Chicago exporting homeless many miles from their home

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/brown/cst-nws-brown03.html

Alicia Jackson used to live in Stateway Gardens until her nephew's troubles with the law got her evicted in 2000. She and her family later took up residence with her father, but he asked them to move out earlier this year. That's when they landed in a homeless shelter. Now Jackson, 38, her husband and three children are back in public housing with their own small town house in a relatively quiet development, all in all a definite improvement. There's only one catch: They're 170 miles from Chicago.

Jackson's new home is in Downstate Danville, where the local public housing agency has room to spare, unlike Chicago, where the CHA is no longer considered a feasible alternative for the homeless. Faced with an acute shortage of affordable housing in Chicago, local homeless shelters are increasingly sending families like the Jacksons to out-of-town and even out-of-state public housing agencies.

Inner Voice, the largest provider of homeless services in Chicago, has relocated more than 30 families to Danville alone since the start of the year. The agency also has helped its homeless clients apply for public housing everywhere from Hammond to Cairo.

"We just filled up our van today to transport two families to Waukegan," said Brady Harden Jr., president of Inner Voice.

Other homeless providers are employing the same strategy. An informal survey of shelter residents by the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless found that more than 16 percent had been encouraged to seek public housing outside Chicago.

[Toots]

1. exporting homeless many miles from their home

This sentence makes as much sense as the Bush* Administration. :rofl:

[EFerrari]

2. The word should have been "community".

When you force people to move many miles away from their community, you'ree tearing up whatever slender support network they may have.

Not to mention, this is discrimination against the poor.

[elehhhhna]

18. There IS an upside:

Better schools, safer neighborhoods, and much cheaper cost of living.

[Critters2]

22. And electricity!

which the south side of Chicago hasn't had for several days.

But it's still the boondocks :eyes:

[EFerrari]

23. That would be the upside.

:)

I'm thinking of the people I know in my neighborhood, or even my husband when he went homeless from rotten mental health care. They would have been so lost and so confused. I guess "traumatized" wouldn't be an overstatement.

Doug in particular, I think, because he does best right here, it's just part of his condition. I tried to help him be in two other perfectly good cities and it was a disaster for him. Once on his feet here, he does great and is now trying to "give back" in any way he can. It's not a simple problem, by any means.

/t

[greguganus]

41. lol n/t

[MountainLaurel]

3. Not just Chicago

In the DC suburbs in Maryland, affordable housing is so scarce that families are being moved to places like Hagerstown, about 50 miles and a world away.

[Laughing Mirror]

4. Yet there's loads of boarded up buildings and houses in DC ...

that could be renovated and turned into low-cost housing. To give you an idea how much, the population in DC is now down to 550,000, down about 250,000 to 300,000 when I was a boy. And I am not that old.

Where did all the people go? Shipped first out to PW & PG county, now out to Hagerstown?

Why not bring them back? There's plenty of room for a few hundred thousand inside the District line.

[Bridget Burke]

5. It's more profitable to turn those buildings into high-cost housing...

Gentrify the neighborhoods & those who can afford it will avoid that nasty commute from Outside the Beltway.

People shipped out to the boondocks will find it even harder to get work & keep families together. But they probably vote Democratic, anyway.

[MountainLaurel]

9. You've got it

That's the issue in a nutshell.

[sweetheart]

14. who wants to live in an urban slum?

Profit or not, its not the choice of anyone with a choice. Community is for
a world where civility rules and inner cities have long past in to the criminal
underworld. Then do you choose to live there, or just say that someone else
wants to stay in a slum to preserve a sense of community... and if someone does,
they can move there, like some people on this thread.

Are we designing a future we ourselves could not have survived in, one in which
we do not live, have never lived and fantasize that some kid down the road will
find it realistic for the planet to have 9 billion cars, when the average
temperature in san francisco is 110 degrees, and a smog belt surrounds the planet
from a failed attempt to cool the atmosphere.

We chould chain people to their houses and arm them with nuclear weapons, to see
who when so anchored goes insane, and then the good neighborhoods will be the ones
without radiation, and it will be more obvious...

The elite's cynical vision that lower classes want to live in crowded anti-private
prison spaces, is wondering to the nature of the animal, and surely even the lowliest
slave in soylent green wanted to live near a bit of nature, some open ground, something
untrammelled by grotty automobiles.

[EFerrari]

16. You seem to be assuming that everyone would chose as you would

and, therein lies the rub.

Poor people like to make their own decisions as much as anyone else. :)

[sweetheart]

34. Yes, that's the rub indeed

but i do find, that the human animal needs a certainl roaming space, a certain
ground per animal ratio before it has a problem. Certainly some might do better
in denser configurations, but maybe they're lying to themselves, and a conformist
villiage of people stacked on top of each other in tight sardine order has been
a decompression since the 1800's, and are we to presume people want to live in
japanese compression of space, where only the wealthy can afford a private moment?

Surely i am unique and everybody else does not need any space, that is why we all
are looking for smaller accomodation, less place to walk around and smaller darker
houses that take less fuel to heat? Ha! really. Surely the absurdity of the packing
densityies of people is unhealthy.

Yes indeed, it is a rub, i do indeed presume people need space, and that compression
of persons in to bigger and larger units of organizational incorporation has a ceiling
where it becomes disfunction. American society has worked, largely, as there *has* been
enough space for its epople, and as this comes under threat with the compressers and
improvers, shouldn't we only trust architects who live in their own projects?

[EFerrari]

37. The space you need might not be the space someone else wants.

:)

The space that makes you feel at peace may be big and frightening to someone else.

It's the choice, imho, that is finally important.

[sweetheart]

46. So should we presume people don't want it?

Does that mean that developers and urban planners are to be given a green light to
turn our world in to "their" vision of what space means?

I reject their paradigm of space, of compressing people together, and the poorer
you are, the more like a prison your house becomes, until the poorest lives
under constant surveillance on the bottom, and all the while, we presumed that
they wanted it that way.

