There seems to be a slight discrepancy between what CNN and MSNBC describe as a booming economy and actuality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCGtxeknSg
Printable View
There seems to be a slight discrepancy between what CNN and MSNBC describe as a booming economy and actuality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvCGtxeknSg
I didn't see any porta-potties.
Those poor wretches.
Not the homeless;fuck them; I feel bad for the adjoining homeowners who have to deal with all of these epic failures pissing and shitting in their rose bushes.
That's the homeless encampment outside Angels Stadium in Orange County, California. One of the wealthiest communities in the USA and there is a lack of portable toilets and washing stations all over Southern California which is why contagious diseases are running rampant. Even in beautiful downtown San Diego homeless urinate on the streets and only in the last six months did various local governments start to recognize the disease and sanitary problems.
Until now the proposed solution has always been taxing developers and real estate sales to build apartments at a cost of $55,000 each. But few are built. And then you have those with mental illness and can't or won't live in buildings.
Count your blessings.
California has one third of the welfare recipients in this country and 22% of the homeless. It's there own fault. The poor and homeless from all over the country flock to The People's Republic of California because of the benefits of being homeless. Your liberal politicians at work for you.
I've been there and done the homeless drifter lifestyle. The thing about it is I always had the power to pull myself out of it any time I wanted to. But I was in love with the carefree lifestyle at the time. I've told people this many times, even when I was homeless, government programs can only do so much for you. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. In the end the only person that really gives a shit about you is you yourself. You have to help yourself out of the situation. You are the only person that can do it. No government program can do it for you. You have to lift yourself up and out of the situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Don't forget the weather and liberal cities like Santa Monica which welcome the homeless.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Isn't the real blessing not having to count them? Feeling funky, today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I seem to recall funding for mental hospitals running out in the early 80's due to legislative changes. I think that was a big factor, along with the economy and what Mickey describes. Not a single factor for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
The deranged used to be in institutions but it was deemed socially unacceptable so they were put out on the street to fend for themselves. Great idea.
Actually, it IS a pretty good idea, except for one little point.
The current treatment model presupposes that the mentally ill will continue with outpatient treatment and continue to take their meds.
Oops.
And to think that POS Jerry Brown won re-election in 2014 by a 60/40 margin. I think liberalism really is a mental disorder.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Well then, how does Trump factor into your insanity scenario?Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyj
He sure looks and acts like the Mad Hatter to me.
He doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterVWell then, how does Trump factor into your insanity scenario?Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyj
He sure looks and acts like the Mad Hatter to me.
give them a one way ticket to idaho
plenty of open spaces to piss in, low cost of living.
they can fertilize the potato crop
I see hundreds of homes in the video. They're not high end but not everyone lives like Alan after all.
IIRC, didn't Alan say he has an apartment?Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaug
Either way, it's an advantage play.Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
An opulent apartment.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterVIIRC, didn't Alan say he has an apartment?Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaug
Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
Now we know how the casinos feel about advantage players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill YungEither way, it's an advantage play.Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
I don't want to play politics, but I hate that republicans on these sites blame everything on the 'liberal democrats' and democrats blame everything on wealthy republicans. There is more than enough blame for both sides on most issues, including this one. I am a registered republican, but consider myself an independent. I voted for Trump once last year (primary) and voted against him once (general). I am socially liberal feeling people should be free to make their own decisions on most social issues and fiscally conservative, thinking the government spends to much of our tax dollars and that includes on the different welfare programs.
So this situation like most there is plenty of blame for both sides, and some blame that is due to neither. California is far too liberal in welfare benefits in my opinion. This is the fault of Democrats. Welfare was not suppose to be a lifelong 'lifestyle' Welfare was supposed to be a temporary aid to help people get back on their feet.
On the republican side, the great Ronald Reagan has to take significant blame. As president he cut funding for mental hospitals, opting for a program to intergrade the mentally ill back into society. People forget that he was also governor of California before he became president and implemented that same policy at the state level first. So that bad idea and failed policy, California got two different slaps from Ronald Reagan.
And some of the homeless are homeless due to no fault of their own. Some of them work fulltime or multiple part-time job and just can't afford to live anywhere in California. Apartments run thousands of dollars in some of these places. How does a low income worker afford that? High cost of living is one of the issues in a place that has high-end job market, like California with the tech industry. There is a greater divide and for people on the lower end, everything is out of reach.
I don't know what the answers are. But nothing will be accomplished by the traditional 'pass the blame to the other side'.
