Homelessness surges as funding falters

[OhioChick]

Source: msnbc.com

Providers to the poor try to stretch meager resources to meet growing need

Fri., Jan. 30, 2009

SEATTLE - As snowstorms blew into this Northwest city and the economy iced over in December, the occupants of a shelter nestled among industrial buildings on the north side prayed for divine intervention.

"We were hoping for the Christmas miracle,” says Glen Dennis, 41, who was working his way through a residential drug-treatment program at the CityTeam Ministries shelter. Dennis and the other 11 guys in the long-term program —dubbed the “disciples” — also worked each day to prepare for some 50 to 60 overnight shelter guests, and dish up free hot meals to about 100 people. “We kept doing what we were doing, and hoped someone would come by and drop off a big check.”

But the check did not come — even after a coalition of other shelters, nonprofits and local churches tried to pull together a rescue package to keep the shelter open. On Dec. 27, CityTeam Ministries, based in San Jose, Calif., closed the Seattle facility — leaving scores of people to seek food, shelter and sobriety elsewhere. For Dennis, who had been free of crack cocaine for nearly 11 months, the upheaval led to another painful relapse out on the streets.

“It’s a real loss,” says Herb Pfifner, executive director of the Union Gospel Mission shelter in downtown Seattle. “We’re all scrambling to try to handle the growth of homelessness because of the economic situation … and then the closing of another mission adds more pressure.”

The CityTeam closure is a piece in the expanding problem of homelessness across the nation: Shelters and related services for the homeless are facing funding shortfalls as the downturn takes its toll on state budgets and corporate donations. And while individual donors in many cases are keeping up gifts — or even digging a little deeper for charities that help with urgent needs like food and shelter — the service providers say they are faced with a rapidly growing demand from people losing jobs and homes in the economic crisis.









Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28916152

[Why Syzygy]

1. You mean faith based funding. Failed?

Where's all the money Pat Robertson got to help the poor! Those churchmen who collected via the bush bloodletting of our Treasury need to step forward. Do what they were PAID for. Or, better yet, return the money.

[bobbolink]

2. Thanks so very much for your concern for homeless people.

It's much more important than your rant against religion, isn't it?

:wtf:

[Why Syzygy]

3. uh.

Where did I mention "religion"? I was talking about PREACHERS taking taxpayer money to provide services they never performed. Is that okay with you?

[bobbolink]

7. And that's all you can think of. The fact that people are suffering escapes you.

Be as snarky as you wish... it just shows where your heart truly is.

[superconnected]

42. I really think society should be taking care of the marginalized, and not relying on Religion to do

it. By society I mean taxes that help the people needing social services. After all we can afford to give billions to banks.

[Why Syzygy]

49. Agreed.

As Islam has its Sharia, we have our fringe fundie fanatics who claim that GOD doesn't want government to ensure its citizens have the provisions they need. What's the difference in death by beheading and death by freezing to death?

[Why Syzygy]

4. * I'm getting out of this thread

My story is just as valid as anyone else's, but I'm not throwing it to pigs.

[bobbolink]

8. Your snark is telling.

Try compassion.

[Why Syzygy]

11. Like your's for me, I suppose.

No thanks. My concerns are out of your league.

[bobbolink]

14. Keep going with the snark. I've asked you to have more compassion than

ire for some organization that you don't like.

Attacking me isn't going to make things any better.

We're talking about homeless people who are SUFFERING!

And, yes, DYING.

Isn't that a bit more important than to continue some little quibble about where that money comes from?

I don't see how this is in any way "Progressive" to be snarky when there are people SUFFERING and DYING.

I'm sure you will want the last word, so have at it. Blast me good. It will show your true colors.

It's only homeless people, after all, not like it's some real issue.

[Why Syzygy]

16. out

[Stellabella]

69. What are you talking about?

Any progressive doesn't want to see anyone homeless.

And yes, it is important where the money comes from. Religions (there, I said the word) have not been able to make the kind of difference that government can make.