Indeed it is the choice that i celibrate as well, and i don't believe we are being given it,
truthfully, that our urban spaces are designed to support and preserve poverty rather
than provide seedbed for universal wealth.

[EFerrari]

48. No, it's my position that having a choice is what is important.

And, it seems as though we agree on that point. :)

[Anita Garcia]

125. So true! k and r

You're right. It is not about what makes us feel good. It is about respect and dignity.

[EFerrari]

126. Thank you, AG. Let's see how we do.

:)

[formercia]

145. I recently spoke with a friend

who had moved from rural Maine to the 'Big City'. She now feels unsettled coming back to the woods and prefers the urban environment. It can be very traumatic being displaced to an area that is unfamiliar in many ways. It takes time to adapt and many homeless with issues find it even more difficult.

[mom cat]

132. There is the catch 22. Is people want to live further from the city

and near nature, away from the "grotty automobiles", they will be more dependent on the grotty automobiles because public transportation is not feasible in low density areas. The low density living that you reccommend will create more of the smog belt that you hate, unless people move to eco-villages ( http://gen.ecovillage.org/index.html ) and get off the grid and travel by bikes.

[sweetheart]

141. agreed

I don't recommend traditional suburbs, rather ecovilliages linked by wilderscapes
and an attempt to give humans a surrounding of open ground, in their villiages,
so that kids and people can walk around freely not enslaved to vehicles.

Some of the villiages planned in UK, pack the houses too close together, that no
amount of surrounding space defeats the incredible compression of the living
densities... and then people get on each others nerves with noise and whatnot.

When i'm talking about space, part of it is pretty rudimentary, like perhaps 1 bedroom
per person?

[mom cat]

142. Did you see the link on eco-villages that I posted?

Also check out this one: Dancing Rabbit Ecovillage:
http://www.dancingrabbit.org/

Check out their vids ... I think they've got it!

[Critters2]

19. Danville, IL is not "the boondocks"

Honestly, they haven't been dropped down a hole. I've lived in the Danville area, and in Chicago. Both have hot and cold running water, cable TV, and electricity....that is, IF Chicago has gotten all of its electricity up and running since yesterday.

[ProfessorGAC]

64. Well, It's Nearly The Boondocks!

I've been there. I used to go to the Balloon Races there every year. (My band got a gig there that was renewed year after year for early Saturday evenings. So, we'd go down there on Friday night and hang out with the balloonists and then fly with them on Saturday.)

One year i went with the Kellogg guys on the Tony the Tiger balloon during a night race. While i enjoyed myself on every flight, i didn't NOT like being in a hot air balloon at night. It's so hard to see where you're going and is difficult to even determine the current drift, so it's hard to stabilize direction, that it's too scary. Never again.

I actually went up one Saturday afternoon in the Disney World castle baloon. That was cool. It's really big and the gondola holds 6 people. Only one time was i there, though for the mass launch. I went up in the GE balloon which looks like a big light bulb.

The Professor

[Critters2]

129. So it was just you all by yourself out there in the boondocks?

Why would they hold races in the boondocks? Ya see, the world isn't divide between just Chicago and "the boondocks". And if you don't like it down here, you can always stay "up there".

[EFerrari]

24. The tiny condo we live in was the only apt I could find in SF

for under $1000. When the owner tried to bribe us out, I didn't budge. But I also didn't fight the conversion. I just didn't have the juice to do either. We were lucky because my family had the resources to buy it for us and our monthly outlay isn't too much more.

But, we are now officially part of the problem. :(

[Gormy Cuss]

121. The lack of a profit motive is why we need PUBLIC housing.

HUD/FHA essentially got out of the business of adding units to public housing in the 1960s. All expansion of Federally subsidized housing since then has been through privately owned developers and landlords. Some privately developed properties are run by nonprofit community groups. They tend to stay with it unless the group itself goes bankrupt.

The rest are for-profit owners. We know what's wrong with that approach: private owners, unless restricted by their agreement with HUD, have an incentive to move out of lower profit low income rental management to either market rate rentals or conversion to other more profitable use. They can and do walk away from subsidized housing use in lucrative housing markets. Even if HUD funded Section 8 assistance for all eligible families and individuals there wouldn't be enough rental housing in some markets.

IMO HUD should move away from the focus on home ownership until the basic need for safe affordable rentals is met. Once that goal is accomplished they can shift back to a home ownership focus.

Traditional public housing got a bad rep because of faulty designs (too many units, too little space)and underwhelming management. In areas where the public housing authorities are well run and the housing stock well maintained, they're not bad places to live.

[ItNerd4life]

143. There is NOTHING wrong with the for profit approach

I know, I have a 3 unit rental building. The problem is the government makes it nearly impossible to figure out how to make the building a Section 8 unit. Many people don't know how many hoops the government makes a person jump through to help the low income. It ends up being a lot easier going for the higher rents than helping the lower income people.

My renters aren't Section 8, however 2 live off of social security, so they haven't had a rental increase in years. I believe very strongly in the quality of living, but the government makes it difficult for me to let it happen.

[EFerrari]

144. That's so true. It's very difficult to deal with the teetering

bureaucracy. Every time you call, you get a different answer from a different person if you are lucky enough to talk to a human being.

[Gormy Cuss]

148. Relying on for-profit rental housing has not worked.

You are describing difficulties for small landlords under tenant-based Section 8 and those issues are real. There is room for improvement to make the rental assistance program more attractive to small landlords. You have pointed out that you keep rents low for your tenants because you believe in trying to sustain quality housing units for those with limited resources. I've know a number of small landlords like you who have sustained that goal with Section 8 tenants too, but either way it's a personal decision to consider tenants as people of value. In the broader context of the housing market, there would be no need for tenant subsidies if most landlords took your approach.

