Democrats can't solve the issue of Homelessness

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah but I'm talking mainly about the addicts who are so far gone, they lost their homes as a result.

My solution is the same as I mentioned in a thread a long time ago here. Separate the drugged homeless from the genuine homeless.

The drugged ones can have a three strike policy. Police can urine test homeless people in the street. Three positive result for hard drugs and they get sent to a closed prison type building for two years to go cold turkey. Ideally these being on the outskirts of towns would be best and they're not allowed unvetted visitors. Old prisons that are about to be closed down would also be ideal.

It's pointless giving them a home when they have a vicious drug habit that can't be kicked unless they're shut off from the outside world and all potential drug sources for a lengthy period of time.

I think this is where people grossly underestimate the difficulty with a lot of homeless people. The worst take an astronomical amount of time and resources to deal with and I wouldn't be impartial to locking them all together by the hundred or thousands and carefully monitoring them in a way where it's cheap(er) and effective.

They're not regular people by a long, long stretch. Many have completely lost control of their own lives and it's wishful thinking to assume they won't obliterate yours if you give them the chance.

https://slate.com/business/2023/05/publ ... risis.html

Such people certainly do exist, but please stop talking about them as if they are the vast majority of homeless people.

They probably were the majority of homeless people back in the 1960's and early 1970's, when housing was cheap, but those days are long gone.

Unhoused people need HOUSING. What to do about drug addiction is a separate question.

Last edited by Mona Pereth on 23 May 2023, 6:02 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Excellent article. Thanks for posting it.

"Just Build the Homes: Public housing is ready to make a comeback" by Daniel Denvir and Yonah Freemark, Slate, May 22, 2023.

I assume the people who complain the most won't actually lay a single brick though.

It's often how it goes.

Brick-laying is usually done by construction workers. Are you saying that construction workers are the only people with a right to complain about the housing crisis? If so, why???

The housing crisis is primarily a political problem, requiring a political solution.

It's just that the people who have the most to say on the subject are usually the ones least experienced on that very subject.

The article is even called "Just build the homes" as if building hundreds of thousands of homes is straightforward, yet along housing a massive percentage of drug addicts and "unstables" in these new homes. They'll have to contend with tradesman shortages, building so many houses their product will likely drop in price before even finishing them, materials, strain on existing infrastructure, inflation rates, interest rates and these new homes being trashed (obviously) and so on.

It's similar to the attitude of climate change protestors assuming it's a political issue when in reality, outlawing the use of fire to any substantial scale is everything but.

Getting back to the subject of this thread, what do the Republicans propose to do about homelessness?

For an answer, let us turn to that most Republican of characters from the Victorian Era -- Ebeneezer Scrooge.

Charles Huffam Dickens wrote:

"At this festive season of the year, Mr. Scrooge," said the [one of the gentlemen], taking up a pen, "it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and Destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time.  Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."

"Are there no prisons?" asked Scrooge.

"Plenty of prisons," said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.

"And the Union workhouses?" demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"

"They are. Still," returned the gentleman, "I wish I could say they were not."

"The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?" said Scrooge.

"Both very busy, sir."

"Oh!  I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course," said Scrooge. "I'm very glad to hear it."

"Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude," returned the gentleman, "a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?"

"Nothing!" Scrooge replied.

"You wish to be anonymous?"

"I wish to be left alone," said Scrooge. "Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there."

"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."

"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."

I will hazard the opinion that the words attributed to Ebeneezer Scrooge express the very foundation of the Republican spirit toward the homeless.

Your opinions may vary.

People do. When my family was homeless, friends and family provided shelter to people. That being said, there is a difference between that and providing quarter to total strangers. Some of these homeless could be thieves, or drug fiends. Even if the homeless could be trusted there are several other reasons someone might opt out, their home might be messy or dirty and they might feel embarrassed, or there is a lack of privacy. Or there is only 1 bathroom and it is impractical to share a bathroom with a bunch of other people. Or a whole host of other reasons. Even with friends and family they usually wear out their welcome after half a year and they have to go "house hopping".

Hence why robots and UBI are necessary. They need to build specialty roach and bedbug proof homes for the homeless. This would have a side effect of benefiting the non-homeless also as future homes would become roach and bedbug proof. And there could be robot maids also cleaning the house. Its clear robots are necessary for this as humans typically keep saying "it cant be done" and acting like its too much effort to build these homes.

What you said seems to be a very ironic response.

Actually, the same political issues -- zoning laws and NIMBYism -- are a major barrier to both.

There would be a lot less car traffic, hence a lot less "use of fire" (i.e. internal combustion engines), as well as a lot fewer homeless people, if only many, many more people could live in apartment buildings in walkable mixed-use neighborhoods in densely populated cities with good public transportation.

Republican states are stricken with Fentanyl overdoses, Diabetes, Cirrhosis, CV disease (the Deep South is called the Stroke Belt for a reason) and quite a bit of homelessness even in non-urban communities where there have been no record rent increases, Gentrification etc.

Noticed the same here. Not as bad for sure but still noticeable.

Isn't that just going to push up the demand for city life even further than it already is? Secondly there has to be housing outside of cities. The only way to support densely populated cities is by having a massive support network outside of them to keep them ticking and these places are usually cheap to live in. A city will always need a huge supply of food, power, concrete, steel and water.

It's easy to fall into the trap of assuming everyone should live in a city but many people who do live in them fail to realise that the only reason a city exists is because people outside providing support to it. Sadly these people can sometimes be looked down on as part of "the problem" because they don't have as small a carbon footprint.

well please do help me understand in which ways the republicans are doing a better job at adressing this.