I would like to appologize about last night.

[Sean Reynolds]

I made a post that was pretty heated and after re-reading what I put I realized my wording was way off. For those that were offended by what I said, I'm sorry. I do not dislike the homeless people nor do I feel that their problem is theirs alone.

The thing that angers me the most about the homeless problem is that we, as a society, are not doing enough to fix the problem. It goes beyond giving money, in fact it's about economics, housing, food, health care and understanding.

I was wrong in my wording, and I'm sorry for that. I'm not angry at panhandlers, rather angry at their situation. Angry because I know that something SHOULD be done to fix it....and giving money, sadly, hardly does anything.

I'm angry at our country....angry at the fact that American citizens have no better option than panhandling.

My post last night tried addressing that in a wrong way. I didn't think before I posted and I thank the members, albeit only a couple, that finally understood what I meant. As for those that didn't, I'm sorry I couldn't articulate myself in a better manner and hope you understand my point of view now.

:D

[southlandshari]

1. That is a very nice post.

:thumbsup:

[no name no slogan]

2. No worries, bro

sometimes it's difficult to communicate with only words on an electronic bulletin board. i would say your clarifications definately helped out, though. :hi:

:D

[jpgray]

3. Hey man, I forgot my bus fare--could you spot me?

[Sean Reynolds]

10. Better yet, I'll give you a ride.

Free of charge.

:D

I've actually done that before.

Stupid, I know...since it puts me at risk. But the guy only needed to go a few miles and I felt safe enough to do it.

[jpgray]

12. Er, actually I just need $3.25 for some water

:yoiks:

(just messing with you Sean. :D)

[MissMarple]

4. Well, you certainly have made a good clarification, & quite mature.

It is a difficult problem to solve, but coming from a progressive direction will place us closer to actually solving it.

[Shell Beau]

5. I wasn't here, but I believe you are sincere! I

am sure no one will hold any hard feelings!

[JitterbugPerfume]

8. when I read that post

I just KNEW that something was a-miss

It just did not sound like our Sean

[Saphire]

6. My son is that panhandler you talk about....he lives on the street

because he can't get the help he needs. I have tried to help him find the resources for his problems, but not many to be found. Just remember that these people are always somebody's son, brother, cousin, father's even..and try to be kind.

[Sean Reynolds]

9. Words to live by....

I'd rather lose $2 to a guy who's going to waste it on a beer than deny a man $2 that could buy him something he desperately needs.

[faithnotgreed]

17. thank you lady of texas

and im sorry about your son

thank you for your post here and for calls for love

[Texasgal]

7. Thank you Mr. Reynolds.

Thank you for the clarification! :)

Who knows, after all of this you may have found your true calling.

An advocate for the homeless! :)

Thank you for clearing that up, your okay in my book!

[Hugin]

11. Although I didn't read the thread this is referring to...

It's always a good idea to clear the air and avoid
confusion.

Thanks!

[Cyndee_Lou_Who]

13. I posted in your thread kinda early...

and you didn't reply to me. I was trying real hard to help you clarify your emotions, which seemed to be anger aimed at the panhandlers. I also saw how heated it got so quickly, and I felt for you. It was good of you to post this and help clarify your emotions.

[KitchenWitch]

14. Thanks for the apology

I was one that was offended by your post, and chose to stay out of it (I have issues of my own around tact and diplomacy).

Having said that, I do respect you as a person, and have enjoyed interacting with you here on the often wild and crazy DU.

:hi:

[swag]

15. Recall that the age of Reagan was the big bang

of the homeless problem.

Here's a nice narrative of what went on back in those glory days:

http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/135/reagan.html

Excerpts:

As some Americans mourn the death of Ronald Reagan, let us recall that the two-term president was no friend to America’s cities or its poor. Reagan came to office in 1981 with a mandate to reduce federal spending. In reality, he increased it through the escalating military budget, all the while slashing funds for domestic programs that assisted working class Americans, particularly the poor.

Reagan’s fans give him credit for restoring the nation’s prosperity. But whatever economic growth occurred during the Reagan years only benefited those already well off. The income gap between the rich and everyone else in America widened. Wages for the average worker declined and the nation’s homeownership rate fell. During Reagan’s two terms in the White House, which were boon times for the rich, the poverty rate in cities grew.

His indifference to urban problems was legendary. Reagan owed little to urban voters, big-city mayors, black or Hispanic leaders, or labor unions – the major advocates for metropolitan concerns. Early in his presidency, at a White House reception, Reagan greeted the only black member of his Cabinet, Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Samuel Pierce, saying: “How are you, Mr. Mayor? I’m glad to meet you. How are things in your city?”

. . .

The most dramatic cut in domestic spending during the Reagan years was for low-income housing subsidies. Reagan appointed a housing task force dominated by politically connected developers, landlords and bankers. In 1982 the task force released a report that called for “free and deregulated” markets as an alternative to government assistance – advice Reagan followed. In his first year in office Reagan halved the budget for public housing and Section 8 to about $17.5 billion. And for the next few years he sought to eliminate federal housing assistance to the poor altogether.

In the 1980s the proportion of the eligible poor who received federal housing subsidies declined. In 1970 there were 300,000 more low-cost rental units (6.5 million) than low-income renter households (6.2 million). By 1985 the number of low-cost units had fallen to 5.6 million, and the number of low-income renter households had grown to 8.9 million, a disparity of 3.3 million units.

Another of Reagan’s enduring legacies is the steep increase in the number of homeless people, which by the late 1980s had swollen to 600,000 on any given night – and 1.2 million over the course of a year. Many were Vietnam veterans, children and laid-off workers.

. . . more

[merh]

16. Thanks for the clarification.

And for your passion :hug: