This throws a bad light on RVs. News from Seattle

[BelgianPup]

Question if population growth is not the problem leading to a shortage of decent shelter - what is?

The same two things it's always been: Greed and lust for power.

 

[BelgianPup]

How about we, as a community, provide decent living spaces within the budgets of the poorest among us without demanding they solve all their personal problems first?

You must not live here on the West Coast. The authorities have taken over multiple motels/hotels and offered them to the junkies and drunks. In a short period of time, the places are absolutely trashed. The drug sales and use is wide open. They're having sex in the corridors and outside walkways. They're assaulting passersby.

The problem is NOT that they're just without a place to live, the problem is the drugs and alcohol. What is so hard to understand about this???

THE PROBLEM IS NOT HOMELESSNESS.

 

[RonDean]

Reading thru this reminds me of the later 60's and a book by Dr. Paul Ehrlich Titled: The Population Bomb Dr. Ehrlich was an advocate for what he called Z.P.G. or zero population growth which at that time he believed could be achieved if each family limited themselves to two children. (ten years later the Chinese went to a policy of one child per family to deal with their population issues)

A couple of years later Alvin Toffler and his wife Adelaide wrote a ground shaking book titled, "Future Shock"

Much change began to take place by the 1960's There were 170,000,000 aprox people in 1960 where as by 2023 there were 334,233,854 as of Jan 1, 2021.

After the 1960's the income tax on the extremely wealthy began to be lowered thus providing additional funds to send their business holdings off shore, use offshore tax shelters, use offshore banks to laundry money and exponentially increase their wealth. This has allowed for purchasing political favor, and placing the people in office that they want to set policies they want. The average John or Jane Doe had 6% passbook savings interest at the Bank in that time but it began to vanish in these same years. But the wealthy had definitely enjoyed the windfall of WW2 supply production and for another ten years before competition from other countries reemerged. Automation has given way to AI today and both will likely merge together soon.



In 1957 a book some point to yet today was published. Somehow ironically the meaning is shifting away from the new rich (of the early 50's) to the new poor of today.

View attachment 33945

My opinion is that Ayn Rand was/is part of the problem. Although she wrote good fiction, she also popularized concepts that seem to justify our current wealth and power disparity. Although I do agree with some of her points, I would not be one to promote her overall philosophical system.

 

[RonDean]

You must not live here on the West Coast. The authorities have taken over multiple motels/hotels and offered them to the junkies and drunks. In a short period of time, the places are absolutely trashed. The drug sales and use is wide open. They're having sex in the corridors and outside walkways. They're assaulting passersby.

The problem is NOT that they're just without a place to live, the problem is the drugs and alcohol. What is so hard to understand about this???

THE PROBLEM IS NOT HOMELESSNESS.

And what is anyone doing to improve the situation? Although addiction IS a issue and feeds the homeless problem, it is far from the only driver. We have many addicts living OFF the street too. Other countries that are addressing the homelessness problem better also have addicts. I think everyone (me included) like to point at the part of the problem that supports their viewpoint and ignore those that don't.

I would love to see better problem solving on all the issues. But, right now I think that homelessness is the most visible evidence of wage disparity, addiction, real estate codes and prices, etc, etc. This will require multiple solutions to solve and I don't even see much of a start anywhere.

 

[mtm12345]

I live in Seattle in the center of the city and I have a business. Almost everyone here including myself has seen the city nosedive since we started "encouraging" houseless people to come here. We see crimes no one has ever dreamed of before. Many police officers voluntarily left after the huge BLM protests and have not been replaced. Theft 911 calls are a joke, even sometimes violent 911 calls can't be answered. Even if police did respond they aren't allowed to do anything for someone walking out of stores with less than $900 worth of merchandise, and any drug you are smoking or injecting is not allowed to be prosecuted. Even smoking fentanyl on the bus and making everyone feel sick is encouraged by public health because the user can be watched and given help. I have talked to a long time sheriff who was in charge of the area where I have my business. He said in 13 years he has offered every houseless person on the street shelter and never been taken up on it once. He also says they are almost universally addict's. At the same time I am a minivan stealth camper, I have parked in several places like Santa Cruz where the overnight laws are not enforced. I may even have to live in my van in Seattle in the near future as I might lose my house. I love that Bob has given people at their last resort hope for dignity. So I am kind of on both sides, I hate having another $1000 of stuff stolen from me, I hate having all these gun shots around my house that the police sometimes can't even respond to, I hate seeing all these tents and RV's and people with needles hanging out of their arms, I hate the way our city council and former mayor blame the police, but I also hate the idea that people without huge fortunes are just expected to die out of sight because they are trying to live on social security.

 

[WanderingRose]

I would love to see better problem solving on all the issues. But, right now I think that homelessness is the most visible evidence of wage disparity, addiction, real estate codes and prices, etc, etc. This will require multiple solutions to solve and I don't even see much of a start anywhere.

