Didn't know you're a social worker! (Counselor in training here)

Kevin, the homeless people you probably don't see are the ones who ARE working while they live in their car with their kids. They won't ask for help and they usually get back on their feet, slowly but surely. I lived in St. Louis which means if you're pumping gas in Midtown you're getting asked for bus fare. Those people probably need the money but know that their line is the one most likely to get them some.

i believe in economics there are the employed and unemployed. the unemployed are broken into: not working and actively seeking, not working and not seeking, and the discouraged worker, who is so fed up with looking for work because the market had slammed them with "dont call us well call you" and "you just dont have the qualifications" for years. that, plus, say... NOT HAVING A HOME or any resources to call your own, well that will kick you in the @ss anyday and surely make you not give a damn.

Riiiiiiiiiiight. and once the homeless start taking advantage of these "free" services, people like you start complaining about how your hard-earned tax dollars are paying for no-good people who can't get it together but could if they wanted to. and again, im going back to the pride issue - it takes a lot for someone to say "i need [insert assistance] help." that admits you cant provide for yourself (and potentially your family). and isnt that the american dream anyway - to be able to be as self-sufficient as possible?

and this takes me back to my OP about homeless people being "people without homes" because guess what? homeless people are PEOPLE first. that means like you, they have feelings. like you, they have (or had) dreams. like you, they at one point have enjoyed the comforts of a home, a decent meal and stability. but even without all of that, they are still PEOPLE. so while you say "why cant they just go to the free shelters, or the free soup kitchens?" youre suggesting a man (or woman) to go to another man and say "give to me." talk about feelings of emasculation.

no, you shouldnt be blindly or stupidly compassionate. in fact i think most of the posters here are saying to be compassionate with some sort of knowledge. because right now, youre spewing a bunch of right-wing BS one-liners that show no depth of knowledge than what you see at face value. i swear if there is a pamphlet of "common homeless myths" everything you have said would be in there.

i'm the type of person who always gives food to the homeless. Maybe because i'm chubby, i always have an extra granola bar or piece of fruit or bottle of water on me... i don't see it as a big deal to spare.

If they ask for money, i just let them know i don't have it (honestly) but if you're hungry i have something to share. If i'm downtown or somewhere walking (and i have TIME) i will offer to take them to mcdonalds or something. sometimes people accept, sometimes people cuss me out. Oh well, i've done my part.

So what you're saying is that there are people who don't want to continue to look for work because they either don't have any marketable skills [their fault] or they have some self-esteem issues [also their fault]. Like I said, there's a state program which had untapped capacity which provides job training and placement services for free -- in many cases it'll even assist people with relocation related costs (probably nothing more than a bus ticket if you're homeless, and the greyhound station is also within walking distance). So at the end of the day, we're still talking about people who don't want to be responsible for themselves (absent the physically handicapped who are eligible for government assistance and the schizos who we could probably do better for, but thanks to the Supreme Court, we can't just institutionalize them).

Why don't you look at the original post. I was specifically talking about the bums who walk up to me on the street and ask for handouts, feigning illnesses, running people down, etc., not the people down at the shelter.

I couldn't care less that these folks take advantage of charitable services and state-run employment relocation/retraining services. I think those are great programs which provide an overall economic benefit if taken advantage of (even a marginally employed person costs the state less than an unemployed person).

You're making a leap here which simply cannot be inferred from any of my posts except that you're stereotyping me as a "right winger" or something along those lines.

Awww.. I'll bet that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to say that. So people are not homeless due to their own bad choices. It's society's fault... two Americas and all that.

It helps to have a job/income. That's the step 1 that many of these people can't seem to fathom. There's actually a business located pretty near to here where they can walk in, and if they can perform manual labor, they get paid for that day in cash.

Personally, if I were homeless, I'd feel a lot better going to a soup kitchen and using services designed for that purpose than hitting up random strangers on the street, making them feel uncomfortable, etc. The "pride" picture you're trying to paint here simply doesn't seem realistic.

And you spew a bunch of typical left-wing b.s. one-liners, so I guess we're even in that regard, eh?

I don't believe I've said anything which you have shown to be mythical. Maybe you can point those things out to me?

Are you kidding? He specifically separated the homeless into two distinct groups, and noted an example of why he feels something resembling compassion for one and not the other. Wow.

OK . . . what are those 'various reasons'? If it's mental health issues, then the problem lies with the failure of the welfare state to adequately and efficiently fund the resources already available - which can mean anything from the state/federal government to the actual agencies in charge (this is another argument entirely).