Before Social Security, the largest population of poor in this country were the elderly. Now it's totally different, thanks to Democrats and the Great Society. Where were the churches when the elderly were poor? Handing out baskets and blankets, but certainly not providing checks for them every month.

Yes, churches do good, and they should. But seeing leeches like Pat Robertson living in luxury while CHILDREN are homeless and suffering is something that should make Jesus' blood boil. Faith-based funding didn't work. We need across the board help for these people. FROM GOVERNMENT. Now you're on ignore.

[Tsiyu]

70. This isn't right

It doesn't help.

It hurts.

[Baby Snooks]

18. And those damn "bags for the hungry" at the grocery stores!

I noticed they are back. I asked a woman who put one in her basket if she realized that the bag went to the food bank and the food pantries had to buy the food she donated. She turned white as a sheet.

When she asked what she could do I told her about the main food pantry in our area. She lives not far from it. She put the bag back and asked me to pick out what they needed. So she took $25 worth of canned tuna and lasagna to the food pantry. Which saved the food pantry some money and saved someone some extra money for their utility bills.

None of the organizations in Houston pay the full bills anymore. That is happening all around the country. Lack of funding and what funding they have has to be stretched. The general rule seems to be they will pay 2/3 of the bill. That's how bad it has become. Many get the pledge but can't pay the other 1/3 because many other organizations can't or won't make up the 1/3 and many of the "government" agencies will only pay a flat amount which in Houston is $25. Because of lack of funding.

It is becoming a crisis rather than just a problem. And for those who turn their head, and their heart, to the crisis all I can say is shame on you.

[Why Syzygy]

19. I've been in that

kind of crisis since 2003. No one has to explain suffering to me.

There is a faith based house in a major Texas city. The residents (7-8) are required to shop food pantries at least once a week, unless they get food stamps, which all go to the house. During the summer last year, the Administrator insisted on keeping the thermostat at 68 degrees, even though she doesn't LIVE THERE. I told her I thought it was a disgrace "in this day and age". My son is in the USAF and has had two tours so far. She said it would be a disgrace for anyone to be hot "in this day and age". She didn't care if the power bill was $800, she said. She has lost all of her legitimate, willing donors because of her dirty tricks in the past. That, plus her program is a miserable failure. One of the residents committed suicide last summer. But, don't worry, the woman was not "hot" at the time.

[Baby Snooks]

44. This doesn't surprise me..

Many of these "faith-based" shelter programs are "feeding off the poor" instead feeding the poor so to speak. Particularly with regard to the disabled and the mentally ill and the "recovering addicts" and when you notify a state or local agency it's sort of this "well, they're a religious organization" excuse for not putting a stop to it.

The legitimate faith-based programs, and I tend to believe most are legitimate, are not only trying to keep people from becoming homeless but also trying to prevent people from being forced into these types of shelters. Few of them in fact operate shelters apart from emergency short-term shelters.

[Why Syzygy]

47. I'm not making any more political contributions.

I have very little income, but I managed to squeeze a few dollars to the Blues.
My support now will go to the ACLU, who is actively fighting every single day for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Not odious bondage to power hungry monsters.

[Baby Snooks]

20. And......

Many also believe the poor should just get on actual supplemental programs. It is not always that easy. You have to have a job in most cases and then you have to justify supplemental assistance such as food stamps in terms of your income. Next to impossible for single people.

With regard to housing programs there are increasing numbers of people being added to the "waiting lists" which in Houston the last time I checked was still around 18,000 people. And again you have to have a job to pay part of the rent. An increasing number of people don't have jobs. So they won't have homes.

And it is not easy for homeless people to find jobs. Most assume there is a "problem" with someone who is homeless. So they don't get hired.

I get ill every time I read about how this is a "Christian" country - you wouldn't know it by the way so many "Christian" people turn their back on the poor.

[Why Syzygy]

21. plz read the edit

The help was pulled out from under most who were getting assistance from Programs in 2004. All services in Texas were cut off. We were led to believe (if you dared) by Bush, that faith based would pick up the slack. Clearly, he Lied again.

*pinches self* I am still @ DU, right?

