• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Wow. Seattle IS dying

Bottom Feeder

Hypophthalmichthys molitrix
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
6,935
Likes
12,149
Location
Seattle
#3
We already covered that. FunnyMoney insists that Seattle is doing just fine and whatever you see in the video is but an insignificant aberration and that the town will live on in glory forever and ever with great prosperity.

bb
Whew! That's quite the synopsis of what FM said.

BF
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
14,941
Likes
26,198
Location
ORYGUN
#5
I did 16 minutes, meet "Travis", what a POS !
This problem will not be fixed because there is more money & control to be had by allowing it.

I am wondering what is coming down the line.
We have been told:
Government will create a problem, in order to introduce a solution, that would ordinarily be rejected by the people.
When the problem becomes more unacceptable, than the solution, the people will accept the solution.

BUT, I wrote this back in 1969, I believe it to be accurate/true.

Government is not in the business of solving problems.
Their business is to perpetuate, control & profit from problems.
To solve a problem would stifle their power,control & growth.

I am wondering which is more applicable to this rising social disorder ?
 

Son of Gloin

Certainty of death? What are we waiting for?
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
5,811
Likes
12,171
Location
USA
#6
Very sad. Let’s elect more democRats to run our cities, because they do such a bang up job.
 

bb28

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
1,516
Likes
1,298
Location
People's Republic of USSA
#8
I remember seeing poor people in the records of the great depression. These new people are zombies. The former were simply out of work and down on their luck so to speak. I suspect most of them settled down somewhere and resumed something bordering on a middle class lifestyle as the economy turned up.

bb
 

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
14,941
Likes
26,198
Location
ORYGUN
#9

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#10
Not exactly. There were a lot of druggies back then too, history books are full of substance abuses.

The drug issue is more powerful today, but what isn't? Used to be people took care of the mentally ill or they quickly were relegated out of sight. Once mentally ill became a crime instead of a health issue, then few were willing to venture in to help.

Same with the war on drugs, it's a lot harder for communities to help and for the addicts to seek help when there's a war involved.

It's already been shown on zillions of threads...
Drug laws = no solution + big $ to crime/drug industry to perpetuate problem
Drug decriminalization/regulations = possible solution ( tobacco/ alcohol )

Also, I always get a kick out of watching that video. the scary music, the fear tactics, I remember carmaggedon in LA, it was such a show, much more riveting than OJ.

Anyway, the meth head guy is an unbelievable crack up. All the police know him by name, I think half the city does by now. Camera crew always takes him to lunch when they stop by for footage. It's unbelievable, you'd think the media here a bunch of hollywood wannabees. The music though has been a hit, they have that part figured out.
 
Last edited:

Joseph

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
4,216
Likes
7,410
Location
south east
#11
Just the first ten minutes is plenty.

With few exceptions, Democrats across the board for years, and have, as usual ruined everything they touch
Just when you think they couldn't make it any more unbearable... they make it even more unbearable. The left once again proves they have their priorities in order by pushing gay democrats into office ... That should fix things ...

Jenny Durkan elected as first lesbian mayor of Seattle
“It wasn’t about me, or anyone else, it was about you, it was about Seattle and the future of Seattle,” Durkan said. “It’s a campaign about what Seattle will be like for that next generation, and you have committed to making it the best Seattle ever.”

Prior to her campaign, Durkan was appointed by former President Obama to serve as U.S. attorney for Western Washington, making her the first openly gay U.S. attorney in the country.

It’s wasn’t so long ago that Seattle had an openly gay mayor. Former Seattle mayor Ed Murray served starting in 2014, but resigned this year on Sept. 13 amid allegations by men he sexually molested them.
.
.
.
.

Aisha C. Moodie-Mills, CEO of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, commended Durkan in a statement for her win.

“We are thrilled Jenny will become the first lesbian mayor of Seattle – and just the second woman elected to the position,” Moodie-Mills said. “Both women and lesbians are severely underrepresented in all levels of government, especially executive positions. While Seattle voters chose Jenny because of her proven track record of leading innovative reforms and fighting for all communities, it is also an undeniably proud moment for the LGBTQ community, which continues to see this strong leader break down barriers.”
.
.
.
.

https://www.washingtonblade.com/2017/11/08/lesbian-candidate-wins-election-to-become-seattle-mayor/
 
Last edited:

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#12
Just the first ten minutes is plenty.
Why just the first 10 min.?

The abc news team really gets going much later than that. These things are made to stay watching. Are you telling me they're not as good as hollywood after all? This is going to be so funny, I can't wait to tell them.
 