If it's social Darwinism in any form (job market, pride/humility, housing costs, etc) then I'm not sure exactly how you're going to reconcile this point - are you really helping by funding the 'homeless lifestyle'? I mean this in earnest - I don't really know the answer. It seems like there is some short-term compassion that would prevent long-term improvement, but it is really hard to say/quantify.

OK fair enough. however, you gave ONE example of your interaction with a homeless person. and surely you know there are as many different types of homeless as there are people in general. im just asking you to look at the other sides - that the answer to homeless people getting their ish together is so cut-and-dry. i suppose it could be in SOME cases, but i bet in MANY other cases, its not as simple as walking into some ready-to-work program and collecting your $ at the end of the day, getting dinner every day at a soup kitchen, or rummaging through a bin of clothes at a shelter. even then those are short-term fixes.

again, fair enough. what im saying is that not everyone is willing to take advantage to what is there. i mean, just because someone is giving out something doesnt mean you should automatically take it. people have their reasons. who are you to judge?

i'm leaping just as much as you are. and yes, im stereotyping you just as much as youre stereotyping the homeless. now what?


i don't need warm and fuzzies, especially on an internet message board from the likes of your opinions. and no, i can agree with you to an extent that some folks are homeless due to bad choices. there are consequences to everything. now should you reach in your pocket everytime a homeless person asks you for it? not at all. but again, you dont know what choices that person made to get to standing in front of you begging.

again, you're cutting-and-drying.

see, and im going to stop you there. you can't really say "if i was..." in a situation like this. you (we, as in the fortunate) can afford to think in idealistic terms versus realistic terms. but since youre claiming im painting an unrealistic picture of pride, then i guess we're even huh?


sure. 1 point for Kevin, 1 point for tld221.

sure:
1. "They aren't really all that bad off." yes, some of them really are that bad off. and dont even come at me saying "i wasnt speakiing for all, just some." you used "they" and that encompasses an enitre group youre stereotyping.
2. "If they're able to... they can definitely work." again, i disagree. i implore you to hire someone off the streets then if you feel that way.
3. "I'd never be in that sort of position." Never say never pal... i just hope your world doesnt come crashing down anytime soon.
4. "...so that I'll give them money to buy alcohol/drugs with." yeah, that's what ALL the homeless folks are doing, drugging and boozing up with your nickels and dimes. maybe theyre trying to grab a cheap bite from mcdonalds to take a break from same ol soup at the church down the street?

I don't get the point of this. You're making a general statement that homeless people annoy the hell out of you because one dude was making a production of trying to catch up and talk to you?

By that logic, I should start a thread "Men:They annoy the hell out of me" -- not to mention the fact that a dude running away from a homeless guy in a wheelchair is kind of pusstacular.

ummmmm yeah. i mean if youre man enough to run away from a homeless dude in a wheelchair, then you really couldve given him the change he mightve been asking for. i mean, it surely wouldve taken you less effort.

but i guess its the principle of the matter right?

If they're asking me for my money, they're asking me to judge whether or not they're worthy of my money. If they're scurrying around the streets hitting people up for money, invading their privacy and space, again, it's my business to judge.

Am I really leaping to say that people who are capable of remaining on their feet all day long, trying to con people out of money are physically capable of other kinds of work, particularly if they take the time to invest a little in themselves? I don't believe that's a leap at all. The fact is that those who do not avail themselves of such services remain on the streets. Why should I or anyone finance that choice? I know for a fact that these services are out there. If someone *chooses* not to take advantage of opportunities, again, their problem.

Considering the other choices I know for a fact that he or she has available to them, you're wrong. It may not be the case in your immediate area, so you shouldn't be casting such a wide net. I know *exactly* what services are available down here. Like I said before, I even did a little volunteer work for the job training/placement service (which is located near the homeless shelter for a reason). I know for a fact that this place does not get near the amount of 'business' that it is set up to handle. It is not an unreasonable inference at all to say that these unemployed, homeless people simply do not want to take advantage of a program which will train them, move them if necessary and find a job for them free of charge.

When I'm able to know that there is an out available to anyone with a working body and mind, I'm able to do that. If I can say with some degree of certainty that people are choosing to or not to take advantage of free services to help them reintegrate into society, then almost without exception (and I say almost because there's probably some situation which hasn't occurred to me) these people are making a choice not to work and to be homeless. Society does not owe you or I a living. It does provide opportunities. You either take advantage of those or you piss them away.