[Baby Snooks]

25. That was then, this is now...

Blaming the Republicans for the problems doesn't mean much unless you hold the Democrats responsible for not moving to correct the problems.

[Runcible Spoon]

33. Yep, well most of us also point fingers at gov't in general for failing to address this

However the answer is NOT more faith-based funding to replace the gutted social programs that should be the FOUNDATION of homeless/hunger relief aid.

[bobbolink]

34. WHO is "the government"???

Given that WE are the government, WHY isn't this more of an issue at DU?

Where is all the ACTION from "progressives" to make sure their government gives enough funding to keep people alive and well??????????

If churches are the ONLY PLACE people can get assistance, guess where their hearts will be.

[Runcible Spoon]

37. Well, I was responding to your question about why don't we point fingers at Dems too.

I don't know what you want from me. We are a republic, not a true democracy, so we don't have many avenues for direct influence on policy.

I don't know what else you expect beyond letter writing campaings, phone calls, petitions, and discussing issues on DU. Soon the issue will be egregious enough that direct social action is warranted. It's a tough cause to bear because the disenfranchised for the most part can't vote or pledge money to politicians, so they are effectively voiceless in our society.

I'm not sure why you put "progressives" in quotation marks...who here is not being authentic to the cause?

[bobbolink]

48. It wasn't *my* question....

I would be very happy if DUers *WOULD* write/call about poverty issues.

My pleas for that fall on deaf ears, and sink like rocks.

"I'm not sure why you put "progressives" in quotation marks...who here is not being authentic to the cause?"

I'm sure it hasn't excaped your notice that "progressives" aren't concerned, in the main, about poverty. It just doesn't rate. Look at ANY of the threads about "priorities"---where does poverty rate? If it's even mentioned, it's at the bottom of the list.

Do you think that escapes the notice of poor folk?

If you are serious about learning more about this, look for Nance Greggs essay later tonight on the media and poverty.

It will be instructive.

[Runcible Spoon]

52. I think you would reach more people if you adjusted your tone

and perhaps more people would listen. DU is merely a microcosm, and I don't use it a gauge for progressive action at ALL. It's a waste of time and energy complaining about what people do or don't talk about here.

You seem to think I'm woefully undereducated about poverty issues; so be it. I will continue to do what I can and help open up dialogue. I hope you find a better way to bring light to this issue beyond chastizing people.

[tama]

63. Generalizations

can be sometimes usefull for mirroring etc. The microcosm of DU falls largely under the label "progressives", to whom, judging by the hottest discussion topics, "cultural wars" (e.g. gay rights and "science" vs. "religion") are the hottest issues and most decisive "us against them" issues against republicans.

Let me tell you, poor don't usually give a fuck about cultural wars, this or that minority (whether social conservatives or social progressives) trying to dictate to the rest of the society by which norms, morals, ethics and values they should live.

To clarify, my own ethics could be called "localism", vs. universalism. As long as the Golden Rule of living and letting live, local communities not doing to other communities what they would not like other communities doing to them, is respected, I don't give a dam how and according to what customs other communities live. Do not judge, lest you be judged. As for the community that I would like to share my life with, most of the values would not be that different from "progressive values". With the major exception of universalism vs. localism. Cause I see that universalism - progressive universalism included - is evil, and localism is ethical and prudent.

[bobbolink]

64. As I said,.... please look at the essay to be posted tonight.

By Nance Greggs, on the "progressive" media.

You will see what I'm talking about.

As far as telling me how to proceed, may I remind you that ALL people on the bottom of the ladder get very angry?

You may want to remember all the "liberation" movements, past and present. Nothing happens when people are "nice" and ignored. It's only when people start confronting the lack of concern, the lack of action.

So, go ahead and confront me.

I'm in good company.

[Runcible Spoon]

65. I don't wish to confront you.

You are making assumptions about me and you know nothing about me. I don't take well to people lecturing me when they know fuck-all about my circumstances or what I do with activism.

You have now managed to piss off two people who are really sympathetic to the cause. Good going.

[bobbolink]

68. Whatever excuse you want to use. Blame me. Blame Republicans.

You can take action NO MATTER how pissed off you are.

