Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Homeless Blame Game in New York City

Posted 7 years ago on March 7, 2013, 7:32 p.m. EST by GirlFriday (17435)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

50,000 in New York City

Read more here

Increased 6% in Minnesota since 2009

Read more here



Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (23255) 7 years ago

That is heartbreaking.

"New York City's homeless population reached a record 50,000 reported individuals in January, and is indicative of a troubling national trend."

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago


[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 years ago

These are the people that fall off the rolls and NEVER get polled.

They are the lost voters.

They are the lost families.

They are the result of the ugliness of our underbelly.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago




[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

Same for me. With all my financial planning, having savings, investments and Social Security, I could be on the street in a matter of months if the economic system failed.

But you see, we’re not unique. Virtually everyone is just a few paychecks from homelessness. So I don’t feel sorry for myself. The way corporations and business in general operate today we’re all at risk.

My observation is there are two different types of homeless people. One group is the drunks, substance abusers, bums and mentally ill who will likely always be homeless regardless of the economy. Normally these are the ones seen panhandling on the street corner.

The second group I call “temporary” homeless. The folks who lost their job or ran out of money; and rely on food banks and community resources. Most of these people just hit a streak of bad luck and will eventually work their way out of homelessness. They work toward that goal.

The reality is we probably won’t be able to ever help the hard core homeless. But the temporary homeless can again become productive members of society with a little help.

[-] 1 points by analystwanabe99 (153) 7 years ago

The corporations figured out a way to lay off the aging baby boomers before their time and now they are continuing on to the next generation. We are all slaves to corporate america. Even the little we get from government goes to our corporate slave drivers. Thus this site . . . Sense the homeless got that way because their homes were forclosed on I wonder what the bankers would do if everyone or at least the 99% stopped paying their mortgage payments, insurance, and only bought groceries from coops or farmers or home gardeners, or farmer markets. What would happen if everyone one day decided to walk, bicycle, bus, or carpool to work from then on. What would the folks that sell gas do? There is much the 99% can do to disrupt the cash flowing to the 1% but we would have to be organized and syncronized all acting in unison like a hugh school of fish. That would stop the big fish from eating us. How can a mortgage company forclose on all or most of its contracts? And if they did who would buy their housing if we all swam together?

[-] 1 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

The type activism you propose would cause a depression. It may sound good on paper. But the reality is if you stop paying your mortgage you will lose your house. If you stop buying corporate goods millions of people would be out of work. I you stop buying gas they’d just sell it to the Chinese. To disrupt the cash flow would put hundreds of millions into poverty and on breadlines.

Besides, the ideas you propose won’t be accepted by the masses. The risk is too great. I submit we’re better off trying to change from within the system. Better politicians and better laws over time.

By the way, I'm one of those aging baby boomers of which you speak. One of the fortunate ones who was able to retire and get out of the rat race.

[-] 1 points by analystwanabe99 (153) 7 years ago

I know . . . your right. I just get pissed off and have to vent. It would be cool if everyone did come together on one day and stage an event just to get their attention. I don't know how big this movement is but Ill bet if everyone here enlisted just 3 friends to join in an event nation wide I bet it would be big enough to get the attention of the media.. Maybe it would be enough to get our elected representatives to come to this site and read what we are thinking and complaining about.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

Personally I’d like to see one or two specific items to be focused on. Such as maybe a day without gasoline or a day without shopping for anything corporate. Not enough to cause any damage, but enough to show corporations and the masses we can make a difference. We need more small triumphs so the populace will see we can do something. Just my two cents.

[-] 0 points by analystwanabe99 (153) 7 years ago

That's too general. They wouldn't even notice that. Maybe a day without cellphone use, or a day off work! How about a day off the internet!!!?? How bout weekly for a month? I would have to be something the big boys would notice. Something we do daily a lot.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

OMG, What if people found out they didn't really need cell phones or the Internet ;-) Actually that's a good idea. But the withdrawel woulld probably make the murder rate go up.

