Please Don't Feed the Animals.. (Homeless) edit; Title is a play on words , for those who can't ge

Our neurotic political policies don't approve of discrimination and regard every individual as sacred and important. In the world of moderns, there are no parasites or destructive criminals, only "unique" people with "certain problems" that easily can be helped thanks to social reforms. Ironically this social safety net is currently breaking down, precisely because the number of people abusing it instead of contributing to it is growing.

It's very simple: a healthy society actively weeds out parasites and onlys offer social safety to healthy people who temporarily need it to move on, not to chronically poor, unemployed, criminal or otherwise dysfunctional individuals/families that don't contribute to society and resent those who can/do. Their nature is to take whatever they can and then run off to the next host. They need to be expelled from society. If they manage to survive on their own, fine. If they don't, who cares? We'll live a happier life without them.

reply to post by tigpoppa


You sure make a lot of unwarranted assumptions.

In point of fact, I had/have several high skillsets. What part of "NO WORK" do you not comprehend? The first time I was homeless was after leaving the USAF with 7 years experience as an aircraft mechanic and most as an NCO (middle management to civilians). Highly trained, highly skilled, with highly transferable skills. But I was also a Vietnam vet coming home during a contraction, viewed with distrust and disgust by most employers, and a Native American to boot. No work for me. Such was my reward for serving "my" country. No amount of retraining would fix that.

I have been many things in my life and retrained myself many times. Having a high and varied skillset doesn't help when there are no jobs. As jobs become scarcer, who you know, and who knows you becomes far more important.

I have also trained others, taught at the college level, and could be homeless again soon if things don't change for the better by summer. One of the flaws with the whole retrianing idea is the very simple problem:

What are you retraining for?

It takes a few months, minimum, to create a class or set of classes to address a specific training need. It then takes anywhere from three months to several years to complete the training. That's a huge investment borne by the state and the individual in both time and money.

All on a gamble that might prove to be worthless because the job you've invested in got shipped overseas and now you have a glut of whatever you've trained people for, which makes the job worth much less than when you started. Without a commitment from the corporate world both to provide insight into what they will be needing and actually going to keep within the country, "retraining" is a waste of time, money, and effort, other than the self-improvement aspects. "Retraining" won't help much if you don't know what to retrain for.

And here lies the failure of the corporate class: they have no idea what to do except make more money. They give no direction to the economy because they lack the intelligence and vision to do so. They have permeated the political class to such an extant that the two are indistinguishable, and lack the visions and intelligence in that arena also.

There always needs to be a point to the economy, that's why wars lift them: you know what skillsets are needed for approximately how long. That's why building the interstate highway system lifted the economy. That's why the Space Race lifted the economy. What's the point to this one? What is our collective economic goal? It can't be merely "make more money", because that isn't a goal, it is the byproduct of a goal.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by apacheman]

reply to post by aristocrat2

From what I've read Canada isn't doing much better than the US with homeless numbers. Our infant mortality rate isn't all that great.

In 2004, the latest year for which worldwide data are available, the United States had a higher rate than 28 countries, including Singapore, Japan, Cuba and Hungary. In 1960, the United States had a higher rate than only 11 countries.

www.nytimes.com...

Originally posted by aristocrat2

They used to own the whole damn continent, now they are being arrest for having to beg for a crust of food.

If it's not bad enough they get arrested soon anyone helping them will be fined. What is it considered aiding and abetting to help a homeless person?

I remember when I was little my grandma would give me change to buy pencils from guys on the street selling them. She made no comment but made sure I said thank you when I got my pencil. Grandma lived through the depression.

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by tigpoppa

 

You sure make a lot of unwarranted assumptions.

In point of fact, I had/have several high skillsets. What part of "NO WORK" do you not comprehend? The first time I was homeless was after leaving the USAF with 7 years experience as an aircraft mecshanic
[edit on 2-3-2010 by apacheman]

Being an aircraft mechanic is about as useful a skill as laying mines or being one of those tank mechanics in the army. sure their good skills in the military but in the private sector those jobs are filled with qualified people who have a working experience on many types of aircraft. Whereas in the military people maybe learn how to repair one type of vehicle that doesnt exist anywhere else. These poor life decisions you made can be corrected by giving you access to tools that are in demand for todays market.