Last edited:

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#13
With few exceptions, Democrats across the board for years, and have, as usual decimated cities ...
Homeless is pretty bad in the red states too. And it was after Reagan was shot when they released all the mentally ill out onto the streets they'd been gathering for just this event.

DIM vs Repuke thing? What has been the Repuke answer to homelessness? Nothing that works and they've had plenty of chances.
 

Joseph

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
4,216
Likes
7,410
Location
south east
#14
Why just the first 10 min.? The abc news team really gets going much later than that. These things are made to get you to keep watching. Are you telling me they're not as good as hollywood after all? This is going to be so funny, I can't wait to tell them.
I wonder how long it took abc to set up the sets across so much of the city ? road blocks to detour traffic so it would look realistic ? where did they get all those extras in such a short period of time ? crisis actors ? the business people ? I wonder if they went to the Seattle dump to bring all the trash and debris and sling it across half the city. The tents, burned out grocery carts. Pulled a bunch of folks from the Seattle psychiatric wards ? I wonder ...
 

Joseph

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
4,216
Likes
7,410
Location
south east
#15
Homeless is pretty bad in the red states too. And it was after Reagan was shot when they released all the mentally ill out onto the streets they'd been gathering for just this event.

DIM vs Repuke thing? What has been the Repuke answer to homelessness? Nothing that works and they've had plenty of chances.
oh puh-leeze. You're continually deflecting. Nothing more. Why ? That was rhetorical. You deflect because you have nothing else to offer in defense of your bankrupt position on this issue.

FM: No, Seattle is a paradise ... , but , but, but, but ... some other cities suck .... somewhere ... Republicans ... yeah that's it . Republican cities ... they suck ... but not Seattle
 
Last edited:

TAEZZAR

LADY JUSTICE ISNT BLIND, SHES JUST AFRAID TO WATCH
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
14,941
Likes
26,198
Location
ORYGUN
#16
I don't like going to Seattle, Portland nor L.A.
I WILL NOT GO TO SAN FAGGOTCISCO FOR ANY REASON !!!
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#17
... all the trash and debris and sling it across half the city. ...
A lot of cities have a trash and debris problem, not sure if it's half the city like here, but it's not a unique thing.

It helps keep the tourists away, it's been working somewhat they tell us.
 
Last edited:

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#18
I don't like going to Seattle, Portland nor L.A.
I WILL NOT GO TO SAN FAGGOTCISCO FOR ANY REASON !!!
Yeah, I hear ya.

I haven't been to NYC for years. I'm afraid to go to DC or Rome.
 
Last edited:

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#19
...FM: No, Seattle is a paradise ... , but , but, but, but ... some other cities suck .... somewhere ... Republicans ... yeah that's it . Republican cities ... they suck ... but not Seattle
Seems to me a lot of the big cities suffer the same problem, once you get near a million or so residents the closed door meetings and crony agendas take over. I've been to many of the solid red cities in the red states and they all have some kind of homeless problem, at least the big ones I've been to. The Repukes and the Dims both have had plenty of chances to move the needle on this issue, they always bow to special agendas instead.

Seattle sucks, the rain and traffic will stress you out, especially if you're not on the free stuff wagon or have at least a median income. The homeless in LA have it much better, even with less of the free stuff.
 
Last edited:

engineear

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
1,300
Likes
1,414
Location
Phx. area
#20
I remember seeing poor people in the records of the great depression. These new people are zombies. The former were simply out of work and down on their luck so to speak. I suspect most of them settled down somewhere and resumed something bordering on a middle class lifestyle as the economy turned up.

bb
The economy turned because we went to a wartime economy...time to donate all your, scrap metal, rubber, etc...oh...we'll need your gold too, while we're at it.
 

Buck

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
5,212
Likes
4,747
#22
What I don't get are the few here who find any humor in any of this at all

Flame me if you like, but what's being shown here, on a few of these posts, represents a mental illness all on it's own

shame really, which shows that some of the ill don't live on the street


sick, really really sick
 

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,278
Likes
8,876
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#23
I've been to many of the solid red cities
What solidly red cities are those? Every "city" (close to a million pop or more) I know of is more blue than red, and most big cities are solid blue.
...and yes, many have a homeless problem. Difference is they all don't allow camping on the sidewalks nor pay people to be homeless.

All they are doing is making it easier for people to choose to be homeless.
...and that's the biggest problem. Making it easy for the homeless to remain homeless. As though it's a lifestyle choice.
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#24
What solidly red cities are those? Every "city" ...
Plenty of large cities.

1 million or more people: 56% HRC - 40% DJT
500,000 to 1 million people: 48% DJT - 46% HRC
250,000 to 500,000 people: 52% DJT - 43% HRC

Iot of cities, and JMHO, but from looking, it seems to me, from one person's individual subjective experience, that they also have a lot of similar problems, regardless whether they vote left or right.
 
Last edited:

Thecrensh

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
5,998
Likes
7,518
#25
Plenty of large cities.

1 million or more people: 56% HRC - 40% DJT
500,000 to 1 million people: 48% DJT - 46% HRC
250,000 to 500,000 people: 52% DJT - 43% HRC

Iot of cities, and JMHO, but from looking, it seems to me, from one person's individual subjective experience, that they also have a lot of similar problems, regardless whether they vote left or right.

The biggest cities are, by and large, overwhelmingly "blue"...and so expensive that the normal people have trouble living there. The "blue" policies benefit only the rich, and leave everyone else struggling to make ends meet and live a safe existence.
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#26
The middle upper size cities are "red", and the mid size cities are, by and large, overwhelmingly "red"...and for both.... ...so lacking in upward mobility that the normal people have trouble living there. The "red" policies benefit only the rich, and leave everyone else struggling to make ends meet and live an existence that America was once famous for.
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,278
Likes
8,876
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#27
Plenty of large cities.

1 million or more people: 56% HRC - 40% DJT
500,000 to 1 million people: 48% DJT - 46% HRC
250,000 to 500,000 people: 52% DJT - 43% HRC

Iot of cities, and JMHO, but from looking, it seems to me, from one person's individual subjective experience, that they also have a lot of similar problems, regardless whether they vote left or right.
Way to dodge the question. I didn't ask the percentage of hag vs Trump voters. My post was about the cities leadership.


However, since you want to claim that we have large cities that are solidly red, could you please locate those cities on this map?

counties.png
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#28
Oregon has metro areas mostly red. OK , TN , NV. What exactly are you looking for? A place without homelessness? What about Amarillo Texas, it is red.

If your point is that there's not a problem with any of the red cities, then if you believe that and therefore the republicans are the solution to all our problems, why don't you just say it?

I don't correlate cause and outcome here, the solution to the big cities turning blue over red is an outcome of the cradle to grave big gov't, just like RP said, - the homeless problem, the same.

Most of the problems that impact small cities and big cities alike are solved with less gov't, not more.
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,278
Likes
8,876
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#29
Oregon has metro areas mostly red. OK , TN , NV. What exactly are you looking for?
What I'm looking for from you, is solid red cities that meet your prior definition.

once you get near a million or so residents the closed door meetings and crony agendas take over. I've been to many of the solid red cities in the red states and they all have some kind of homeless problem, at least the big ones I've been to.
What large cities near a million or more are "solidly red"?
....and the point is that the problem is mostly caused by dem/lib/prog/soc leadership in the cities.
 

the_shootist

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
30,203
Likes
38,114
#30
Oregon has metro areas mostly red. OK , TN , NV. What exactly are you looking for? A place without homelessness? What about Amarillo Texas, it is red.

If your point is that there's not a problem with any of the red cities, then if you believe that and therefore the republicans are the solution to all our problems, why don't you just say it?

I don't correlate cause and outcome here, the solution to the big cities turning blue over red is an outcome of the cradle to grave big gov't, just like RP said, - the homeless problem, the same.

Most of the problems that impact small cities and big cities alike are solved with less gov't, not more.
Weak, very weak!
 

Unca Walt

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
8,701
Likes
11,949
Location
South Floriduh
#31
Joe King --

"Way to dodge the question. I didn't ask the percentage of hag vs Trump voters. My post was about the cities leadership."

That is what he does -- poorly, continually, and predictably -- when his dick has been nailed directly to the floor.

"If your point is that there's not a problem with any of the red cities, NO! then if you believe that NO! and therefore the republicans are the solution to all our problems,NO! why don't you just say it?" See Rule 8.

"I've been to many of the solid red cities in the red states and they all have some kind of homeless problem." See Rule 3.

Straight out of Rules For Radicals (No. 3, No.5, No.7 and No.12) No No No No

Right here: https://www.steelonsteel.com/saul-alinsky-rules-for-radicals/

Hey FM: Your dick. Floor. BIG NAIL. Still there holding you to the dirty floor.
 
Last edited:

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#32
I call a large city anything over 250K, you can define large differently and make a different point if you have one.


You can make your point about cities and homelessness, if you have one, whenever you want.

You don't need to bash me, just because I wanted to make my points (1, 2 & 3 below).

Creating a long debate about the definition of "large" is not required to be able to make your point.



What was the question you were asking? What was the purpose of your question?

