If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(My Northwest)   The Bread of Life Mission told not to feed the homeless in Seattle city parks. Let them pick-up trash, clean the city for their meals   (mynorthwest.com) divider line 174
    More: Interesting, Lord Jesus Christ, Seattle, Executive Director Willie Parish, lunch boxes, South Main Street, nutritional value, homeless, diamond  
•       •       •

4352 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jan 2013 at 5:25 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



174 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-19 08:29:30 PM

BronyMedic: whidbey: Prank Call of Cthulhu: whidbey: Prank Call of Cthulhu: Fallout Boy: ...

The article says nothing about suggesting that the homeless clean the city for their food.

This wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea, though. When I see a city with dirty streets, some empty buildings, and homeless, I can't help think there might be a win-win solution here. "Here's a broom and a bin, Mr Homeless Person. You're in charge of this block. We've got a cot for you in this building over there, where we'll also serve three squares a day. Now get to sweeping."

Yes, slavery. It makes a person responsible.

How on earth is that slavery?

Because it's one thing to encourage volunteers to work. It's quite another to force down and out people to work just to get something to eat. The food should be no charge, no strings. Maybe you should volunteer there, quite frankly. Get a real perspective.

You have no idea, historically, what the hell you're talking about, you social justice white knight you.

Ensuring that the homeless have safe, sanitary food, and offering them programs which allow them to work and rise above their conditions in exchange for reasonable pay and assitance with placement in housing and educations is NOT slavery.


Um, didn't the WPA *pay* people for their work?  I'm kind of at a loss as to what you're getting at here.

I don't agree with the "it's slavery" remark, but I'm not a fan of attaching conditions to feed people who are hungry.

/for the grace of God go I, etc.
//ha, two posts and I name drop God/the Father in both of 'em.... not too bad for a recovering Catholic agnostic
 
2013-01-19 08:38:07 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto:
Because as decent human beings, it's the least we can do to offer a hungry person food.  If cleaning the streets needs to be done, f--king hire homeless people.  Pay them minimum wage, but pay them *a* fair wage.  What about those who have mental issues, disabilities, are *children*, etc., who can't easily sweep up some trash while they "mope about on the streets"?  Sucks to be them?

This is NOT a concept unique to Christianity.  And in every version I've seen of it, I've yet to see "For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat after I swept up trash for a few hours which is awesome on an empty stomach and doesn't feel at all demeaning, and definitely doesn't continuously reinforce that I'm beneath you because I'm homeless and hungry therefore I'm a failed human being".


So, just giving someone a handout--essentially treating them like a helpless child--isn't demeaning to them, but paying them with food and shelter for work that is only marginally more taxing than what they were going to be doing anyway is?
 
2013-01-19 08:40:04 PM
Maybe the homeless in Seattle are different but in NYC the ones that refuse to go to shelters and kitchens to get fed are overwhelmingly long term alcoholic, drug addicted and mentally unstable men. Luring them all into a public park with the promise of bringing the food to them is the wrong way of adressing the problem.
 
2013-01-19 08:47:20 PM
Sometimes parts of downtown Seattle feel like the set of a zombie movie. So many homeless/f*cked up/mentally ill/drug addicted/alcoholics shuffling around it's pretty sobering...pun sort of intended.
 
2013-01-19 08:47:44 PM

Gotfire: I saw that a homeless guy shiat in the stairwell of the monorail station across the street from the Weston.


Wrong. A very well to do lady with tastes more refined than yours pays very well to be watched while defecating in public places. It provides her a thrill you've never experienced.

Idiots like you that ignore the evil over taking America make it so much easier for them to do so. Mankind's most important task in life is to assist those in need. Charity and generosity carries greater importance than wealth, technology and the rest of the false gods people waste time chasing. Please extricate your cranium from your rectum and re-prioritize your life before someone else does it for you.
 
2013-01-19 08:59:50 PM

Hermione_Granger: Everyone who needs a meal is not jobless or homeless.


Exactly.
 
2013-01-19 08:59:57 PM

FormlessOne: Gdalescrboz: whidbey: Gdalescrboz: gopher321: Yay slavery!

So now we are calling work slavery.

If it's an actual job where a paycheck is involved agreed, it isn't. If it's Nazi Calvinist bullshiat as described in TFA, there's little difference.

Working to get food/water is nazi Calvinist bullshiat? America was founded by people putting in work from dawn till dusk just to provide food/water for their family. Your logic is what is wrong with America, for some reason people think they are entitled to more than they are for simply existing. I'm sorry, but walking around in the street picking up trash for 15min does not get you a paycheck. Food and water is actually pretty generous

Actually, America was founded by slaves putting work from dawn till dusk just to provide riches to someone else's family. Seriously. We've had slavery and indentured servitude as the basis of our wealth for at least 60% of this country's history - look it up. This country was built on the backs of First Nations folks, slaves from Central and South America, slaves from Africa, immigrants from pretty much every friggin' country on the planet, indentured servants, even child workers.