About 15 miles from where I live.....in Oakland there is massive makeshift tents in one are along with massive trash lining the streets of one area. Just a feww blocks off of broad street which is a main business thoroughfare . Its asstounding to drive off an exit from the highway,,drive a half mile and see the massive accumulation of trash and filth lining the streets along with the "tents"
The city is starting to buy tuff sheds......I have one in my nevada home. Of course no running water or electricity. Just a brand of shed that will allow 2 people to sleep and allow the city to remove the massive trash and tents. They are being built on an empty PG&E owned lot. Kind of like sweeping the dirt from one side of a room to another. The city is going to provide a manager and security for the shed village.
I actually live in a modest apartment in a very nice area of town and frankly I never want the upkeep of a house again.Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaugAn opulent apartment.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterVIIRC, didn't Alan say he has an apartment?Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaug
People who have a good work ethic and are able to work and do work as KJ states, has no business living in certain calfornis cities, new yourk boston, princeton....the list is long. However the list is longer for cities and towns across the country that have a low cost of living and lower sales tax where a dollar goes farther.
SO KJ...they are homeless...they dont need to get money to get a moving company to move them 1000 miles. They just get on a greyhound and move somewhere that is more suitable to their earning ability. So it IS their fault. There is nothing keeping homeless that are same and can work in san francisco, in NYC, in Oakland, in San Diego. For the folks that KJ talks about.....it is their fault that they are homeless if they can hold down a job and the earnings arent enough to pay for an apartment.
Then all they have to do is move somewhere where minimum wage WILL pay for an apartment. There are places in this country where minimum wage earners can live.
There is a casino, just a couple miles from reno called Boomtown. On the way back to california on sunday morning I pass it and they have a lighted electronic billboard with different everchanging messages on it. One said....Room Cleaners 13.00/hr. I was thinking that walmart just announced 11/hour minimum for their company....and this backbreaking work s paying 13.. But if you drive 20 miles outside of reno....you can live for 13 per hour.
Maybe you can get 16/hr in san francisco...and you couldnt rent a closet with that income.
Larry, that concept, ship the problem people, whether just lower income, people with mental issue somewhere else, is an often sough solution. Is that REALLY a solution? Again, I don't know the answers. But I don't think shipping the problem elsewhere is the answer, especially from someone who lives in that area and is suggesting shipping the problem elsewhere. :p
Rental prices in some areas are crazy. In LA I rented a luxury 1BR with a gym and outdoor pool and one parking space (important) for $1985 a month. Now in an area of Summerlin I'm in a two bedroom, two bath with a gym, outdoor pool and indoor pool with one parking space for $1070 a month. My grocery bill is actually 20-30% lower here because supermarket prices are less. I'll give you an example: I buy these large bottles of Kroger flavored water. In LA the price was 99-cents, but at Smith's in Vegas it's 69-cents. The same Lean Cuisine frozen dinners are 30 to 40 cents less. And premium gas for my Benz is 60 to 70 cents a gallon less than what I pay in LA and I drive to LA about twice a month so I keep up on the price difference.
It's the usual divide and conquer strategy of the elites - both major US political parties are owned by the same multinational corporations and they want to get the rank and file arguing with on another instead of looking up at the gated communities in the mountains:Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
wo is "shipping" them. You said they are competant workers who dont make enough money to live in high rent areas of the country. So the answer is eaither to move to low rent areas of the country or live on the street. Its a no brainer. If it was me, no one would have to "ship me". I was talking about your homeless where you say its not their fault because they dont earn enough. Well if there are those people out there that you claim exist....they have no one to blame but themselves. Thet should not be living in high rent areas of the country.
I live in a high rent area of northern Ca.....the median home here is 1.3 mil. We have a supermarket chain that pays around minimum wage just a mile from my home. Should those workers be allowed to live in the streets here because they cant afford the prices.
Theydont need to be "shipped"....they need to be arrested, and told to find a place to work that supports a living space. You said they work and have some money. So tell them they are not entitled to soil neighborhoods merely because they want to live in a certain area of the country. There are alot of things people want....and sometimes they just cant have them. Thats life.
We shouldn't allow homelessness. Years ago when I was on the news I did a report about how JUST the money spent to maintain our nuclear weapons would be enough to end the homeless problem.
Trump was right about one thing: we give away too much foreign aid instead of solving our own problems first.
Eliminate just a couple jets and see what $80 million can accomplish.
CORRECTION: Each F-35 is $160-million. And the Pentagon wants more than 2,000 of them??????
Do they not enforce vagrancy laws anymore?Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
you are living in a dream world. Big business and special interests rule. So cutting out big business contracts in favor of helping the homeless aint gonna happen .