It's YOUR CALL.

[tama]

61. Progressives seem to

worry about the middle class - well, global upper class, in fact. Themselves. And poor don't vote. Or afford internet connection (hard to connect when living in a tent, other priorities get priority). So who cares?

Exceptions noted, but to this observers it seems DU is most about, close to exclusively, about the "middle class"... understandably, of course. Not condemning, just observing.

[riderinthestorm]

71. I've already given you links to organizations that are secular. Many of them.

You've ignored my posts about this several times. Religious organizations are NOT the only thing out there helping the poor. You persist in trying to link poverty relief with religion, and I object.

Doctors without Borders. Goodwill. Unicef. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Most of these orgs work hand in hand with govt organizations to effect poverty relief and they are ALL secular. Directly, the US food stamp program comes to mind as a relief agency as does the agency that administers the free hot lunch program in schools. These are thousands of relief organizations that are both govt and govt/private agency partnerships that work together to ameliorate poverty.

I personally assist, weekly, with my COUNTY agency at the food bank so I know whereof I speak. I organize and direct weekly food drives so I'm on the front line of community action that is NOT church related and I resent your smears regarding those of us who are NOT religious.

I'm thoroughly SICK and TIRED of your egregious slams against "progressive action" for poor people that isn't faith based. We're out here. We're effective. And we're a hell of a lot of dollars that you persist in denigrating.

Ingrates like you are beginning to piss me off. Get the fucking chip off your shoulder and begin to recognize that churches aren't the only poverty-saviors out there.

[Baby Snooks]

50. With one exception..

Last month I was given food on an "emergency basis" by a food pantry even though I was no longer "qualified" and they do that a lot. The church they are connected with allows them to do it. They divert other church funds to the pantry to cover it. So if anything, there should be more direct funding to these food pantries. Not less. When I first had to turn to a food pantry, I got four bags of food. Sometimes five. Usually two weeks worth of food. This past year, only two. Usually one week's worth of food depending on how much canned tuna and lasagna and other canned sources of animal/fish protein they had. That right there indicated how bad things were getting. The other indication was the number of people on food stamps who were having to supplement. It is really quite frightening. But apparently only really quite frightening if you're having to deal with it. A growing number of Americans who never thought they would have to deal with it are having to. And that is what is the most frightening of all.

[Runcible Spoon]

53. Yes, it's downright terrifying.

I am defaulted in my huge student loans and have little savings. If the loan agencies wanted to come after me, they would wipe me out and I would be crawling back to my parents. A lot of people don't even have the "luxury" of going back to their parents, so in many ways I am "lucky". All I ever wanted was a good job and the opportunity to support myself and perhaps a family some day.

The most marginilized and powerless have no voice right now. Do people really think we are IMMUNE from food riots, soup kitchen lines, Hoovervilles (Bushvilles?)?

[Why Syzygy]

58. They will come after you sooner or later.

And they have just as much power as the IRS to seize assets. But, there is no section to appeal for help, which at least the IRS has. I owe both. You're right, it would ruin you. Try to set up a payment plan before it goes that far. And, you are fortunate that your parents are willing.

[Runcible Spoon]

60. They can come for me, as far as I'm concerned.

I have no assets. Citibank owns my loans, I'll let them go through the work of discovering that I'm defaulted. It takes 9 months to "rehabilitate" loans anyway so if they're defaulted they might as well STAY defaulted since I can't pay them.

Worse comes to worst, I'll move to Buenos Aires since that is where my fiance is from. I'm not busting my ass to pay back a loan to a crooked company for money the government should have given me in the FIRST PLACE.

[Why Syzygy]

62. *assets*

applies to any income from any source, even Social Security/Retirement. No matter how small, they will take as much as legally allowable (15% I believe). About half of the $1800 they took last year went towards interest. $400 of that was my willingly paying to set up the rehabilitation. Even after that, they levied my income.

I'd go to Buenos Aires in a heartbeat. Depending on your income sources, it might be protected.

We thought we lived beyond debtors prison. Nope. Now the streets are the prison for those who don't go onto a life of crime. Some do the crime just so they can do the time. It's a bed.

edit:

There are people at DU who are involved in trying to change THESE laws, to protect people from such harsh measures to collect debt. That's a movement that needs fueling.

And WS Execs pay their second house mortgages for the house in the Hamptons.

I truly believe we are at the tipping point. Maybe you mentioned above (someone did) that the top heavy cannot be sustained any longer.

[Qutzupalotl]

27. Why do you think Why Syzygy has no compassion?

To me it seems like her statements about funding come directly from her compassion. She just has her own way of expressing it.

And we are a discussion board. I don't think criticizing any policy should be out of bounds. We have to work on solutions, so criticizing what someone thinks doesn't work should be encouraged, not stifled.

[Runcible Spoon]

30. Yeah I don't know why s/he's getting jumped on here

I guess people are just really touchy but honestly we all want the same thing so perhaps a modicum of calm is needed here.

[undeterred]

6. What does that have to do with this story?

Regular contributions are down because the economy is so bad, and there are more people in need.

[bobbolink]

9. thank you.

It's amazing what we've come to.

:hi:

[Why Syzygy]

13. We know that.

out

[shrike]

17. And charities and foundations lost their shirts in the market

They depend on endowment and investment income, and their portfolios shrank, too.

[Runcible Spoon]

29. I don't think non-profits should be taking private and public money and then pouring it into hedges

That money should have been in secure slow-yield investments.

[shrike]

56. I agree

They drank the Kool-Aid like a lot of other Americans. And now the poorest are suffering.

[Baby Snooks]

54. Charities shouldn't be investing...

The money they take in should be given back to the community. I have always been outraged by the matter. Years ago an organization I worked with got caught in a financial scandal. A Ponzi scheme. And the organization lost $250,000. It shouldn't have been invested. It should have been used to expand services which would have probably would have resulted in increased funding from the community it served on the basis of the expanded services. And in this case, and in most cases, the money was invested on the advice of a board member. Who profited from it.

Many charities are forced to invest now. Because of other charities and their "private sector" approach to "administrative" positions. The corporations got tired of paying $250,000 salaries to the executive directors so they cut off "administrative" funding.

I always refused to "volunteer" for organizations that were paying enormous salaries to their administrative staff. Many of which didn't have a pr or development person. The salary for one of course was being paid to someone else. Usually added to the salary of the executive director. Who always claimed they could earn that or more in the private sector. My reponse has always been they should go try to earn it in the private sector. Few probably could. At least one I knew of didn't even have a BA. Just the right connections.

[shrike]

57. See my above post

[Runcible Spoon]

31. I see the connection....

these organizations shouldn't HAVE to rely on contributions from private citizens. Although supplementary charity is always a good thing, it should NEVER replace a sound public assistance safety net. Bush gutted those programs, and as a result faith based funding and private charities became the primary sources for relief. This is wrong.

[Why Syzygy]

38. I want to know what Pat Robertson did with $14 million

January 28, 2006
$14 million in federal faith-based money goes to Pat Robertson
Televangelist's claim that Ariel Sharon's stroke was an act of God may have cost him the friendship of some Israelis, but it hasn't prevented his charity, Operation Blessing, from garnering faith-based grants from the U.S. government

While the Reverend Pat Robertson was flayed recently over his suggestion that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was an act of retribution by God for the transfer of land in the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians, the Reverend's charitable organization, Operation Blessing, was raking in wads of faith-based money from the Bush Administration.

http://www.mediatransparency.org/story.php?storyID=108

Where's the accountability? He postures on about having NO DEBT, yet he doesn't have a problem putting Americans in debt to finance his scams.

I'm a Christian. Not a fundie. The Atheists and Secular Humanists have to call out these people, because people of FAITH just let it slide and attack anyone in their midst who might question the morality.

[Runcible Spoon]

39. Ughhh. It makes me nauseous to think about it.

Hypocritical piece of SHIT!