Much of the agitation against unions, against pensions, against social supports, comes from the very same mindset you're espousing - and was espoused throughout this country's history. We've been fortunate, in that folks like Lincoln, Eisenhower, Roosevelt, and others understood that the whole point of society is to ensure that, from a social & financial perspective, the bottom continues to rise even as the top does so.

We've taken a huge step backward from that in the last three decades or so. We've unraveled social supports, destroyed unions, and erode the very concept of retirement (except for the rich, of course.) We continue to take money, time, and resources from the poor and hand them over to the rich in increasing volume and speed, even as the infrastructure we spent the last century constructing during WWI, both New Deals, and WWII falls apart. Bridges, roads, dams, and other public works crumble. Social supports are slowly destroyed, robbed by the rich and reviled by the clueless.

The fallacy you're communicating comes pretty much from the "fark you, got mine" playbook.


America was not built by slaves. Suggesting it was, when a very very small percentage of people owned slaves, shows a gross amount of ignorance
 
2013-01-19 09:01:19 PM

KrispyKritter: Wrong. A very well to do lady with tastes more refined than yours pays very well to be watched while defecating in public places. It provides her a thrill you've never experienced.

Idiots like you that ignore the evil over taking America make it so much easier for them to do so. Mankind's most important task in life is to assist those in need. Charity and generosity carries greater importance than wealth, technology and the rest of the false gods people waste time chasing. Please extricate your cranium from your rectum and re-prioritize your life before someone else does it for you.


i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-01-19 09:02:37 PM

Gdalescrboz: whidbey: Gdalescrboz: gopher321: Yay slavery!

So now we are calling work slavery.

If it's an actual job where a paycheck is involved agreed, it isn't. If it's Nazi Calvinist bullshiat as described in TFA, there's little difference.

Working to get food/water is nazi Calvinist bullshiat? America was founded by people putting in work from dawn till dusk just to provide food/water for their family. Your logic is what is wrong with America, for some reason people think they are entitled to more than they are for simply existing. I'm sorry, but walking around in the street picking up trash for 15min does not get you a paycheck. Food and water is actually pretty generous


Um, RTFA. They're telling a charity not to feed homeless in the park. For someone with paranoia symptoms, that just  might be a problem.
 
2013-01-19 09:04:11 PM

fozziewazzi: Maybe the homeless in Seattle are different but in NYC the ones that refuse to go to shelters and kitchens to get fed are overwhelmingly long term alcoholic, drug addicted and mentally unstable men. Luring them all into a public park with the promise of bringing the food to them is the wrong way of adressing the problem.


They're not being "lured" into the park. THEY ARE IN THE PARK.

The volunteers are not cynical drug dealers tricking their victims. THEY ARE FEEDING THE HOMELESS.

This thread makes me depressed.
 
2013-01-19 09:05:10 PM

FloydA: FTA:City officials say the restriction is nothing new, and that Bread of Life simply operated in the park for three years without being caught or reported.

Yep, they've been doing this for three years without any sort of problems, right next door to the Sheriff's office and the courthouse, where there are always cops, so if anything was going wrong, it would have been noticed.

I'd like to offer a big, hearty, steaming bowl of Fark You, with a side of KITBASH to the city officials who did this.  People are hungry, and other people want to feed them.  Stopping this solves absolutely zero problems and creates new ones that we don't need.


Um, did you read the article? They're still being fed three squares a day by Bread of Life. But it has to be at the normal location and not at the park.
 
2013-01-19 09:05:28 PM

Superjew: Nobody's stopping anybody from feeding the homeless, they're just asking them to refrain from doing it on public property in the middle of a city park.

There are numerous health, safety and social service reasons for wanting the mission to serve their food in more appropriate and sanitary locations, instead of in the middle of a public square


... and this also applies to Bite of Seattle, right? The now numerous Farmers' Markets?
 
2013-01-19 09:06:22 PM

PsiChick: Gdalescrboz: whidbey: Gdalescrboz: gopher321: Yay slavery!

So now we are calling work slavery.

If it's an actual job where a paycheck is involved agreed, it isn't. If it's Nazi Calvinist bullshiat as described in TFA, there's little difference.

Working to get food/water is nazi Calvinist bullshiat? America was founded by people putting in work from dawn till dusk just to provide food/water for their family. Your logic is what is wrong with America, for some reason people think they are entitled to more than they are for simply existing. I'm sorry, but walking around in the street picking up trash for 15min does not get you a paycheck. Food and water is actually pretty generous

Um, RTFA. They're telling a charity not to feed homeless in the park. For someone with paranoia symptoms, that just  might be a problem.


I was responding to someone who suggested that IF they were, it would be slavery
 
2013-01-19 09:07:08 PM

Gdalescrboz: gopher321: Yay slavery!

So now we are calling work slavery.


Unpaid work to survive is farking slavery you stupid jackass.
 
2013-01-19 09:12:36 PM

super_grass: So Bread of Life has to fill out a few forms and coordinate their efforts with the city?

I am OUTRAGED.


After learning of this, the organization tried to obtain a permit to serve food. They were told by the city that no permits were being issued. (KING5).
 
2013-01-19 09:18:06 PM

Phil Moskowitz: Gdalescrboz: gopher321: Yay slavery!

So now we are calling work slavery.

Unpaid work to survive is farking slavery you stupid jackass.


Noone is forcing them to work and noone is fettering their ability to go elsewhere. They are compensated in food as a reward for their labors. Slaves are given food in order to keep them working.
 
2013-01-19 09:20:34 PM

Prank Call of Cthulhu: StreetlightInTheGhetto:
Because as decent human beings, it's the least we can do to offer a hungry person food.  If cleaning the streets needs to be done, f--king hire homeless people.  Pay them minimum wage, but pay them *a* fair wage.  What about those who have mental issues, disabilities, are *children*, etc., who can't easily sweep up some trash while they "mope about on the streets"?  Sucks to be them?

This is NOT a concept unique to Christianity.  And in every version I've seen of it, I've yet to see "For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat after I swept up trash for a few hours which is awesome on an empty stomach and doesn't feel at all demeaning, and definitely doesn't continuously reinforce that I'm beneath you because I'm homeless and hungry therefore I'm a failed human being".


So, just giving someone a handout--essentially treating them like a helpless child--isn't demeaning to them, but paying them with food and shelter for work that is only marginally more taxing than what they were going to be doing anyway is?


Yes. Pay them in cash and they have the freedom to do with it what they wish instead of singing for supper.

If they paid them in grocery gift cards (ones you can only use for food) I'd warm to the concept a bit more, especially if the value was at least enough to cover at least three and extra meals per day (assuming here that a longer term shelter has a kitchen for residents).
 
2013-01-19 09:32:28 PM
Can they still take care of the sleepless?
 
2013-01-19 09:33:30 PM

majestic: It's because the homeless are like cats.


Always licking their own asses?
 
2013-01-19 09:38:23 PM

Gyrfalcon: Dude, you keep on about slavery. Slavery is involuntary forced servitude. If the homeless person agrees to the terms and conditions and is free to walk away any time with no repercussions, it's not slavery. If the mission says "here's your broom, when the sidewalk is clean come get your meal" and HP says "screw you" and walks off; or says "OK", starts to sweep and then leaves the broom at the end of the block, it's not slavery. It's a contract.


If I were homeless, I would have no problem going along with whatever work they wanted me to do.

But some either can't or won't, and there is no reason to make somebody jump through a hoop just to get food. Methinks you are a bit too privileged.
 
2013-01-19 09:40:24 PM

BronyMedic: You have no idea, historically, what the hell you're talking about, you social justice white knight you.

Ensuring that the homeless have safe, sanitary food, and offering them programs which allow them to work and rise above their conditions in exchange for reasonable pay and assitance with placement in housing and educations is NOT slavery.


Oh farking can the history lesson.

The WPA!=the Bread of Life Mission

Jesus.
 
2013-01-19 09:41:47 PM

netcentric: Is that a STYROFOAM bowl !? AAAaaaaaaaaauuungggggg.... pollution.

Dead Sea creatures washing up onshore. Won't someone think of th environment.
Landfills are filling faster than Al Gore's bank accounts !


That's pretty damn fast...
 
2013-01-19 09:45:45 PM

Gdalescrboz: America was not built by slaves


LOL
 
2013-01-19 09:47:50 PM
I don't mind helping out with someone who is down on their luck. Helping someone who has made it a life long career living on the expectation that others will be there to provide? Bite me.

You want freebies? I'm making it conditional. I'm fair in that i won't expect you to sell your personal dignity or do anything that runs afoul of the law. In this particular case, you eat where I am willing to provide the food, regardless of my motivations. If you don't like the rules, try your luck elsewhere- or better yet-- find a job or a sponsor and then you can decide where it is you want to eat and eat there. Sorry to be so cold but there is a fine line between a helping hand and enabling. As long as there is free stuff, people will come for it. Provide it enough and they will come to expect it, losing any motivation to work in the first place.

Probably why I'm not allowed to feed the wildlife in my area. I've been told they get lazy about hunting for food in their own environs, and tend to make excellent targets for others that prey on them when they leave their habitat seeking what I would provide them.
 
2013-01-19 09:49:15 PM

clowncar on fire: Helping someone who has made it a life long career living on the expectation that others will be there to provide? Bite me.


You're not even basing this hatred on anything that exists in real life.
 