Owner-occupied multifamily buildings are the most likely to have landlords who prefer to maintain good limited income tenants rather than maximize return on investment. That's not the case with the majority of real estate management companies and owner/investors in rental housing. It's a business and making a return on investment is the goal. If a two bedroom unit of similar size and with similar amenities is renting for $1000/month, but the Section 8 contract rent is $800, it's hard to justify the below market rate returns. In some instances the impetus for keeping the building in the assisted housing stock is to provide a loss for investors seeking to offset gains in other investments, but ultimately the incentive is financial. When the dollars no longer make sense they get out of the business of low income rental housing.

Public housing, on the other hand, exists for the sole purpose of providing affordable rentals. The old models of high density buildings on high density sites has been proven to be faulty in all but a few areas. Newer public housing, built to replace these high density dinosaurs, tends to look and feel more like private market housing and has attention to architectural designs that promote community. There are other 'lessons learned' from the early public housing developments and as I wrote before, well run public housing authorities do a good job of maintaining livable developments. If our government would get back into the business of adding units to public housing it would go a long way to address the problem of family homelessness.

There would still be a place for programs to encourage landlords to rent to subsidized tenants because relying solely on public housing wouldn't make sense either. The main issue is that there is a chronic insufficient supply of safe and affordable rental units in many areas of the country.

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. In Key West, they simply put them on a bus to Miami

[bloom]

117. There are a lot of small towns that buy people a bus ticket out of town

because they don't want to deal with it.

[porphyrian]

7. It is a shame, but I understand the logistics of it.

The cost of real estate in Chicago is much, much higher than it is 170 miles away. They always have a limited budget, too small of one (although Chicago is better than other cities), and they are left making the decision to help one family stay there or send three families to homes, but far away.

[EFerrari]

11. Bingo. The cost. So, ship out the family of the disabled vet

who's getting shitty healthcare when he gets it at all. He's served his purpose.

This is the logic you're talking about. :(

[porphyrian]

17. Well, on one level yes, but imagine you are the director...

...or whoever is in charge of spending the money allocated to deal with the homeless. With the same limited budget, do you try to house the most homeless inconveniently or far fewer homeless, but with a greater quality of life? You're damned either way. That doesn't excuse society's treatment of the homeless and the poor in general, I was just seeing a way it could make sense to do this.

[EFerrari]

20. The choices are ugly and the few resources we have are

just about daily assaulted. I have several friends who work in this field. Their war stories are just incredible -- or they would be if we hadn't lived through some of them ourselves.

It is a valuable thing to do, to try to wear those shoes. You're right.

[Critters2]

21. In Danville he'll be near a VA hospital with public transportation

to get there. With paved roads and everything!!

[eridani]

138. But away from any social support networks he now has.

However, if he doesn't have any such networks, it probably won't make any difference.

[cgrindley]

8. The homeless do have a responsibility

From each according to their ability to each according to their need.

The homeless have a duty to minimize the negative effects that their misfortunes have on their communities, especially when most communities are already facing terrible burdens caused by a truly wretched economy. Even if it means leaving a cherished community, it is more important for homeless people to find more permanent shelters, so that they can begin the process of rehabilitation, and look forward to contributing to society. Perhaps, with rehabilitation and/or a stable home base and employment, they can return to those communities they had to leave. But these things are their duty.

[EFerrari]

10. What a crock.

The homeless don't set the rents and aren't responsible for OUR MISERABLE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

Most of the people you are talking about are single moms with small kids and veterans.

Wow. Maybe we should just set aside a state for all our poor, ship 'em there on cattle cars and that will be that.

You have any suggestions? New Mexico? Louisiana? What do you think?

:wow:

[cgrindley]

33. A homeless person or homeless family

Should be willing to live anywhere that offers appropriate, clean and safe housing. Some communities become over-burdened. Some communities have open spaces in their shelters and public housing.

[EFerrari]

38. Well, if that is true, then we have to stop calling this a free country.

:)

[cgrindley]

54. By what rationale?

Person X is homeless in community X. Community Y has an open shelter bed. Person X is encouraged to take the shelter bed in Community Y. It shouldn't be forced, but I would advocate withdrawing other services from Person X if they decline the offer. I come to this discussion from a strictly socialist viewpoint. If society is to look after its weakest members, then there are certain concessions that should be made.

[EFerrari]

58. "certain concessions" -- your euphemism -- is your answer.

What, exactly, is being conceded? :)

And, if those foggy "concessions" are okay for those Other people today, will they be okay for you and yours tomorrow.

So many questions.

[cgrindley]

61. Certain Concessions

I'm not a big Libertarian here. I'm a quasi-socialist Canadian Liberal. I believe that it is just to sacrifice some individual freedoms for the good of greater society. I believe, for example, in income redistribution. I believe that no one, for example, should be able, allowed, to see or seek private medical care, and so on. I've got no problem with taking the homeless from place X and putting them in a shelter in place Y.

[EFerrari]

68. If you have no problem moving people from X place to Y

then you do not believe in basic human rights or you have no ability to empathize.

Either of which could be a life changing problem.

Good luck.

[Critters2]

131. There's a basic right to live in Chicago?

In which charter or constitution?

[AngryOldDem]

27. And society has a duty to help them, too

Go volunteer at a shelter and see how the system works.

[EFerrari]

30. You haven't seen it until you've seen it. n/t

[cgrindley]

35. So an offer of housing is not helpful?

Look. I moved 4000 miles to get a job. Why? Because there wasn't a permanent job where I lived. Someone made an offer and I accepted.

[EFerrari]

40. And why can't everyone be just like you?

:shrug:

[cgrindley]

47. Yeah

If you are homeless and someone offers you a clean and safe home, you should take them up on it. I'm a socialist. I believe that everyone, even the most dispossessed, abused and disadvantaged have obligations to everyone else in society.

[EFerrari]

51. Then, while you may be a socialist, you have a very limited

grasp of the range of human functionality or vulnerability.

