You’ve taken the comic way too literally. Homelessness is a policy choice, and politicians are responsible for failing to allocate funds towards prevention, housing, etc. That applies to politicians at every level of government, with varying levels of responsibility/ability.
Reality is more complicated than you’re viewing it.
junkies and other socially unfit people
You don’t seem to understand what leads a person to do drugs either.
The financially wise decision is to house people, keep them fed, and in good health. Because when politicians let housing get fucked, when they let people starve, when they let them be ill, you get problems that get expensive in the form of prison time, police budgets, and crime rates. This is an area where doing the morally right thing is the most cost effective thing. Dehumanizing people as “junkies” and “socially unfit” just makes everything worse, for yourself included.
The financially wise decision is to house people, keep them fed, and in good health.
Feel free to invest into housing and then practice what you preach.
Also, I’m not dehumanizing junkies and socially unfit people. They’re definitely human. Being human however does not entitle you to free shift from people who are actually functional.
If anything, it’s the people who say we should give them a home and food that are the ones who do the dehumanizing, treating them like pets that shouldn’t be left outside in the cold.
Feel free to invest into housing and then practice what you preach.
This problem can’t be solved by personal behavior.
Also, I’m not dehumanizing junkies and socially unfit people. They’re definitely human. Being human however does not entitle you to free shift from people who are actually functional.
You are demeaning people as “junkies and socially unfit”. That’s dehumanization.
treating them like pets that shouldn’t be left outside in the cold.
They aren’t pets, nor are they being treated as such. Your jump to calling them pets further shows how you see them as less than human.
Stop putting words in my mouth, I did say they were biologically human.
You’re the one looking to treat them like pets. I have 4 cats that I house, feed and take care of. Brought them from outside for 3 of them and one from a shelter. This is what you want to do to actual human beings.
House them, feed them, care for them. Like a pet. You’re a sick fuck.
What if the road to becoming “functional” requires, at least in a plurality of cases, help from those that can afford it?
That “free shit” might be what helps them turn their life around. Do you think they have a better chance to improve their station in life if they don’t have access to support from the public?
I wholly reject that it’s somehow dehumanizing to give folks food and shelter during the worst moments in their lives.
Nowhere in my comment did I suggest that, because it would be a silly way to deal with such a big problem. It takes a lot of training to help people in crisis, and a lot of infrastructure to get people on their feet.
It’s not your responsibility alone, it’s not my responsibility alone. If you’d like to discuss any of the points I actually made, great. Otherwise you can try to oversimplify the discussion and I won’t respond anymore
We’re already paying for it. It’s cheaper (financially and otherwise) to fix the problem instead.
Do you think a town’s mayor has the ability to turn junkies and other socially unfit people into actual functional human beings?
You’ve taken the comic way too literally. Homelessness is a policy choice, and politicians are responsible for failing to allocate funds towards prevention, housing, etc. That applies to politicians at every level of government, with varying levels of responsibility/ability.
Reality is more complicated than you’re viewing it.
You don’t seem to understand what leads a person to do drugs either.
https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/what-does-rat-park-teach-us-about-addiction
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7234816/
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-80897-8
The financially wise decision is to house people, keep them fed, and in good health. Because when politicians let housing get fucked, when they let people starve, when they let them be ill, you get problems that get expensive in the form of prison time, police budgets, and crime rates. This is an area where doing the morally right thing is the most cost effective thing. Dehumanizing people as “junkies” and “socially unfit” just makes everything worse, for yourself included.
George Carlin said the homeless exist to remind the poor & middle-class what could happen to them if they step out of line.
Feel free to invest into housing and then practice what you preach.
Also, I’m not dehumanizing junkies and socially unfit people. They’re definitely human. Being human however does not entitle you to free shift from people who are actually functional.
If anything, it’s the people who say we should give them a home and food that are the ones who do the dehumanizing, treating them like pets that shouldn’t be left outside in the cold.
This problem can’t be solved by personal behavior.
You are demeaning people as “junkies and socially unfit”. That’s dehumanization.
They aren’t pets, nor are they being treated as such. Your jump to calling them pets further shows how you see them as less than human.
Stop putting words in my mouth, I did say they were biologically human.
You’re the one looking to treat them like pets. I have 4 cats that I house, feed and take care of. Brought them from outside for 3 of them and one from a shelter. This is what you want to do to actual human beings.
House them, feed them, care for them. Like a pet. You’re a sick fuck.
You’re the one using dehumanizing words like junkie and social unfit. I don’t need to put words in your mouth. You’re doing it all on your own.
I already rebutted this.
I sincerely hope you’re just a troll instead of being this maliciously dishonest.
Every negative term is dehumanizing now? Lmao.
Again, they are human beings. However that doesn’t somehow entitle them to free shit from everyone else.
What if the road to becoming “functional” requires, at least in a plurality of cases, help from those that can afford it?
That “free shit” might be what helps them turn their life around. Do you think they have a better chance to improve their station in life if they don’t have access to support from the public?
I wholly reject that it’s somehow dehumanizing to give folks food and shelter during the worst moments in their lives.
Feel free to feed, house and finance a homeless person.
You tell me how it goes.
Be the change you wish to see in society.
You talk like it’s somehow my responsibility to fix other people.
It’s not.
Nowhere in my comment did I suggest that, because it would be a silly way to deal with such a big problem. It takes a lot of training to help people in crisis, and a lot of infrastructure to get people on their feet.
It’s not your responsibility alone, it’s not my responsibility alone. If you’d like to discuss any of the points I actually made, great. Otherwise you can try to oversimplify the discussion and I won’t respond anymore
So why do you want to give my money to fund junkies and their addiction?
You certainly want to make it my responsibility.
Yes, unless you’re in some ****hole country ? Hmmm what’s the polite word, rustic ?