Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well. I’m as anonymous as anyone else with a username here.
Did I ever say I lived in SF 30 years ago? I moved to CA 30 years ago, to the Bay Area 28 years ago. I had been visiting SF specifically, twice a year, since the mid 80’s, which may be longer than you’ve been alive (but I won’t check your post history to get to the bottom of that, since I have better things to do). I moved out of CA (Bay Area, Oakland specifically) just last year.
I contributed my anecdotal lived experience with the homeless. Take that for what it’s worth, and work on your sarcasm. Sometimes it’s not the best venue.
Kudos for actually asking many of them why they live there. As I suspected, it's the weather.
More good information coming out of CalMatters on the homeless situation that was published just the other day.
For the second year in a row, Democrats today voted down a bill that sought to ban homeless encampments near schools, transit stops and other areas throughout California.
It all makes sense why it's so difficult to stop this from continuing on. How do you fight the majority lawmakers in Sacramento? There's a huge problem happening in Oregon right now and it's going to end up in the Supreme Court. If you haven't followed it, check it out. Seeing how it's frowned upon to clutter city streets with these individuals, one solution is to open up some that open federal land up there and let the homeless live there. Would the feds do that? They should. They'd be helping the American People and isn't that why they were voted into office? There's so much open federal land in this state, that would be a solution for the problem we're having here, as well.
This YouTube video did a pretty good job explaining the Homeless Industrial Complex and how it works.
That video clip addresses problems within specific cities in the country, e.g. Houston, Portland, L.A. The majority of the video is about LAHSA, Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. L.A.'s homeless problems are not the same as homeless problems in, say, Fresno. (There's a 914-page thread on homelessness in the L.A. subforum.)
Riverside, San Bernardino and Kern Counties have homeless rates (percentage of homeless per 100,000 people) that are far lower than what Madera or Mendocino Counties have. How these cities handle their finances for the homeless is only part of the issue.
Actually, there's a fair percentage (around here) that were serving in the military. Coming from other areas, they quickly found out they don't have to shovel snow 4 months out of each year, in San Diego.
So, when they retired/discharged/separation from the Navy/Marines, they suddenly did NOT have a regular pay check coming in. And since they'd been conditioned to follow orders from the brass, they'd never learned to think for themselves, being self sufficient. It's very sad to see a person that has served honorably for 20+ years, separate and not know what to do. They've always been TOLD what/when/how to do. Now, they have to figure out this path for themselves. Unfortunately, many do not do well, after serving. This is a large percentage of our homeless in this area, sad to say. They begin to spiral down, to what we see on the sidewalks, today. Really a sad situation, for these Americans.
Lol on me … this morning, my wife asked what was I typing in when she went to sleep last night. I told her about your post … she looked puzzled and read what you wrote, especially the part re: retired military “not having a regular paycheck coming in”.
She laughed and said to me: “Silly. You have a regular [retirement] paycheck coming in … all you [retired military] have “regular paychecks coming in” …. No retired military are homeless.” And she walked off to make her tea.
True.
The homeless who are veterans are short timers … some of whom have fallen to poverty through substance abuse, PTSD issues, and other connected behavioral issues. They aren’t homeless because they don’t know how to ‘figure things out on their own after 20+ years of being told what/where/when/how to do everything.”
BTW, nearly ALL career-retired military move on to second, civilian careers … as such, earning a doubled paycheck.
Stick with posting and wisecracking about the many things you know well.
That video clip addresses problems within specific cities in the country, e.g. Houston, Portland, L.A. The majority of the video is about LAHSA, Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. L.A.'s homeless problems are not the same as homeless problems in, say, Fresno. (There's a 914-page thread on homelessness in the L.A. subforum.)
Riverside, San Bernardino and Kern Counties have homeless rates (percentage of homeless per 100,000 people) that are far lower than what Madera or Mendocino Counties have. How these cities handle their finances for the homeless is only part of the issue.
So? Mysticaltyger's video explained the Homeless Industrial Complex and how it works. It would apply to all places in the country, not only California. You're right, though. There is a specific thread dedicated to the homeless problem in LA and all comments posted about LA should remain there and not here, but if we're talking about the entire state, then all cities (including LA and Fresno) are relevant and shouldn't be minimized by comparison. Homelessness is homelessness. Unfortunately, cities outside the state are often used as a measuring stick to make one's point. Those cities should be left out of the discussion ... unless they're doing something about the situation that's working. If they are, then we should be looking at what works and maybe applying the same principles here.
The homeless who are veterans are short timers … some of whom have fallen to poverty through substance abuse, PTSD issues, and other connected behavioral issues. They aren’t homeless because they don’t know how to ‘figure things out on their own after 20+ years of being told what/where/when/how to do everything.”
