And, while a cure for alcoholism, autism, and schizophrenia will help about 1/5 of the homeless population, it will do nothing for the functionally illiterate, the severely depressed, the emotionally dysfunctional, and the fact that with no permanent address, it’s damn hard to get a job, especially if you combine homelessness with low job skills and functional illiteracy (about 30% of the adult workforce cannot read a schedule).

At any rate, I think we’re beating dead horses at this point. I don’t seem to be able to say anything to sway you from believing that most people who live on the street did it to themselves, and you’re not going to convince me that it’s not a problem that needs fixing or that homeless people deserve to be homeless. So, I submit that we might end this thread.

And, I wish you could edit these damn comments, too.

as far as i know, julie was never homeless. she particitapes in a program for the learning disabled.

there are many more people living in the us that either suffer from a learning disability or mental illness than there are homeless people, so that cant be what you mean.

if you just mean that homeless people lack houses, well, duh. how does that futher this discussion?

anyways, i still find this fun, but if it grows tiresome to you, ill just close in saying that i agree with you that there is a mental heatlh crisis in this counrty and that homelessness is related to this crisis, but the “homeless problem” is not one that can be solved with more social programs. “better” social problems, maybe, but that change has to come from scientific finds in the field of mental health, not just better budgeting.

in other words, when you find the cure for alcoholism, let me know. until then, more federal monies and time spent on this problem would be pointless and would be better spent elsewhere (the environment).

The vast majority of what?

Why bother getting a job when you can be on SSI or SSDI? Because it’s not enough to live off of if you actually want an apartment, clothing, food, etc. Many people on the streets do indeed have income, but it’s not enough for them to rent an apartment.

Just because the mental health issue is difficult to solve does not excuse society from leaving the mentally ill to fend for themselves on the streets.

Your neighbor’s son was lucky that there was someone to car for him; many people do not have anyone to be “given the choice” and end up on the streets. Not everyone is lucky enough to have family friends on whom they can rely when they hit hard times.

I never said they were all closed.

At any rate, you choose to ignore the fact that despite all of the “coddling” programs out there to help homeless people, there are still thousands of homeless people. I said “adequate and proper resources” are necessary because the current resources – like those that helped your pal Julie – help a precious few while the vast majority languish on the streets. We don’t need more resources (as many advocates argue), we need better, scientifically-informed resources. And, I’ve never argued for coddling.

Several thousand “bums” were living on the streets or in shelter this winter in Massachusetts. If you think that’s okay because you think they “chose” it as a “lifestyle,” then you must sleep easy at night.

I don’t, however, and I won’t until they’re off the streets.

As the article states, it is a modern trend in mental healthcare to deinstitutionalize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_commitment

It would seem to me that those that fall through your cracks are treading the fine line between treatable in an institution and better off in society.

I would support additional research into these areas.

Thus, it still seems to me that this is a scientific effort, not a social one. This is not something that can be magically swept away with new work programs and minimum wage laws. This is a health problem that really has persisted thru centuries that we are a long way off from solving, if there is even a solution.

There, I said it in a way that doesn’t demonize anyone. Satisfied? Hopefully this will turn you slightly from the belief that I need to be prayed for, which I find highly distasteful and offensive, in many ways.

I have much personal experience with the deaf population– under federal eyes “disabled” folk. Permit me to share. My brother, for example, is hard of hearing. Technically (audiologically) he does not fall under the catergory of “deaf” (eligible for aid). But, like many of his friends, through the appeals process he was able to convince a judge that he has enough difficulty getting and keep a job that he indeed is in need of federal aid (a lie.) He, and every single one of his friends (varying degrees of deafness) is on SS, and few of them have ever held a job for more than a few months. Why bother?

Hard to get? I think not.

Alcohol/drug abuse is often the result of “self-medication” for such illnesses.

About 75% of those on the streets, according to a study in Massachusetts, have no substance abuse or severe mental health issues; though, almost half are disabled enough to receive Federal disability money, which is pretty tough to get.

Anyway, you’ve made many assertions that are not backed up by facts or research. It’s clear that you’ve hardened your heart and closed your mind. Since your mind’s made up, I’ll not further waste your time or mine trying to persuade you from your deeply held beliefs.

I’ll just pray to my God that you don’t end up homeless.

People make bad choices.. that is a feature of a free society..

Basically, if you are homeless on the street and mentally ill, you do not have severe illness (because they would put you away in that case) or you are not eligible for work programs because you are unable to show up to work sober. (This is a terrible generalization, and there are many shades of grey when taking about any section of humanity, but we have to clarify the issue in order to continue this.)

I’ll bet your instinct is to counter with “alcoholism is a disease, too.” I agree that it is. But, with all the programs available to help you kick it (SO MANY in california), on a certain level people choose that path. And I don’t mean “choose” as in choose a funky hairstyle. Of course the guy doesn’t think “hey, being drunk all the time and homeless is so much fun, I totally CHOOSE this,” but people are unwilling to accept help or cannot summon the strenth required for too many reasons to get into here, and those are choices, as unromantic as they are.

At some point, we have to hold people responsible for the life choices they have made and cannot coddle them any more. And I believe our system does more than enough in this state (I am not qualified to talk about any other).

“If the resources available were adequate or proper, there would be no homeless

people.”

Totally rediculous.

Why would someone choose homelessness in Massachusetts? There are many here. Or New York? Or Detroit? Certainly not places a rational person would choose to live without shelter.

Certainly some individuals – a very small number, I would guess – have chosen to live as vagabonds, perfectly capable of self-sustainance, but undesiring of it. Those, however, are not the majority of the individual homeless on the streets, as anyone who has actually worked with homeless people will readily tell you.

There are, in fact, some indications that people who have become homeless choose to remain homeless rather than seek assistance. This is human nature: especially in America, it’s shameful to accept charity, to admit one needs help. That’s at least one reason unrelated to substance abuse that people remain on the streets. Another is mental illness, which in Julie’s case was minor, but in many cases can prevent someone from making rational decisions (e.g., schizophrenia).

Certainly, systems exist to help people on the streets; though, the “welfare state” is geared more towards families than individuals on the street. You’ve met a couple homeless or formerly homeless individuals who left you with the impression that the system offers them a sweet deal, where they don’t have to work and little or nothing is expected of them. It may be good enough for them, but again, they are not the majority of the homeless population.

Yes, there are resources out there. On my way to work every day, I walk by a “day shelter,” where people can go to get all manner of services. But, these people still live on the streets. To say that they have chosen this as a “lifestyle” is to ignore the real barriers to their self-sufficiency, even insofar as that may mean simply seeking help.

If the resources available were adequate or proper, there would be no homeless people. If society gave equal opportunity to all, there would be no homeless people. If we looked at “bums” on the street as people, and we asked them why they are homeless and what would it take so they wouldn’t be, there would be no homeless people.

In the final analysis, we live in a society that has decided – probably for reasons much the same as your own – that homelessness is acceptable. I posit that it is not. A society that allows homelessness to persist gives rise to a society that allows violence against homeless individuals to take place. And that’s not a society in which I am happy to live.

I have talked to them and hung out with them.

You believe that people who live on the streets have chosen to do so as a “lifestyle”?