroughly admirable posts I've read in these forums. I'd like to vote you for WATS, but I can't find the button.

Amazing post ! I'll read it again soon, because every time I do, I find something else of value. If only someone such as you were in a position to implement the plan you've set forth !

Thanks Dock6,

I'm hoping that I actually end up with the ability to do something about it in the future. I intend to run for office in real life. This campaign is something of a practice run to get my platforms out there. Who knows, if I don't make it, maybe someone else will use it as a springboard. Regardless, thanks for the compliment! The reason you can't find the WATS button on my profile is because I'm a mod nowadays... which I think can't get WATS nominations, but the thought is appreciated all the same.

Let's see, how do we fund this. How about building two less F-22 raptors. There's $200,000,000. A Billion $ is chump change to the government. President Bush probably has that in his piggy bank. Besides, the whole idea is for the homeless to supply for themselves. They could make goods, and become productive citizens. It would take some tough love though. But done right, you bet.
Build a city for them. Get Greyhound to bus them there. Totally voluntary, of course. Counseling and jobs would be available, and hope. Originally built by taxes and donations, would eventually be self supportive, even productive.

Libra,

I wrote up something very similar not too long ago. I too am very interested in helping our homeless out, as they need the help more than the illegal aliens do, not to mention they are an untapped source of labor. You always hear the excuse for allowing illegal aliens to have the worst jobs is because "no one else will do them". No one else will do them, huh? I bet I know a silent minority that wouldn't mind that little bit of cash one single bit.

If you ever get something like that going, remember me, as I'll help in any way that I can.

TheBorg

[edit on 6-5-2007 by TheBorg]

Originally posted by stompk
Let's see, how do we fund this. How about building two less F-22 raptors. There's $200,000,000. A Billion $ is chump change to the government.

With all due repsect stompk, it does not work that way. There is a certain minimum cost for producing anything which covers the cost of design, production facilities, testing, etc. That cost is evenly spread over the number of units produced. If we build two less raptors, we only save the actual construction cost of those two planes, but not their full unit price.

Originally posted by stompk
Let's see, how do we fund this. How about building two less F-22 raptors. There's $200,000,000.

I think you are thinking of a different plane.

F-22 Raptors cost about 120million a piece.

B-2 bombers cost about 2billion a piece, which is one fo the reasons
we don't have a huge fleet of them.