🚀 go-pugleaf

Rudy Canoza wrote:
> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:
> 
>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>
>>> dhm_at_best_dot_com@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> >From Robert Norse Tue Jan 9 00:31:27 2007
>>>>
>>>> Date:     Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:31:27 -0800
>>>> Subject:  City Council Moves Today To Expand Police Power Against Poor
>>>> -
>>>> More Police Punishing the Poor in the Pogonip
>>>
>>> This massive and massively incoherent load of SHIT perfectly
>>> illustrates, again, the big myths of homelessness, mostly in its
>>> lumping of all the homeless together as people "just like you and me"
>>> who happen only to be poor.  It's crap.
>>>
>>> It is dishonest to talk about "the homeless" as an undifferentiated
>>> class of people.  Most homeless are seriously mentally ill, have major
>>> subtance abuse problems, or both.  VERY FEW homeless people are "just
>>> like you and me."
>>>
>>> Santa Cruz is one of those places infected with a naive form of
>>> liberalism that makes a mockery of true compassion.  The answer to the
>>> plight of homeless people is not to try to keep them homeless, as this
>>> idiot seems to think.
>>
>>
>> Which robot factory did you come out of?
> 
> 
> Nice whiff-off, asshole.
> 
> You are full of shit about homelessness and the "virtues" of homeless
> people.  Normal people don't like them congregating around parks and
> business districts, shitting and pissing wherever and whenever,
> haranguing people, degrading the quality of life in neighborhoods.
>  Normal people are sick of them, and they're even more sick of jackballs
> like you who don't really give a fuck about the homeless, but instead
> are merely using them as pawns in order to lash out at good, normal,
> productive citizens.
> 
> You really are an asshole.  You are USING homeless people for a really
> juvenile, misanthropic agenda.

You're right, they never should have been there in the first place.
There weren't any in 1980, but there were hundreds of thousands in 1981.
So let's figure out just exactly who is responsible for it, and put them
in the public light.

If it turns out to be some failed social experiment, then the
responsible parties should be called to task and prosecuted.

How about this; we take every homeless person off the street, and put
them in an apartment or some old house for say, three months rent free,
and give them $100 a month plus food stamps. Not together as a group,
but spread out, and not in contact with one another.

In the meantime, we close down all the shelters, and other social
service programs that depend on them. Most of all, we do not supervise
the people that we have removed from the street, we just leave them on
their own.

If, after the end of the three months, they don't have their rent, then
they would be SOL, but, I'll just bet that most of them would have found
another way by then, and the remainder really would be the one's who
rate a mental hospital.

In the long run, this would be the most prudent way out, since after
that final expense, it would all be over. Of course, in order for this
to work, we would have to exclude the poor, who would doubtless be at
forefront, as they always are when they think that something is free. We
can take care of the poor later.

These are people, not animals.