C'mon, Tulemutt. You don't know that they're "short timers." Your exposure to those who are is just a drop in the bucket. There are plenty who've been living this way for years, not months or weeks. The length of time doesn't even matter. Vets who come back from war emotionally damaged struggle with making decisions and navigating life in general. They shouldn't have to and they sure as hell shouldn't be living on the street. But that's what our government does. They ask these men and women to sacrifice their life for their country and then often forget about them, once they return home. The cut in spending for Vets is disgusting. Guess it's hard to give money to them when it's being spent on "other things" ... and I won't even mention what those are because that would be considered off topic and flaming and I won't go there.
C'mon, Tulemutt. You don't know that they're "short timers." Your exposure to those who are is just a drop in the bucket. There are plenty who've been living this way for years, not months or weeks. The length of time doesn't even matter. Vets who come back from war emotionally damaged struggle with making decisions and navigating life in general. They shouldn't have to and they sure as hell shouldn't be living on the street. But that's what our government does. They ask these men and women to sacrifice their life for their country and then often forget about them, once they return home. The cut in spending for Vets is disgusting. Guess it's hard to give money to them when it's being spent on "other things" ... and I won't even mention what those are because that would be considered off topic and flaming and I won't go there.
Sorry. But you misunderstand my use of the term “short-timers”. In the military, those who serve only a short enlistment (typically 4 years) and those nearing discharge are good-naturedly referred to (by other service personnel) as “short-timers”. I didn’t mean they were short-timer homeless.
As for “they shouldn’t have to live on the streets …. but that’s what our government does” … I agree with the first statement … but not the second.
What I mean by that is: veterans, especially those suffering from service-connected medical issues, shouldn’t be living on the streets. (Then again, nobody should, really.)
But as to what “our government does”? Well, homeless veterans have lots of benefits and services available to them more than do non-veteran homeless. The VA offers an open door for assistance. Veterans who don’t avail themselves seem a puzzlement to many. I understand the reasons … but at this point not going to go deep into that tangent which is better suited for the veteran’s forum.
Thanks for clearing up that misunderstanding about short-timers. That helps with others (like me) who don't know all the military terms. Maybe I was too harsh in placing 100% of the blame on the government for it but I get very angry at them (government, not vets) for their actions. And I know that there are a lot of services available to Vets and I also know that some (not all) will run from them. They're broken. Emotionally broken and with anyone, not only former military but anyone, being broken is devastating and not easily fixed. Like you, I don't want to see anyone, ANYONE, living on the street but there are some that do like it. They don't want any responsibility of any kind but that doesn't hold true for all of them.
It's difficult to separate those who want help against those who don't but doing nothing and letting the problem grow is something that no resident wants for their city and this state hasn't tackled the problem adequately. If they had, the numbers might not have grown to what it is now. And just as I posted in the CalMatters article, there's absolutely no transparency. We have no way of knowing what money is being spent and where it's going. I want more transparency in this state. I think others do to but as for the homeless population, give us solutions. I suggest that the state and federal heads get together and open up more of the open land they own and let homeless people live there. I mean, what's all that open land really doing anyway when it could be put to good use?
That video clip addresses problems within specific cities in the country, e.g. Houston, Portland, L.A. The majority of the video is about LAHSA, Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. L.A.'s homeless problems are not the same as homeless problems in, say, Fresno. (There's a 914-page thread on homelessness in the L.A. subforum.)
Riverside, San Bernardino and Kern Counties have homeless rates (percentage of homeless per 100,000 people) that are far lower than what Madera or Mendocino Counties have. How these cities handle their finances for the homeless is only part of the issue.
It may be worse in L.A., but as the CalMatters article showed, the lack of accountability is pretty similar statewide. That's an invitation for corruption and ineptitude.
Certainly how the finances are handled is only one piece of it. The other piece of it is policies. The homeless problem is the worst up and down the West Coast of North America, from Vancouver to San Diego. That's primarily because similar policies are being followed that create and enable homelessness, coupled with zoning laws that make housing of any kind difficult or impossible to build, resulting in skyrocketing home prices and rents.
Certainly how the finances are handled is only one piece of it.
Your video clip is definitely worth watching. And toward the end, it addresses the myth that the homeless move for the weather or services here. "The UCSF study looked at common homeless claims that homeless people are moving to California because services here are better than what they could receive in other states....the study actually found that 90% of adults experiencing homelessness in the state became homeless while already living in California."
The short version: Similar to the CalWorks article, it mentions these agencies have no accountability. It goes further to say, they have no incentive to actually solve the problem. If they do, a lot of their jobs go away, especially the highly paid directors of non-profit agencies that help the homeless.
Great catch. How this isn't obvious to anyone with a half a brain is mind-boggling.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's so much open federal land in this state, that would be a solution for the problem we're having here, as well.