[AngryOldDem]

66. True story

I work at a homeless shelter, so I think I know a little about of which I speak.

We had a mother and a couple of kids get an apartment in a public housing project in the city. Many poor and homeless people are referred there as units become available. About a week they got the place, they were back with us. I asked what happened. She point-blank told me that the conditions were unlivable. Cockroaches, dirt, exposed plumbing in the bathroom, a toilet that barely worked. She complained loudly to the management of the place, and they "promised" things would be fixed. She got tired of waiting and was concerned for her kids.

Now...would YOU "take them up on it" if such a place were offered to you?

If you were offered a place in a drug- and crime-ridden area, would YOU take them up on it? Especially if you are a recovering addict, as some of our clients are?

If not, then why should a homeless person?

The fact of the matter is that decent, safe, low-income housing is at a premium in many larger cities in the U.S. And yes, I do see that as society's failure to adequately look out for its least fortunate.

Yours is just the type of tripe I hear from right-wing types who say to the homeless, "get a job," never mind the fact that wages may not pay for a place, the job may not carry benefits, and that there may be no way to get to the job unless its through private transportation. Or, people may have other issues (such as mental illness) that may make it harder for them to become self-sufficient.

I know; don't tell me. I'm full of shit on this, even though I see it on almost a daily basis.

As a postscript, the project where the woman and her kids were placed is scheduled for demolition. As of now, there are no plans to replace this housing, which means the options will be even tighter in the months to come.

Homelessness and its causes and effects is a very complicated topic. Too often people want quick solutions that just aren't there, and unlikely to be.

[cgrindley]

84. I never said put the homeless in cockroach infested dumps

I said safe, clean and appropriate housing.

PS don't you dare call me right wing, even by association

[EFerrari]

90. That you can even imagine "putting" another human being anywhere

could be an indication that you have dehumanized homeless people.

:shrug:

[cgrindley]

92. Nonsense

I put my children in school. I put myself through twelve years of university. I have hardly dehumanized my kids or myself.

If a shelter is safe, clean and appropriate to the needs of its prospective clients, then...

[EFerrari]

93. Apprarently, you have no problem "putting" anyone anywhere.

That's very telling.

And also, very undemocratic, to say the least.

Homeless people aren't your children.

Oh, hell.

lol

[cgrindley]

94. It's totally democratic

to look out for the most disadvantaged members of society and where necessary provide necssary services to them.

[EFerrari]

95. No., That's paternalism.

I really have no interest in pissing you off, cgrindley. In fact, I'd much rather talk to you until we agree on anything.

But when *YOU* set about deciding what is best for poor people, that's paternalism.

[cgrindley]

98. You just alligned yourself with Mill and the Libertarians

Are you against seat belt laws, bike helmet laws, driving age restrictions, building codes?

[EFerrari]

100. GOP tactics: "You are pinko AND crazy. Nice try.

It's unfortunate that you can't marginalize me as you'd like to. I think I understand that.

But, I'm here to tell you, your paternalistic attitude doesn't wash and won't last.

Because thoughtful people are hard at work.

cheers,


Beth

[cgrindley]

101. How dare you

Slandering me as a GOP supporter is against forum rules.

I ignored the charge of paternalism once. I won't ignore it twice.

[EFerrari]

102. Might be a good idea not to ignore it twice. n/t

[cgrindley]

103. And what do you mean by that?

And by the way, who called you pinko and crazy?

Mill denied the value of what you would call any form of paternalism and he was far from pinko. As far as I can tell, out of the two of us, I'm the one holding the liberal point of view. Yours appears to be confused, but partially informed by Mill.

[EFerrari]

105. You advocate the relocation of poor people.

As a liberal progressive, I canna agree with you.

I think that about sets the account straight.

And, we are no longer having a fruitful dialogue.

Let it go.

[cgrindley]

107. I advocate

Housing the homeless in clean, safe, appropriate and free public housing wherever those accomodations may be. I wouldn't force someone into a particular shelter or housing project, but I would encourage them to use those facilities, and feel that with free public housing comes certain responsibilities and obligations including one that would suggest that if a home becomes available in neighborhood x, then perhaps you should move away from neighborhood y. You shouldn't have to be asked or be told.

I spent three years on various wait lists for public housing in Scotland, and I didn't give a shit where the flats were just as long as they were affordable, safe and clean, and near a decent school for my kids. I would expect anyone to have the same common sense.

[EFerrari]

109. Yes. You expect anyone to have your common sense.

And yours only. And that expectation is faulty.

Best of luck to you.

[mom cat]

134. Public housing here is not free. I do not know what the situation was in

Scotland, but it now costs about 40% of a person's meager income here. Most people in public housing are the working poor. If they have to move 170 miles away from their jobs, like in the OP, and they have no reliable transportation, bingo, they lose their jobs and become more of a "burden to society". This is a burden that society should not place on them, especially since their plight stems from the rapacious greed of the uber-rich. The problem could be solved with their chump change.

[cgrindley]

137. It's relatively unaffordable there too

I'm arguing that there *should* be free quality public housing for those who are homeless and unemployed.

[mom cat]

139. I hear you. What we have now is a disgrace.

[AngryOldDem]

108. If the shoe fits, man

I stand by what I said. Too many people think the answers are jobs and a good place to live. It just ain't that simple.

Not all housing offered to the homeless is safe, clean, or appropriate. Seems to me you want them to take the first thing that they're offered.

[cgrindley]

112. I don't want them to take the first thing offered

well, actually I do, because I want all public housing to be fricking awesome.

[AngryOldDem]

115. If you have to resort to sarcasm, then I'm done with this discussion

I just want housing that most people can afford, especially those who are economically disadvantaged.

[cgrindley]

118. I'm not being sarcastic

I think that society has an obligation to provide safe, clean and free housing to those who need it. What's so idiotic about wanting that?