Why are there 10 posts directed to me regarding some debate which I'm not sure what it's parameters actually are., when: The thread was about how Seattle is dying and the video in the OP has been posted at least 3 times in the last month.

1.
I say: Red vs. Blue is not the root cause of homelessness in today's American cities, both cities large and small, cities large and mid size and also those that are very large size.

2.
I say: left vs right, is
not the root cause of homelessness in today's American cities, both cities large and small, cities large and mid size and the very large size ones also.

3.
I say: increasing the war on drugs (video's solution in the OP) or more status quo political involvement (video's solution) is not the solution to the homelessness problems in our cities (all of them, small, large, very large, super large - all of them).


If there's a specific question someone had that is not answered by the 3 above opinions, then you can be clear about the question details, and about the relevance to this thread, and then maybe someone here will be able to answer it for you - I am not the forum teacher or the forum expert who does all the research for your questions.

What I was attempting to do was debunk the solutions and fear fomenting tactics in the hour long video - which of course, you are only supposed to watch the first 10 min.
I think it is obvious, if you actually watch the entire video, their fear tactics and their solutions are 100% MSM propaganda (their solutions have been tried for decades and don't work and the fear about the issue is blown way out of proportion - but the scary music is great, so forgive me if I watch it again - the meth head guy needs to go to hollywood, of all the homeless I've met, he appears to have some promise - I think hes' afraid to leave as he's got a good thing going here already... knows all the police by name, free meals from the news teams and he seems to like the rain.


Thank you for your interest in homelessness and it's relevance to the inside the matrix framed talking points (left vs right, red vs. blue, black vs white, large vs small, rich vs poor, very large vs super large, north vs south, home owner vs renter, has a home vs doesn't, west vs east, and so on...
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,278
Likes
8,876
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#33
I call a large city anything over 250K, you can define large differently and make a different point if you have one.
Ok.
....and here I thought we were talking about big (large) cities nearing a million population, or more.

Seems to me a lot of the big cities suffer the same problem, once you get near a million or so residents
You know, cities like Seattle is nearly as big as.
....but now you want to redefine that as 250K?
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#34
There were 3 line items in the statistics I provided: 250-500; 500-1M; over 1M. (see post several back)

I call large anything over 250K, you can define large differently and make a different point if you have one.


You can make your point about cities and homelessness, if you have one, whenever you want.

You don't need to bash me, just because I wanted to make my points (1, 2 & 3 below).

Creating a long debate about the definition of "large" is not required to be able to make your point.

Is it possible for you to formulate more than 1 paragraph of an opinion or a point about the subject without attempting to attack every missing period and comma found in my posts? I am not required for you to formulate and post your opinions about the homelessness issue.

My points are pretty simple. Here are the points I made that apparently upset a lot of members:

1.
I say: Red vs. Blue is not the root cause of homelessness in today's American cities, both cities large and small, cities large and mid size and also those that are very large size.

2.
I say: left vs right, is
not the root cause of homelessness in today's American cities, both cities large and small, cities large and mid size and the very large size ones also.

3.
I say: increasing the war on drugs (video's solution in the OP) or more status quo political involvement (video's solution) is not the solution to the homelessness problems in our cities (all of them, small, large, very large, super large - all of them).


If there's a specific question someone had that is not answered by the 3 above opinions, then you can be clear about the question details, and about the relevance to this thread, and then maybe someone here will be able to answer it for you - I am not the forum teacher or the forum expert who does all the research for your questions.

What I was attempting to do was debunk the solutions and fear fomenting tactics in the hour long video - which of course, you are only supposed to watch the first 10 min.
I think it is obvious, if you actually watch the entire video, their fear tactics and their solutions are 100% MSM propaganda (their solutions have been tried for decades and don't work and the fear about the issue is blown way out of proportion - but the scary music is great, so forgive me if I watch it again - the meth head guy needs to go to hollywood, of all the homeless I've met, he appears to have some promise - I think hes' afraid to leave as he's got a good thing going here already... knows all the police by name, free meals from the news teams and he seems to like the rain.


Thank you for your interest in homelessness and it's relevance to the inside the matrix framed talking points (left vs right, red vs. blue, black vs white, large vs small, rich vs poor, north vs south, west vs east, and so on...
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,278
Likes
8,876
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#35
There were 3 line items in the statistics I provided: 250-500; 500-1M; over 1M. (see post several back)
I was going by your post #19. Ie: cities of near (or more than) one million population. You know, like the size of Seattle or bigger. Ie: the subject of this thread.

I don't consider a mere 250K to be near a million, do you?