Also your flaws and faults that make you move so slowly are why you may end up homeless again. Having a drive in life to succeed and out compete your peers is what drives America forward. People like you just make excuses as to why it takes you a long to do what you do. What you dont know is while your making excuses other people are solving the problems your creating. Dont be surprised if your homeless because your not doing the job your paid to do. If you were able to do that job you would have had tenure.

Originally posted by stephanies-chase
reply to post by guyopitz

 

Wonderful idea! We can send the murderers, child molestors, bank robbers, families who lost their houses in a hurricane and a poor mother with her child that lost her job and can no longer afford her rent to EDUCATION CAMPS

To be honest I would take a Bank robber or a murderer who has work skills and something that can help our economy over some mother whose only thing she ever contributed to society was an ever expanding population surplus. Honestly the mother would need the most help, who would turn down a chance at a free education? Especially a mother who had such poor decision making skills she couldnt keep a husband around to help out with the bills, or be bothered with learning a trade to provide for her own child. you raise a valid point about how children should be dealt with who are exposed to this type of parenting. The best solution is to remove the government from the picture in this case and let the private sector pitch in by allowing the children to become the wards of businesses instead of the state. This would allow the business owners to train the child in a skill and give them a place in the company to grow and expand their mind as well as their horizons.

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by tigpoppa

 

Have you ever donated just a few hours to work in a soup kitchen and talk with some of our millions of homeless people?

You have no comprehension of how many of these people got to where they are.

Whats more, your post promotes slave labor.

Many of these "homeless are vets, families that had one medical issue and or individuals that really belong in a home of sorts that Reagan shut down in the 80's.

These kinds of posts dont contribute tot he discussion. People like this want to keep the homeless on the streets and do as little as possible to help them jsut so they can pat themselves on the back at the end of the day. This kind of mentality of running a soup kitchen is what is contributing to the problem. We need a system in place to provide for them more then just a meal here and there. I care about my fellow citizens unlike the previous poster who thinks doing the minimum is enough to scrape by. These are people! They deserve a chance to contribute to our great society.

Originally posted by dashar
reply to post by guyopitz

 

and
reply to post by tigpoppa

Was you in charge of hitlers S.S.
i dont think you got a clue mate. Lots of homeless a very well educated and dont want to be a part of the system either because of some catatrophe in their life or kid dieing or family or war or whatever.
many are vets who will never serve the man again and are happy to have nothing .
it is his\her choice by putting him\her in a camp would probally make him kill himself.

you propose leaving them on the streets to die like the holocaust and call me a Nazi? I suggest you look in the mirror and remove the deaths heads on your collar since you want to condemn these people to death, many of whom have never committed a crime in their life. You make it sound like being homeless is some kind of vacation. NOONE wants to be homeless. To prove my point I suggest you go up to any homeless person with 40$ and ask them if they want it, they will say yes. My point is that giving them a reaason to wake up in the morning by working and giving them the ability to buy things would make their lives better. These are people who lost track of their own lives, and people like you are satisfied watching them die in the streets. Well I say NO MORE! NO MORE abandoning our fellow man and let them enter these "work camps" and get free training about life in america and being a true AMERICAN! Most vets are not "true" americans, they just joined the military because they had nothing else to offer society. Then when they leave the military their still as useless as when they joined. These life long slackers can finally be trained in how life works and how america works and how to be a fixture ina society and not just try to skate by on our welfare system. As I said earlier many people join the military which is a form of welfare simply because they ahve no job skills. Any john or jane doe can point a gun, it takes training to be a physicist or a astrobiologist. Its time we stop forgetting about these vets and start caring for them starting with camps and education free to all of them. Those who dont wish to participate can be placed into containment zones where they can fend for themsleves and not infect society any further with their hatred of the human race.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by tigpopp

[edit on 2-3-2010 by tigpoppa]

Liberalism arises from human self-pity, and causes us to think backward, so that instead of working toward a goal and liking ourselves for the attempt, we consider ourselves superior for reasons unrelated to reality, and this makes us neurotic.

The basic idea behind liberalism is that life is bad. Nature is bad, and life is bad, because they are scary. We the individuals could die at any minute. Even worse, we could screw up.