There are those who have fallen into homelessness, otherwise functioning adults who lost a job, then their dwelling, and/or couldn’t afford the rising cost of renting.

They would live differently if they had enough income to meet expenses, or if income-based housing were more accessible.

Then there are the addicted, and the mildly to moderately mentally ill who 50 years ago would have been institutionalized.

And those who never internalized any sense of responsibility for themselves, prefer to live hand to mouth and off of others, uninterested in working jobs, paying rent, becoming a part of mainstream society.

Homelessness is a very complicated problem, for which we do not have the answer here, but I would bet those who work directly with the homeless have some very good recommendations.

If only the powers that be would listen.

 

[user 36441]

Population growth definitely isn't the issue. It's income and wealth disparity. The "powers that be" changed policies in the late 70s and early 80s, specifically for this purpose, and it's been a smashing success... and it doesn't show any signs of abating. I won't go into the details, but policies have favored profit over worker income, which has naturally led to an overabundance of "investment". People lack buying power, resulting in less investment in production or goods and services, and instead assets get inflated... primarily stocks, and the one we care more about... real estate.

I think the long game is AI related with a dramatic socio-economic shift. If/when AI gets advanced enough, making a large % of us unable to exchange work for a decent wage, there will be a big push to quickly reduce population... a lot. Existing housing will be cheaper then in many areas, but we won't be happy about it, since we'll be on the dole (if we are lucky) and in poverty.

And what is anyone doing to improve the situation? Although addiction IS a issue and feeds the homeless problem, it is far from the only driver. We have many addicts living OFF the street too. Other countries that are addressing the homelessness problem better also have addicts. I think everyone (me included) like to point at the part of the problem that supports their viewpoint and ignore those that don't.

I would love to see better problem solving on all the issues. But, right now I think that homelessness is the most visible evidence of wage disparity, addiction, real estate codes and prices, etc, etc. This will require multiple solutions to solve and I don't even see much of a start anywhere.

There's a spectrum here. On one end you've got the people who would like to see everybody survive. On the other are people who think that's unrealistic, and they want to survive on their own merits and feel they can't afford to care what happens to the whole group. You can call the first group Democrats and the second group Republicans, but whatever you call them, they are both valid examples of two extreme ends of a spectrum, and we need to find a balance in the middle.'

 

[eDJ_]

Ron Dean wrote:

My opinion is that Ayn Rand was/is part of the problem.

That's what I was driving at Ron. Nearly 70 years hence her original words to an emerging "have & have more" class (in the 50's) are turning a 180 to reflect a burgeoning "have little & have nothing" population that has resulted and suffers in some ways from the same points Rand listed. The same population who couldn't begin to retire the National Debt no matter how heavily taxed they are in their life time given prevailing wages and cost of living.

Many small constant increments can accumulate in a massive build up. As an example, in the 70's a Public Service Announcement (PSA) demonstrated this with "Littering". It became known as the Crying Indian commercial. (youtube video below)

Keep America Beautiful

But I bet no one has ever seen a PSA like it directed at the extremely wealthy reminding that 10% of the population that every graft or corruption or tax cheat could help put us in the national debt we are in now: $31,462,154,854,903 as of May 23, 2023.

Where I live, I see "Now Hiring" signs everywhere. Never seen anything like it when I was younger. Still there are no lines at any of those establishments waiting to interview. There's plenty of people at the busiest intersections with cardboard signs asking for money.

If you talk with any of those beggars, they'll tell you that they can make more money in a few hours on a couple days of a week than they can working at any of those minimum wage jobs where they believe they're in a higher tax bracket than the most wealthy.

So what have we learned from Ms Rand ?

 

[bullfrog !]

Labor intensive jobs or low skill level jobs with little opportunity to advance that result in premature health and stress related mental problems that offer no benefits or even a living wage makes for a hard sell to young people wanting to experience American prosperity resulting in many attempting to join the global community for jobs and social relations via the internet. For them just getting by as good as it will get.

 

[Morgana]

An article on the CNN app today about the estimated 11,000 people living in RV’s on the streets of Los Angeles

(reposting same or similar link)

Good Lord, some of those people pay more in rent than I do.
And there are "vanlords" renting out vans like slumlords rent out sticks and bricks. And even companies that offer upkeep services (so, presumably, people who want to live clean and can afford to pay for it).

It doesn't really even seem like a nomadism issue (or at least, it has many non-nomad angles).

Anyone who thinks that there is one simple explanation for homelessness -- OR that all people living in these van encampments are the same (whether you want to write them off as demons or saints) -- read this article.

 

[rruff]

Anyone who thinks that there is one simple explanation for homelessness

There doesn't need to be. For whatever reason they are there, it should not be ignored, allowed, perpetuated, etc. Laws. None of us can do whatever the hell we want.