2013-01-19 09:51:20 PM
I used to volunteer for a church-run free lunch program and I can see where both sides are coming from here -- it's great to have a big area where lots of people can be served quickly, but there are downsides -- people try and get two, three lunches at once when there isn't an infinite supply to go around and as strange as it might sound, there really was a ton of waste. We had garbage cans right there but still ended up with a ton of spoons, containers, wrappers etc on the ground, and a fair amount of food as well -- if people didn't like the fruit we gave them, they'd drop it and it would get stepped on, or they'd take the lettuce off the sandwich and drop it. When it's one person, it's easily cleaned up, but when you have 200-300 people doing this, it can turn a park into a trash-strewn mess pretty fast. A lot of the people who came for the lunches were great, but there was also a sizable minority who were a combination of entitled (throwing a huge fit over not getting a soda instead of orange juice) very unpredictable, and sometimes dangerous (one volunteer got grabbed by her hair and threatened by a pretty big guy, I remember). A controlled space really is better for keeping things safe and orderly, plus you don't end up with a trashed public area. I doubt the city's motives are exactly noble here, but they do have a point. The park probably gets trashed on a routine basis, and that sort of thing not only looks awful but it can be a pain to clean up, a slipping hazard for anyone walking through, and it attracts rats and other vermin like you wouldn't believe.
 
2013-01-19 09:53:11 PM

majestic: It's because the homeless are like cats.


You can pour milk on your junk, and have them lick it off?
 
2013-01-19 09:54:41 PM

RenownedCurator: A controlled space really is better for keeping things safe and orderly, plus you don't end up with a trashed public area. I doubt the city's motives are exactly noble here, but they do have a point. The park probably gets trashed on a routine basis, and that sort of thing not only looks awful but it can be a pain to clean up, a slipping hazard for anyone walking through, and it attracts rats and other vermin like you wouldn't believe.


There was nothing in TFA about any garbage or any of the parks being trashed because of the mission's efforts.

It sounds to me like it's just a pissing contest between the city and the BOL Mission.
 
2013-01-19 10:00:37 PM

StreetlightInTheGhetto: Prank Call of Cthulhu: StreetlightInTheGhetto:
Because as decent human beings, it's the least we can do to offer a hungry person food.  If cleaning the streets needs to be done, f--king hire homeless people.  Pay them minimum wage, but pay them *a* fair wage.  What about those who have mental issues, disabilities, are *children*, etc., who can't easily sweep up some trash while they "mope about on the streets"?  Sucks to be them?

This is NOT a concept unique to Christianity.  And in every version I've seen of it, I've yet to see "For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat after I swept up trash for a few hours which is awesome on an empty stomach and doesn't feel at all demeaning, and definitely doesn't continuously reinforce that I'm beneath you because I'm homeless and hungry therefore I'm a failed human being".


So, just giving someone a handout--essentially treating them like a helpless child--isn't demeaning to them, but paying them with food and shelter for work that is only marginally more taxing than what they were going to be doing anyway is?

Yes. Pay them in cash and they have the freedom to do with it what they wish instead of singing for supper.

If they paid them in grocery gift cards (ones you can only use for food) I'd warm to the concept a bit more, especially if the value was at least enough to cover at least three and extra meals per day (assuming here that a longer term shelter has a kitchen for residents).


Unless these grocery gift cards are tied to the recipient and requires an ID to be used, they'll be sold for drugs and alcohol. A lot of people in this thread seem to have this romantic notion that most of the homeless are just down on their luck people that need a break. The reality is that most of the people that refuse to go to shelters are drunks and addicts.
 
2013-01-19 10:13:02 PM

FloydA: FTA:City officials say the restriction is nothing new, and that Bread of Life simply operated in the park for three years without being caught or reported.

Yep, they've been doing this for three years without any sort of problems, right next door to the Sheriff's office and the courthouse, where there are always cops, so if anything was going wrong, it would have been noticed.

I'd like to offer a big, hearty, steaming bowl of Fark You, with a side of KITBASH to the city officials who did this.  People are hungry, and other people want to feed them.  Stopping this solves absolutely zero problems and creates new ones that we don't need.


Wait one farking minute! This is Seattle, fort Christ sake; how in the world did Ebil Rethuglicans get elected in Seattle. the land of Unicorns, Rainbows, Latte Liberals and Starbucks? This sounds VERY suspicious. Where's all of that famous liberal tolerance and compassion? Whar? Whar?
 
2013-01-19 10:25:19 PM

yingtong: This got flagged 'interesting', not 'stupid', 'FAIL', or 'asinine'?

Oh right.. Seattle is in a blue state.


Yes, I'm shocked, SHOCKED that something like this could happen in a Nice Liberal Town like Seattle.

Whereas in the "Let's Grind Down The Poor" Land of Right Wing Fascism (Orange County) the County Center in Santa Ana helps coordinate private and public feedings of 2,000 to 4,000 people a day 500 feet from the farking county courthouse, and the nOC Board of Supervisors is looking at a proposal from the Orange County Rescue Mission (a private right-wing evangelical organization) to jointly turn the obsolete OCTA downtown bus terminal into an 2,000 bed emergency shelter,

It just doesn't make sense, I tell ya! NO SENSE AT ALL!
 