[mom cat]

133. Certainly, one of the economic motivators is gentrification. We have a

big problem in my area with condo conversions and the prices are unfordable to most. For over a hundred years, this has been a neighborhood of working class families, but now all the new sales are to yuppies. I am working hard to try to encourage the development of affordable housing, but, even that is not affordable to the many who need it. The waiting list for public housing is horrific. I know someone who just went on the list and there are over 5000 people ahead of her.She is mildly retarded and would not be able to survive if she was transported away from her support systems that try to keep her safe from those who prey on the disabled.

[porphyrian]

45. The harm goes both ways. Why should the homeless act unilaterally?

Why should the victims be the first to act towards a solution, and what makes you think anyone will reward them for their efforts?

[cgrindley]

49. The first act in the equation

Is the offer of a safe shelter. The homeless going to said shelter is the second act.

[EFerrari]

53. And so your equation is flawed. Here's a site you might want to

visit to update your understanding of the issue. Lots of good info there.

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/

[cgrindley]

59. I don't want to visit that site, I want you

to rationally tell me why you think that homeless people do not have their own social responsibilities, and why, if they are unwilling to fulfill those responsibilities, that it would be unjust for a local or national government to become involved.

EG involuntary drug rehabilitation for homeless addicts.

I take it that you would be against this?

We have responsibilities to one another, and those responsibilities do not vanish because we are destitute, or homeless, or addicted to drugs, or recovering from mental diseases.

My ex-wife, a few months before I met her, lived in a shelter for battered women. And women were routinely kicked out of that shelter for not helping out the others with the laundry or the dishes. We all have obligations no matter who we are.

[EFerrari]

67. And I don't feel compelled to explain to you that most homeless

people are not drug seeking addicts. I've gotten less resistance from homeless people seeking treatment than I have from you in this thread.

:rofl:

Of course we are all in a web of relationships.

Welcome to that web. :)

[cgrindley]

85. I never said the homeless were all drug addicts

You didn't answer my question. My only question.

So you don't think that homeless people have responsibilities to the societies that care for them?

[EFerrari]

99. Tell you what. Next time you need something

no matter what your history is, how would you handle some person standing over you, asking you what you owe the community?

I have to stop myself here.

[porphyrian]

62. Well, that's your prescription.

Assuming that is "the" way to do it, I'd say we're still waiting for step one.

[cgrindley]

86. D'uh

We have an absolute duty as a society to ensure that every single person has safe, clean and appropriate housing. That's what we have to do. That we don't is criminal.

[porphyrian]

88. O...OK... - n/t

[mark414]

71. have you ever been homeless?

those shelters treat you like yer a 10 year old kid, with all their rules and condescending bullshit. THAT'S why so many people don't seek them out. i stayed in a couple shelters once or twice - NEVER again.

[EFerrari]

77. How are you, Mark?

It's good to see you on the internets.

What you say is so true. Some of our neighbors are more afraid of using the shelters than of taking their chances outside.

We're not bad. Getting some work.

:hi:

[cgrindley]

87. What are these rules of which you speak?

If it's praying to jesus, then I'm with you, fuck the man.

But if it's no smoking, no drinking and no disruptive behavior, no guests, no gambling, etc. Then grow up.

[mark414]

89. it's like a farm

and no i'm not talking about the no vice rules, those are understandable and acceptable.

it's the whole system of treating a bunch of grown men and women like they don't know any better and they're in no position to help themselves and "okay sir sure thing why don't you just sit down and i'll take care of this, okay??"

the workers talk to people like you would a child or a dog - i've been talked to like i was a child and i have a thing called pride so fuck that i'll sleep outside.

[cgrindley]

91. What do you mean?

I don't understand? How like a farm? Give me an anecdote. Sounds like you've got a legitimate beef, but you're not explaining yourself.

[EFerrari]

96. Spend one night in a shelter and then maybe YOU will grow up. nt

[meisje]

12. Tuff shit, it is a home!!

Why is it when one attempts to help someone, that person or group will still bitch about it. I tried to donate a large amount of catered food to our homeless shelter(large city) and they wouldn't take it. Trays of Mac and cheese, baked beans, potato salad, ect. The shelter would not take it because there was not enough to feed everyone in the shelter, so I dumped it in the trash!

[KamaAina]

13. So that's why the problem's so bad out here!

We don't have anyplace to ship 'em :eyes:

[EFerrari]

15. I wonder if people remember when reading about homelessness

that a homeless family gave us Dennis Kucinich?



:hi:

[KharmaTrain]

25. This Has Been A Long Term CHA Solution

The areas of many of the old high-rise public housing complexes, including the infamous Cabrini-Green, sit in the way of upscale development. The buildings are deteriorating and the CHA long gave up on doing anything but tearing them down. The plan has been for "low-rise" replacements and began offering special incentives to large apartment complex owners to take on these families. In the early 90s, we had an influx of "Section 8s" in our area...people from "the projects" who had been moved into townhouses and apartments in the area...about 40 to 50 miles from their former communities. Needless to say, problems ensued. Crime rose in many areas and some housing violations were common. Some units had 2 or 3 families under one roof and mars lights were a common sight on Friday nights on certain streets. The village finally cracked down and forced the apartment owners to enforce regulations on the number of people per unit and levied some tough fines for violations. The companies eventually sold out to new owners...many who turned former rentals into condos (at the village's urging).

While a lot of the "riff-raff" have moved on, many of the former city residents have stayed and have added to the diversity of the area. While its a shame some are re-located in this manner, but the world they're leaving behind was not a paradise. Moving some of these poor people out of the city can help as it puts them closer to where the jobs have moved...here in suburbia.

Urban blight is still a major problem in most cities and it appears the answer is gentricifcation. As the rich move back into the downtowns and inner cities, the "problems" are tossed to the expanded suburban areas or rural areas where the cheapest housing is.

[EFerrari]

43. "the world they're leaving behind was not a paradise"

We have a lot of rationalizations for pushing poor people around.

