Proud day for America: Homeless only exist if you can see them.

[SteadyMercury]

I'm recognizing and mentioning that you are brainless. Giving the homeless a home is a solution. You won't do it because you're all mouth, no action.

All mouth no action says the guy who has a "solution" consisting of an unknown army of volunteers stepping up, and if they don't it ain't his problem. Dumbfuck.

The solution to homelessness is idiotic? Maybe to an idiot.

No, I think an average 5th grader could see the gaping holes in your volunteer army solution. Hey everyone just step up and take a homeless person into your home! Brilliant. Please don't take any job higher than ditch digger, clearly critical thinking skills ain't the strong point.

You generated enough on your own, I don't need to fabricate anything. So now you admit you don't give a shit about them after all? LOL.

You certainly have fabricated plenty, you think because someone sees how brain dead your volunteer solution is you can attribute all sort of new opinions and emotions to them. I've not once claimed any care for these homeless people and you know it.

You confuse calling you out on your dumbassedry with giving a shit, because you are an idiot. You've only embarrassed yourself in this thread, keep it coming is funny shit volunteer boy.

 

[SteadyMercury]

My solution is logical. Put those incapable of caring for themselves out of harm's way and let volunteers take care of the rest.

Brilliant! We just need volunteers!

 

[Iceweasel]

I'm recognizing and mentioning that you are brainless. Giving the homeless a home is a solution. You won't do it because you're all mouth, no action.

All mouth no action says the guy who has a "solution" consisting of an unknown army of volunteers stepping up, and if they don't it ain't his problem. Dumbfuck.

You can't read and you calling someone dumb is pure irony. The only way you're retiring at 40 is if you had a brain dead government job.

No, I think an average 5th grader could see the gaping holes in your volunteer army solution. Hey everyone just step up and take a homeless person into your home! Brilliant. Please don't take any job higher than ditch digger, clearly critical thinking skills ain't the strong point.

No, not everyone, you can't read. I said anyone that cares. Now you say you don't care so we see you were all talk.

You certainly have fabricated plenty, you think because someone sees how brain dead your volunteer solution is you can attribute all sort of new opinions and emotions to them. I've not once claimed any care for these homeless people and you know it.

You confuse calling you out on your dumbassedry with giving a shit, because you are an idiot. You've only embarrassed yourself in this thread, keep it coming is funny shit volunteer boy.

Change your tampon, you'll feel better.

 

[Wake]

I wonder if the ones passing these ridiculous ordinances stem from the Left or the Right.

One of the frustrations I have is that conservatives and republicans are stereotyped as heartless people who really don't care about the homeless. Frankly, being a conservative, and looking around at some of the comments I have seen, it's not easy to ignore that sentiment that that problem does exist within the political Right.

We should use our common sense and humanity. Help feed them, but also help make sure they can work. I would not only see to it that the homeless are fed, but have them rounded up and have them work. Whether it be to clean up the city or any other thing that helps, have them go out and do so. I would like to see them sheltered, too, and find better ways to care for them.

The situation is undoubtedly far more complex and difficult than I imagine. One thing to keep in mind is that if you do feed them, while not expecting them to do honest work, they'll return, expecting to be fed on a routine basis. There is a reason why people say not to feed the deer, wild cats, and coyotes, among other living things. What are we to do?

 

[Gracie]

Now now. No need to make them work for their food. We have illegals that can do that. Oh. Wait.

 

[SteadyMercury]

You can't read and you calling someone dumb is pure irony. The only way you're retiring at 40 is if you had a brain dead government job.

I read just fine, at least well enough to see you desperately assigning straw man arguments to others.

No govt job, software engineer.

No, not everyone, you can't read. I said anyone that cares. Now you say you don't care so we see you were all talk.

Correct, what we are doing is talking. You proposed a solution consisting of an army of volunteers adopting homeless people, and when I question that validity suddenly you are all over the map. Noting the stupidity of your idea isn't endorsing other government programs for the homeless nor is it indicating some passion for their plight. You're just too dense to realize that.

Change your tampon, you'll feel better.

Stop trying to provide ridiculous solutions that someone in elementary school could see thru, and you won't get called out like the dumass you are.

 

[Iceweasel]

I read just fine, at least well enough to see you desperately assigning straw man arguments to others.