2013-01-19 10:27:27 PM

whidbey: yingtong: This got flagged 'interesting', not 'stupid', 'FAIL', or 'asinine'?

Oh right.. Seattle is in a blue state.

Actually, most of the state is full of right-wing rednecks outside the cities, but you knew that, didn't you?


Perhaps geographically. But I'm pretty sure they are vastly outnumbered by Latte Liberals in the cities (especially Seattle). It's like you are comparing North Dakota to San Francisco. Try harder.
 
2013-01-19 10:28:04 PM

FormlessOne: whidbey: Wow. Seattle really is turning into NY, jr.

I've been staving off the inevitable acknowledgment for some time now.

It's actually a bit different, having lived in both places - Seattle's government has swing to the right a bit after WTO, when they realized the rabble could provide a significant rousing. There's a reason the Justice Department's watching the SPD like a hawk.


Riiiiiight.
 
2013-01-19 10:28:44 PM

whidbey: RenownedCurator: A controlled space really is better for keeping things safe and orderly, plus you don't end up with a trashed public area. I doubt the city's motives are exactly noble here, but they do have a point. The park probably gets trashed on a routine basis, and that sort of thing not only looks awful but it can be a pain to clean up, a slipping hazard for anyone walking through, and it attracts rats and other vermin like you wouldn't believe.

There was nothing in TFA about any garbage or any of the parks being trashed because of the mission's efforts.

It sounds to me like it's just a pissing contest between the city and the BOL Mission.


The article mentioned "wasted food" and cleanup being "a little chaotic" afterwards. Based on past experience, I would not be surprised if these were diplomatic understatements.
 
2013-01-19 10:32:42 PM

chascarrillo: Superjew: Nobody's stopping anybody from feeding the homeless, they're just asking them to refrain from doing it on public property in the middle of a city park.

There are numerous health, safety and social service reasons for wanting the mission to serve their food in more appropriate and sanitary locations, instead of in the middle of a public square

... and this also applies to Bite of Seattle, right? The now numerous Farmers' Markets?


For lotsa dollars, yeah...this would be sort of like 'apples and oysters'. They just don't equate...
 
2013-01-19 10:33:11 PM

Allen. The end.: jehovahs witness protection: whidbey: jehovahs witness protection: You can't reason with these people.

Tired of posting near the top of a thread and then running out before everyone flames you? What gives?

WWWW...the siwwy wiberal got him's fewings all hurt.

Jesus dude, that was stupid.


Why? Because you disagree?

lh3.googleusercontent.com
 
2013-01-19 10:33:29 PM

El Brujo: Sometimes parts of downtown Seattle feel like the set of a zombie movie. So many homeless/f*cked up/mentally ill/drug addicted/alcoholics shuffling around it's pretty sobering...pun sort of intended.


Because of the rain, I always thought of the movie "Dagon"...
 
2013-01-19 10:36:52 PM

fozziewazzi: StreetlightInTheGhetto: Prank Call of Cthulhu: StreetlightInTheGhetto:
Because as decent human beings, it's the least we can do to offer a hungry person food.  If cleaning the streets needs to be done, f--king hire homeless people.  Pay them minimum wage, but pay them *a* fair wage.  What about those who have mental issues, disabilities, are *children*, etc., who can't easily sweep up some trash while they "mope about on the streets"?  Sucks to be them?

This is NOT a concept unique to Christianity.  And in every version I've seen of it, I've yet to see "For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat after I swept up trash for a few hours which is awesome on an empty stomach and doesn't feel at all demeaning, and definitely doesn't continuously reinforce that I'm beneath you because I'm homeless and hungry therefore I'm a failed human being".


So, just giving someone a handout--essentially treating them like a helpless child--isn't demeaning to them, but paying them with food and shelter for work that is only marginally more taxing than what they were going to be doing anyway is?

Yes. Pay them in cash and they have the freedom to do with it what they wish instead of singing for supper.

If they paid them in grocery gift cards (ones you can only use for food) I'd warm to the concept a bit more, especially if the value was at least enough to cover at least three and extra meals per day (assuming here that a longer term shelter has a kitchen for residents).

Unless these grocery gift cards are tied to the recipient and requires an ID to be used, they'll be sold for drugs and alcohol. A lot of people in this thread seem to have this romantic notion that most of the homeless are just down on their luck people that need a break. The reality is that most of the people that refuse to go to shelters are drunks and addicts.


Again, help is great if you play by the rules. There ARE lots of addicts who simply cannot make it through a single night. Simply putting them up for a night, or week, or month, without real help does no one any good and harms the image of the group that tries to run these houses. You can't just allow anyone in if they are going to bust out the lock at midnight and find some way to get a few bucks for hooch (or worse). So what do you do?
 