[Why Syzygy]

43. It makes me post as in #1

It's very disturbing. I KNOW these kinds of people. When I was faced with homelessness, my socially conservative son sent me a sleeping bag, an electrical thing for the lighter in my car, where I planned to live, and a CHRISTIAN TRACT portraying some kid getting thrown out in the snow, finding a piece of paper that said, "Jesus loves you", and then he dies. But an angel comes to take him to heaven. Isn't that sweet. Yes. I've had words with him. This is what "we've" come to. And someone wants to wail on me?

Jesus said, "if you've done it for the least of these (the stranger, the hungry, unclothed, prisoner), you have done it for me". What do you think he says if *they* don't? They are depriving their very own claimed savior's needs. It's a poison in the faith community.

***
Get some Pepto - more
***

"I really don't know what to do," Robertson told viewers of his "700 Club." "But this thing could be a real Pandora's box. And what seems to be such a great initiative can rise up to bite the organizations as well as the federal government. And I'm a little concerned about it, frankly."

Robertson was particularly concerned that the president's initiative might open government coffers to such groups as the Nation of Islam, Church of Scientology and the Hare Krishnas.

"You know I hate to find myself on the side of the Anti-Defamation League and others, but this is, this gets to be a real problem," Robertson said. "I mean, the Moonies have been proscribed, if I can use that, for brainwashing techniques, sleep deprivation and all the rest of it that goes along with their unusual proselytizing. The Hare Krishnas much the same thing. And it seems appalling to me that we're going to go for somebody like that, or the Church of Scientology, which was involved in an incredible campaign against the IRS."

In an interview with the Fox News Channel's Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes, Robertson said that "if the government gets into the faith-based initiative too much, they're going to dominate what the people of faith think. And one of the things they want to impose is on hiring practices. They want to force people to be hired by religious organizations who don't share the fundamental tenets of those religious groups."

Robertson changed his tune the following year, when in October 2002, Tommy Thompson, then the head of the Department of Health and Human Services awarded a $500,000 Compassion Capital Fund grant to Robertson's Operation Blessing International.

[Runcible Spoon]

46. WTF! $500,000 COMPASSION GRANT!

I hate these people, and I don't use that word lightly.

I am angered to hear about your pain and mistreatment. The wealth gap in this country is criminal. The wasted resources just boggle my mind...it is glorified through what we consume in media. We are trained to want and expect diamond rings and then realize we are lucky to pay the rent on our apartments for the month. What the rich spend in a weekend would keep me well cared for for a YEAR.

Just know that your story does reach people on a personal level, and we are listening. NOBODY IS IMMUNE from losing everything tomorrow. More and more people will be learning this brutal truth first hand, and it is our responsibility to keep SHOUTING!

[Why Syzygy]

51. It's the poison doctrine that we are not responsible to one another.

I used the Jesus example, but as a former Pagan, I can tell you, we are all One. Doesn't Pres Obama say that? Anytime we turn a cold eye to someone in need, we belittle ourselves.

With us or against us is the toxic lie. Too many believe it.

[1776Forever]

10. Amen - When my middle-aged son with no insurance being chronically ill we got nothing for him!

He had never been married and had no minor children. So Florida told us to H with him and your family. My husband and I who had little money helped him keep going for 2 years until he received SSI. We found out the last month before he received it there was an organization that was run by Faith-Based monies that could have helped us out with him but no one had told us because they didn't advertise it! Can you believe it? I couldn't!

[Why Syzygy]

40. This issue hasn't even been addressable until January 20, 2009.

I haven't been following closely, because I'm out there. I know the realities. Now, that we have a CHANCE, stuff needs to start happening.

Where's the accountability? They don't have to inform the public of services? They get the same check no matter what? Who knows. It's nothing more than a scam to line the Republican'ts FUNDIE BASE. Take care of Wall Street and fringe fundies, was the motto. We don't have to do that any more.

[Runcible Spoon]

23. I agree with you. Bush gutted government programs and threw money at the churches to deal with it.

And now Obama is following suit. All the while, people are hungry, scared, and homeless. It's criminal!

[Why Syzygy]

26. Well, you're gonna luv this thread!

I thought I had slipped through a time warp to FR for awhile.

