# Homeless



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

According to the video New Zealand (1%) has more homeless as a percentage of the total population than the USA (.2%). Canada (.1%) has about half the percentage of homeless as the US.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Home ownership in NZ is 63%
USA - 65%
Canada - 68%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate

China is 90%


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

I think many lessons in the video about income inequality in NZ applies in the US.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

One question this video caused me to ask was; Do cities where China invests in homes have higher homeless rates?


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

My small hometown never had a homeless problem (folks under the interstate bridges, beggars with signs standing near Walmart, and such).

Now they have modified a moderate size motel to accommodate homeless folks 'until they get on their feet'.

Guess what we now have: More homeless folks.

A good analogy: Years ago I put up a bird feeder and bought a sack of sunflower seeds. The birds that came to feed were cute and the wife and I enjoyed seeing them and we felt good because we were feeding the poor, hungry birds---birds that had hungry babies.

Soon we had more birds, and I put up another feeder, and I was buying more sunflower seeds. 

Then more birds came and I put up a third feeder and started buying large bags of sunflower seeds every week.

But some woodpeckers and sapsuckers didn't eat sunflower seeds. They needed suet; so I bought a suet cage and some suet for them and they loved it.

Then some deer and raccoons discovered the sunflower seeds and started coming. Well, they could eat more seeds than I wanted to buy; so we started feeding them store-bought sacks of dog food and table scraps.

So we got more deer and more raccoons and I started buying dog food faster. (The other night I counted 9 raccoons in the back yard eating.)

The squirrels also discovered the sunflower seeds and started eating them all day every day.

I finally had to put an electric fence charger on the bird feeders to keep the deer and raccoons (and an occasional possum and chipmunk) from eating the seeds.

I am now spending more money on animal food than on people food every week.

See how that works?

Demand for free, easy food (and shelter) will increase and it will eventually exceed whatever supply exists.


----------



## 101pigs (Sep 18, 2018)

NRA_guy said:


> My small hometown never had a homeless problem (folks under the interstate bridges, beggars with signs standing near Walmart, and such).
> 
> Now they have modified a moderate size motel to accommodate homeless folks 'until they get on their feet'.
> 
> ...


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

101 post outside the quote. We can't tell what you said, assuming you said something


----------



## 101pigs (Sep 18, 2018)

HDRider said:


> 101 post outside the quote. We can't tell what you said, assuming you said something


When i was a kid in St.Louis we had what was called a work house. The people raised most of the food they consumed. It was for small time lawbreakers and also some homeless people. Most of the homeless lived along side Mississippi river in South St. Louis. Most of them would do a bit of work for people that needed a bit of help. The bums that would not work were not allowed to live on the streets. A lot of them the police would take them to the city limits and tell them not to come back. A lot of big towns moved the homeless out of these places and opened places for them to eat and stay over night. Most had a job to do like help with the cooking etc. A lot of the homeless do not want to be in places where they have to follow rules and would rather live under bridges etc. and eat at churches and missions. All homeless and welfare people should be given a job to clean the streets etc.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

101pigs said:


> When i was a kid in St.Louis we had what was called a work house. The people raised most of the food they consumed. It was for small time lawbreakers and also some homeless people. Most of the homeless lived along side Mississippi river in South St. Louis. Most of them would do a bit of work for people that needed a bit of help. The bums that would not work were not allowed to live on the streets. A lot of them the police would take them to the city limits and tell them not to come back. A lot of big towns moved the homeless out of these places and opened places for them to eat and stay over night. Most had a job to do like help with the cooking etc. A lot of the homeless do not want to be in places where they have to follow rules and would rather live under bridges etc. and eat at churches and missions. All homeless and welfare people should be given a job to clean the streets etc.


Thanks


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

So far no one seems to get the point of the video. Did anyone watch the video?


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

101pigs said:


> A lot of the homeless do not want to be in places where they have to follow rules and would rather live under bridges etc. and eat at churches and missions.


I dont think any but hardcore hobo prefers living in dumpster or under a bridge. But soon as they find a hidey hole to put up a shanty, here comes city and bulldozes it and pushes them out onto streets again. Shelters are NOT private space, nor safe. It can be a dangerous "open ward barracks" type situation where if it isnt below zero, they are kicked out in morning and rejected at night if they smell of alcohol or get there after available space is filled. 

What is so hard about designating an area they can build a shack and it wont be torn down and hauled away along with their possessions so they continually have to start over. Hey we tore down the cheap flop house type places in name of gentrification, but forgot those served a vital function of providing place for the down and out. And back before that, at least in rural areas, the town looked other way if town drunk put up shanty out by town dump or some swamp land nobody wanted. At least back then they got it that its evil to force somebody to sleep rough on sidewalk or in doorway.


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

NRA_guy said:


> My small hometown never had a homeless problem (folks under the interstate bridges, beggars with signs standing near Walmart, and such).
> 
> Now they have modified a moderate size motel to accommodate homeless folks 'until they get on their feet'.
> 
> ...


You need a bear.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

HermitJohn said:


> I dont think any but hardcore hobo prefers living in dumpster or under a bridge. But soon as they find a hidey hole to put up a shanty, here comes city and bulldozes it and pushes them out onto streets again. Shelters are NOT private space, nor safe. It can be a dangerous "open ward barracks" type situation where if it isnt below zero, they are kicked out in morning and rejected at night if they smell of alcohol or get there after available space is filled.
> 
> What is so hard about designating an area they can build a shack and it wont be torn down and hauled away along with their possessions so they continually have to start over. Hey we tore down the cheap flop house type places in name of gentrification, but forgot those served a vital function of providing place for the down and out. And back before that, at least in rural areas, the town looked other way if town drunk put up shanty out by town dump or some swamp land nobody wanted. At least back then they got it that its evil to force somebody to sleep rough on sidewalk or in doorway.


Would they build it, put up their tent or cardboard box where they were told?

Many people simply cannot afford rent, or to buy a house. Costs have exceeded many's ability to pay.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

HDRider said:


> Would they build it, put up their tent or cardboard box where they were told?
> 
> Many people simply cannot afford rent, or to buy a house. Costs have exceeded many's ability to pay.


Give them a space where they wont be hassled, then yea they would build there. They try to find unused nooks and crannies, but city always comes and tears it down forcing them back onto the streets. Look at the big cities in South America. You get shanty towns surrounding them. The profit makers have tried to evict them for the land, but mostly they were entrenched enough they fought back, so left alone, some cities even put in water and sewers to control disease. And proper electric service to avoid catostrophic fires.

Look either societ pays for standard housing for poor or they allow space for the poor to do it themselves.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)




----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

HDRider said:


> One question this video caused me to ask was; Do cities where China invests in homes have higher homeless rates?


