Posted on 05/06/2005 5:49:32 AM PDT by marylandrepub1
So, have they increased it or slashed it? Kind of confusing here.
We should have affordable housing - with some conditions. No drugs, No alcohol, the tenant must work and keep his place clean. He/she can not lay up and make babies. No loud parties, No loud music, No profanity - these are the conditions - you don't like it or can't comply - die on the street.
Exactly. I grew up in a very poor household, though Mom and Dad had good work ethics. They married as teens but kept working their way up. We kids paid for our own education while working.
Some do not want help or have been let out on the streets from mental institutions. The mental cases need to be rounded up and re-institutionalized. Spend those housing vouchers on their mental care instead.
Those that don't have jobs .....can get a fair wage becoming caregivers for the mental cases. :)
freedom means, in part, the freedom to fail.
the freedom to fail includes the freedom to fail totally and take the full set of lumps.
I am not at all convinced that the government can alter the tail end of the equation without altering the head.
In other words, I don't think the government can sheild the indolent, the unwise, and the unlucky from consequences without simultaneously infringing upon the totality of freedom for us all.
Live Free or Die.
Be assured the author of this piece is absolutely dedicated to helping the homeless in every possible way. With your and my tax money...
Yeah, maybe.
When I practiced law, I volunteered for a program to help single people who were going to be removed from the welfare rolls. I was supposed to help them stay on assistance or find some other program. I'll never forget my 'client' who, even tho he was about to lose his income, constantly missed meetings and, when I called to see how I could help, cursed me out. We never got together. Most participants in the program had similar behavior.
Many of these folks are drug addicts and alcoholics and my pity for them is just about nil. I too believed they were one step from homelessness or that evil Reagan was responsible for what was happening to them. However, I learned better and experiences like this were the begining of my road to conservatism.
Work, be responsible, or lie down in the street and die but don't look to me to provide them with a living. The only one I know of that is stupid enough to do that is Jimmy Carter.
homelessness only occurs during republican presidential administrations.
(/s)
i lived and worked in wa wa d.c. during the reagan administration. almost daily there were photos and articles on the homeless in downtown d.c.
later i moved to los angeles. same problem, all reagan's fault.
and then bush 41 became president and the problem intensified in the los angeles times.
martin sheen came down from the mountains above malibu to minister to the homeless on the streets of santa monica.
years later the people in santa monica tired of sheen and the homeless and told them both to take a hike.
While not exactly The Ritz (or "section 8"), it fulfilled a need.
Your experience is one of the reasons private charitable organizations are more efficient and effective than government. You can see the individual's behavior and make judgments as to whether he/she truly wants to be helped or not. Government 'assistance' is much more 'robotic'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.