Liberalism is a counterattack by human beings against the cruel, cold, evil world. Since we have these big brains, and in them we keep track of the world in our holographic mind-maps, we can choose to edit the map instead of acting on reality. Why strive, when we can just say we did and go home?

The oldest form of this attitude is a kind of social non-aggression pact. It says that we all accept each other and ignore our deficiencies so we can keep the peace. It may be essential in really bad situations to have this type of social order; if all of your friends are morons, and you are one too, it's best not to compete for least moron status.

Liberalism takes this attitude to a new level. Instead of waiting for results, we assume that results prove we as individuals are good, and then whatever happens becomes officially Not Our Fault. You tried to vault a cop car on a motorbike and ended up in a coma? Probably a faulty bike wheel made by a large corporation with ties to Israel or worse, the Church.

Most of our human activity consists in establishing this Not Our Fault level. We do this by not talking about results, but how nice, moral and friendly we are.

This creates a large mob of people committed to denying reality and being useless because they pity themselves. They feel horrible about how evil life is, and how cute little bunnies get ripped apart by fast mean eagles. They start to idolize being useless and nice, instead of possibly mean -- but also smart. Because their thinking is already inverted, they quickly turn this into hating the smart because they could be evil.

When this hits a culture, it invents for itself a further justification -- it's progress, liberal thinking, big-mindedness, open-mindedness, whatever. That's all just advertising and is as sincere as the words of a prostitute or used-car salesperson. People of this mentality like to sabotage any order, authority or consensus as to what reality is, because that way they can hide behind the chaos. Anarchy, libertarianism, weird sex, postmodernism... these are all justifications, not positive and constructive reasons for living.

As part of this whacked-out backward logic, it's important to always champion the underdog. The underdog after all has suffered, and so knows things those of us in comfy homes with stable lives cannot. We didn't die on the cross -- they did. But all of that is the tail end of the backward thinking, with the real goal being this: if we accept the most screwed up people on earth, and with pity make them equal to us, then no matter how screwed-up we are, we should accept and like ourselves.

Chant it with me now: who's going to save us? The slums are going to save us! The sharecroppers will save us! The dropouts, the addicts and the insane! Let's accept everyone, so we can accept ourselves.

This is the psychology of liberalism, leftism, progressivism -- whatever you call it, the origin is crowdism, or the will of the mob to have it be Not Our Fault. Instead of simply fixing themselves, they're seeking external scapegoats and self-esteem builders. The scapegoats are the powerful (God, Kings, corporations, Nature) and the self-esteem builders consist of lifting up the underdogs, praising the neurotic, and of course liking themselves. Backward thinking means you start by liking yourself; you don't like yourself because of anything you've done, learned, conquered or achieved. It's the loser table at high school appointing themselves Fuehrer.

I don't want to boil it all down to money, but money reflects the degree of organization in our society. A sensible society thinks forward: it looks at reality, tries to understand it, and then sets reasonable goals and charges forward to accomplish them. A sick society thinks backward: it congratulates itself on being brilliant, and finds a reason why it is owed money by government or some other large scapegoat. The healthy society thrives and gets more organized; the sick society lapses into greater degrees of disorganization until its population breeds itself back into gibbons and flings poo at the camera.

I think I'd like being a liberal more -- but it's hard to turn my mind off to the consequences of my actions. Because, if you can get over the fact that life ain't fair and we all suffer, you can see this world as a mostly blank canvas in which great things can be constructed. But the liberal psychology turns its back on that, and from fear of it, hopes to destroy it.

Originally posted by concernedcitizan

It's very simple: a healthy society actively weeds out parasites and onlys offer social safety to healthy people who temporarily need it to move on, not to chronically poor, unemployed, criminal or otherwise dysfunctional individuals/families that don't contribute to society and resent those who can/do. Their nature is to take whatever they can and then run off to the next host. They need to be expelled from society. If they manage to survive on their own, fine. If they don't, who cares? We'll live a happier life without them.

>

- Margaret Thatcher

The basis of every totalitarian state is a belief in this fiction idea of "society" and that the "state" must be stronger by ridding itself of paracites:-

- In 1917, Lenin referred to the Middle Cllasses as "paracites".
- In the 1930's, Stalin referred to family farmers as "paracites" and sent them to labour camps.
- In the 1940's, Hitler referred to the Jews and gypsies as "paracites".
- In Rwanda, the Hutu referred to the Tutsi as "cockroaches".