It will come from raising of taxes, or locally shifting funds from education. police, senior citizen programs.
they can if they choose.....but what cop wants to touch and put a lice infested urine soaked person in their patrol car.
Otis the town drunk and vagrant in Mayberry was lovable, and didnt stink up the sherriffs jail. But vagrants of 2018 can be covered in urine and feces.
And then the jail space is scarce. So for the folks that KJ talks about that are hard working people collecting a paycheck but living on the street.....there is plenty of violent criminals taking up the jail space.
He didn't? :confused: How do you know? Did your travels from NJ to California take you through Mayberry? :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
I watch Andy griffin several times a week while eating our evening meal between 7-8. I love that show. Why would you think Otis didn't smell bad? He was a drunk?
BTW, for the last week or so, they have reverted to the first year's show and I not only am seeing episodes I haven't seen before but you see other differences. Andy is a little more of a country hick, in his talk. Andy and barney have different girlfriends. Clara Edwards, aunt Bea's longtime friend and sometime nemesis, was in an episode last night but had a different name. two nights ago, there was a different person playing Floyd the barber.
By the way, the person that played Floyd (except 2 nights ago) had a stroke during the run of the series. In the first year or two he is very active, but post stroke, he is always seated either in the barber's chair or on the bench out front. He also never uses one hand after the stroke.
It worked great for Nevada.....until they got caught.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...369736411.html
because as you know, he was in jail quite a bit, and it was a one room sheriff.office/jail combination. And andy never ever commented about the stench. Even whispering to Barney so as not to hurt the feelings of Otis. Andy would get visitors while Otis was in the jail, and again not a peep.
There was no divider in the room. I never saw an air freshener candle burning...probably because they probably didnt exist.
I never saw a can of Lysol handy or being used.
I never saw urine stains on his pants
Nor did i see track marks on his arms
There was one episode where from behind bars he called andy a motherfucking cocksucker and he threatened to rape Aunt Bea.....but other than that one episode he was rather docile.
And dont forget Otis had a respectable wife and home. He just had a bit of a drinking problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
Yes, that was a show for the ages. Mostly mini morality plays on how to act as a kid and how to act as a grown up. Opie learned valuable lessons and about consequences to actions and decisions whch ended up being a teaching to to kids growing up watching it. And it taught a lesson on parenting, as Andy was not dismissive of his kid, he would sit down and talk to him like a real person.
Leave it to beaver was and is also a treat to watch. The realistic writing from the point of view of children was remarkable as the adult writers had a great ear and remembrance of childhood banter and thought processes.
there was something that rings true on both of those shows....which keeps them on the air.
"Gumby" was a show cut from the same cloth, albeit with a Christian point of view / message.
back in the day, alot of the shows were mini morality plats as was cartoons.....but then came the married with children generation....and nothing has been the same since. trash talking and "getting the best " of people took over as common themes
Same guy did Davey and Goliath I believe. Same claymation type show.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I've been to Alan's apartment and can say he is being VERY modest. I mean with the shag rugs the beautiful walnut paneling and the water bed with the mirrors on the ceiling in the master bedroom it's like a holiday every day!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI actually live in a modest apartment in a very nice area of town and frankly I never want the upkeep of a house again.Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaugAn opulent apartment.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I think it was All In The Family that changed TV and not Married With Children.
to me no...All in the family had redeeming qualities. It actually taught good morals...and the racist rarely came out on top. Archie would constanty get his come-up-ance. He always had his son in law, wife..and daughter to make him look foolish for the things he said. As well as lionel who mocked the racist in front of his face without him even realizing it.. It showed good family values, and decent people overall outside of the main character.
Now married with children showed parent who didnt give a shit for their kids, a mother who didnt even care about feeding them or having food in the house. Parents who had contempt for each other. Alot of scheming to get what you want. Neighbors that were treated like crap and mocked. It was considered funny when they stole from others and got away with it. Children talked back to and ignored parents , and had no moral compass just like their parents. A daughter that was totally stupid and got by on her body. A son thats lazy .Totally dysfunctional. Parents were miserable hated each other and the burden their children put on them.
I dont know for sure..but for me personally..thats where sitcoms took a turn. Then a .flood of other shows where the kids wisecracked back to theirparents, and talked about sexual references. And parents who mock their children. It becomes the norm. Art imitating life..or life imitating art. I think a little of both occurred. It was a show where no character gave a shit about anything or anyone.