2013-01-19 10:53:06 PM

whidbey: Gyrfalcon: Dude, you keep on about slavery. Slavery is involuntary forced servitude. If the homeless person agrees to the terms and conditions and is free to walk away any time with no repercussions, it's not slavery. If the mission says "here's your broom, when the sidewalk is clean come get your meal" and HP says "screw you" and walks off; or says "OK", starts to sweep and then leaves the broom at the end of the block, it's not slavery. It's a contract.

If I were homeless, I would have no problem going along with whatever work they wanted me to do.

But some either can't or won't, and there is no reason to make somebody jump through a hoop just to get food. Methinks you are a bit too privileged.


The ones who can't or won't....probably wouldn't be there.

You've got some of your wires crossed here, methinks. There are, after all, several kinds of homeless people after all. There are those who would rather work than just receive handouts, but can't get work because by this point they're too beat down or smelly or been off the payrolls too long. These folks would LOVE the chance to give back in exchange for whatever they get, and maybe a job reference or work experience thrown in.

Then there are those, a smaller number, who can't, due to mental or physical disability, age or infirmity. Nobody has a problem with giving these folks food and money to live on; although it would be better for them psychologically to do something in exchange for their benefits. If only because sitting around doing nothing is bad for you. But the truly disabled shouldn't be required to work if they cannot; but the truly disabled won't be the ones showing up to soup kitchens, because they probably can't.

Finally, there is the tiny minority of people who won't work. There aren't many of these, but there are some chronic malingerers who would rather mooch off free sandwiches and coffee and sit around. I'm sorry, but they shouldn't get squat. You can disagree if you like, but the able-bodied and able-minded who would rather not use either don't deserve freebies. Happily, there are very few genuine leeches among us.

Where this idea came from that "nobody should have to jump through hoops" to get a meal, I don't know. I mean, it would be lovely if NOBODY had to jump through hoops to get a meal, but sadly, everyone else does. We have to get some kind of job, or marry someone who does, or do something to put food on the table. Why is being homeless and down on one's luck suddenly a free pass to having to work? Plus, it's psychologically very bad for the recipient, what psychologists call "infantilizing." It makes the person feel like a child to have someone else hand them the necessities of life without requiring them to do anything for them and then send them on their way. "Here's your dinner, now go off and don't bother us."

In fact, this would be an excellent way to quickly sort the wheat from the chaff: The ones who want to and are willing to work could be easily located by finding out who was anxious to sweep the front walkway for a meal, who was unable to do so because of mental disability or physical infirmity, and who said "Are you crazy? What's in it for me?" The former can be sent on to job placement after dinner, the second to social services, and the latter given a kick in the ass. But you can't treat everyone like disabled children because SOME of them are. Or you can, but then you can't be surprised when they all start acting like it.
 
2013-01-19 10:55:26 PM

whidbey: BronyMedic: You have no idea, historically, what the hell you're talking about, you social justice white knight you.

Ensuring that the homeless have safe, sanitary food, and offering them programs which allow them to work and rise above their conditions in exchange for reasonable pay and assitance with placement in housing and educations is NOT slavery.

Oh farking can the history lesson.

The WPA!=the Bread of Life Mission

Jesus.


Oh shut up, you opened the door on this, now reap the rewards of being criticised for your hyperbole of "slavery".

You were the one that decided to invoke the monacker of "Slavery" as a label to this whole thing, which is a fallicious comparison - and borderline offensive considering the conditions that actual slaves are kept in or have historically been kept in. The fact of the matter is no one is forcing these people, against their will, to work for food or shelter. There are plenty of OTHER programs in the city of Seattle which do not require them to do any work or labor to participate in them. The funny thing is, you seem to have no problems with "religious" missions for the "homeless" which force them to participate in religious activities in exchange for food and shelter, something they are notorious for, and some who actively discriminate against Non-Christian, and Non-Heterosexual homeless individuals.

I brought up the WPA because it is an example of a program which you seem to think equates to forced servitude and slavery given your rhetoric on the topic. In reality, it was one of the major factors which brought the United States out of the worst depression in the history of our country, and hired the homeless and unemployed in exchange for food, shelter, and a stipend salary to support their family. There is nothing wrong with saying "Hey, look. I know you're homeless. I don't care why you got that way, and I don't judge you for it. But we have this program. We need unskilled labor. In exchange, we'll provide you food and shelter, pay you minimum wage, and provide help with drug and alcohol rehab, basic medical care and mental health services, and housing placement and education assistance.". That is NOT slavery, it's helping people who truely need it be able to work and rise above their current socioeconomic status, and be sustainable as a member of society, not dependant on handouts to live day to day.

Again, how does providing a person the option of working unskilled labor in exchange for pay and benefits, shelter and food equate to slavery?

whidbey: clowncar on fire: Helping someone who has made it a life long career living on the expectation that others will be there to provide? Bite me.

You're not even basing this hatred on anything that exists in real life.


Bullshiat. Everyone who stands on the street corner with a sign that says "Disabled Veteran, please Help" is not a needy person. Many of them are professional scam artists. Every few years a news story will pop up about one who's actually living pretty good based on the scam. The same with panhandlers - Atlanta, to use an example I know of, is horrific about pandhandling - especially aggressive panhandlers. Memphis used to be the same way down on Beale and Riverfront until the city passed ordinances against it. If you want to help someone, the best way to do it is NOT giving them a hand out. It's directing them to one of numerous organizations that are dedicated to helping the homeless, ESPECIALLY drug and alcohol rehab, and mental health care.
 
2013-01-19 11:06:04 PM

whidbey: clowncar on fire: Helping someone who has made it a life long career living on the expectation that others will be there to provide? Bite me.

You're not even basing this hatred on anything that exists in real life.


Actually, I am. Not hatred by the way, just acceptance of reality.

Case 1. Several years ago, while sharing a house with a friend, he thought it was a good idea to find a replacement for the roommate we had recently lost. I didn't know anybody in my circle of friends that was looking for a place so I left it to him. A few days later, he brought home a hard luck case who claimed he had a couple of prospects but was kind of out on the street at the moment. He was a very likeable fellow and between my roommate and I, we had therent and food covered for the next couple of weeks so we figured we'd let his costs slide until he got a job and had some money to spend.

As luck would have it, an entry level position (6.50/hr) opened up with our landscaping company. Again, folks found him very likeable, and he found himself with a decent job that payed well. We explained to him that because he was working outdoors, he would need to cover his skin, wear work gloves (we loaned him a pair), and pay attention to what he was told to do as he was on a probationary period for the first couple of weeks.

On his first day of work he (aside from showing up over an hour late): showed up with a tank top- resulting in a severe sun burn by the end of the day, didn't bother to bring the gloves or use the ones another co-worker offered him so he tore up his hands enough that he could not return for the next couple of days, got high at lunch, and had the foreman asking me more than once where I had found such a loser. He biatched all the way back about how ill treated he was and went into the I think I got the sunstroke act (probably was for real though did not care at that point) saying that he would not be attending work. By this time, it became obvious that he had sabotaged his first day of work. We explained in no uncertain terms that he was to be out the door if he couldn't hold a job or even make an attempt at it. He promised to behave if he was given another chance.

After convincing the foreman that he really needed a job and a second chance, soon to be ex-roommate did not even bother showing up, even after be generously offered a few days of r&r.

He did, however, remain with us for a short time, periodically showing up with "things" for the house he had aquired in the neighborhood which we immediately recognized as the furniture not unlike that provided by the furnished apartments right next door. Much to his dismay, we returned the stolen booty to the apartment he had been stealing it from. After strongly suggesting he take up residence elsewhere, he took up disappearing the hours we were home (claimed a night job though did not offer to cover the food he was eating while we were not there or his share of the rent), and only returning when he was assured we had gone to work. Couldn't get the key back, ignored our requests to talk. Personal affects began disappearing- much of it found hidden in a box under his bed. We finally were done with him. One morning we packed the few things he owned, left them outside the door and had the landlord change the locks. Rather than go to work, we waited him out for about an hour so we could at least give him some final attempt to justify his actions and give him a ride somewhere if he needed it. He whined a bit, but offered no excuses. Seemed pretty well versed in being kicked out. Dropped him off at a street corner and didn't bother to see where he went from there. The few people we met that did know him said as far as they knew, that was how they had always known him to operate- get someone to take him in and sucker them for all they were worth.

Case 2: We took on a hubby, his wife and kid. He worked for all of two weeks at the same place we worked (the last time my reference held any weight i might add), gave us a small portion of his pay with a promise of finding another job. Was a great cook, kept the house clean while I was at work but offered nothing in financial renumeration. I was tolerant all of a month feeling sorry for the kid. When i found out he always seem to have money to party (but not cover me), my patience grew thin, and after some urging from my roommate, we politely asked him to leave. He tried the sympathy for his baby ploy, but my thoughts were that if you had enough to party 7 days a week, you could scale back and take care of your kid. Helped the family find some cheap rent apartment- they didn't last very long due to the endless disturbances with their neighbors.

I have at least 3 more similar tales in my resume. The fact is- some people will never attempt to care for themselves as long as others will foot the bill.
 
2013-01-19 11:06:44 PM
About 5 years or so ago I passed thorough pioneer square on weekend mornings maybe one weekend a month and then after a half day of work, back through in the afternoon on my way home. There was one group, don't know the name, that brought in powered sound gear for the sermon and I am told refused meal service to people who showed up too late or didn't pay enough attention as determined by their ushers. The park was always a disaster in the afternoon. I saw one of their youth volunteers wrestling a garbage can that was overflowing to their truck. They knew their event would generate trash, but hadn't brought anything like enough trashcans.
 
2013-01-19 11:25:11 PM
Suddenly, liberals have a problem with people doing what they want with their property.
 