[-] 0 points by analystwanabe99 (153) 7 years ago

I'm game. Now all we need is a consensus and a date and some media announcements and were off to the races!!! Wouldn't it be fun just to see if it had an affect?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

You could get the mentally ill off the street.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

Agreed. It's worth the effort. I'm not sure what the law is, but I don't think you can institutionalize the mentally ill unless they’re a danger to others. You can’t force treatment on those who reject it. Still, we should make an effort.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

Well, it doesn't have to go backward but it cannot stay as it is. The group of people that are mentally ill seem to go around in a circle jerk. They can't function in society and then become homeless, they harm someone or act out and are arrested, they are found incompetent and released or wind up in prison but will be released. The amount of money that it is being paid could actually be much less if we did the right thing the first time around. But these are issues that no one wants to deal with unless and until someone gets hurt.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

Still, Until the they actually commit an offense they can’t be forced to do anything. Walking around talking to yourself and eating out of dumpsters isn’t criminal. I’m sure they often get arrested for small items, like peeing in public, being drunk in public, etc.. . Being arrested may be the nearest thing these folks ever get to treatment. At least a place to sleep, a hot meal and a shower helps.

Yes, the homeless mentally ill need treatment. But I doubt few will accept it without being institutionalized or forced to do so. But at that point we are talking about people’s rights to live as they please. The mentally ill have the same rights as everyone else.

I don’t see any major fix for this. As usual it’s a matter of resources and money. I think local community based assistance is the best we can hope for.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

Schizophrenics make up 6 % of your homeless population and 6% of the prison population. Ya, I'm thinking that we might want to think about institutionalization.

They wind up in prison because there is no place else for these people to go. Thus, the major fix is right there. You WILL spend the money--you WILL spend more money. It has simply been diverted into areas that people don't want to look at.

There is only one reason that this has not been taken care of. One.

A few jack offs haven't figured out how to exploit them for profit

[-] 2 points by Nader (74) 7 years ago

But do we force them to be institutionalized against their will?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

Uh.......if you have an individual with psychotic breaks and homicidal ideation that in calmer moments is defecating and smearing it on walls..............then I would say yes, against their will. If you have an individual that cannot function in society with violent tendencies then yes, against their will. Simply because someone has a mental illness is not enough.

Usually, but not always, you will find people that have a have a series of bizarre behavior that leads up to an event. People like to say, "Hey who dropped the ball?" The reality is that there may not be anything in place.

When we have mentally ill homeless people that are beaten or killed or mentally ill homeless people that are violent or even mentally ill people that cannot function in society with their primary caretakers having passed away or have become too old to care for them then there needs to be something in place. What we have right now serves the people profiting from the mental heath care system not the people needing the services. We need to change that. Society absolutely cannot return to the way it was but the present is not working out either.

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (331) 7 years ago

Not sure which is worse, mentality ill homeless or a return to life in the state institution system, which back when they existed was pretty bad, and one of the reasons that no one can be institutionalized without consent unless they present a clear danger to others. I agree that they need help, but, without their consent, not much one can do but continue to offer it.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago



[-] 1 points by Nader (74) 7 years ago

Well said.

[-] -1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

Well, thank you.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 years ago

Local, community assistance is exactly what (R)epelican'ts CUT out of the budgets decades ago.

To mention it as viable succor now, just seems to ignore the reality.


What do we do with those that suffer from pleonexia?

[-] -1 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

Sorry Shooz, you can’t lock’em up simply because you don’t like them. And I for one hope it never gets to the point where we can lock people up because we don’t like their thoughts.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 years ago

Lock 'em up was EXACTLY what the (R)epelican'ts did.

They cut funding, shut down cervices and waited.

Then they.............!

Threw 'em prison.

Cheaper than treating 'em, Just call them criminals.

It's against the law to be crazy and broke these days.

So yeah, you are pretty sorry, not to have noticed.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

Actually Shooz, it was the court who said we can’t institutionalize the mentally ill just because they have mental illness. The court opened the door a and the mentally ill walked straight into homelessness. And it’s both the (R)epelican'ts and the libtrads who are not funding treatment and assistance.

Not everything is a right or left issue.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 years ago

That might have been the case in your neck of the woods, but here it was all about (R)epelican't budget cuts.

Hell they even spent time and money on a smear campaign against mental health care workers.

Sound familiar?

It should if you've been paying attention to the (R)epelican't unions busting campaigns of the last few decades.

[-] 0 points by Narley (272) 7 years ago

Focus. The topic is mentally ill homelessness, not political affiliations. You seem to see a republican behind everything. Just not true.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 years ago

Oh, so what are the loving, compassionate (R)epelican'ts, that threw them into the street in the first place, planning to do about this?

Tax the rich to pay for their therapy? LOL

So what's the plan on treating neoplexia?