Theft 911 calls are a joke, even sometimes violent 911 calls can't be answered. Even if police did respond they aren't allowed to do anything for someone walking out of stores with less than $900 worth of merchandise, and any drug you are smoking or injecting is not allowed to be prosecuted.

How did we ever get to this clusterf@&k of insanity... where we just let people steal stuff? Shouldn't that be punished? If drug addiction is involved, put them in residential rehab. If it's psych problems, same deal. If they are on the street for financial reasons rather than choice, give them the help they need. It won't be cheap, but cough up the $$$. Federally funded, not locally. And, I'll say it again... no way in hell does a person have a right to an apartment in an expensive city. The "free" housing will be somewhere cheap.

Where I live, I see "Now Hiring" signs everywhere.....If you talk with any of those beggars, they'll tell you that they can make more money in a few hours on a couple days of a week than they can working at any of those minimum wage jobs where they believe they're in a higher tax bracket than the most wealthy.

Exactly. They prefer their freedom, and begging pays better and is easier. Also, Covid policies "encouraged" a lot of people to go from part time (with a job) to full time addicts, and these folks would probably work if they could get through rehab. Where I live fast food is paying $15/hr and COL is well under the national average. Beautiful, great climate, nice place to live. Can't hire. Also, we don't have a homeless problem here, because it isn't allowed.

 

[bullfrog !]

We do have lots of problems and finding a place to live without seeing them or being a part of them is getting difficult! Lol!!! Being mobile and able to adapt while trying to help solve them by voting is being made more difficult as well! Something everyone should do in my opinion. Not allowing something doesn’t fix the problem.

 

[maki2]

What happens in Seattle should stay in Seattle. Meaning every city has its own particular culture and elected officials and they are the people who make executive decisions. Because they are elected, or sometimes hired or appointed by committee, the way homeless are handled is a set of rules that are ever changing. What is done in one city at any particular time should not be assumed as being an indication of a nationwide trend for how the same issue will be dealt with.

 

[maki2]

The Fountainhead is a work of fiction and was intended to create drama and conflict. It is was written 80 years ago during WWII.

 

[Morgana]

I don't believe anyone has suggested The Fountainhead was nonfiction?
It remains a highly influential work that has philosophical and political meaning -- as many works of fiction do --for many people (that would not include me).

Not sure how its age is relevant.
The Bible, the Tao Te Ching, and Plato's Republic are all >2000 years old.

I'm sure it was "intended to create drama and conflict" -- few written works can succeed without those -- but then real life is pretty full of drama and conflict too and that's kind of why people write, to deal with that stuff.

 

[RonDean]

I've got an idea that makes sense to me but I know will never happen. Every religious organization I know of claims they want to "help" those in need. I think homeless people are in need. Just as a point of information, not all countries give churches a free pass on taxes. And even the US didn't give religions an federal exemption until 1913. According to The Washington Post, the amount of taxes churches avoid is about 82.5 BILLION a year.
( https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...give-religions-more-than-82-5-billion-a-year/ )

I could imaging all sorts of national solutions could be provided with that kind of money.

 

[maki2]

I would just as soon see the churches spending the majority of donated dollars within their local communities where they personally know the people they are helping.

 

[wayne49]

Stop funding the war in Ukraine, bring back productive jobs from US factories in China (who is also US's #1 enemy).

 

[rruff]

rruff - please elucidate. How does giving handouts to people who qualify as poor increase wealth and power disparity?
And what is "the cause of it"?

The short version is that it encourages people to qualify as poor (it's based solely on recorded income), and discourages them from having a job. In other words to be a member of the government certified poor class, that lives better than the working poor.

The way every other developed country does it is to have ubiquitous wage support (through unions and MW) so anyone who works can live decently, plus extensive public benefits that everyone receives... along with high marginal taxes so that over a certain amount there is no point in getting more income.

We did a much better job in the middle of the 1900s. Unions were strong (it was actually encouraged by law) and marginal taxes on personal and corporate income were very high. This had the effect of discouraging companies from extracting cash, but rather investing profits back into the companies and the employees. Real median income rose nearly 200% in 45 years vs <20% in the last 45... no exaggeration.

It isn't hard to fix this at all. The problem is that the rich want it the way it is, and they get what they want. They like to extract and accumulate as much profit as they can and pit the poor and middle class against each other. Divide and conquer.

 

[PlmrPaulie*]

There's a spectrum here. On one end you've got the people who would like to see everybody survive. On the other are people who think that's unrealistic, and they want to survive on their own merits and feel they can't afford to care what happens to the whole group. You can call the first group Democrats and the second group Republicans, but whatever you call them, they are both valid examples of two extreme ends of a spectrum, and we need to find a balance in the middle.'

Ok, this is obviously a "political statement".
Are we allowed to discuss politics on this forum now? Because I take issue with what I consider "false labeling, here. Remove one sentence (and I think you know which one it is) & I'd be fine with the rest.