I think its more than just "China". We are seeing a second Gilded Age with concentration of wealth. That wealth is seeing residential properties as yet another money making asset to further their wealth. So money from outside a community comes and bids up property so locals in local economy can no longer afford it. Even when houses get built, they are houses that are most profitable, meaning those the poor cant begin to afford. Notice the unfinished "ghost houses" in the video? Houses nobody lives in cause there is no demand, cause those living in those cars simply cant afford them. Capitalism left to its own devices always tries to concentrate wealth and head towards monopoly with head gorilla hoarding all the bananas. In other words back to a "feudal" type society where everybody but the aristocracy (who own everything) is an indentured servant having to buy and rent from the aristocracy with their labor and thus their life energy.

Notice wealth isnt from being productive anymore, its from playing money games. Real life "Monopoly" game if you will. Accumulating the most bananas and become king of the hill.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Wolf mom said:


>


Over time and left unmolested people slowly improve, maybe finding better and more durable castoffs to upgrade their shanty. Look at the shanty town surrounding say Rio in Brazil. Upgrades happen, just like they do with the wealthy in their McMansions.

For example have you ever seen the pioneer log cabins and sod huts in this country? Many were very crude, using what was available since they had land but usually little money. Slowly they worked up in prosperity. Or moved to city for dreams of gold paving streets with the new high paying factory jobs. Nobody told them cost of living would not only eat up those amazing wages but put them in worse position....


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> *What is so hard about designating an area* they can build a shack and it wont be torn down and hauled away along with their possessions so they continually have to start over.


Have you volunteered to have them on your property?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Have you volunteered to have them on your property?


Reminiscent of Indians volunteering to host pioneers.


----------



## dmm1976 (Oct 29, 2013)

HermitJohn said:


> Over time and left unmolested people slowly improve, maybe finding better and more durable castoffs to upgrade their shanty. Look at the shanty town surrounding say Rio in Brazil. Upgrades happen, just like they do with the wealthy in their McMansions.
> 
> For example have you ever seen the pioneer log cabins and sod huts in this country? Many were very crude, using what was available since they had land but usually little money. Slowly they worked up in prosperity. Or moved to city for dreams of gold paving streets with the new high paying factory jobs. Nobody told them cost of living would not only eat up those amazing wages but put them in worse position....


Maybe over time it improves. But til then you have LA.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

dmm1976 said:


> Maybe over time it improves. But til then you have LA.


LA being a prime example of unaffordable housing.

Based on my readings and research, affordable housing is 2x annual salary.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

HDRider said:


> LA being a prime example of unaffordable housing.
> 
> Based on my readings and research, affordable housing is 2x annual salary.


Top three rules of real estate.... Location, location, location. If you can't afford housing in an area.... Relocate!
I didn't like being homeless. I secured a peice of property, accumulated materials on the cheap and built myself a place to live. I'm certainly nothing special, same two arms, two hands, two feet and legs just like everyone else.


----------



## dmm1976 (Oct 29, 2013)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Top three rules of real estate.... Location, location, location. If you can't afford housing in an area.... Relocate!
> I didn't like being homeless. I secured a peice of property, accumulated materials on the cheap and built myself a place to live. I'm certainly nothing special, same two arms, two hands, two feet and legs just like everyone else.


One of the reasons we left chicago and moved to SC. Our little 2 bedroom apt on the south side had higher rent then our mortgage (4 bed 3 bath) in the country. And we are much happier.


----------



## dmm1976 (Oct 29, 2013)

And the little house we rented in town before we got this place...it was only $400 a month.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

And don't discount the so-called "reservation mentality". Too many Americans nowadays are willing to live in squalor, or a run down tenement or Section 8 housing, survive on food stamps or community kitchens, and such if it takes no effort on their part---rather than exert the effort that is necessary to better themselves.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

HDRider said:


> So far no one seems to get the point of the video. Did anyone watch the video?


I did not.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Have you volunteered to have them on your property?


Only when I am elected mayor of Trumptown, they can come and live on front lawn of that big house with all the servants and the gold toilet.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

NRA_guy said:


> And don't discount the so-called "reservation mentality". Too many Americans nowadays are willing to live in squalor, or a run down tenement or Section 8 housing, survive on food stamps or community kitchens, and such if it takes no effort on their part---rather than exert the effort that is necessary to better themselves.


Maybe they are still waiting for their 40A and a mule that was promised to them? I mean its sad they didnt get their share of the spoils after the Indian Wars and divvying up all the stolen land..... thats the true American way after all. Now they just have to become CEO of a corporation to buy their $6M McMansion cause thats all that is being built. Illegal to build anything on the unsettled lands in cities anymore without lot expensive paperwork and inspections and paying the decendents of those that stole the land in first place. I mean fair is fair, finders keepers....


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> Only when I am elected mayor of Trumptown, they can come and live on front lawn of that big house with all the servants and the gold toilet.


So you're all for letting them have someone else's property, but not yours.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> So you're all for letting them have someone else's property, but not yours.


Typical "this needs to be fixed, by others!"  me? We (my Yvonne and I) provide affordable housing to several people. Young families, retirees, single moms.... Six homes worth, and one single guy in our own house.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> So you're all for letting them have someone else's property, but not yours.


As soon as you bow down before me and pledge fealty as your absolute king, pledging your life and treasure to follow me into battle, then yea verily I will solve your homeless problem for you. For then and only then is it my personal responsibility to solve the problems of this realm.

But until I am made absolute monarch of this land, I have no such power to solve your problems. Since it is a representative democracy at the moment, then it is the problem of your elected representatives to solve your social problems, not I, a mere citizen. It is upon YOU to plead your case to your elected representatives.

So are you ready to bow down and pledge fealty, to pledge your life and treasure to me as your new and absolute king? Do all here so consent? 

Seriously you needed to pay more attention in government class in school. But you have proved over and over in your posts that you are clueless how American government works.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> But until I am made absolute monarch of this land, I have no such power to solve your problems.


Then you shouldn't suggest that someone else should provide a place for them.



HermitJohn said:


> But you have proved over and over in your posts that you are clueless how American government works.


I'm not the one trying to give away something that doesn't belong to me.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Then you shouldn't suggest that someone else should provide a place for them.


I suggest OUR government provide a place for them, not an individual. YOu obviously are clueless that we have a government and IT is charged with such duties.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> I suggest OUR government provide a place for them, not an individual. YOu obviously are clueless that we have a government and IT is charged with such duties.


They already have "places" for them.
You want them to provide free land with no regulations.
You suggested the Govt should leave them alone.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They already have "places" for them.
> You want them to provide free land with no regulations.
> You suggested the Govt should leave them alone.