You're right, your assertion doesn't pass the smell test.

You're suggesting that someone who is hitting individuals on the street up for cash, dealing with a lot of rejection and spite, knowing that they are creating an uncomfortable situation for others has more "pride" than someone who simply gets in line at a soup kitchen or signs up for a program to help them get back on their feet.

[quote]Sure. 1 point for Kevin, 1 point for tld221.

Substitute "they" for "many." Some aren't that bad off. Some, in fact, make a better living than I do (tax free) on public charity.

As I have repeated here, there is a program downtown which by the way is not even near capacity which specializes in finding employment for these folks. I understand you're not well acquainted with downtown Oklahoma City. If they're able to, they absolutely can work.

Don't worry, it won't. I'm well prepared for any eventuality which may befall me (at least financially).

Beggars can't be choosers. Statistically speaking, I'm going to be more correct on this one than you are. Drug and alcohol dependency is a big reason people end up on the street.

By what logic?

And no one ran away, merely avoided. I merely found it humorous that he was using this prop in the manner he did. It also occurs to me that if he is disabled to the point of needing a wheelchair, he is also eligible for social security, public housing, etc.

These are both mental illnesses as well. It's hard to get someone with an addiction through a rehab program period, let alone follow up with them and make sure they don't revert back to old habits. Welfare and state health is just in poor shape.
I'd rather give these people something to eat but yeah...just saying, addiction is a genetically pre-disposed illness, one that will cripple your life.

While there are people who can do and wont, yes, there are people who cant and cannot really get any help.

One good example is a fellow who would sit in a parking lot with a sign saying will work for food. He was offered money to work clean up jobs and would not take them. He would bring his cache of food items and trade for a bottle of cheap wine.

He had family who offered him a place to live but wouldnt do it!

Remember, there are those who are panderers and more and more citys are passing ordinances for this very fact.

I have seen some who wear better clothes than I do.

Some alos have more money than some would think! Beats the hell out of an office or manual labor job.

But like Kevin, if I gave to every swinging begger, I could not afford to live either.

Scam to many times is what it is.

Are you saying you traded homeless people wine for food?

In your post, you complained about the behavior of one person (wheelchair dude) and then made generalized statements about homeless people (this one guy annoyed me --> they annoy me). Without even getting into the substance of what you're saying, that's, uh, lame.

Running away and avoiding are pretty much the same thing in this situation, cowboy.

It seems like what you're saying (and I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong) is that you feel you should not have to deal with strangers who want something from you addressing you in public.

Am I really leaping to say that people who are capable of remaining on their feet all day long, trying to con people out of money are physically capable of other kinds of work, particularly if they take the time to invest a little in themselves? I don't believe that's a leap at all. The fact is that those who do not avail themselves of such services remain on the streets. Why should I or anyone finance that choice? I know for a fact that these services are out there. If someone *chooses* not to take advantage of opportunities, again, their problem.

by "my immediate area" you mean the greater NYC metro area? please there are hundreds times more homeless people than there are shelters, soup kitchens, outreach centers, etc. available. so in *my* immediate area, i do believe most of the people who need the help access it in some form, even if it is going to a pantry once a week for a loaf of bread or a men's shelter for a daily shower. and i'm giving YOU examples of volunteer projects i've worked in. and you'll always have your number of folks who just aren't trying at all. but again i couldnt pinpoint them on the street and say "that filthy liar - he could totally get a job and be OK if he wanted to." which is what you're doing.

perhaps the ratios are different in OKC than NYC and you are exposed to a greater number of folks who can actually get their hustle up and make something for themselves. i just dont see that here as much.

oh, so damn them homeless because they're making us, the "priveledged" inconvienenced? oooh poor baby. you will live. geez.

and the dude who is asking you for change in the morning could be in the line at the soup kitchen in the afernoon, then back on the streets during PM rush hour, and in the shelter to get a bed for the night. just because homeless arent putting 2 and 2 together to make a decent living doesnt mean they dont have the smarts to say "well panhandling couldnt hurt - all people can say is no."

and this is why i say youre cutting and drying. you keep naming this ONE program. what happens when th less fortunate wise up, start taking advantage hardcore, and there are no more empployment in OKC? then what are you going to start recommending?

and i commend you for putting yourself in an advantageous position. but i dont commend you for the level of certainty you are holding. i believe that is called "getting comfortable." and we all know folks who get comfortable take downfall the hardest.

and conversely, people end up on the street and create a drug and alcohol dependency. so how are you more correct than I?