Why should I desperately try to make a retard on the internet understand something?

Stop trying to provide ridiculous solutions that someone in elementary school could see thru, and you won't get called out like the dumass you are.

Wow, you called me out? I said the nuts need to be locked up. The rest need a job or someone to support them and that made your pussy explode. LOL.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Why should I desperately try to make a retard on the internet understand something?

Good question, you probably would have been best leaving your childish volunteer army solution to yourself. You won't get laughed at as much for demonstrating you have the critical thinking skills of a plank of wood.

Wow, you called me out? I said the nuts need to be locked up. The rest need a job or someone to support them and that made your pussy explode. LOL.

Pussy explode = noting that your plan to have volunteers step up to adopt homeless people? I don't think so.

 

[Iceweasel]

Good question, you probably would have been best leaving your childish volunteer army solution to yourself. You won't get laughed at as much for demonstrating you have the critical thinking skills of a plank of wood.

Pussy explode = noting that your plan to have volunteers step up to adopt homeless people? I don't think so.

Pussy explode=guy(?) flying off the handle on an internet forum because someone says something they disagree with. Grow up, Sheila.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I read just fine, at least well enough to see you desperately assigning straw man arguments to others.

Why should I desperately try to make a retard on the internet understand something?

Stop trying to provide ridiculous solutions that someone in elementary school could see thru, and you won't get called out like the dumass you are.

Wow, you called me out? I said the nuts need to be locked up. The rest need a job or someone to support them and that made your pussy explode. LOL.

Either contribute or please shut it, thanks.

You sound like your fourteen years old.

 

[Iceweasel]

Either contribute or please shut it, thanks.

You sound like your fourteen years old.

I did contribute, asshole, read or go do something else. Failure to agree with your dimwitted ass in not failing to contribute.

 

[Barb]

I agree with you, except that many of those alkies and druggies are self medicating, due to mental health issues. There is a certain number that it is due to bad choices, but many are due to things outside their control.

They are probably all self medicating and their mental health issues are not unrelated. I don't buy the victim hood argument except for maybe a small percent that need to be in a locked home. Lots of them just don't want to work. Some panhandlers don't do too bad with income. One guy called Medved's show and talked about how he made about 10k a year.
If you can panhandle 10k a year, you can work.

Smog in our brains

"Over the past decade, researchers have found that high levels of air pollution may damage children's cognitive abilities, increase adults' risk of cognitive decline and possibly even contribute to depression.​

"This should be taken seriously," says Paul Mohai, PhD, a professor in the University of Michigan's School of Natural Resources and the Environment who has studied the link between air pollution and academic performance in children. "I don't think the issue has gotten the visibility it deserves.'"
​

and from me:

Please don‘t poison the children

One of Vice President Bush‘s most noteworthy targets for regulatory relief was ―the EPA‘s entire hazardous waste control program.‖79 Two signifigant results of environmental deregulation were the massive profits that industries gained and the terrible price paid by the urban and the rural poor who did not have the resources to move away from the damage, the degradation, or the health injuries caused by exposure to physically and neurologically damaging substances.80 This is especially important, as the rhetoricians of the Reagan Revolution blamed the poor directly for their condition,81 and considered at least some of their problems inherent to the lower economic classes.82

One in five children living in urban poverty that were tested between 1976-1988 tested positive for lead levels higher than 30 micrograms per decimeter. High levels of lead in children‘s blood cause lower IQ scores and learning disabilities by induced nervousness and lack of ability to concentrate.83 Neurological problems can only add to the stresses of poverty, which already seem eternal to children. Physical and psychological development retarded in childhood presents immense challenges to successful economic participation in adulthood. 84

The rhetoriticians who pointed to weak test scores; lack of concentration; learning disabilities; and poor impulse control of a portion of the poor community did so in order to justify the attitude that poverty is the natural result of improvidence on the part of the poor. Meanwhile the political misrepresentations these assumptions supported helped the very industries that caused so much damage to make obscene profits in doing so.

Lash, Jonathan, Katherine Gillman, and David Sheridan. A Season of Spoils; The Reagan Administration's Attack on the Environment. 1st Edition. New York, New York: Random House, 1984, xii, xiv,
27, 102, and 131-142.
Schiller, Bradley R. The Economics of Poverty and Discrimination Tenth Ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, NJ, US, 2008, 48-49

 

[Barb]

Sadly, we don't have proper help for the mentally ill here in the US anymore, and that is what many of the homeless suffer from.