"They" already have "places" for "them". Care to elaborate? Where are these places? There are some private charities that offer a cot and a hot. No where near enough to meet demand. I do NOT see govt providing such where I live. So where are these "places". Local jails are already overflowing. Prisons? Prisons cost money, shall we double your taxes so we can put poor people in Super Max? Is that your answer? Or do you think people belong on sidewalks and under bridges? Is that their "place"???

You will have to be more specific than just "places".


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Waste of frickin time


----------



## geo in mi (Nov 14, 2008)

Don't know what it's like today, but back when I was more active, Habitat for Humanity had a pretty good model. The qualifiers:

Currently living in sub-standard housing...(as determined by a home visit)
Willingness to contribute sweat equity (work alongside the volunteers to build the house)
Ability to pay back a no interest mortgage (job, credit rating, debt to income level.)

There were income guidelines involved, and I don't remember them all, but they were determined by the gov poverty income levels and number of family members. A lot of people had to be turned down because of credit problems or court judgments. The interview process pretty well screened the "gamers" and the lazies. 

HfH houses were pretty basic; about a thousand square feet, usually three bedroom, one bath, no garage homes--stick construction …, and built to code, maybe even with some handicap features We preferred them to be in the city or village areas, so there would be city sewer and water, plus a greater likelihood of natural gas, and walking distances to amenities and schools. Habitat had a "no garage" policy, but I always tried to position the house so one could be added later on, once the owner got on her(usually) feet. I also tried to get a basement whenever possible, with coded egress so extra bedrooms could be built--more cheap square footage, more bang for the buck......

We tried to build and finance houses for about $60,000. That would make payments for mortgage and taxes about $300--$400 per month, as I recall, and the rest of the income could pay bills and utilities and other things, with good budgeting and discipline.

We didn't give homes away, but we gave a lot of ourselves in the process, and I really liked working in Habit for Humanity. If anyone on this forum is concerned about homelessness and wants to lend a hand, just Google Habitat for Humanity and see if it would fit you.

geo.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Juxtapose the cities with the highest number of homeless with this...

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — While the conditions of its street has drawn criticism, a new survey has found that San Francisco is actually the healthiest city in the United States when it comes to access to quality health care, parks to relax in, nutritional food to eat and the desire to stay fit.

WalletHub, which generally creates credit scores, turned its panel of experts attention to lifestyle choices by residents in more than 170 cities across the United States.

Each city was ranked according to health care access, green spaces, food choices and physical fitness options.

San Francisco got the highest scores of any city when it came to green spaces and food. It ranked No. 4 in fitness and No. 29th in health. Each of those ranks were given a score and when the numbers were crunched San Francisco came out with a top score of 73.99.

Seattle came in second at 70.62 while San Diego was third (70.01), Portland, Ore. fourth (65.66) and Washington, D.C. rounded out the top five with a score of 63.87.

Four other Bay Area cities were among the top 36 with Fremont coming in at No.18, San Jose No. 20, Oakland was 35 and Santa Rosa was 36th.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...san-francisco-the-healthiest-city-in-america/


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

This thread actually makes me wonder where the line is between the government's responsibility and individuals' responsibility.

For example is it the government's responsibility to provide a person:

Housing?
Food?
Medical care?
Education?
Police protection?
Fire protection?
Potable drinking water?
Transportation?
Phone service?
Internet service?

I.e., when did such needs/desires become rights and government responsibilities? FDR initiated much of it, and LBJ pushed it ahead with gusto.

I was raised to believe that the government's only responsibility is to provide the opportunity for folks to have such things---not to actually provide them to folks.

The main issue, of course, is who pays for it. In order to provide such things, the government must take resources from others and redistribute them based upon "need". And (like beauty) need is in the eyes of the beholder---or the politician who wants votes.

A second issue is what standards of each must the government provide. How good must government-furnished housing, food, medical care, education, etc., be? And to what extent does the government provide such things? 

The third issue is inclusion criteria and incrementalism. As soon as the government provides medical care for the truly needy, it finds folks who just barely don't meet the criteria; so it moves the line to cover the others. What starts out with good intention (e.g., providing emergency medical care for a poor child) evolves into providing things like sex change surgery for folks.

If that sounds like Karl Marx, it is: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> "They" already have "places" for "them". Care to elaborate?


There are shelters they can use.
They can get out of town and off the public sidewalks and parks.
They can get jobs like the vast majority of the world.
They can check in to hospitals and get help.



HermitJohn said:


> *You will have to be* more specific than just "places".


No, I really don't have to be, since I'll just get the same old replies no matter what I say.

We've already established your only "solution" is to give away something that doesn't belong to you. 

It's time to accept the fact no one "owes" them anything at all.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

HDRider said:


> LA being a prime example of unaffordable housing.
> 
> Based on my readings and research, affordable housing is 2x annual salary.


There is a direct link to cost of housing and number of homeless in an area. It's the number one cause if it IMO. Everyone always wants to talk about how alcohol and drugs are the main cause but I disagree. 

Housing prices go up and so does rent. An investor will want monthly rent to equal 1 percent of the price of the house. They can't even get that anymore on the west coast big cities the prices are so high.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

HermitJohn said:


> We are seeing a second Gilded Age with concentration of wealth.


IF we are, which is a big IF, it is likely a result of a small number of people creating wealth and a large number of people complaining about the people creating wealth instead of trying to create their own.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

NRA_guy said:


> For example is it the government's responsibility to provide a person:


Federal Government: 

Housing?: No
Food? No
Medical care? No
Education? No
Police protection? No (unless you include military)
Fire protection? No
Potable drinking water? No
Transportation? No
Phone service? No
Internet service? No

State/Local governments: 
Housing? No
Food? No
Medical care? No
Education? Yes
Police protection? Yes
Fire protection? Yes
Potable drinking water? provide access, yes. Pay for it? Depends on respective Constitutions
Transportation? Depends on respective Constitutions
Phone service? usually no, but, Depends on respective Constitutions
Internet service? usually no, but, Depends on respective Constitutions


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

HermitJohn said:


> As soon as you bow down before me and pledge fealty as your absolute king, pledging your life and treasure to follow me into battle, then yea verily I will solve your homeless problem for you. For then and only then is it my personal responsibility to solve the problems of this realm.
> 
> But until I am made absolute monarch of this land, I have no such power to solve your problems. Since it is a representative democracy at the moment, then it is the problem of your elected representatives to solve your social problems, not I, a mere citizen. It is upon YOU to plead your case to your elected representatives.
> 
> ...


Our American government is not responsible to provide anyone with a home, medical care, phone services, food or anything else of that nature. It's job is to protect the states from foreign invasion, protect our God given rights, run a post office and a few others so named in our constitution. (Article I section 8) They are prohibited doing anything beyond those few duties. (Amendment 10) Read our constitution. It's right there in black and white!