[KharmaTrain]

76. Not Rationalization...More Like Reality

The state of inner city poor are a dirty secret that many, even liberals and progressives, wish to go away. Sadly many have become imune to the problems of these people...where jobs are scarce and vice and crime are a quick out or way to survive. It's someone elses' problem until it hits their neighborhood.

One benefit for those "pushed around" is it puts them in better schools than the ones in the city. And, as I noted, moving into outer areas puts these people...who had little opportunity in the city, closer to jobs and a chance at improving their lives.

[EFerrari]

79. We have so many rationalizations for pushing around poor people. nt

[AngryOldDem]

26. In my city the homeless have a choice

They can go do subsidized housing in the city, which often is barely above code and is in some of the most crime-infested areas in the region. Or, they can move to subsidized housing in the suburbs, which is much nicer, with greater opportunities to raise kids in a more relatively stable environment. As a matter of fact, many of the clients at the shelter where I work at have refused inner-city housing because of its poor state. Clients who have gone to the suburbs, however, are doing quite well.

Low-income housing is at a premium. I don't see this as "exiling" the homeless so that they are out of sight, out of mind. I'm sure many have welcomed this chance at becoming self-sufficient.

Waiting lists for this housing, though, are totally unacceptable, especially for people with kids.

[EFerrari]

28. Waiting lists for most services are now ridiculous.

I'm on a 2 year waiting list to see a doctor, lol.

There was an 18 month waiting list when my husband needed to see a shrink for medications.

Dark ages America, no kidding.

I'm wondering, how would one know if the clients that have become suburand are doing well? It sounds good. What kind of follow up is there?

[AngryOldDem]

57. They check in with us

Their case managers at the shelter often hear from them, and we get updates. Some call the shelter just to talk. Also, we see them out in the community. Also, agencies network with each other, so it's pretty easy to keep tabs. But what I think is neat is, we often hear from former clients because they are just so happy and proud that they're finally out on their own.

Not to say that this is always the case. Recently a family came back to the shelter that had been out for more than a year --lots of underlying problems that can crop up. But the bottom line is, there are plenty of success stories.

I think the point some may be missing here is that the bottom line should be the quality of the housing people are moved to, as well as the area. Should not the homeless have standards and expect to be treated with dignity, just as the rest of us do?

[EFerrari]

63. That's really good to hear! Because too often, these programs

have oddly familiar even Orwellian names and the actual delivery to the client is negligible if non existant.

I'm not sure if some abstract "quality of life" should be the bottom line, though. Choice that is supported seems just as important to me, in the limited experience I have.

Because of our history, I've tasked myself with getting to know every homeless person in my neighborhood. We live by the beach and by Golden Gate park, so you know that there are plenty of places for people to try to exist without being hassled in the best way that they believe they can.

My homeless neighbor K is in a wheelchair. And he is not willing to be indoors at this point. He is unkempt and has all this stuff strapped to the chair and you can see him most days sitting near the beach. He doesn't panhandle.

He probably freaks some people out and he probably could use some health care beginning with a bath. But, you know, I'm so grateful to my neighbors, including our cops and our momNpop retail places. Because while he's a pain to them, they think of him as a person, not as an obstacle.

I don't know if that makes any sense. But, I'm very encouraged by what is happening in our little corner of the beach, anyway.

[AngryOldDem]

73. Too often the homeless ARE seen as problems and not people

Don't get me wrong -- the work that I do can be stressful and I literally have to pray for patience some nights. That's especially true when we happen to have a particularly volatile mix of people, which happens from time to time. But overall, I'd say that I have been blessed to do the work that I do. I have met some really fascinating and neat folks.

I guess my biggest frustration right now is the community's attitude, which has only gotten worse. There are basically just two shelters in my city -- the emergency overnight shelter (where I work) and the day shelter. Through a lot of bureaucratic sleight-of-hand and weight-pulling by business leaders, the majority of the care for the homeless is falling on the overnight shelter's shoulders. We have very little support and very little money. The city is trying to squeeze the homeless into a very narrow "ghetto" and it is taxing us to our limits. I could go on but the whole discussion literally exhausts me. I've seen your posts on this issue here and elsewhere on DU, so I think you probably have a sense of where I'm coming from anyway.

[EFerrari]

74. Yep. And thank you so much for being willing to extend yourself.

Lots to do. And the Frat Boys in Charge don't help.

Thank you, AngryOldDem. Thank you very much.

[Swamp Rat]

29. It's much cheaper to exterminate them then cremate the bodies.

If it all boils down to economics, then the business planners will eventually arrive at that conclusion.

Who runs our country now? A lot of middle-aged white men with MBAs (yes, there are women too and a couple of minorities), many of whom have already shown disdain for the poor, minorities, and the disabled.

Will they follow a new business plan modeled around a final solution to this problem?

We may find out in the next few years. Halliburton and Bechtel need more time to build the facilities.

[EFerrari]

31. This is from a work in prog, "Blood on the Clownsuit" and is

a tour of SF's skid row. I'm not sure if this is OT, exactly. But, maybe it is some measure of quality of life and the level of personal choice that we're talking about in this thread:




The Tenderloin is in the theater district and has about 50 residence hotels with tiny rooms once used by dock workers in the 30’s.

The Tenderloin has its own climate, its own seasons. They are poverty, hopelessness and fear.

Let’s take a tour of the Tenderloin.
Sound Cue: Traffic
GOES OUT INTO AUDIENCE WITH BULLHORN
Everybody please stay together, it’s dangerous. Do not feed the lions,.
Here’s Market Street, the financial district. People in sharp clothes on cell phones. You can beg for change from them and sometimes they slow down and say “No”.

Let’s go two blocks North. Here’s St. Anthony’s Dining Room, where you get your free hot lunch after spending a pleasant social hour in line with the other guests. Down the street here is Glide Memorial Church. I think we may be too late to get a good table. What a turnout, huh? They serve donated leftovers from restaurants and bakeries three times a day to a full dining room. God bless them. Every now and then, they run out of gloves in the kitchen and you get gastrointestinitis. Then, you have to find a toilet that you can sit on for three days.. If you’re lucky, you get to go to the hospital.