Mostly druggies and hard core alkies. They aren't victims, they made bad choices in life. enabling them is the worst thing you can do. For those too insane for the street, the street is the last place they need to be. States need to step up but we need to get over the idea that it's wrong to institutionalize people.

They tried wholesale institutionalization, and it didn't work.

Actually, as governor of Cali, Reagan led the charge to throw the mentally ill out of institutions and onto the streets, making the problem of homelessness considerably worse. No, I agree that "wholesale" institutionalization is wrong on many levels, but there are people who need the structure and medical attention to live a decent life, and those facilities are woefully lacking today.

 

[Barb]

one of my favorite guiding passages in the Bible of what is 'right' and what is not.

Matthew 25:31-46New International Version (NIV)
The Sheep and the Goats
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

That's right. The people who think that other people don't do enough should provide shelter and food to these people.

Instead of trying to force others to do it.

Public policy, government policy is important:

If policy is a reflection of society‘s values, the resulting image in America resembles that of a fun house mirror. Neoconservative thought, amplified by the media and hard-wired into American culture, assumes that our economic and social systems are inherently fair. This assumption leads to presumptions. The first is that those favored by the system prosper because they are smarter, harder working, and more virtuous. This naturally leads to the idea that those not so favored are mentally deficient, lazy, and immoral. One of the roots of this understanding of poverty is the English ―Poor Laws that came to America from England, laws that treated poverty as the natural result of improvidence, and the poor as if they had a self inflicted and communicable disease. The resulting conclusions are that our poor willfully avoid success, so we have a moral obligation to insist that they feel like rubbish. Under these circumstances, if we must help, every tool we use to do so should double as a club to punish and shame them.

The poor, demonized as a drain on society, are also the poster children for individual acts of charity conducted through donations of time or money to fraternal or religious non-profit organizations. Individual acts can be beneficial on many levels, not the least of which is to give the people who join those organizations the opportunity to express as a group what they find to be socially important. Nevertheless, government policy sets national standards, and is the collective expression of what society holds as valued, valuable, and worthy of collective and universal investment, not merely to benefit certain individuals or groups, but as an advantage to the community as a whole.

People don‘t want charity. Citizens deserve a government that responsibly stewards the economy and squares the rules between people and corporations to provide achievable opportunity and protection from the predatory claws of a capitalism that would have all of the power, the rights, the profits, and none of the responsibility. Most poor, unemployed and underemployed poor people would love to earn the means to provide even the thinnest slice of the "American dream" for their families. Crumbs provided instead, begrudgingly and with a sneer, are valued for what they are worth.

 

[Barb]

It's no secret that Conservatives loathe the disadvantaged. Today they don't want them fed. Yesterday they did not want them to have medical care. The day before that, they did not want them to be housed.

The 90 year old man in Florida is a saint.

Previously we saw someone show up with seven loaves of bread and seven fish. Conservatives would have hounded Him off the mount for ministering to those in greatest need.

Oh cry me a river. Go ahead and recreate biblical miracles, just don't force it on others and cry about them not marching along. I sponsored 8 international kids for 15 years, what have you done? You break out a loaf of stale bread and jerk off about how good you are?

Why do you think that feeding as many homeless is a bad thing?

Why would you oppose the actions of a man trying to make a difference?

Why would you have your fellow American citizens forced away from what is probably their only meal?

Why wouldn't you advocate more feeding centers and streamlining the political process to make that happen?

Why is compassion a virtue Conservatives lack in epic proportions?

These are the same people who applauded pigeon spikes to prevent "loitering" any where someone might rest their weary bones.

 

[Barb]

No, you are idiotic. It isn't up to me to solve their problem. If you want to, go ahead, just don't drag me into it.

Wow you're fucking dumber than I thought, you can't even carry a though from one post to the next.

I never said it was up to you to solve your problem, I'm just pointing out that you claiming you have a solution which consists of unknown volunteers showing up to adopt homeless people is fucking stupid. If you don't think it can be solved fine, but don't pretend your ridiculous volunteer notion is anything close to a solution.

You can't grasp that concept so you're probably a paycheck away from joining the street zombies.

Hah hah retiring early in January, mid 40s. Thanks for playing.