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

NRA_guy said:


> And don't discount the so-called "reservation mentality". Too many Americans nowadays are willing to live in squalor, or a run down tenement or Section 8 housing, survive on food stamps or community kitchens, and such if it takes no effort on their part---rather than exert the effort that is necessary to better themselves.


 “ too many”?
What’s the proper number?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> “ too many”?
> What’s the proper number?


Zero


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> There is a direct link to cost of housing and number of homeless in an area. It's the number one cause if it IMO. Everyone always wants to talk about how alcohol and drugs are the main cause but I disagree.
> 
> Housing prices go up and so does rent. An investor will want monthly rent to equal 1 percent of the price of the house. They can't even get that anymore on the west coast big cities the prices are so high.


That is the point I was trying to make using that NZ video. It explains and makes some great points as to why housing has got so expensive. I think those factors in NZ apply here, and I 'd say a lot of folks that own homes do not want to hear them.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Farmerga said:


> Federal Government:
> 
> Housing?: No
> Food? No
> ...


You can spout dogma all day long. It really does not matter. As long as government makes policies that have unintended, and unwanted, consequences, ideology has no place. 

There is a problem, and you thinking making a list of what government is not supposed to do does not help anyone, except maybe making you feel some type of self righteousness. 

The government caused these problems, so the government owes us all a way out. All of us can point out what is, and is not in the Constitution, but that does not negate government's effect on our lives.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Our American government is not responsible to provide anyone with a home, medical care, phone services, food or anything else of that nature. It's job is to protect the states from foreign invasion, protect our God given rights, run a post office and a few others so named in our constitution. (Article I section 8) They are prohibited doing anything beyond those few duties. (Amendment 10) Read our constitution. It's right there in black and white!


If the government's action caused the problem, and it does, then they owe a solution. Again, you are another self righteous one always thinking since you did IT, everyone can do IT. Actually sounds like your wife is the one that makes your life style possible.


----------



## Meinecke (Jun 30, 2017)

Housing costs are out of control...thats for sure...
May it be investor, property tax or greed driven...but my mom for example...68 on a 700 buck pension...without support she would never be able to have a dry place to sleep...the price of raising kids in this world i guess..wasted her life to family and not profit...and in NJ you cannot rent or own on 700 budget...so Section 8 would be the only way to survive, but that turns out to be more of a lottery thing than an alternative.
Living with the kids is also not possible...in-laws can be a challenge...


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

HDRider said:


> You can spout dogma all day long. It really does not matter. As long as government makes policies that have unintended, and unwanted, consequences, ideology has no place.
> 
> There is a problem, and you thinking making a list of what government is not supposed to do does not help anyone, except maybe making you feel some type of self righteousness.
> 
> The government caused these problems, so the government owes us all a way out. All of us can point out what is, and is not in the Constitution, but that does not negate government's effect on our lives.


Kinda the point of my post was that we should insist that government STOP making policies that have said consequences. That will go further to solve the problem that allowing them to further screw it up. The point is that government is incapable of fixing it.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Meinecke said:


> Living with the kids is also not possible


Why?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

HDRider said:


> If the government's action caused the problem, and it does, then they owe a solution. Again, you are another self righteous one always thinking since you did IT, everyone can do IT. Actually sounds like your wife is the one that makes your life style possible.


If a monkey gets hold of a gun and shoots a few people, do you depend on the monkey to do surgery on the victims?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Meinecke said:


> Housing costs are out of control...thats for sure...
> May it be investor, property tax or greed driven...but my mom for example...68 on a 700 buck pension...without support she would never be able to have a dry place to sleep...the price of raising kids in this world i guess..wasted her life to family and not profit...and in NJ you cannot rent or own on 700 budget...so Section 8 would be the only way to survive, but that turns out to be more of a lottery thing than an alternative.
> Living with the kids is also not possible...in-laws can be a challenge...


 Kinda sounds like your mom shouldn’t live in jersey.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

HDRider said:


> If the government's action caused the problem, and it does, then they owe a solution. Again, you are another self righteous one always thinking since you did IT, everyone can do IT. Actually sounds like your wife is the one that makes your life style possible.


My Yvonne plays a large part in making my lifestyle possible for sure. She helps me a lot. Sees to it that i have plenty of food prepared, clean clothes in the closet, makes sure I don't forget to take my meds and a zillion other things. I am very greatful for all the care she gives me. That being said her money is hers. Our home was well under construction when we met, (dec 2 2002) on property that I owned free and clear. Logs all up and roof on. I continued working on it for several years after we got together. We moved into it in 2008. I owned several rental properties at that time as well. My income pays the basic living expenses, hers pays for her "extras", goes into her retirement funds, and whatever else she wants to do with it. (Like buying her own warehouse that she leases to the company she works for) . She likes the late model cars, taking trips, buying goodies but she makes her own payments, and pays her own bills. I'm happy with my 89 ford truck and the 1990 Mercedes our son bought for us for Christmas. They both run great,up in good shape. I've also managed to purchase two more rentals and remodel them in the past two or three years out of my own pocket which now add to our income. I'm nothing special, certainly not "rich", nor am I self righteous. I'm conservative and live within my means. Millions more just like me in this country. The country could use more like us.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

It's been said before in this site, many times, but it bears repeating; THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT PROVIDE SERVICES TO ANYONE! 

The taxpayers put their money in a pool and the government distributes that money, supposedly at the direction of the taxpayers. Anyone who overlooks that is living in a fantasy world.

Now, since _we the people_ are providing funds for these services we should have more say in the matter but we don't. The oblivious majority vote for representatives who offer them something from the money pool (Obama phones, roads, health care, etc) without considering that money for those services comes from other peoples pockets.

In many cases, homeless shelters, food pantries and soup kitchens, are paid for through federal programs. Some are funded through private donations. 

Habitat is a great program, as far as it goes. A lot of people fall through the cracks since the recipient has to be employed and be able to pay on the loan. A lot of homeless people have no or poor credit and no job. If you don't have a physical address you are left out of a lot of govt programs and it's nearly impossible to get a job. In many states you can be required to have a bank account as a condition of employment. 

How many immigrants do you see begging on the street corners or set up in homeless camps or sleeping on sidewalks or lined up at food pantries? In most areas, immigrants are given more help and services than American citizens.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

HermitJohn said:


> I suggest OUR government provide a place for them, not an individual. YOu obviously are clueless that we have a government and IT is charged with such duties.


Actually IT isn't charged with such duties, and has no constitutional authority to assume such duties. Or the authority to pay or subsidize rent, or tuition. Not that doing something unlawful has ever stopped them, when it might help someone get reelected.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

muleskinner2 said:


> Actually IT isn't charged with such duties, and has no constitutional authority to assume such duties. Or the authority to pay or subsidize rent, or tuition. Not that doing something unlawful has ever stopped them, when it might help someone get reelected.


