🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <cb8bd93a.0403091432.63591ed4@posting.google.com>,
Proprclr <balanco01@yahoo.com> wrote:
" geoffm@u1.netgate.net (Geoff Miller) wrote in message
" news:<c2iu8r$dhr@u1.netgate.net>...

[...]

[proprclr:]
" Sadly, there are few public restrooms out there, and it's hard for
" them to find someplace to p.

BS.  (I may be biased because when I grew up finding good places for
that was relatively easy, in my opinion, but perhaps I didn't have the
experience of a bum.)

[Geoff then proprclr:]
" > Look, the ultimate solution to this stuff (as opposed to the Final
" > Solution) would be for these indigents to either get their lives
" > together, remove themselves from civilization, or croak.  Adapt,
" > migrate, or die, in other words.  Pick one.
" > 
" > It's to be expected that polite society 
" 
" I hate to hark on this, but what polite society?

We're out here.

" The society that spends much of its time obsessed with money, buying
" crap at Wal*mart, and shutting themselves out from the world's
" problems?

They're a different segment.  Don't lump us together.

" The society that often condemns people who are different, and finds
" excuses to treat them like $6!t?

Different because evil, or different but not evil?  Different doesn't
necessarily mean good or bad.

" > is going to look askance at the sort of behavior associeted with
" > vagrants: public sleeping, public $6!##!"g and pissing,
" > panhandling, and poor hygiene,
" 
" Remember, there are no public showers, and very few charities that
" have them available for the homeless

Really?  There were semi-public showers in NYC, Portland Oregon, and
Des Moines Iowa, although none of them were perfect by any means, but
I find your statement to be questionable.  Some gyms are cheap, and
they have cleaning facilities; in the above areas, that's one the
source of such things.  However, I admit, they were usually
welfare/charity supported, so that isn't such a good thing.  However,
if the market *is* providing such welfare and charity, then they
really have no excuse except if they have found a better system of not
further burdening such market segments (and the market and society as
a whole).

" > Why do bleeding-heart liberals like you have such a powerful
" > instinct for defending society's failures and fuckups?

" Maybe society, or their parents, or the economy ("You're being laid
" off. We are "sending" your job overseas") failed them.

No --- he was referring to those who are bad, I think, but I'm not
sure exactly what he was saying, but I'm almost certain that's who he
was referring to.  Sometimes society, parents, economy, etc. (your
list) do fail people, but that isn't always why people become
homeless.  Some who are homeless should not be, and some of them were
failed by your list, however, many who are homeless deserve what they
got.  Some are just retarded somehow.  Not all homeless are good, and
not all homeless are bad (I don't think there's such a thing as
neutral wrt people's social integration).  I don't know in what
proportions these groups have existed, and I don't usually care.  I
just know that they aren't all the same.

A large proportion of homeless populations are ex-convicts fresh out
of prison.  You *cannot* say those are innocent people in all but a
very very very small set of judicial mistakes!  Now, *some* of those
have decided to be "rehabilitated", but many (most?) of them have not,
and/or perhaps cannot.  Those, ASAP, should be sent right back to a
crimeless prison (efficient IV beds stacked densely designed to
attrify the convicts with total full term immobility with cameras
watching cameras to stop crimes against them and keep them safe for
the few that ought to be given an eventual future chance to be
unincarcerated, esp. those not yet fairly convicted via due process,
but in no way burdening our prison budgets).