Back on Market Street, we come to Carl’s Jr., open 24 hours. You can stay there all night as long as you never go to sleep. See, the security guard is going around and poking the guys that are nodding off. If they fall asleep, he has to kick them out. (Waves goodbye to the guard.)

It’s dark out here now but if you look carefully, you can see here’s a guy passed out on the sidewalk with a needle in his arm. Just step around him, like everybody else. Okay -- here’s the St. Francis Theater that shows two new movies for $3.50 starting at about noon. I saw 100 movies here.

Now, we go about six blocks west on Market to our next stop. It’s early, so the only people out are people going to work. I remember that.

Now we’re here at the famous Pill Corner. You can buy any pill in the world here. People sell their medication here to dealers for a few bucks or sometimes they take merchandise in trade. It’s sort of like an urban flea market only without the hotdog vendors or the carousels. And here’s Sixth Street between Market and Mission, the Walmart of Crack.

That woman – that skinny woman in the middle of all those big scary guys, she has a big plastic bag with 100 rocks of crack cocaine in it. You notice, there’s no policemen? There’s never any police. Those guys all have guns. Let’s keep moving.

Are we all still here? Nobody got robbed? Good. Hope you enjoyed the tour.
PUTS AWAY BULLHORN

[Swamp Rat]

42. Oh, I have seen them!

My brother lived in the 'TenderNob' and I have sat on the street playing music (further down, below Geary) with the folks who are part of the 'exibit' while the buses rolled by.

Welcome to the Disunited States of Dystopia!

[EFerrari]

44. Living well is the best revenge. We're going to open the play

in September and it will work well. And the Coalition on Homelessness here will benefit from every single ticket we sell.

:toast:

:evilgrin:

[Swamp Rat]

52. hugs

:hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug: :hug:

[EFerrari]

55. Swamp Rat, we had a gig to go to NOLA to speak and then

Katrina hit. We did manage to find the booker (from the National Coalition for the Homeless) finally. He said he was okay but, I don't know. It was going to be a multi city tour.

I don't think I'm patient enough for things to be this f'd up.

:mad:

[Critters2]

32. As a resident of downstate Illinois

I take some offense at the notion that moving people to Danville is equivalent to extermination. It's a city, not a concentration camp.

[Swamp Rat]

36. As a resident of New Orleans...

I am only warning you of what is to come.

[EFerrari]

39. To come? It's here!

:hug:

[Swamp Rat]

50. Don't WE know it.

My post, as you have already surmised, was not to offend the good people of Danville, Chicago, et al who are trying to help the homeless. I have been homeless for a very short period of time, so I know what it feels like to need the help of others.

What these good folks do NOT see is a very disturbing trend that is evolving too slowly to comprehend the consequences.

The modus operandi of uprooting people, and moving them to new and "better" locations is so fucking scary I don't know where to begin to discuss it.

Maybe we should start a sociology/anthropology reading club concentrating on social theory?

[EFerrari]

56. Or a "How I stopped worrying and learned to love the cattle cars"

group.

It's frightening to see so little critical thinking when we're up against the Empire's forces.

Damn. Who in their right mind could watch the effen Katrina Coverage, as fucked up as it was, and not know EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE WORTH to this government?

:shrug:

[Blaze Diem]

60. OK SwampRat ..that pic is just way too creepy...

Maybe because it is more reality than I care to accept?

As to the homeless agenda:

The small state of North Dakota ships them from west to east..towards a more populated area, many move on from the Minnesota boeder and college cities to Minneapolis...Who knows from there where they end up..
Probably Chicago!!
oops, big mistack obviously.

Ndakota, last I recalled, did set families up in housing, with women & families groups who had more funds to use, from the shere matter of population from east vs. western part of the State.

Many end up given a better choice of where their future may lead, but they do have to relocate in order for this to take place.

You can survive on the welfare role, in North Dakota. minimumly, that is, but it is survivable. The problem is that the wages are so low, that the welfare benefit for a family is better than earning a living at a job.
This is for most cases, and if you're earning a minimun wage level job.

[Swamp Rat]

69. Not quite what I would call the "American Dream."

:hi:

[Blaze Diem]

81. Hardly ..you're right about that....Shifted and shuffled from place to pla

some will slip into an open slot along the way while others get re-shuffled and sent down another corridor until they too find an open slot to exist in for a while.
Then there are always the streets for those who just cannot tolerate the emotional upheaval of being shuffled any longer.
For these people, the mere familiarity of a place, though dangerous and harsh, signifies "home".

Human beings are pushed till they break.

Our society sucks.

[ReadTomPaine]

65. The only "help" a homeless person can always get for free in most cities..

is a one way bus ticket out town.

This has been true for many years.

[EFerrari]

70. Yep. And lately, in San Francisco, where the "homeless problem"

has now been resolved. It's "33%" better!

Rah.

[ReadTomPaine]

78. Everyone should see this great segment from "California Connected"...

It puts the proper face on homelessness today. Highly recommended.

Here's the link to the entire segment "Half Homeless":

http://www.californiaconnected.org/tv/archives/420

[EFerrari]

80. Thanks! I'll take all the tools I can find or be gifted with.

:)

[ReadTomPaine]

82. It's a very moving piece from a show that's often on target...

and it shows a side to homelessness that people don't want to know or see, because they too are just a paycheck or so away from the life these people lead.

Everyone will recognize themselves or someone they know in the personalities here.

[EFerrari]

83. I look forward to seeing it. My husband came from an upper middle

class family of overachievers. Dad in the space program, Mom an accountant for the feds. IQ well over 130. Hardworker all his life.

Until he got sick.

That's all it took.