All in the family was ground breaking in a good way...in that they addressed social and political issues. But although they used a bigot as a conduit to attack social issues......the foundation was always a functional family where the kids showed respect for others, and stood up to intolerance. The parents loved their kids and vise versa.
TV didn't change society, it merely served to publicize already ongoing change.
i think it showed what was going on possibly in springer trailer trash households that people seemed to love to watch.....but as kids watch it growing up...it becomes the new normal. the new acceptable behavior.
Just like video games make kids numb to death and violence.
tv shows are teachers as well.
I cant say for sure....i cantprove it....but I fairlypsoitive that watching leave it to beaver and andy griffith, and father knows best, and bachelor father, and family affair....all shows that revolved around parents and kids..taught me a type of "normalcy" on parenting and being a kid...with moral values, and consequences for actions. It showed me how to be a good citizen and taught how people talked to each other with respect, both parents neighbors and kids.
married with children was the antithesis of that. Showing disrespect for children for parents for neighbors, for society. That may have been brewing anyway....but it became the new norm for millions.
it accelerated the springer crowd into the living room of middle america in prime time
iduplicate
A more likely springboard toward the change you describe was probably the growth of the suburbs and automobile culture; it has allowed people to see more of the world, to be mobile and somewhat empowered which leads to: new horizons, the grass is greener, etc.
Add to it the influx of women into the workplace starting with WWII and the dawn of the computer era and there's your catalyst for societal upheaval.
Today half the kids born in America are born out of wedlock, most marriages fail, religion is on the wane: I don't know where we'll wind up, but as always life evolves.
I see more devolving
And I didnt drive around in cars or see the world. Yet I was influenced by what I saw on TV.
Kids in the ghetto dont drive around and see the world....yet unsupervised at home, are influenced by video games and TV.Its always been that way.
and yes the computer accelerates the deterioration......people mimicking what they see on youtube,usually inappropriate behavior....that adds to it. Maybe over the last 10 years, the computer influences more than tv.
But when married with children came out......there wasnt allot of the other stuff like video games other than mario brothers or donkey kong......nor computers.
and not alot of drivig around the world either. at that time.
My point about automobiles is that until that time most people never strayed far from their birth place.
Their education was minimal, their aspirations were the same as their parents: very, very conservative and self-perpetuating.
But then it all changed: the generation before the boomers were the first wave, and the boomers rode it into now.
that was also a factor for sure. I am not laying all on a dopy sitcom.
But you are right as grown children moved far away, and got married and had kids, they didnt have the structure of parents who can guide them with advice through hard times in the relationship. Kids didnt have grandparents to babysit....instead had 17 year old goth girl. Even more opportunity for kids removed from a extended family structure to lose themselves into video games and TV. No family barbecues with cousins their age to play with. No grandmas birthday. Alot less things to do....more time for themselves. Not even time with their own parents.......enter "quality time"...the grand excuse I heard the first time in the early 80s i think......where "quality time" was the ticket to feeling less guilt for not being with your kids.
Alan, recall that most of the nation's leaders either suffer from psychopathy, sociopathy or both (it's difficult to get a group like this convinced that they need to be on anti-psychotic medication). This makes the chance of re-allocating the small percentage of the defense budget (or other budgets) required to solve the homeless issue in the country a remote possibility IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Totally agree Larry.Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
Although i will admit when married with children came on in the 80's i was in my mid 20's and thought the show was funny as hell.
Do you mean like people got shipped out of the cities of Europe in the 1940's? The right to live in any state you want is a constitutionally protected right. Arresting people and shipping them off to another state is not. Only stormtroopers do that. Are you a stormtrooper?Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
Larry praising how people talked to each other with respect? Now THAT is funny. LMAO!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
when you get a lucid moment you will read that I never suggested "shipping". But you will understand when things settle down in your bloodstream. I said arrest people for valid laws that they are breaking, and tell them if they are working and cant afford living in this high rent town...to find a place in the USA or in the world that is more conducive to their payscale. And if they are arrested enough for real crimes they commit(vagrancy)......they will get the hint that san francisco, san diego, NYC, ...is not the place for them. Who said anything about shipping. Shipping is for UPS.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmDo you mean like people got shipped out of the cities of Europe in the 1940's? The right to live in any state you want is a constitutionally protected right. Arresting people and shipping them off to another state is not. Only stormtroopers do that. Are you a stormtrooper?Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
I was talking about the sector of people that KJ said had jobs but couldnt afford housing. I am not talking about drunkards and dope users or the mentally ill.They need medical help.
Question: what makes you think, LarryS, that jobs are available in the low rent districts that you would like these people to move to?