The answer is always the same - mass killings.

Furthermore, even with liberal state intervention, a culture of dependency is built and the average Joe feels no reason to help his fellow man as the state will do that for him.

With the concept of "society" removed, one moves responsibility back to the individual and each of the homeless becomes a person again. It is a tough situation then for the homeless person, particularly if unemployed, but all efforts by individuals to assist will generally move him to a position of self-sufficiency at least whilst ensuring that the true criminals and those where they are through amorality end up where they should be, behind bars.

Originally posted by tigpoppa
These life long slackers can finally be trained in how life works and how america works and how to be a fixture ina society and not just try to skate by on our welfare system.

I understand your frustration with "slackers" and I agree with the other poster who feels liberalism helped bring about what we see today.

What you don't understand is that while the economy was going good the welfare system became a huge money making entity. It's original intent came second to the money that could be made. Now it's purpose is to justify a budget. Employees of the department want to keep just enough people in the system to keep the money flowing. It doesn't matter if some are slackers in fact the system seems to encourage it.

The medical industry has a huge hand in the welfare pot. The department employs vast numbers of people. Welfare is probably the biggest industry in this country.

So while liberals are for social services to a fault, it's the conservatives who find ways to make money off it. The system is full of welfare lifers. The taxpayers are sick enough of welfare how many of these new homeless are very much aware of this fact and won't even ask for help?

Please don't confuse the new homeless families with career welfare recipients. One comes from a family with a work ethic the other does not. The career welfare person is not homeless and probably lives better than most of us.

From what I've read it's school age homeless children that's on the rise. Imo this means it's been a recent development. If the children are in school now they must have had a home when they enrolled. I believe proof of residency must be provided for school enrollment. How many of these kids won't be able to attend school next year because they have no permanent address? If we don't send our kids to school we go to jail then social services steps in...... Instead of work camps we better start building orphanages for all the homeless kids. We're going back in time.

.
.
reply to post by Sean48


I bought a new fridge and placed an ad in the local paper offering the box it came in as a "cardboard-o-minium" for rent ..... Sadly there were no takers.....
.
.

Originally posted by dizziedame
I know this sounds unbelievable but every homeless person is not of good character.

Wow...

So every single homeless person out there is not of good character huh??

I guess you think they all deserve to be homeless?

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
So what ever happened to the phrase "Beggers can't be choosers"???


I guess now, by law, beggers can in fact be choosers.

Oh well...I'll still give them an extra apple if I have one.

It isn't the homeless that are usually complaining.

It is the elites doing much of it. They want to control everything and they use this as one of the excuses.

reply to post by Ratkiller


After I posted the youtube link I received a U2U that had me confused thinking I had linked the wrong vid. But I had just read about new DNA testing that shows most modern jews are not semites. I rechecked the vid and found that it was the perfect video considering the DNA proof.

Since the people claiming Isreal are not semites from that region, but rather Kazars, they are indeed the cause of a lot of problems in the world today. They have no valid claim to the land. Never really did, the US and UK gave it to them at the end of WWII without the minor technicality of ownership. That is rightfuly the Palistinians.

This is disturbing for many reasons, but mainly because it seems to tie a number of things together. The jews in the 1930's and 40's were blamed for much of Europes finacial woes because they were bankers and businessmen. As they have been for generations. That smacks of the Bilderbergers and the NWO. Someone has to finance it. And the original Rothschild was one of the Kazars that converted to judaism to placate the government at that time, this I read on a thread here at ATS but I can not remember the title, if anone comes across it let me know.

It seems this NWO idea is much older than I ever expected, I thought maybe 200 years. No, it seems much older.

I have found this whole thread totally vulgar, unecessary and nasty!
This is not just being homeless, this is about absolutely having nothing, apart from the clothes you stand up in.
I work with the homeless and have done for the past 15 years. Believe me i have met them all, from the over qualified Professors, teaterring on the edge of madness to the idle rich, who have lost it all through sheer greed and over endulgence. It's a mixed bag alright?
Work camps? whats that all about? Some people have some funny ideas?
Well take my advice, don't piss anyone off on the way up, cos you never know, you might meet them on the way down!