I had to drop out of my PhD prog to try to figure it all out. We had little effective support. Recipe for disaster. We were functionally homeless for about five years. I pawned my PBK key, lol, no kidding.

Well, it's very good to know better about so many more things today. But, I'm also happy today is today, if you know what I mean. I slept last night without interrupting, racing worries. When you are stuck in poverty, even sleep comes at a premium.

Thanks.

:)

[ReadTomPaine]

150. Kick..

Get a chance to watch the segment? What did you think?

[maveric]

72. 1996 repug convention, San Diego. Hundreds of homeless were rounded...

up and dumped off in rural areas of the county. The Convention Center is situated by what was once a "skid row" area of downtown. The repugs and the city didnt want anyone to see the homeless on TV coverage. Like they dont really exist. So they gathered them up and dumped them off in areas with no facilities or aid.
The residents of those rural areas weren't to pleased about it either.
Typical repug tactic. Hide the problem and its not there.

[EFerrari]

75. What you said, maveric. Add: I bet those rounded up people

weren't all that jazzed about it either.

:kick:

[EFerrari]

97. Since we're having a real heart to heart here, what about voting

this thread up?

:)

[theHandpuppet]

104. What an excellent idea

I gave it my recommendation this morning, but certainly this thread is worthy of MANY votes!

[EFerrari]

106. So, help round 'em up.

Thanks.

:loveya:

[bobbolink]

110. Please, push our Dems to take homelessness more seriously!

The suicides of NOLA survivors must never be again repeated!

Enough of this nonsense... push this issue!

PLEEEEEZ!

[EFerrari]

113. Yes.

:kick:

[bobbolink]

147. ..

:hi:

[bobbolink]

111. Please give this some recommends!!

[EFerrari]

114. How far are most of us from homelessness?

:(

:kick:

[bobbolink]

146. One paycheck? One major illness? One tragic car wreck??

"There, but for the grace of God, go I."

[EFerrari]

116. Thank you, DU.

:kick:

[Catherine Vincent]

119. Kick to read later.

Plus a recommend.

[McCamy Taylor]

120. I wanna live in Downtown Manhattan but I have no money. Gimme a house!

Seriously, it is possible that some urban areas do not have jobs that pay enough and housing that is affordable enough for some people to live there. Until cities get off their butts and build more affordable housing, I guess they will have to send people away.

[EFerrari]

122. Sure! But we have to scrutinize every single instance.

Or, it does become the easy way out, it does become the cattle car.

Because those poor people should be grateful to relocate.

You see what I mean?

[Sapphire Blue]

123. This has been going on all over the country for years, and it is so WRONG!

It seems that, as more & more people have moved up in class, that they don't want to see who is left behind... if they can't see it, then it must not exist... and they don't have to bother their consciences w/the misfortunes of others.

Well, dammit, look in the mirror, because those 'others' may soon be you!

Honestly, I am so very fed up w/this crap. Social programs get their budgets slashed year after year... food, housing, medicaid, you name it, they've slashed it.

They make it illegal to sleep in public. They make it illegal to sit down on the goddamn sidewalk. They make it illegal to feed the homeless. They give people a one-way ticket out of town, so they can be treated the same way @ the next town.

For God's sake, THIS IS WRONG! Every person on this planet has value, and we had better start treating each other as such.


:mad: :argh: :grr: :nuke: :rant:


(Note: rant not directed at the OP or anyone else here; it is directed at all of the uncaring people in this country of ours, and the damn politicians who care nothing about their fellow humans.)

[EFerrari]

124. Don't hold back on my account.

:)

lol

[Sapphire Blue]

127. Not a chance ; )

:hi:

I'm both furious & heartbroken about this country's descent into the pits of greed.

[EFerrari]

128. When did we start thinking we should shuffle people around

like so many pecks of wheat?

What is Up with that?

What is the MATTER with us? Hello! Bill of Rights! Constitution! You get the idea?!

I'm out of here for a few hours. Hafta go work and earn Junior's war on the world.

[Sapphire Blue]

130. I don't know, but a whole helluva lot of people in this country have...

... eyes that don't see, hearts that don't feel, and souls that are dead.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

135. Something about that title doesn't quite ring true...

NT.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

136. This article doesn't make clear what the alternative was.

Or at least, if it does, I've missed it.

Forcing homeless people to leave the city or be arrested clearly isn't acceptable.

Making e.g. receiving benefits conditional on leaving the city is very dubious indeed.

Offering state housing outside the city but not inside it is perfectly reasonable.

[undergroundpanther]

140. If you are not perfect

Or in the right crowd with the right income,dress and appearance,if you don't work,if you have no home,if you are diasabled..You are not part of a community anymore. You become a burden a useless eater a pain an unwanted and unworthy throwaway scapegoat for all the people scared to death unwilling to realize they have no control and with a few unfortunate circumstances could be an unwanted too.It is so easy for the well off to be so maddenly paternal the unfortunate.I mean if you as a fortunate empowered accepted person seen a a worthy person by the community, kick a helpless soul in the gutter,who will complain,because America hates the victims,the have nots,of the fortunate ones and of the greed and comforts of the haves.

For a few to have alot,and a little more to have some it means some have very little and some have nothing.

For a few to have alot more than they need alot must do without and have not.

Equality is not evil,it brings the peace,empowerment,community, respect and hope we all desire.

It is those fortunate ones, the 'haves', with privilege who would so desperately want the have nots to believe it is natural for the wealthy to live so well and the less fortunate to suffer so long,and it is in the wealthy fews interest to convince those who have not that this is how things must be or worse it is the victim's fault.. And..It is a LIE..The wealthy are whom cause poverty and profit from it..

It is the unequal stratification of wealth created by greed made by have it all to oppress have nothings..that is evil.

[Radical Activist]

149. I'm sure people in Danville are thrilled about it too.

This is a small farm town. Its not exactly where I would want to be sent if I were a poor black person from Chicago.