2013-01-19 11:40:43 PM
It's what Jeeeeeeeeeezus would have wanted.
/for real dough

DrPainMD: Suddenly, liberals have a problem with people doing what they want with their property.


What part of "Seattle City Parks" do you not understand?

Here's a hint: You get to do what you want with what's yours. City parks don't fall into that category. They belong to all of us, even the homeless. They're "ours", as in "all of ours". Me, you, your neighbor, his brother, the kids down the street, the asshole who cut you off in traffic, and the guy asking for change in front of the $tarbuck$. Everyone.
If that sounds too socialist for ya, then TFB. Deal with it.
 
2013-01-19 11:40:57 PM

Prank Call of Cthulhu: f option 1 is just ignoring the homeless, and option 2 is giving them a place to sleep and food in exchange for having them clean up the streets, how is that forcing them? I mean, if you're homeless, it's not like you had any other plans besides sitting on the street all day. What harm is there in pushing a broom around a bit in exchange for food and shelter? I'm not talking about whipping them if they leave a few candy wrappers behind.


People with drug and alcohol problems benefit from doing chores and just farking doing anything besides sitting around thinking about how much they want drugs. When you go to rehab or sober up, they tell you to get a hobby, exercise, find something to do that you can take pride in, even if it's something dumb like cleaning your room or doing dishes. Because people who are addicted have forgotten how to do anything except get high, plus they usually hate themselves.

And there is nothing wrong with doing a little work, for any reason, if a person is able-bodied. Some of them would love to pick up trash. it would give them a little self-esteem.
 
2013-01-19 11:46:40 PM

clowncar on fire: I have at least 3 more similar tales in my resume. The fact is- some people will never attempt to care for themselves as long as others will foot the bill.


Yeah, this. Also BronyMedic's.

Look, nobody is going to ever be able to question my liberal credentials. And I have been on the bottom of the heap oftener than I'd like to remember and dependent on the kindness of strangers. That said, I know from my very own experience that the people who are down & out through no fault of their own usually don't stay there very long. They want work and they will find something and keep it no matter how much they hate it and no matter how long it takes to find something. The ones who don't either have some kind of serious mental or substance abuse issues and WOULD work if they could get help--and thanks to our society, they cannot--or they are "friends" like yours and just don't want to. Possibly they have some deeper psychological issues as well, but that's beyond my area of expertise.

I also know that institutionalization is a very real effect, and people with minor mental problems fall victim to it easily. Someone who is already depressed or has paranoia doesn't need someone telling him 'There there, you don't need to work or try hard, we'll take care of everything for you, here's your food and clothes you poor dear," they need someone to give them something to do. They need--surprise!--to work. Not to LOOK for work, which may be beyond them at this point, but for someone to say Here is work for you to do, go do it.

Maybe it's time to stop treating everyone like they are helpless. Maybe we need to treat them like they are capable of being helped.
 
2013-01-19 11:57:11 PM
When we have a pidgeon problem at one of our stores, we put poisoned pellets on the roof. Takes care of the problem for a few months. Maybe they should try that approach...not with pellets, of course. Poison pellets are OK for pidgeons, but for homeless you'll need poisoned Night Train or Natty Ice...
 
2013-01-20 12:33:29 AM
It's like we've just given up. We could try schlepping toward Jerusalem with understanding, intelligence and study; but we would rather reward brutality and ignorance, sweep the human detritus out of sight.

Living in Santa Monica (L.A.), and being a musician, I know more than my fair share of homeless people. I have no ready answers to the problem, partly because homeless people are individuals and not all alike by any means. One thing I have observed is that their real problem by and large is not that they don't have a home. a job, money, a car, etc.; it's that they can't deal with people, can't form healthy human relationships. This keeps them outside, literally and figuratively. Of course many of them are afflicted with a debilitating mental illness, often schizophrenia. And many (though by no means all) have some substance abuse problem, though it's not clear if this is the cause of their problems, or a symptom.

No good deed goes unpunished -- a facile expression, but so often so apropos.
 
2013-01-20 12:52:35 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: whidbey: yingtong: This got flagged 'interesting', not 'stupid', 'FAIL', or 'asinine'?

Oh right.. Seattle is in a blue state.

Actually, most of the state is full of right-wing rednecks outside the cities, but you knew that, didn't you?

Perhaps geographically. But I'm pretty sure they are vastly outnumbered by Latte Liberals in the cities (especially Seattle). It's like you are comparing North Dakota to San Francisco. Try harder.


Hurr.
 
2013-01-20 12:53:29 AM

clowncar on fire: whidbey: clowncar on fire: Helping someone who has made it a life long career living on the expectation that others will be there to provide? Bite me.

You're not even basing this hatred on anything that exists in real life.

Actually, I am. Not hatred by the way, just acceptance of reality.


LOL I didn't realize a Fox News brand of subjective hatred constituted objective reality.
 
Displayed 50 of 174 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report