It usually stopped most of them prior to FDR and his shenanigans.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> It usually stopped most of them prior to FDR and his shenanigans.


Yep.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

HDRider said:


> the government owes us


Any idea or plan of action that starts with, the government owes us, isn't going to end well. The fact is nobody owes us anything. Many have come to expect something, but that doesn't mean it is owed.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

muleskinner2 said:


> Any idea or plan of action that starts with, the government owes us, isn't going to end well. The fact is nobody owes us anything. Many have come to expect something, but that doesn't mean it is owed.


I see it more as you broke it, you fix it


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

muleskinner2 said:


> Any idea or plan of action that starts with, the government owes us, isn't going to end well. The fact is nobody owes us anything. Many have come to expect something, but that doesn't mean it is owed.


I can't say I look at it like that. Shall we just watch the chaos continue, hoping the capitalist economy will straighten it out, or do we ask our local government to do something? I think asking government to fix the homeless problem isn't unreasonable (if not fix, at least do something constructive). That is why we have governments. 

I am quite happy to watch my property assets appreciate daily but, I cringe when I pass these RV packs along roads or read about how some parks in Vancouver have been turned into homeless campgrounds...we've had some miserably cold nights this winter. When I grew up, there was so little of this nonsense. Now, it is an epidemic. Vancouver has instituted foreign buyers tax etc., to offset the cost of building low income homes. I think that is reasonable. While I don't live in a castle, it sure is feeling that way with what is going on out there. 

The problem will not go away by itself. Besides, if we let it run its course, we all will be worse off.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

Danaus29 said:


> Now, since _we the people_ are providing funds for these services ...


I agree 100% with your entire post, but I would point out that it's going to be our children and grandchildren who bear the brunt of the government's abuse via deficit spending and inflation stemming from printing fiat dollars.

As the FRAM ad said, "You can pay me now or pay them later."

Eventually the US Ponzi scheme will get rejected by China. When they start quoting prices for exported goods in yuan (or renminbi or gold) rather than in US dollars, you will know that the end is near.

When they do that, the Chinese won't care if the US doubles the amount of dollars in circulation, it will just make our TVs and stuff that's made in China cost us twice as much.

Of course, that will trigger demands by US voters for the government to print dollars even faster.

And our TVs and stuff will just go up in price even more.

But there is an end. Every country that has gone down that path has crashed.

The death spiral actually started when the US politicians first gave the right to vote to non-taxpayers.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

melli said:


> I can't say I look at it like that. Shall we just watch the chaos continue, hoping the capitalist economy will straighten it out, or do we ask our local government to do something? I think asking government to fix the homeless problem isn't unreasonable (if not fix, at least do something constructive). That is why we have governments.
> 
> I am quite happy to watch my property assets appreciate daily but, I cringe when I pass these RV packs along roads or read about how some parks in Vancouver have been turned into homeless campgrounds...we've had some miserably cold nights this winter. When I grew up, there was so little of this nonsense. Now, it is an epidemic. Vancouver has instituted foreign buyers tax etc., to offset the cost of building low income homes. I think that is reasonable. While I don't live in a castle, it sure is feeling that way with what is going on out there.
> 
> The problem will not go away by itself. Besides, if we let it run its course, we all will be worse off.


I am not qualified to complain about the laws in Canada. In general it falls to the voters to vote for politicians who actually do more than tell a good story at election time. Politicians have learned the the attention span of the average voter is less than fifteen minutes, and they won't remember what you told them a week ago.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

HDRider said:


> I see it more as you broke it, you fix it


The problem is the ones who broke it aren't in office anymore and were never held accountable for what they did. The problem isn't with the government. The problem is the feeble minded weaklings in this country, who call themselves citizens. We vote for the biggest liar on the ballot. And when that doesn't work, we fall for the next line of BS that is put before us. And the whole time holding our hand out for something.

The politicians have learned that telling a good lie will get them elected or reelected faster than actually doing what is best for the country. Peace and prosperity and a chicken in every pot, is a pipe dream, and always has been. Yet every two or four years, depending on who we are voting for, we keep falling for it.


----------



## ticndig (Sep 7, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's time to accept the fact no one "owes" them anything at all.


 And that's the bottom line.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

As the saying goes, all politics is personal.

We all vote for whichever politician we feel will be the best for us personally---not necessarily the best for the country.

It's the "What will you do for me?" mentality.

The government should not be in the business of choosing winners and losers (the free market should fulfill that role), but it does.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

HermitJohn said:


> spoils after the Indian Wars and divvying up all the stolen land.


Yep, when the Euorpean came to north america he liked what he saw and he took it. And he killed anybody who got in his way. Just like the Indians did when they got here.

And the Mongols, and the Huns, the Goths, Picts, Francs, Romans, Spartans, Egyptians, Bedouin, Jews, Chinese, Masi, and the Zulu. It has been that way since the first to humans stood up on their hind legs and looked at each other. And that is how it is done today. If you don't think so, just go spend some time on Wall Street. Or modern day Communist China.

And if you step back and look at the big picture, it was a pretty good system. It kept people moving, thinking, inventing, changing, evolving, and most important of all it culled out the weaklings. Any species that doesn't cull it's weaklings won't last.

Today, there isn't any place left to go, so we sit and stew in our own filth. It's going to get worse, a whole lot worse.


----------



## gilberte (Sep 25, 2004)

Farmerga said:


> If a monkey gets hold of a gun and shoots a few people, do you depend on the monkey to do surgery on the victims?


 I hope I'm able to stop laughing before I have to go to the hospital.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

muleskinner2 said:


> Yep, when the Euorpean came to north america he liked what he saw and he took it. And he killed anybody who got in his way. Just like the Indians did when they got here.
> 
> And the Mongols, and the Huns, the Goths, Picts, Francs, Romans, Spartans, Egyptians, Bedouin, Jews, Chinese, Masi, and the Zulu. It has been that way since the first to humans stood up on their hind legs and looked at each other. And that is how it is done today. If you don't think so, just go spend some time on Wall Street. Or modern day Communist China.
> 
> ...


You might (might not) like the following book that is kind of related to that subject. I am only about 1/4 through it so far and it's pretty good, but I cannot testify about the remainder of it. It kind of reminds me of the "Bell Curve" book, but gets more into the evolution of liberals and conservatives.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

Books about politics don't interest me. They are someones opinion, about someones opinion.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

melli said:


> Shall we just watch the chaos continue, hoping the capitalist economy will straighten it out, or do we ask our local government to do something?


What about option 3? Do it yourself? If you see a problem that you are passionate about, link up with as many like minded folks as you can and fix said problem, at least in your immediate area. While a capitalist economy has pulled more people out of poverty than any other thing ever devised by the mind of man, there are going to be some who do not/cannot participate in said economy. Government can't do much of anything right, so, asking them to do such things only tends to make things worse. 



melli said:


> That is why we have governments.