Its up to them to go to the library, use the internet and find places...and not just take a bus to a random city. It all about personal responsibility
So a person that lived all their life in San Francisco should move to Corn Junction, Iowa to placate you?Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
Let's quit pussy footing around here about the homeless, and call a spade a spade.
The homeless are failures; they've failed at life, thus they are homeless.
Natural selection favors the strong over the weak.
We really need to cull the herd.
Maybe we need to criminalize vagrancy, and send those convicted to work camps to repair the nation's infrastructure.
Another option: hello, Soylent Green (while I'd turn my nose up at eating it, I suspect the residents of shithole countries wouldn't be as picky).
*Good Trump-keeping seal of approval given*
I became homeless on my 18th birthday when my stepfather woke me up and gave me an hour to get out. It was March of my senior year in high school. I spent a couple nights at the home of a friend and classmate, but decided I didn't want to be a burden to their family, so I spent the next 3 months at the men's homeless shelter, on a cot in a room with 2 dozen men, most old enough to be my father, a few my grandfather.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
For 3 month from March til early June, I rose before dawn, to take a public transportation bus to high school. I also worked a part time job 2 evenings and weekends at an ice cream store. I also was the starting short shop on my high school baseball team, that went to but lost the state championship that spring. In June I graduated.
At no time did I feel like a failure or consider that I had failed at anything. As a matter of fact, when my name was called and I walked across the stage to receive my diploma and my classmates rose and applaud, it was without doubt the proudest moment of my life.
Shame on you MrV. I am sure it is easy for you to look down your nose and judge everyone. You don't know everyone's story and circumstances though do you.
I know enough to form an opinion, and my opinion is that, with some exceptions (e.g. women with kids being dumped, gay teens being thrown out by intolerant step-parents upon their coming out) homeless people have failed at the most important game we play, the game of life.
What, do you seriously disagree that most of the chronic (i.e. not short term / situational) homeless are in fact Losers?
I only scowl and flip the bird at the filthy roadside beggars; let me guess, you have a heart and give them money?
If you do, you'd best but a big "S" in front of that "AP" label you so proudly wear.
You have been on enough forums with me that you are probably aware that I donate both time and money to the Nevada Partnership for Homeless Youth. I also a sponsor to a local radio station's backpack and school supply give away each August to homeless and disadvantaged youth returning to school.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I am not looking for any "S", which I am sure in your mind stands for "schmuck" (2nd time in 24 hours I have used this word and I a not even Jewish :confused:) I just offer a little compassion, non-judgmental compassion to those less fortunate than myself. I make no apology for that.
No, I didn't know, but that changes nothing.
And it wasn't "schmuck," it was "sap."
Bootstraps and Old Spice ITT
I admire you for the adversity you overcame. However the argument you make on V's comment I dont buy.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI became homeless on my 18th birthday when my stepfather woke me up and gave me an hour to get out. It was March of my senior year in high school. I spent a couple nights at the home of a friend and classmate, but decided I didn't want to be a burden to their family, so I spent the next 3 months at the men's homeless shelter, on a cot in a room with 2 dozen men, most old enough to be my father, a few my grandfather.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
For 3 month from March til early June, I rose before dawn, to take a public transportation bus to high school. I also worked a part time job 2 evenings and weekends at an ice cream store. I also was the starting short shop on my high school baseball team, that went to but lost the state championship that spring. In June I graduated.
At no time did I feel like a failure or consider that I had failed at anything. As a matter of fact, when my name was called and I walked across the stage to receive my diploma and my classmates rose and applaud, it was without doubt the proudest moment of my life.
Shame on you MrV. I am sure it is easy for you to look down your nose and judge everyone. You don't know everyone's story and circumstances though do you.
There are outliers for any instnace..but that doesnt make them the norm
For example I can easily say with certainty that black children growing up in single parent households without a dad have a higher drop out rate from school and have a greater chance of living at the poverty level. Even though you can point to Obama as being a black child raised by a single parent. He ia an outlier.
So just because you are not lazy, stupid, a loser, poor decision maker, poor educated by your own choice,.....and got out of the homeless situation by being the antithesis of what I just mentioned.....means you are an outlier.....it doesnt mean the majority of homeless are just like you.
It all comes down to personal responsibility. If yOU(the general you) are lazy, sit home and watch tv, and take up drinking and become an alcoholic...you now have a self inflicted disease. Some of the alcoholics on the street are cut from that cloth. I have no sympathy for them just as I have not sympathy for a 500 lb man who complains that he cant get a job. Again self inflicted. So Mr V is looking not at the exceptions.Not the outliers.