Designs to drive away the homeless

Duplicate post.

 

Did you post that in this thread for any actual REASON?

 

The 16th and 17th amendments prevent that from happening.

 

I have a friend who I met while serving in the USAF who worked for NASA and when NASA cut jobs he returned to Idaho, his home State, and lived in the forest for over a year before returning to work as a forest ranger, and at a much lower wage.

 

The occupants are voters, so it pays to locate them near government facilities for easy access.

 

Rather than incriminating the homeless, why hasn't the state decided to pack up and relocate the entire non homeless population elsewhere so the homeless can get some peace for themselves?

 

There are a number of communes where they could be transported to.

 

How about a Federal law requiring each State to set aside a sizable amount of fertile land to be occupied and governed autonomously by its occupants. They would remain citizens, counted by the census, but only be allowed to vote in local elections. In addition they would be taxed relative to, and in full for the costs of any services they required but were unable to provide on their own.

 

Rather than subsidizing, purchase an entire ghost city or town.

www.youtube.com/results?q=ghost%20towns%20for%20sell&sm=3


They can even have their own mayor and work businesses. They can become their own store owners, teachers, school superintendents, fire and police.... it can be their own town which they would be responsible for as far as taxes and state laws. They would have to deal with the larger city to have running water and power to operate in the town. And on top of that, they can do the hiring for anyone who would be seeking employment in any of that town's offices.

 

Detroit?

 

Running Water and power ?
Well water and gravity feed, lakes, wind power, water power, solar electric, I build sustainable systems.

You can do it all without a larger cities help.
Grow food etc....

 

That's not completely true. I know three men that were forced to live in their vehicles because their whole check was spend on child support and alimony. All of them had jobs and all of them were left homeless (for doing the right thing by their children and ex-spouse). None of them were chemically dependent or "bums" by any stretch of the imagination.

 

1) Were they forced to divorce?
2) Were they forced to marry someone who was likely to cause problems in the marriage?
3) Were they forced to dismantle strong ties with their relatives, who could have given them a home in such situations?

 

1. All 3 were cheated on and the respective spouses kicked them out or made it impossible for them to stay.
2. It's impossible to know who will be a problem in the FUTURE. We would ALL do something different if we had crystal balls.
3. Two of them came from very abusive families and couldn't rely on them for help. The third did not have living relatives.

 

Oh please, you're putting excessive blame on the man. I don't think your expectations on men are always going to be realistic in these type of situations.

It's true personal responsibility is important, but there does come a point where it's not fair to keep blaming the individual.
A person is not always the complete and total master of their circumstances.
It's a mixed bag though.

And it's a good thing they left, because statistically false domestic abuse allegations are most likely to hit men when their woman is moody and wants him out of the house but he won't leave.

To be completely fair to Crank, some men really should know better, but it's probably also true that if every man took that advice, 40% of women would be left living on their own.

Anyway these days, a lot of people can't afford to live on their own, so it just makes sense for the men to partner up with their woman to cohabit the home.

also see related post:
This is what child support can do to you

 

1) Were they forced to marry someone that flakey?
2) WRONG. It's incredibly easy to spot bad eggs (they announce themselves loud and clear, always), and even easier to fail to even consider that stuff. It's all choices.
3) So why didn't they build solid 'family' type relationships with responsible and loyal friends, who could have helped in this situation?

 

OK.

 

1) It has nothing to do with gender. I put the same blame on women who, via lazy or impulsive choices, **** themselves over.

2) It's absolutely fair (in fact it's unfair to do otherwise) to blame the individual. We're all capable of making better choices, and practising the self-discipline that always goes with that. The only exceptions are minors, the very aged, and the disabled.

3) People strike problems when they insist on living alone, but can't actually afford to do so. Families need to stick together. If you're not rich, and aren't likely to ever be, you have no business having anything but a solid and reliable family network. No family? Do the same with your solid and reliable friends. It doesn't take luck, or privilege, or good looks .. to be solid and reliable. It just takes full acceptance of your limited financial means, and the careful (ie, good behaviour and sensible choices) approach that that necessitates.

 

Not everyone is lucky enough to have such a family.
In other cases, reliance on family can lead to strain on those relationships, sometimes even lead to fights.
Roommates can be luck of the draw as well. For some people it's too difficult waiting long enough until a roommate who seems to be a really good match comes along. If you pick the wrong roommate, it can lead to financial struggle, eviction, or even homelessness (a subject just a little too complicated to go into here).

Any choice, in this type of situation, could carry potential downsides and risk. So it sort of seems like a potential "damned if you do, damned if you don't" sort of situation. Or it can be for some people in many situations.

 

Unless he shares a rich widow or heiress, any man that gets married should have his head examined.

 

1. Have you NEVER made a mistake by thinking someone was one way and they turned out to be another?

2. No, it's not easy to spot a bad egg. That's why con artists are successful.

3. Would you be willing to house and feed someone INDEFINITELY (which could takes months or even years if they are waiting on their divorce case to get before a judge)?

 

This is absolutely ridiculous.

 

I don't believe any of that. How our social circles are first chosen, then maintained, is all a matter of choice. If we don't choose reliable, responsible, stable friends, then it's our own fault if they fail us later on. Or if we have great friends, but abuse their friendship ... again, it's our own fault. Even a functional and harmonious family is a matter of choice. Well adjusted and responsible adults don't allow relationships to decay to the point of 'fights' which go so far beyond the norm that they result in loss of cohabitation.

There is always risk in relationships, but they should only be risks beyond our control. Death, disaster, etc. Anything we create ourselves is a choice, and not a risk.

 

That you think it's ridiculous, shows how dysfunctional so much of First World society is. And shows exactly why homelessness is rampant.

 

1) Yes, plenty. But not when it comes to the people I chose to have in my life (friends). Haven't had a single one turn out to be dysfunctional/ unstable yet.

2) It's very easy. It's in everything they say and do, and how they live. Are they in a stable (first) marriage? Do they own their own home by age 40? Do they avoid alcohol/drugs/tobacco abuse? Do they have good stable relationships with their relatives? Do they have a work ethic? Etc.

3) I AM always willing to feed and house a loved one or good friend indefinitely. Have done so multiple times. As long their situation is not a consequence of their own poor choices, of course (spent all their money on fun, or gambling, or living beyond their means, etc). It goes without saying that they must also be responsible, hard working, clean living, stable, and well adjusted. Then again, what person in need is NOT going to be those things, and still expect anyone to help them .. LOL