 No, we have governments to keep us from raping/killing/pillaging from each other. Other than that, they should leave us alone.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

muleskinner2 said:


> And if you step back and look at the big picture, it was a pretty good system. It kept people moving, thinking, inventing, changing, evolving, and most important of all it culled out the weaklings. Any species that doesn't cull it's weaklings won't last.


 Not even close. 
Any society that valued might over right was quickly destroyed. 
It is the early adapters that’s have survived.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

AmericanStand said:


> Not even close.
> Any society that valued might over right was quickly destroyed.
> It is the early adapters that’s have survived.


The Aztecs and Mayans lasted for thousands of years. The Egyptians had a pretty good run as well. The Chinese were able to get by until the Communists took over. The Communists are still going strong in China now, and they butcher thousands of their own citizens every year.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

All of them would adapt new technology in a heart beat
Until Their enemies beat them to it.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Soo many misconceptions, soo little time and no one cares or takes action,....why bother to be honest.


Having worked with MANY homeless, people are under false pretenses as to the reasons and are offering a cure people threw away.


They look at most "Housed" up people are crazy drone rats...…..chasing a cheese ball they will never get.


They have dropped out on purpose, many with equitable skills,...they see no reason to toil for the man all their life to pass that money on to all the brokers who support the toilers quest.


You see them as wasting their lives and they see you as wasting yours...…….


In a free country the right to pursue whatever life style should be a given...……..we all have ideas of what the perfect life is, let each man live that life.


Do you think the "Homeless" pay off politicians to pass laws and funding or rally up a massive petition voter base.

Once you dig below the surface of misconceptions it is quite sickening really.

A bunch of self righteous people feel the need to make some one else conform to their idea of a perfect life......and who is going to pass up a free ride, when they go out of their way to give free money.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> They look at most "Housed" up people are crazy drone rats...…..chasing a cheese ball they will never get.
> 
> 
> They have dropped out on purpose, many with equitable skills,...they see no reason to toil for the man all their life to pass that money on to all the brokers who support the toilers quest.
> ...


They are not incorrect. It aint called "the rat race" for nothing. Its why I "homesteaded" long ago instead of racing rats. Alas that isnt an option for most anymore. There is no cheap land and what exists tends to require bunch hoop jumping to build anything. Meaning you are forced back in rat race in order to try and escape the rat race. 

Sleeping rough or in some dangerous overnight barracks situation wouldnt be my idea of freedom. But trying to find place to put up cabin without lot harassment and threat of it being torn down anytime day or night not easy. Oh there are very remote places, but then that requires more infrastructure to survive there and you are still at mercy of speculators wanting "recreational land". You choose that route and you arent going to walk down to corner store, you better already have experience to grow your own. Again not realistic for city folk and darn few country folk. Still scratch my head when they run stories of farmer with land and water, that somehow is on food stamps. I assume even farmers cant garden or raise few chickens anymore, they are too specialized. Not an easy age if you dont want to race the rats.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Food stamps eligibility is determined by income, not by a persons capacity to raise crops. They can be used to purchase food the farmer can't grow.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Danaus29 said:


> Food stamps eligibility is determined by income, not by a persons capacity to raise crops. They can be used to purchase food the farmer can't grow.


Not arguing legality, just fact this is a FARMER. He has LAND, and WATER. But apparently not the ability to raise any of his own food? This doesnt seem bit odd to you?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I grew up in farm country and, yes, I knew people like that. One rented part of our acreage. No garden, no livestock, just a very small stocked pond.

Farmers are not necessarily gardeners. Many of the more self sufficient ones I knew did not raise gardens at all. The garden and food crops were tended by their wives and children.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

I have read that many homeless folks (such as those in Seattle) are drug users. 

I wonder how they can afford drugs. 

Pretty good information on the subject:

https://www.addictioncenter.com/addiction/homelessness/

-----------------------
*The Connection Between Homelessness and Addiction*

In 2017, there were approximately 554,000 homeless people in the United States. The US homeless population is increasing yearly, particularly in younger age ranges. Tragically, homelessness and addiction go hand in hand. The end result of homelessness is often substance abuse, and substance abuse often contributes to homelessness. The National Coalition for the Homeless has found that 38% of homeless people are alcohol dependent, and 26% are dependent on other harmful chemicals.
----------------------

Has the "Seattle is Dying" video been posted lately?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Not even close.
> Any society that valued might over right was quickly destroyed.
> It is the early adapters that’s have survived.


The USA seems to still be perking right along.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

We are the worlds leading early adapter.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Right. How large is our military?


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The USA seems to still be perking right along.


But going downhill pretty fast (depending upon who you ask).

Copied:
------------------------------
_In 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations progressed through the following sequence:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage "_

----------------------------------------
I figure the US is around stage 6 or 7.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

Just imagine how crowded it would be if we didn't have a good war every ten or fifteen years. And kill off a few thousand of our best and brightest.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

That’s pretty apathetic!


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

NRA_guy said:


> 1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
> 2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
> 3. From courage to liberty;
> 4. From liberty to abundance;
> ...


So, we are at about 9.5? We are fast becoming a third world country, the paint just hasn't faded yet.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Right. How large is our military?


Why ?
It’s not compromised of the biggest and strongest. 
We don’t cull the weak, we let them invent the things that win wars.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

NRA_guy said:


> But going downhill pretty fast (depending upon who you ask).
> 
> Copied:
> ------------------------------
> ...


Prolly why our founders avoided a democracy when they constructed our republic. A pity so many insist upon converting to democracy. They have managed to get a taste of the "free stuff" now. Going to be hard to put the lid back on that box! "The rise and fall of the USA... Thanks to FDR" will be popular reading a thousand years down the road.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

AmericanStand said:


> Why ?
> It’s not compromised of the biggest and strongest.
> We don’t cull the weak, we let them invent the things that win wars.


The idea remains the same... Might makes right. The guy with the biggest stick etc.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

Interesting and relevant news report out of New York City about homeless in Grand Central Terminal:

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2020/02/13/grand-central-terminal-business-owners-homeless/

Be sure to read the comments below the article.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> The idea remains the same... Might makes right. The guy with the biggest stick etc.