In other words, when you use the word "solution" you mean a government program. Thanks for admitting it. Also thanks for admitting that no libturd would ever personally lift a finger to help another human being.

I bet that 90 year old VETERAN is someone you consider a "libturd," and he lifted more than a finger, you pointless twit.

 

[Barb]

What is the reason for the law of not feeding the homeless? I mean the guy is doing something nice for people and they outlaw it? What could possibly be their reasoning? They are already in dire straits having no home. It makes zero sense. So you feed a person heaven forbid. What a bunch of idiots down there. Don't they have bigger fish to fry than some guy feeding the homeless? How is that a problem? How do they justify such a statute?

They want poverty to be invisible. You see a bunch of people in line for food and one of them is your cousin's wife...shit! Your cousin got you your second job! Hell, he co-signed the loan for your first car! What the hell happened to society if someone, a family member, no less, someone who helped you when you needed it came to such a pass?? Maybe you'd have to rethink what you've been told all your life about "success," "virtue," and oh, shit, poverty!

"They" would like, will kill, actually, to prevent those shifts in attitude.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Pussy explode=guy(?) flying off the handle on an internet forum because someone says something they disagree with. Grow up, Sheila.

Then you're again demonstrating detachment from reality. I didn't fly off the handle, you're just frustrated because I pointed out the absurdity of your volunteer army solution.

 

[koshergrl]

one of my favorite guiding passages in the Bible of what is 'right' and what is not.

Matthew 25:31-46New International Version (NIV)
The Sheep and the Goats
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

That's right. The people who think that other people don't do enough should provide shelter and food to these people.

Instead of trying to force others to do it.

Public policy, government policy is important:

If policy is a reflection of society‘s values, the resulting image in America resembles that of a fun house mirror. Neoconservative thought, amplified by the media and hard-wired into American culture, assumes that our economic and social systems are inherently fair. This assumption leads to presumptions. The first is that those favored by the system prosper because they are smarter, harder working, and more virtuous. This naturally leads to the idea that those not so favored are mentally deficient, lazy, and immoral. One of the roots of this understanding of poverty is the English ―Poor Laws that came to America from England, laws that treated poverty as the natural result of improvidence, and the poor as if they had a self inflicted and communicable disease. The resulting conclusions are that our poor willfully avoid success, so we have a moral obligation to insist that they feel like rubbish. Under these circumstances, if we must help, every tool we use to do so should double as a club to punish and shame them.

The poor, demonized as a drain on society, are also the poster children for individual acts of charity conducted through donations of time or money to fraternal or religious non-profit organizations. Individual acts can be beneficial on many levels, not the least of which is to give the people who join those organizations the opportunity to express as a group what they find to be socially important. Nevertheless, government policy sets national standards, and is the collective expression of what society holds as valued, valuable, and worthy of collective and universal investment, not merely to benefit certain individuals or groups, but as an advantage to the community as a whole.

People don‘t want charity. Citizens deserve a government that responsibly stewards the economy and squares the rules between people and corporations to provide achievable opportunity and protection from the predatory claws of a capitalism that would have all of the power, the rights, the profits, and none of the responsibility. Most poor, unemployed and underemployed poor people would love to earn the means to provide even the thinnest slice of the "American dream" for their families. Crumbs provided instead, begrudgingly and with a sneer, are valued for what they are worth.

Utter hogwash.

 

[koshergrl]

What is the reason for the law of not feeding the homeless? I mean the guy is doing something nice for people and they outlaw it? What could possibly be their reasoning? They are already in dire straits having no home. It makes zero sense. So you feed a person heaven forbid. What a bunch of idiots down there. Don't they have bigger fish to fry than some guy feeding the homeless? How is that a problem? How do they justify such a statute?

They want poverty to be invisible. You see a bunch of people in line for food and one of them is your cousin's wife...shit! Your cousin got you your second job! Hell, he co-signed the loan for your first car! What the hell happened to society if someone, a family member, no less, someone who helped you when you needed it came to such a pass?? Maybe you'd have to rethink what you've been told all your life about "success," "virtue," and oh, shit, poverty!

"They" would like, will kill, actually, to prevent those shifts in attitude.

No, we just don't want them lining up for free food in our public parks.

If you want to feed them, feed them out of your house or church, like we do.