Agencies were CLOSED. People, long term employees, with degrees! were sent packing. The summer of 2004, in Texas. They were doing the job. Bush disassembled the system that was in place. It may not have been perfect, but it was a damn site better than anything since. That was his stated agenda all along, so I don't know why people are shocked at the mention.

What do you mean Obama is doing that? Funding for faith based? I thought the States were getting re-funded.

[Runcible Spoon]

28. Obama is expanding faith based funding.

Which we have known all along. And there's no provision for the homeless in this stimulus bill; I hope he can get Congress to push something through because this situation is ONLY going to get WORSE.

[Why Syzygy]

That's a huge disappointment. nt

[NoQuarter]

35. bush threw money at the churches

so they would vote for him and his ilk.

[Rage for Order]

67. Actually, it appears that LACK of funding is the issue

If you had bothered to read the article you may have caught that minor bit of information. From the sounds of it they were doing great work with the little bit of funding they did receive. When the funding dried up, the services they performed went away. But hey, I'm sure the cold, starving homeless people the operation used to care for will be happy to know that not one more dime went to that "faith based" operation.

:eyes:

[biopowertoday]

5. its a double horrible when shelters close in COLD sites such as Seattle. I

don't know the answer ---except for money at this time to keep them open.

[Baby Snooks]

12. And of course that is the one thing missing from the "stimulus package..."

Unless I've missed something there is no money for shelters or programs to help people avoid becoming homeless.

Most of the programs in our major cities are "faith-based" but do not engage in "faith-based" activities and they were stretched financially long before the economy began to collapse. But of course some object to funding "faith-based" organizations. Perhaps not realizing the reality.

One reason is the focus of so many stories such as this one - if you read it carefully, an implication is being made that only the drug addicts and other "guilty victims" are in need of help and so of course the response is they should just "take control of their lives" instead of expecting everyone to take care of them.

The majority of homeless people the past couple of years have been increasing numbers of people who lost their jobs and couldn't find another one and had nothing once the unemployment ran out.

Were it not for the kindness of strangers and a very few real friends who didn't take the "take control of your life" attitude I would have become one of the homeless.

I wish the media in this country would do a story or two on the real face of homelessness. Not the usual story of the recovering addicts and the mentally ill. Which is usually what these stories focus on.

[bobbolink]

15. AMEN!!

"I wish the media in this country would do a story or two on the real face of homelessness. Not the usual story of the recovering addicts and the mentally ill. Which is usually what these stories focus on. "

From your keyboard to the monitor of the Goddess!!!!

That's why it's up to us to PRESSURE the media!!

Which is what the next January essay is about.. please watch for it!

[Baby Snooks]

22. I think we need "years" instead of "months"

I get so frustrated with National Stalking Awareness Month. It is usually the middle of the month before the media takes notice. And then of course after the obligatory story or editorial, the media ignores it. It's the same with everything else. There are so many "ribbons" at this point for each month no one remembers which color is which cause and which month is which cause's month.

Maybe we need to have "years" instead of "months." Maybe by the end of a year everyone would have gotten the message. About stalking. About poverty. About domestic abuse/violence. About so many things.

[bobbolink]

32. Interesting. I thought of that a number of years ago, too.

It would take a year of INTENSIVE information to get people even half-way educated about poverty!!

But, of course, there would be the predictable fights over which cause would go first.

:(

We humans really ARE capable of multi-tasking when it comes to learning new information.

But, it's WORK, and people want to be entertained.

Thank YOU for being involved with the January poverty essays! :hi:

[Baby Snooks]

36. You can have 2010...

I'm all for 2010 being National Poverty in America Awareness Year simply because so many are affected - particularly victims. Victims of random crime like robbery, victims of domestic abuse/violence, stalking victims. We all suffer as a result and employers often respond by finding someone else who isn't a victim. Sounds horrible but that is what happens in "corporate" America. It revictimizes the victims along with our justice system and in the process many victims end up jobless and then homeless.