Edited to add:....and my whole point is to get you to name the large "solidly red" cities you've visited. With "large" meeting your prior definition of near a million or more in population.
My contention is that all cities meeting your definition are solidly blue.
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#36
I was going by your post #19. Ie: cities of near (or more than) one million population. You know, like the size of Seattle or bigger. Ie: the subject of this thread.

I don't consider a mere 250K to be near a million, do you?
Seattle has around 3 million people, depending how you draw the line.

Most cities with a population of 250k have much more than that, often double that if you just extend the line into the surrounding suburbs.

Homeless people are able to roam both inner city and suburbs if that city allows them that freedom.

As I said before, several times already, if you have a point to make about the homelessness issue, then you are free to formulate and post that point. You don't need to come to an agreement about the definition of city/metro areas sizes to make a point about the homelessness issue. If you do need to do that, then set the definitions anyway you want to and simply make your point.

Do you have a point that you want to make that doesn't involve debating me about size definitions? Then if so, simply make it. If not, and you simply want to debate or negate my posts, then I refer you to the 3 points I made above and you can explain how you do not believe they are correct.

I made 3 very simple clear points about the MSM framed debates and the status quo provided solutions. (see 1,2 and 3 above in earlier posts). I am willing to defend those points with short follow-ups if asked.

I also believe the fear tactics are really silly, yet entertaining. I also provided my opinion on the music in the video and the cameo appearances.

I am surprised nobody wanted to ask me about the meth head guy - much more interesting a topic than the definition of "large" I thought.
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,278
Likes
8,876
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#37
Seattle has around 3 million people, depending how you draw the line. Most cities with a population of 250k have much more than that, often double that if you just extend the line into the surrounding suburbs.
Ok, first it was cities, now you're talkin' metro areas.


As I said before, several times already, if you have a point to make about the homelessness issue, then you are free to formulate and post that point.
The point is, it's the modern lib/dem/prog/soc leadership that makes the problem worse.


If you do need to do that, then set the definitions anyway you want to and simply make your point.
I was attempting to use your definitions, but you keep changing them.


Do you have a point that you want to make that doesn't involve debating me about size definitions? Then if so, simply make it.
Yea, the point is that the way the typical large city is run is in fact a big part of the problem, but the extreme way things are run in places like Seattle and San Fran, (dem/lib/prog/socialist) is the reason the problem is so much worse there than in other places.
Ie: it's worse there due to the extreme lib policies of those cities that attract and allow the homeless to keep being homeless. If it's made to be easy for people to be homeless, what is their incentive to want to no longer be homeless?
 

FunnyMoney

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
3,756
Likes
2,315
#38
..., what is their incentive to want to no longer be homeless?
Some of the homeless are not capable of getting a job which pays enough to live on.
While these people can sometimes find P/T work, it is not enough usually to get the off the streets.


Many also have mental illnesses which preclude them from high paying opportunities.

I have seen both of the above situations first hand in both blue and red cities and metro areas and in large, small and very large cities and metro areas.

The video shows a dozen or so homeless people up close - that is an extremely small test case. For those shown in the video, you have a good point - but those are the selected cases to help further the video impact, those few homeless presented in the video are a long way from the entire story. There are thousands of people who fall into the 2 groups I mentioned here above, who will not be helped by an increase in the war on drugs nor any of the solutions provided by the mainstream pol-tic types.
 
Last edited:

Joe King

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,278
Likes
8,876
Location
Instant Gratification Land
#39
Some of the homeless are not capable of getting a job which pays enough to live on.
While those in this group can sometimes find P/T work, it is not enough usually to get the off the streets.
What got most of them into that situation to begin with? One day they just could no longer afford their rent no more? Or is it due to substance abuse issues and the poor life decisions that go hand in hand with that abuse? Ie: got kicked out because they chose to buy heroin etc instead of paying their rent/bills?


I have seen and spoke with homeless people in quantities much greater than, many times the number presented in the video. The video shows a dozen or so homeless people up close - that is an extremely small test case.
So you actually believe that "those few" shown in the vid are responsible for all the trash everywhere, camping in the streets, and homeless camps all over?
Those few were but an example of the larger problem
...and I understand that homeless exist in a lot of places, but most of those places don't encourage homelessness by paying them and allowing them to camp anywhere. Ie: places like Seattle are trying to make it easy for people to remain homeless, and that's the biggest problem of all.
 

Bottom Feeder

Hypophthalmichthys molitrix
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
6,935
Likes
12,149
Location
Seattle
#40
Let's condense this down to:
  1. Some peoples don’t want to work
  2. There’s some loonies there
  3. Piss poor planning
  4. Love drugs more than security
  5. Don’t give a shit as long as the spare change keeps coming
And no city large or small is exempt.

JMSO,
BF