I was responding to the culling of the weak.






muleskinner2 said:


> And if you step back and look at the big picture, it was a pretty good system. It kept people moving, thinking, inventing, changing, evolving, and most important of all it culled out the weaklings. Any species that doesn't cull it's weaklings won't last.





muleskinner2 said:


> Just imagine how crowded it would be if we didn't have a good war every ten or fifteen years. And kill off a few thousand of our best and brightest.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

muleskinner2 said:


> Yep, when the Euorpean came to north america he liked what he saw and he took it. And he killed anybody who got in his way. Just like the Indians did when they got here.
> 
> And the Mongols, and the Huns, the Goths, Picts, Francs, Romans, Spartans, Egyptians, Bedouin, Jews, Chinese, Masi, and the Zulu. It has been that way since the first to humans stood up on their hind legs and looked at each other. And that is how it is done today. If you don't think so, just go spend some time on Wall Street. Or modern day Communist China.
> 
> ...


Such a rosy outlook. What you are describing is Darwinism. We are still doing it. Just isn't as obvious. We try to raise our offspring to be the best, be successful, be better than us. The best usually succeed.
In the past, most of us were middle class, once we brought down the cartels. Now, we are competing against developing world folks, which is hallowing out our middle class. Globalism, they call it. 
The only way to stay above the fray is to give our youngins the best education, the best start possible, but we've just made them serfs to student loan debt. And our educational system is producing drones, not worker bees. 
Now, we are scraping over the resources left, which is dwindling. 
I think the filth was always there. It was just easier back then to survive. Low to middle economic classes could survive on menial jobs, even own a home. In my hood, if you don't own a home, you are screwed. Even a good paying job will not get you into the housing market. Myself, I'm thinking about a big fence and gate.


----------



## melli (May 7, 2016)

Farmerga said:


> What about option 3? Do it yourself? If you see a problem that you are passionate about, link up with as many like minded folks as you can and fix said problem, at least in your immediate area. While a capitalist economy has pulled more people out of poverty than any other thing ever devised by the mind of man, there are going to be some who do not/cannot participate in said economy. Government can't do much of anything right, so, asking them to do such things only tends to make things worse.
> 
> No, we have governments to keep us from raping/killing/pillaging from each other. Other than that, they should leave us alone.


I agree with you to a point. Government has a way with contorting, even the easiest solutions. 
As for policing, they are not very good at that either...more of a clean-up crew.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

HermitJohn said:


> But *apparently not the ability* to raise any of his own food? This doesnt seem bit odd to you?


It doesn't seem odd because you're not being realistic.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

HermitJohn said:


> Not arguing legality, just fact this is a FARMER. He has LAND, and WATER. But apparently not the ability to raise any of his own food? This doesnt seem bit odd to you?


 Sure he can raise some but what amount of his own product should A horseradish farmer be expected to consume ?


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

AmericanStand said:


> Sure he can raise some but what amount of his own product should A horseradish farmer be expected to consume ?


Lets see, he goes down to local Walmart and buys some 10cent packets of seed for something other than horseradish. If 100% of his farm is planted to horseradish, he plows small patch of it under and plants the seeds he bought. Terribly difficult. If he is clueless to growing anything but horseradish, then guess he should get used to living on horseradish or perhaps get a library card. If he cant read, then guess he is just out of luck.

Little different than somebody living in city that at best has tiny patio/balcony. You arent going to raise much beyond a small tomato in flowerpot and maybe few herbs. Thats if your patio gets significant sun.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It doesn't seem odd because you're not being realistic.


Ok, HOW am I not being realistic? Its way small farmers have done for generations upon generations. They didnt limit themselves to growing crops for sale, then purchase their food. Why is it unrealistic NOW? Most families could grow ALL veggies for the year on an acre or less. Significant amount summer veggies on whole lot less. Its amazing what you can grow in a 16ftx16ft spot. Just go out and work in garden instead of watching tv... LOL


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

I had five brothers and three sisters. And in-laws and their kids coming over to eat two or three times a week. My mother grew all of our vegetables in a patch less than one hundred feet square. And canned enough to last all winter.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Generally speaking the large farms specializing in one crop require little hard physical labor. It’s just not needed and time is to precious for such large jobs. 

Planting, processing, storing, their own food supply very likely requires skills they do not have and involves work they are not the least bit interested in.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Redlands Okie said:


> Generally speaking the large farms specializing in one crop require little hard physical labor. It’s just not needed and time is to precious for such large jobs.
> 
> Planting, processing, storing, their own food supply very likely requires skills they do not have and involves work they are not the least bit interested in.


I have known many large operation farmers. Grew up with quite a few. The term "farmer" in this age would not be an accurate description of what they are.
Almost all of them bought their food at the store.
I knew one who had 1700 acres of corn and beans. He worked round the clock for several weeks during spring and fall.
He had 3 chickens and a row of tomatoes growing behind his kitchen.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

NRA_guy said:


> But going downhill pretty fast (depending upon who you ask).
> 
> Copied:
> ------------------------------
> ...


We are well into 8


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I raised nearly 200 pounds of veggies in 4 apartment windows one year the key was to hang vines out the window. 
The guy under me got cukes ,tomatoes Zucchini and a pumpkin 
The guy under him got a cucumber, and a tomato with a rig like a apple picker we put together just so he could say he did it.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Aspen’s housing authorities aim to put _half_ of the workers who are locally employed into subsidized housing of one kind or another. 

_Half_. Teachers and police officers and hotel staff—but also CEOs, lawyers, and business owners. 

The bus stops in front of a house that is for sale—not a time-share or a condo but an honest-to-goodness free-standing house, albeit a two-bedroom, one-bath affair that is less than 1,000 square feet. It is listed at . . . _$3 million_, making it one of the cheapest houses on the market in Aspen. The houses for sale within a few blocks range from $6 million to $31.5 million. One-bedroom condos commonly command a million bucks.

Aspen is an extreme example—maybe the most extreme example the United States has to offer—but the phenomenon is pretty much the same from coast to coast. Like the Bay Area and New York City

https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2020/03/09/in-aspen-billionaires-and-baristas/


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

NRA_guy said:


> I am now spending more money on animal food than on people food every week.
> 
> See how that works?


Reminds me of the story of the guy that won the lottery.
To be nice, he went around the neighborhood and gave everyone $100. A month latter he did it again, to be nice. The next month he handed out another $100 to each neighbor. 
But the following month, nothing. 

The whole neighborhood was angry because they were depending on their $100 and he had shirked his duty but with holding it. 

During the Great Depression, men traveled about, often aboard a box car, seeking work. The pressure was on. Just a couple days without work, one might starve. Plus many had families that needed money to survive. There was no safety net. There was no "getting on your feet" . Even after two major world wars, there was no help with PTSD. Tough up or die. Many died, far more toughed up.

In my community's facebook page, a woman reached out for help. She'll soon be a mom, her and her fiance are moving into a home, but don't have any thing to furnish it and no money to buy anything. I thought, "Poor choices result in hard lives."? What do I know? Seems there are numerous charities and individuals willing to furnish their new home. I guess bean bag chairs, wooden crate end tables and mattress on the floor, is too Boomer.

Around Thanksgiving, a guy, recently returned from California, was seeking free food, "Where can I go to get free food? as the story evolves, he's filled his calendar with free meals, breakfasts, lunch and dinners, but had three gaps in his schedule. You gotta be kidding me! So when people complain that their food stamps only buy $300 a month, remember, they can eat for free if they pay attention, leaving the government food money for barter.

On cold nights, hundreds of warm blankets are passed out to the homeless of Toronto. No doubt most major cities do this. 

I was in a major city in North Carolina. About a hundred homeless were milling around the town square/park. They were openly grousing about the Church volunteers running late with THEIR meal.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

HDRider said:


> Aspen’s housing authorities aim to put _half_ of the workers who are locally employed into subsidized housing of one kind or another.
> 
> _Half_. Teachers and police officers and hotel staff—but also CEOs, lawyers, and business owners.
> 
> ...


It is the same here in Jackson. New Development s have to build a certain amount of subsidized housing to get an okay.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

painterswife said:


> It is the same here in Jackson. New Development s have to build a certain amount of subsidized housing to get an okay.


As much as I failed, that was the point of this thread. Housing is being priced out of range for a lot of my generation, and the younger generation. Sometimes that turns into homelessness, or, hopelessness.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I think the reason The reason the public has been needed in places like Prospect is the wealthy don’t want to it that they don’t pay their health enough to live where they work. The reason the public has been needed in places like Prospect is the wealthy don’t want to it that they don’t pay their health enough to live where they work 
By letting government subsidize the lifestyles of the rich by providing housing for that poor in places like Aspen fool themselves about living on welfare.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

HDRider said:


> Aspen’s housing authorities aim to put _half_ of the workers who are locally employed into subsidized housing of one kind or another.
> 
> _Half_. Teachers and police officers and hotel staff—but also CEOs, lawyers, and business owners.
> 
> ...


I once went to a doctor for hernia surgery. He told me 15k for a 30 minute deal. I told him no. 

2 years later he needed a new front door. I told him 6k for an hour deal. He told me no also. He remembered me though and says something about it every time he sees me lol. We laugh about it.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> I once went to a doctor for hernia surgery. He told me 15k for a 30 minute deal. I told him no.
> 
> 2 years later he needed a new front door. I told him 6k for an hour deal. He told me no also. He remembered me though and says something about it every time he sees me lol. We laugh about it.


He was higher than you over 400%. Greedy bastard


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

HDRider said:


> He was higher than you over 400%. Greedy bastard


IKR?


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

First cleanup.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Danaus29 said:


> It's been said before in this site, many times, but it bears repeating; THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT PROVIDE SERVICES TO ANYONE!
> 
> The taxpayers put their money in a pool and the government distributes that money, supposedly at the direction of the taxpayers. Anyone who overlooks that is living in a fantasy world.
> 
> ...


I think most immigrants grab any work available and pay their own way. At least that's what I see in my area.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Here there are several organizations including Job and Family services that bend over backwards just to help immigrants. Sure, immigrants will take any job available. I don't know if most homeless people would. The point I was trying to make is that many organizations exist only to help immigrants while homeless Americans do not have the benefit of such services.

I've seen many people holding "will work for food" signs and I would love to have them do some of the odd jobs I need done. The problem is that you hear so many stories about people using that ploy to case houses to rob. I don't have that much crap worth stealing but the experience with my van has shown me that some people will steal anything.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Danaus29 said:


> Here there are several organizations including Job and Family services that bend over backwards just to help immigrants. Sure, immigrants will take any job available. I don't know if most homeless people would. The point I was trying to make is that many organizations exist only to help immigrants while homeless Americans do not have the benefit of such services.
> 
> I've seen many people holding "will work for food" signs and I would love to have them do some of the odd jobs I need done. The problem is that you hear so many stories about people using that ploy to case houses to rob. I don't have that much crap worth stealing but the experience with my van has shown me that some people will steal anything.


I dunno how many exactly but we have plenty of people in government positions being paid to keep people dependent upon government services.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Yes, and no one to help those dependants stand on their own two feet. The system is designed to keep them down.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Danaus29 said:


> Yes, and no one to help those dependants stand on their own two feet. The system is designed to keep them down.


The helping hands that I found the most useful are attached to my arms.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

When you have people on the dole, who know nothing about life except being on the dole, they might benefit from some guidance as to how to get off the dole. When you have 3rd generation welfare recipients you have a problem.

Some people need a bit of help. It's easy to get lost in the system and just keep sinking. It's easy to tell someone to swim, but if they don't know how they just sink.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Danaus29 said:


> When you have people on the dole, who know nothing about life except being on the dole, they might benefit from some guidance as to how to get off the dole. When you have 3rd generation welfare recipients you have a problem.
> 
> Some people need a bit of help. It's easy to get lost in the system and just keep sinking. It's easy to tell someone to swim, but if they don't know how they just sink.


Row that boat to shore. Stop filling it with goodies. They will learn quickly to take care of themselves.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> Yes, and no one to help those dependants stand on their own two feet.


I don't think that's accurate.
There is lots of help available for those willing to make an effort.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I don't think that's accurate.
> There is lots of help available for those willing to make an effort.


Not quite as much as you want to believe. I know people who have been through it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> *Not quite as much* as you want to believe. *I know people who have been through it*.


That's different from this:



> Danaus29 said: ↑
> Yes, and *no one to help* those dependants stand on their own two feet.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Danaus29 said:


> Not quite as much as you want to believe. I know people who have been through it.


I've been there. Lots of people were quite willing to help me. Amazing how many were willing to let my hands do stuff they didn't care much to do or when they had more to get done than their own hands could accomplish alone. Things like thawing water lines under their houses in sub zero temps. Stuffing barn lofts with hay bales in 100 degree temps. Pulling thousands of tobacco leaves from the stalks, tying them into neat little bundles preparing them for sale day. Standing around, getting in the way? Not so many.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's different from this:


Nitpicking again. 
The only help the people I know got was from individuals, not the govt. You have to stumble across people who are willing to take a risk. Those willing to lend a hand are not as numerous as those who want and need help.

Quite different from a government program designed to help people get off the public dole and manage on their own.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Danaus29 said:


> Nitpicking again.
> The only help the people I know got was from individuals, not the govt. You have to stumble across people who are willing to take a risk. Those willing to lend a hand are not as numerous as those who want and need help.
> 
> Quite different from a government program designed to help people get off the public dole and manage on their own.


True. People do need to take advantage of the many opportunities offered, but when it gets down to the nitty gritty they need to get off their duffs and go find the work.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> Nitpicking again.


Nope, just going by what you actually said.



Danaus29 said:


> The only help the people I know got was from individuals, not the govt.


That still doesn't mean there is no other help available.


----------