[undeterred]

24. And although there is much talk about foreclosure

when was the last time you heard anyone mention eviction, and renters falling behind on their rent? Its like non-homeowners don't even exist. But renters are in fact more vulnerable to becoming homeless than homeowners.

[Baby Snooks]

41. Renters don't matter...

That's another problem with many of the assistance programs. Many are having to cover a mortgage payment instead of someone's rent. I asked about it once. I still do not understand the mindset that a homeowner is a priority. The homeowner who can't pay their mortgage can sell their house and if need be file for bankruptcy to buy time. Someone who can't pay their rent can also file for bankruptcy but most obviously cannot afford to file for bankruptcy if they cannot afford to pay their rent and so they up being evicted and they end up homeless.

The attitude, really, is that renters don't matter. Only homeowners.

We are really not much of a society at this point to be honest. Rather than deal with the victims we have created, we find ways not to deal with them. Usually by defending their victimizers. Which is what we did with Wall Street. Great fortunes are still being lost. But great fortunes are still being made. Much of the latter with the taxpayer money meant to "stimulate" the economy. Only the victmizers, the crooks, will see any real improvement in THEIR economy. The rest of us, well, who cares about us?

Congress really has not done much to help homeowners either. Except to trust that the banks they've bailed out will use the money to help the homeowners keep their homes. So far there doesn't seem to be much indication that the banks are doing so.

But then in many cities, many of the "landlords" are experiencing high vacancy rates, sometimes because of the high eviction rates, so the homeowners who are foreclosed on will become renters and the "landlords" will then benefit from the "stimulus" and be able to pay their loans.

It is a vicious cycle of victmization. We are a country of victims. And self-justifying victimizers. The problem is the cycle is merely producing more victims. And more homeless people.

[Why Syzygy]

45. You do remember?

There was no such thing as a "homeless" person until Reagan installed his trickle philosophy, vis a vis the Federal Reserve.

Instead of building more shelters and food pantries, shouldn't we find a SOLUTION so that people can actually live in a home environment???

[Baby Snooks]

55. No I don't remember that....

I remember the problem of homelessness being a problem that the Reagan Administration, an administration whose policies upon reflection were the policies of George HW Bush more than Ronald Reagan, refused to address but it certainly was not a problem that it created.

You just seem to want to blame Republicans for everything. Which solves absolutely nothing.

[Why Syzygy]

59. You see it as blame. I mean it as assigning responsibility.

I was a tax preparer during Reagan's administration. I saw daily, on paper, how it affected people. My ex-h was in construction. Huge office buildings sat vacant. He had no work. We moved to Las Vegas, where the building never stops. The mentally ill were turned out on the streets. Above you say another example should be used. But, the truth is that people with less than adequate coping skills are the hardest hit. And who says they are mentally ill? Our mentally ill society.

[Why Syzygy]

66. .

[defendandprotect]

72. Homeless aren't in the stimulus package . . . !!!????

[defendandprotect]

73. Shouldn't DU have a call-in day to Congress at least once a week for homeless --?????

[maryf]

74. Thats a fantastic idea!

[defendandprotect]

75. Good . .. let's do it -- Obama, too, of course . . .

[Why Syzygy]

76. Can we make it for all people living below poverty level?

Some of us are taken in by people who care about us. That leaves us *technically* not homeless. And, I agree, it sure beats living on the street or in a shelter. But, below poverty level would include the true homeless. If the kindness runs out, we temporarily housed are in the same situation.

Debt relief is a big part of it too.

[maryf]

77. Of course

Many people are in that situation, I believe the government does consider that homeless. I'll check and post here on edit.



This page is located on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Homes and Communities Web site at http://www.hud.gov/homeless/definition.cfm.


Homes and Communities - www.hud.gov
Federal Definition of Homeless


The United States Code contains the official federal definition of homeless. In Title 42, Chapter 119, Subchapter I, homeless is defined as:

§11302. General definition of homeless individual
(a) In general
For purposes of this chapter, the term “homeless” or “homeless individual or homeless person” includes—

1. an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and

2. an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is —

1. a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill);

2. an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized; or

3. a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.