Everyone should volunteer at a homeless shelter at least once.

[knitter4democracy]

Homeless shelters are awful. They're only meant to be a stop-gap solution, not a permanent solution. Yet, more and more people are using them as their nightly housing, and more and more of us who aren't homeless just assume that the shelters are taking care of "the problem." They aren't.

In most cities, shelters are segregated. Men have one, and women have another. Yet, more and more of the homeless are families. Where are they supposed to go? Is it really smart to separate families just so they can have shelter during the night? The shelters aren't safe for children, really, aren't set up for them, and the reality is, shelters aren't safe for most people anyway. Things get stolen, people get attacked, drug dealers fight over turf, and it's just plain not safe to go to a shelter in most areas.

The shelters are too small, too, so everyone has to start lining up in hopes to get a bed as early in the day as possible. Since many of the homeless have jobs, those people are SOL if all the beds fill before they can get off work and get in line.

That's right--many homeless have jobs. They're often used and abused by temp agencies for daily work. They're to show up in hopes that there's work that day, and then they're paid at the end of the day, often in cash and below the minimum wage as an off-books job. Then, they have to rush to the shelter and hope they can get a bed for the night.

In 1992, my church youth group went to Kansas City for a mission trip. During the day, we cleaned the church's men's homeless shelter and ate our meals there with the men. During the evening, we put on a Vacation Bible School (aka free babysitting) at one of the local churches, a very poor church in a very poor area. By the time we got to the church every night, we were exhausted from working at the shelter but still had hours of work ahead of us. It was a long, hard week.

The shelter depended on groups like us. They hadn't had one in awhile, and the bathroom showed it. Yes, a friend and I pulled the short straw on the first day and got the bathroom. We were bound and determine to make it sparkle, but it was all we could do not to gag. It hadn't been thoroughly cleaned in awhile, though it doesn't take long with 60 men going through it every day to become a filthy mess. There were mildew and stains everywhere. We used cleaners so powerful that they ate through two pairs of gloves each, and we scrubbed that shower room and bathroom until it shone. The next day was an easier cleaning job, and the day after that, the shelter paid one of the guys to do it instead. By the time we left, the bathroom was better but still not as clean as it should have been on a daily basis.

A few of the other kids got to help in the stockroom. Box after box of outdated canned goods, MREs shipped back from the first Gulf War, stale bread, and moldy stuff that had to get thrown out. They were disgusted at what we were feeding the men, but the shelter figured it was still okay to eat. They took whatever was donated and tried to make it edible.

It wasn't. We ate there for lunch and dinner every night, and by the end of the week, we were starving. It just wasn't enough food for hard work every day and more work every night. One of the kids was a football player, and he lost 15 pounds by the end of the week, just not getting enough calories (his parents were furious when they found out, since he was to start practice two weeks after we got home). We all lost weight and started getting sick, and our youth pastor had to start taking us to another dinner and have parents wire him money to pay for more food. The shelter didn't have enough food to give a big enough meal to the growing teenagers and the sixty men they housed every night, plus some of the food was just plain inedible. One of the parent chaperones who'd been in the Marines actually took over the kitchen, so the rest of the week was a bit better, but it still wasn't enough food for us with the amount of work we were doing (not that much different than most of the guys, and most of them were constantly hungry, too).

The hardest moment was when one of our other chaperones, a Vietnam vet, ran into a guy who was in his area of Vietnam at the same time he was. They didn't recognize each other, but when they started sharing stories, they found out they'd served together. Our chaperone cried all night that night, realizing that his buddy could've been him and that he needed to help his buddy. He ended up giving his buddy his coat and boots and all the money he had, and they stayed in touch after that. He wasn't the only vet we ran into, but he was the one who connected with us. We heard so many stories that week of men working hard but losing their houses, drug and alcohol abuse, and more, and it was really hard not to want to take them all home and get them real jobs and homes.

The only answer for homelessness is housing. Shelters don't cut it. I've seen that with my own eyes. Soup kitchens don't cut it. People need a living wage and homes to live in. Sure, some will still slip through the cracks, but if we did a better job of helping those with health problems, set up more permanent housing solutions, and figured out a better way to feed people, it would make a huge difference in millions of people's lives.

In a country with the resources America has, it's disgusting that people need to line up in the cold and pray for a bed, only to get crappy outdated and stale food and go to bed hungry. The men told us that the shelter we worked in was the best in the city, and yet we saw for ourselves how it wasn't clean enough and the food wasn't enough and was barely edible. Why should our poor get the leavings of society? Aren't they our brothers and sisters? It's time for a real solution, a permanent solution, and it's time we all start working together to take care of our brothers and sisters in need.

[Warpy]

1. Hell, I think everybody should have to STAY at one

at least one night. BTDT, crammed into a huge auditorium space with a bunch of strangers, listening to coughs, snores and the occasional scream all night, afraid to sleep because I didn't know who else was awake and waiting to rip me off.

Should such an occasion ever arise again, I'll go sock a cop. Jail would be preferable.

[knitter4democracy]

7. I agree. My experience was bad enough, but we had a dorm to sleep in.

At least we were safe at night and weren't worried about theft or attacks.

How many are in jail just because they're poor and need a place to stay and food to eat, I wonder. I'd wager a decent percentage, more in some states than others.

[bobbolink]

12. A woman I know who was homeless tells me of her brother's friend with AIDS.

He finally bought a gun, but refused to buy ammunition.

He held up a 7-11, without bullets, so he'd get arrested and have a bed and meals.

Yes, it is happening.

Yet, whenver I post of the need for low-income housing, with numbers to call, it sinks like a rock!

I'm PISSED at the lack of concern right here on DU!

Thanks for posting this..... the story goes on...

:hug:

[knitter4democracy]

14. See, I don't think he's alone.

It makes sense. If you're cold and hungry and desperate, why not do something stupid so you'll be warm, dry, fed, and mostly safe?

[bobbolink]

16. Why is it stupid? Yanno, it becomes a total no-win situation!

What the hell is he supposed to do that would be "smart"?

Then, when all else fails and he kills himself, then he's either stupid or selfish or mentally ill.

What the hell is he supposed to do that is acceptable????

[Warpy]

18. He did the only rational thing in a country that's gone insane.

He's got a slim chance of getting bare bones health care in jail along with the 3 hots and a cot.

This country has gone just plain nuts as well as intensely cruel.

Like I said, I've been there and I'm not going back, no matter what. I feel sorry for the cop I sock, but I have advanced arthritis so I won't do any real damage.

[bobbolink]

48. Yuo're so very right, and your wit is tremendous!

:hug:

[knitter4democracy]

22. Oh, no, I meant stupid as in could get himself hurt.

Walking into many stores around here with a gun could get yourself killed, not put in jail. That's awfully dangerous.

Honestly, I don't know what else he could do, though, off the top of my head. Getting medical care is damn difficult in our county (there's a free clinic one county over that gives out free meds, too, but we don't have that here), and getting housing is even harder. It's terrible that someone has to commit a crime to get care.

[bobbolink]

38. I don't consider it "stupid" at all.

The point is, he had NO GOOD OPTIONS.

That is sad, not stupid on his part.

"We can do better."

And, we MUST.

[caseycoon]

52. Things like this were happening 35 years ago.

I lived in Wisconsin for awhile & there were several homeless men who were alcoholics & they would get arrested for various things so they could get off the streets in the winter.
The difference is then there were treatment centers where they could go & get detoxed, have a nice room for 30 days & eat good meals.
Now those programs no longer exist. The people who are homeless now are whole families, women, men & the lower middle class who are rapidly becoming poverty stricken. There are no great programs for them.
America won't take care of her own anymore.

[bobbolink]

68. Thank you for drawing the distinction between drunks and the majority of homeless people now!

SOME on this thread can't seem to get that!

SOME are still back with RAYGUN and the ignorance of that era.

:mad:

SOME can't understand how insulting and hurtful that is to those of us who are suffering deeply!

[Mojorabbit]

2. I help out

with food not bombs on the first wednesday of the month feeding at the orlando park where people have been arrested for doing this. The numbers are increasing and lately, I get rushed for the food.
It just breaks my heart. I met a woman pregnant with triplets who is homeless. We have 2000 beds for 8000 people. Something needs to be done. The problem is huge. I am disabled or would be out there more often with the group helping to feed. You are right, a lot of them are day laborers. you can never catch up as it takes all they make just to survive. I wish I could do more.

[knitter4democracy]

8. Pregnant with triplets?! Poor thing!

First of all, that's not an easy pregnancy at all. But homeless and preggers?! *shudder* That's got to be hell right there. Makes me want to get the guest bed all spruced up and ready. No one should be homeless and preggers.

[bobbolink]

21. You CAN do more!

Start with educating people about the stupidity of the shelter system, then start DEMANDING low-income housing.

Months ago, I was posting PLEAS for people to please write/call their reps in support of the National Housing trust Fund Bill, right here on DU.

It sank like a rock... nobody was interested.

You ALL can do more.... if you want to.

[rubberducky]

3. Your post is so damn sad I don`t know where to begin.

Living in MI I`ve been very worried about my feral kitties, due to the intense cold lately. Hubby and I already decided to give our "stimulous checks" to Gleaners( they help feed an awful lot of people in Detroit). My mom has also agreed to hand over her check. I don`t have much to give, but this post just breaks my heart. I`m worried about kitties, but your post shows PEOPLE at stake. My aunt works for a church that is trying to help people out with some groceries and she continuously tells us how they are falling short. This is not about people falling through the cracks. This is about "compassionate conservatism" at it`s absolute worst. Let `em drown, freeze to death, or starve to death. Is`nt the main idea to "thin the herd", and eliminate the weak?:cry:

[knitter4democracy]

5. I'm in MI, too. It's really bad here.

I've been giving what I can to the Food Bank, and they're mostly meeting the need here. Shelter space, though, isn't nearly enough, more and more keep losing their homes. It's getting dire, and I don't see it getting any better at all.

[izquierdista]

4. The cost of housing the homeless

I have maintained, and a recent article I came across about some city in the Northwest backs it up, that by building low-cost housing for the homeless, governments can actually SAVE money. Consider the case of a vacant 10,000 square foot building (like a medium size grocery store put out of business by Wal-Mart). For around 20 to 30 dollars per square foot, the building could be completely renovated, bathrooms enlarged, outfitted with basic furnishings, etc., and turned into a type of dormitory housing. Figuring about 250 to 300 square feet per resident (which is generous), such a dormitory could end homelessness for 30 to 40 people at the cost of $300,000. Governments pay FAR more than that now in vouchers, assistance programs, emergency services, jail space, etc., even when you figure in something like 8-10% of the cost of the renovation as annual maintenance and upkeep.

However greedy they are, "compassionate conservatives" who oppose social services for the homeless can't see how this can actually save money. Plus, once the homeless have a stable address, they are more likely to be able to return to being contributing members of society and earning a decent wage in order to be able to move out.

The reason it isn't done is because there is no money to be made in it, therefore the capitalist economy provides no supply though the demand is great. The private sector will never come in and do what is essential cost avoidance in the public sector.

[knitter4democracy]

6. I came up with this idea today--what do you think?

HUD buys up foreclosed houses at auction. Many are going for pennies on the dollar around here. If they think they can sell it for a profit, they do. If not, they make it a Section 8 house--cut out the landlord middleman and have a family pay Section 8 sliding scale rent for it. I'd bet it would be way cheaper than paying landlords who often overcharge the government to do it themselves. If the family decides to stay there, they could switch it to rent-to-own or some other program.

It would keep houses filled, it wouldn't make the poor live in ghettos, and it would be cheaper for the government, I'm sure. Even with hiring property managers, it would still be cheaper, I'd bet.

[izquierdista]

10. I'll go you one better

Create a class of "assigned" housing -- have the government (city or county, best if it is a local entity) take title to an abandoned property and then KEEP it as government owned. Bring it up to acceptable standards for residential housing and then provide that housing to those who are incapable of housing themselves, for whatever reason. Your sliding scale rent could be something as simple as 20% of the resident's wages, that is, if the resident has an income. For those incapable of having an income (like the mentally ill), provide it through some type of non-cash voucher, so they can't sell their bed for booze or pills or whatever their abuse problem might be.

Treating the "homeless" problem, means that you also treat the "mental illness" problem, as the two often strike in the same spot.

[knitter4democracy]

11. I like that idea. I think it would have to be federal government, though.

Here in Michigan, we're totally screwed. I know that our city and county governments couldn't do this at all--huge budget problems with just covering the basics. Our state government is also really bad off and couldn't do anything like this. It would have to be a federal program.

[bobbolink]

19. Are you mentally ill??? I'm fucking not, and I'm getting so goddamned tired of that shit!

Do you know that is one of the most hurtful things that homeless people go through, is this continual assumption, thanks to RAYGUN, that we're all mentally ill.

What the fuck does it take to get it through to you?

Yes, I'm really pissed at your assumptions!

YOU walk in my shoes, take this shit for a couple of years, then tell me just how "healthy" YOU feel!

Get educated!

The number one cause of homelessness is the shitty health care system in this country.... YOU could be caught in that too, and it wouldn't make you any more mentally ill that I am, or anyone else who is homeless.

Get EDUCATED!

[izquierdista]

25. I said often, not always

Once I worked in an office that overlooked a small downtown park. There was a homeless woman who used to eat out of the trash cans and would curse at anyone who approached. This was also the same time that St. Ronniedumfuck emptied out the mental hospitals. Do you think she might have been mentally ill?

Now calm down before you demonstrate that you fit the profile.

[bobbolink]

33. Are you always so authoritarian?

"Now calm down before you demonstrate that you fit the profile."

When people talk to you that way, do you "calm down"?????

Do you talk to your mother that way?

You make a case out of one example. :crazy:

I can point to lots of mental illness.... in McMansions.

You need to disabuse yourself of the Raygun attitudes you have picked up.

[knitter4democracy]

44. No, I don't think she was mentally ill.

Curse the world for her pain? Sounds reasonable to me. Homeless woman who needs to eat? Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

The little bit I've worked with homeless people, the more I've found that they have some pretty strong emotional walls up. They have to--it's called survival. You would too if you were in their shoes. Not trusting people from being hurt before, cursing those who judge that which they don't understand, and doing whatever it takes to survive sounds pretty darn rational to me.

[izquierdista]

55. Are you channeling LaWanda Page?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB71oiqDPwI

[knitter4democracy]

63. Um, I'm sorry. I don't get it.

Which one am I supposed to be?

[NMMNG]

89. Back off

"Often" would imply that well over 50% of homeless people have a mental illness and that's not the case. The actual figure is around 33%. That's not "often".

Now calm down before you demonstrate that you fit the profile.

So a person who gets angry because you make a patently false claim about the group they're in is now mentally ill?

[knitter4democracy]

23. Not everyone who's homeless is mentally ill.

Heck, the mentally ill in our area fare better. Many, if not most, qualify for group homes and a good social work agency that takes them to doctor's appointments and such and keeps them off the streets. The homeless are SOL with fewer than half the beds needed on any given night and temps this weekend hitting in the negative twenties.

[izquierdista]

26. Often

often
adverb
1. many times at short intervals; "we often met over a cup of coffee"
2. frequently or in great quantities; "I don't drink much"; "I don't travel much"
3. in many cases or instances

Clearly, part of the problem of providing social services is determining who are homeless due to economic reasons, and who are suffering from a mental inability to house themselves. Even there, the divide is not so clear. Is the alcoholic who can't hold a job and pay the rent an economic casualty, or is he in need of treatment for an addiction (a form of mental illness)?

[knitter4democracy]

28. I'm not sure about often, either.

Yes, we all know Reagan kicked those with mental health issues out of the hospitals and such, but I'm not sure what the real numbers are amongst the homeless. Everyone I've ever met who was homeless had far more economic reasons than anything else (lost job, lost home, couldn't get back on their feet, etc.).

It's a stereotype we have, that the homeless are mentally ill or addicts. I'm not sure how true it really is, especially here in Michigan where the economy's tanked.

[izquierdista]

30. Take a visit to Los Angeles or Phoenix

In the warm places of the southwest, it may be different. The economy hasn't tanked, yet you have people camping out, pitching tents on the lawn at L.A. city hall, around the Arizona State Capitol building. Their home is wherever they can pitch their tent or haul their belongings that the authorities will look the other way. In Las Vegas, there is an arroyo that runs west of the Orleans hotel and parallels Tropicana Bl. where many people camp under the mesquite trees.

It really doesn't matter why people are homeless, what they need is assistance from the government in getting shelter from the elements. Once that need has been met, then each person is individual, whose needs have to be considered on their own before the "right" answer can be found. Some will need job counseling and placement, some may do well with outpatient medications, some might need to be in assisted living, some may really need to be back in a supervised surrounding, but all will need something to keep them from ending up back out in the elements.

[knitter4democracy]

31. I totally agree with your second paragraph.

Get them housing, and then we can deal with the rest. :hug:

[bobbolink]

35. You agree with that? That whole list of in loco parentis controls?

That is exactly WHY so many of us are "out in the elements"!!

I wrote that whole painful story to show people just what causes a whole lot of suffering and homelessnes.... A B U S E... yet, here we are, once again debating the old Raygun shit about drunks, crazies, etc.

I'm so very sick of all this!

You know, I've begun talks to groups that are composed of a lot of conservative people, and even THEY don't list those things first!!

Yet, here we are at DU, supposedly ever so "progressive", and here are the stereotypes, and we can't even get past them enough to talk about something important.

Yes, I'm disgusted.

[knitter4democracy]

40. I agreed with getting people housing first.

I think it would be awesome if we had national health care and so had many more options for people who need them, people who are homeless because of health care bills or chronic health problems. If we had real housing options and got people into homes and had national health care, then I think we'd be a lot further to equality and joy.

I don't like authoritarian answers, but I like it when people realize that we need housing first and other stuff second. That I agree with. I think we'd need national health care, too--that way, people wouldn't lose their homes in trying to pay their health care bills or lose their insurance with their jobs and then lose their homes because of losing their jobs and just spiral downward.

Shouldn't we work for housing first, not other programs to "fix" people before getting them homes? I think, if we got people into homes, it would take care of a lot of other issues.

[bobbolink]

43. That's not at all how I read that post.

You know, the town where I am now forces people, yes FORCES them to take a "course" in handling money before they can sign up for the food bank!

You see how destructive these parental controlling things are?

Imagine thinking that your mother would be treated that way.... or your sister... Imagine someone you cared about being dissed in that way!

All because so many people simply cannot look at us as real people.

And I think it's because it scares the bejeebers out of 'em....

As well it should!

[knitter4democracy]

45. What?! A course on money just to get food from the food bank?!

That's insane! I'm going to look into whether ours does that. I've never heard of it, but that doesn't mean they don't. What the heck?! Yes, I'd be furious! Hell, in Michigan, you could take all the money classes you want and still not be able to make ends meet. People are losing their jobs here left and right, and the foreclosure rate's off the charts. They're not losing their homes because they don't know how to manage money--it's because there's no money coming in!

I totally get what you're saying now about that. I'd ignored that part of the paragraph, focusing instead on the idea that we need housing first and foremost. I get it now.

[bobbolink]

46. Thanks, and yes, it's one more slap.... one more blaming of the victim.

"If you're in need of some help, then you must be screwing up really badly, and we're going to take over and straighten you out."

(#+!@)(%*($(EI#!+#!!!!!

In other words...

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

How did I write it the other day....?........

"The same as you can't both prepare for and prevent war, you can't simultaneously tear down poor people with constant criticisms and controls, and then demand they be strong and get their lives together."

I *think* that's what I said... ~~chortle~~

[knitter4democracy]

47. That sounds like something you posted.

It's true, too.

What kind of messed up thinking says people going to the Food Bank need a class? Sheesh! Yet another way to make people not ask for the help that's available. Grrr!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

73. That's absurd and insulting

When I work at my church's dinners for the poor, there are a lot of really sharp people there, people who have obviously seen better days.

Telling a formerly middle-class, educated person that they need "a course in handling money" is the height of paternalism.

[izquierdista]

56. Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!

"...if we got people into homes, it would take care of a lot of other issues."

The point of my original post was that it is cost effective and not that expensive to design solutions to the problem. When you see homeless people sleeping against the wall of a boarded up building, you are seeing a problem and a solution right next to each other. The only thing lacking is the social will to make it work. For less money than the homeless cost the community in services, the building could be renovated into adequate housing.

The tone of this thread has degenerated into a lot of yelling and brawling, which are signs of people in desperate situations. If they had an adequate amount of secure living space, whether it be called a dormitory, a studio, a loft, a bungalow, a walk-up efficiency, or whatever, it would indeed, take care of a lot of other issues.

And about the authoritarian answer, I take a lesson from the former USSR. Yes, they were authoritarian, no doubt, but they also had no homeless problem. If the militsia saw people who looked homeless, they would take them in, have the social worker find out their story, and ASSIGN them to some living quarters. Yes, that runs counter to the freedom that Americans enjoy, the freedom to freeze to death, alone on a cold winter night.

[knitter4democracy]

59. Have you been to Russia and talked with people there?

I have. They're not so fond of those years, even now.

I worked in an orphanage once in Moscow. The children were half the size they should've been for their age with dead, dark eyes. The state workers didn't hold them or cuddle them enough, and they didn't thrive. Saddest thing I've ever seen. I found out later that the state takes children away if you're poor or if you have a chronic health condition or if someone reports you for anything. This in a country that supposedly honors children and builds monuments to them. I'll never forget that hellhole, and I still get nightmares of the children reaching out to me, begging me to take them home with me.

You might want to find how they treated those homeless first before holding them up as an example.

[izquierdista]

61. Last month

Lots and lots of people living on the street, in train stations, begging at the bus stations. Even though things were bad in the past, there are many for whom capitalism has chewed them up and spit them out.

It's worse now, not better if you are poor.

[knitter4democracy]

62. It's true that it's worse, but that doesn't mean it was right before.

Going from bad to worse still means it was bad to begin with.

Whereabouts were you? I studied there in college, and I miss it terribly. We were in Nizhni Novgorod for the most part, but I loved the Golden Ring cities, too.

[izquierdista]

75. Simferopol!

Technically part of Ukraine now, but they are so ethnically Russian there, they won't call the local currency hrivnyas, but instead use the term rubles. And whatever is bad about Russia is even worse in Ukraine. A perfect example of disaster capitalism in action.

Which brings me back to the point of the thread. Unless there is a social will to put an end to homelessness, it will continue. Local authorities need to be able to say "you can't sleep here, it's against the law; we're taking you in and finding you a decent place to stay". Sounds a bit authoritarian and it will infringe on Americans' precious freedoms, but it's the right thing to do.

[knitter4democracy]

79. We do need the social will, that's true.

I wish we had a better way, though, than to just round everyone up and stick them in some dorm and tell them to be happy about it. Taking over foreclosed houses and having mobile HUD units that go where people are, help them with paperwork, and get them all set sounds better to me.

I wish I'd been able to go to Kiev. I want to see the catacombs and the cathedrals there. Did you get to see Kiev?

[izquierdista]

80. Rounding people up

There is a right way, and many, many wrong ways to go about things. I would not trust any law enforcement agency in the U.S. to do it right. First you need to have trained social workers, not police to find people in need and convince them that the community can provide them with a better option than they currently have. (Let's assume for a second that you actually DO have some decent government owned residential type housing where they can be housed.) Second, you don't have a one-size-fits-all type of arrangement and tell people to be happy about it. You provide people with steps up to get them out of the situation and back into a stable condition, where they can function independent of government services. Too many government services have thresholds, above which, the safety net gets yanked away, most times prematurely, with the result that the person needing help is no better off 6 months later.

A market-based approach on the foreclosed homes could be to give the banks some incentive not to let the foreclosed homes stay vacant while they are trying to recoup their loss. They already don't like to have the insurance liability of a vacant house, so if the government vouches for a tenant while the house is in foreclosure, then maybe banks will be more cooperative. Some combination of incentives and penalties could prod bankers in the right direction.

Again, just as a point of economics, if you take 1% of the US population, 3 million, and decide that's how many single-wide trailers the government would need to own to house all the homeless, even at $50,000 per trailer, that's 150 billion dollars, an amount that is inconsequential when the Pentagon asks for it.

And no, I didn't get to Kiev.

[knitter4democracy]

81. All very good ideas.

You're right--it couldn't be the police. They deal with the homeless too much today as it is, and there are too many stories of the bad things that happen. It would have to be a social agency of some kind.

I keep thinking that it really wouldn't cost as much as conservatives think. You're right--the Pentagon spends more than that in a couple of weeks, and then they lose half of that. :eyes: It just shows how messed up our priorities are--the poor need help, but they're "too expensive" but when the Pentagon loses $2 billion, we just give them more and fire the auditors who found the problem. Grrr!

[bobbolink]

64. I"ll say it again... YOU live in a dormitory the rest of your life!

You first.

I'm really glad you're not in power!

I'll live in my car rather than a goddamed dormitory!! :mad:

[bobbolink]

17. I'm 62 years old.... I don't need a damned dormitory, for gawd's sake!

I tried to post this before, and DU went down.

Could you please listen to yourself?

Where the hell would I keep my belongings safe, the rest of my life?

How the hell wooulld I sleep the rest of my life, with at least 10 other women snoring, coughing etc all night, and some working shifts?

How the hell would I stay healthy, with germs being passed around all night??? Do you KNOW that TB is 14 times greater in a shelter than in the population at large?

Do you have any concept of the idea of PRIVACY????

Do you have ANY IDEA just what you are consigning people to? I'd rather be DEAD!

YOU got live in a dormitory the rest of your life!

[izquierdista]

27. Dormitory life

I went through it for 4 years in college. For 3 of those years, I had a single room, no roommates to pass around germs and a locked door which secured my belongings. Before you bitchbitchbitchbitchbitch about the idea, would you consider shutting up long enough to look at what an architect can come up with?

[knitter4democracy]

32. Can we please keep it civil around here?

Bobbolink's homeless, so I think some anger on her part is justified.

With college dorm living, everyone knows there's an end. Most people get to go home on breaks, too. Putting all the homeless in dorms for the rest of their lives or until they can save up enough to move out is totally different. Dorm living really isn't fun. Look at how much gritching the Russians did with their communal living. It's not a great solution for many people.

[bobbolink]

36. College dorm living... one roommate, maybe up to 4.

Shelters... 10 and even 20 in one room!!

Yes, for the rest of your life!

Even temporarily it's insane!

I can't even believe people who say they care can even CONSIDER this shit!

All of you first!

Let me know how you all like it....

[bobbolink]

34. Hey, sweetie, YOU have't been in a dormitory if you had a single room!

Would you have your grandparents live out their lives in a dormitory????

When people tell me to shut up, I know exactly where they're coming from. Your attitude was clear from your initial posts, and you've confirmed it.

As I said, YOU live in a dormitory. We poor folk live in the richest country in the world, and you can damn well understand our needs.

[izquierdista]

57. Yes

That's what a lot of assisted living places look like these days. A large building with communal areas for socialization and private rooms with bed and bath facilities.

College dormitories and assisted living facilities are two obvious models that could be used to provide shelter for the homeless. The assisted living facilities not so much so, because they are mostly owned by for-profit corporations, but college dormitories are usually owned by the university and their aim is to cover costs, not make a return on investment. In the same way, a city or county could own a dormitory (I'm going to keep using that word, since it is a perfectly good noun to describe a building designed for many people to live in) and house people there. Maybe even have more than one; one for short term stays, another for longer stays, and finally something like permanent low-cost housing.

Also, in another post, you refer to the "if things are this bad for you, you must be screwing up and this is how we will help you" as demeaning and patronizing. How about being less defensive? Most of the homeless people I have known personally have had very dysfunctional behaviors that got them into that situation: alcoholism, meth addiction, "anger management" issues, gambling addiction, etc. Even if you find these people a place to live, they still carry the behavior around 24 hours a day and they are one arrest, one fight, one bender away from being back at the bottom. There is one set of rules that governs how to survive out on the street with no place to call home. However, you can't carry that set of rules with you when you deal with people who have a home to go to and you want to join them in having a home yourself.

[bobbolink]

65. AGain, I'm very thankful you and your parental attitudes aren't running this country!

[izquierdista]

76. Yes, that's a good thing

We wouldn't want Uncle Sam to actually have a parental attitude to his nieces and nephews and prevent them from enjoying a nice January night sleeping on a heating grate. :sarcasm:

[bobbolink]

67. Keep cranking out all that RAygun propaganda!!

You're adding so much to society's understanding and caring with that prejudicial crap.

[Cant trust em]

9. Recommend! What a great way to bump up your karma points

Every time I spend a day voluteering I feel like a million bucks afterwards.

[bobbolink]

13. I don't think volunteering is the answer.... experience LIVING in a shelter!

Many people here, if they are to be believed, already do volunteer, and of course, they are going to say that their shelter is different.

Many years ago, I organized a "Plunge".... sending clergy out into the streets with a homeless guide, and that really got their attention, even though it was only for one night.

Oh, and on families... many shelters and help agencies ONLY deal with families.... there is NOTHING for a single person like me.... except the possibility, and I mean POSSIBILITY of a night in a large dorm. Women sick all night, up coughing, etc., so no sleep to be had, and germs passed around to everyone.

The TB rate in shelters is FOURTEEN times that of the rest of the population!

Yet, all people can think and talk about is "Shelter".

:mad:

[knitter4democracy]

15. You and Warpy are right--staying in one would be a real eye-opener.

I say we round up all the media types we can and make them do a week of living poor. For those who are super-cocky, like Ann Coulter or Rush, we make them homeless for a second week. Talk about an eye opener. ;)

Shelters aren't the answer. It's time to ditch them and go for a real answer.

[apocalypsehow]

20. Very moving post, and absolutely right. K & R.

[kdmorris]

24. I think so, too

I've stayed in a few, both times dragging at least one toddler along with me.

Nothing like being in a homeless shelter with a 15 month old. I couldn't sleep at all, because I was so afraid she would wake up and wander off.

[knitter4democracy]

29. *shudder* I can just imagine that.

My kids both are notorious for waking up in the night and wandering. Ugh. I can just imagine the horror of worrying they'd disappear in the night and I couldn't find them. That's really scary. :scared: I hope things are better now. :hug:

[kdmorris]

58. Things are better now, yes

But that sort of lifestyle stays with your forever. It's drilled into you that you are a worthless piece of crap and it's really hard to get over that feeling.

Even today, when I'm at work, I worry that someone will find out about "the real me". I've had this job for 10 years.

[knitter4democracy]

60. The real you is that gorgeous person typing on that keyboard.

You are the real you right now. :hug: Who you were then--that wasn't the real you. Not at all. It was like you were a butterfly in that chrysalis, waiting for the right time to come out. You were penned in, locked up tight, and scared of the future, but now, now you're the butterfly and gorgeous and free. You are beautiful--don't ever forget that. :)

[kdmorris]

70. Thanks!

You are right, of course. But, the person I was then, that was me, too. It's society's view of my actions that were messed up, not me. It the way people view a 24 year old woman with 3 kids who steals food to feed them that is wrong.

Granted, I didn't steal food all the time, but I did what I had to for my survival and that of my daughters. I'm not ashamed of that anymore, but for a long time, I was. But, going through that, living like that for 8 years, taught me a lot about humanity. And it wasn't always pretty. But it did teach me empathy. I do understand now why a person would steal. Not just food, but other things, as well.

And all of that has melded together to make me the person that I am now. But I still know that if anyone at work found out I was stealing food at one time, they would disapprove. This week I'm working on not giving a shit what others think. :D

Thank you for the wonderful words.

[knitter4democracy]

71. You did what you had to do.

If I and my kids were starving, hell yeah, I'd steal food. You have to survive, and nothing's worse than seeing your kids suffer. If the people where you work would judge, then they're idiots who aren't parents. If they can't imagine themselves in your shoes, they're not worth the dust on your shoelaces.

Think of that. You were that poor, and look where you are now. You did that. Maybe you had some help here and there, I don't know, but the reality is, you did that. You are a survivor, and you are seriously strong. That's amazing! I think it's so easy for us moms to buy the lie that we're weak or we're wrong or we're not good moms or whatever. Those tapes in our heads are wrong. Wrong! You are strong! You are amazing! You survived with grace and, I'm sure, your own style, and your kids are stronger and healthier for it.

Hear, hear on this week's homework. Mind if I borrow it? ;)

[bobbolink]

37. MOST people in shelters don't get sleep! For various reasons.

Yet, we're expected to be able to function just fine.

I'm so sorry you went through that.. there's just no excuse in a country this rich!

:hug: I hope things are much better for you now!

[bobbolink]

39. On this whole "mental Illness" crap....

I'm posting this response from another person, on another thread, because it is so clear, and should make EVERYONE reconsider their biases and prejudices:

"Much of modern liberalism and progressivism is based on the "help" model. The enlightened superior person who "cares" helps the poor less fortunate one - it is quite similar to volunteering at the local dog pound.

But "help" people to do what? To adjust to insane conditions, to be made more comfortable in their oppression, and this is called "healthy." Adjusting to and functioning effectively in a system that is insane and very unhealthy in every way is not "healthy."

Or, they seek to re-make a person into a "winner" - clever, greedy, self-centered, driven by and focused on personal self-actualization and self-improvement 24 hours a day.

But what if the "winners" are the insane ones, and are actually the losers in every area that should matter - in respect to their very humanity? And what if the "healthy" ones are actually very sick - morally sick?

Why should we adjust and adapt to that? Why should we emulate bullies and self-centered morally depraved people? What kind of "win" is that?

This strain in modern liberalism is also politically very reactionary. Adjusting people to the existing system strongly mitigates against overthrowing the system. If the goal is to make everyone a "winner" - or at least drug them and get them out of sight and out of mind - by adapting human beings to the existing social structure, how can we ever fight for adapting the social structure to the needs of human beings?"

[knitter4democracy]

41. Wow. This is so right.

It's not about fixing people, it's about fixing the problems. That's so true. If we had a living wage, national health care, and realistic housing prices, things would be better. If we had a real food stamps program that actually fed people instead of supplemented other sources, things would be better. If we really listened to people and fought for the change we need to be a healthier, better America, we'd finally be on the right path.

We need to fix the problems, not the people. The people are fine--it's the problems that aren't. Homelessness, health insurance and the lack thereof, too-low wages, no union strength in too many sectors, welfare being cut to the bone and then some--all of that needs to get fixed.

[bobbolink]

42. Glad you could see it---that is a brilliant writer, and I doubt most of DU will ever really

hear him!

It's so damned easy, and so very convenient, to dismiss us as it's our own problem... dismiss us as "mentally ill" and all that other crap. Because then, it doesn't pressure us to REALLY look, and REALLY change. We can continue on as before....

Gays used to be considered "mentally ill", but they are certainly making headway on that.

We used to laugh at Russia for labeling their dissidents as "mentally ill". Now look at US!

It's so easy to do, with people who are on the bottom rung... just look what was said to me above... about watching my step, or I'll fit the profile. Yet, we all know, or should know, that it's impossible to prove a negative, so the accusation stands. On the basis of the prejudice of one person. And the damage is done.

At some point, we MUST look at the assumptions from the Pharmcos that we have swallowed, and stop consigning people to the trash heap....

Thanks for listening.. as I said, with EVERY homeless person I've spoken to at length, this is the one thing they all mention as causing them deep pain. And you can imagine what it would cause if they were to be locked up because of it!

[izquierdista]

77. There ARE problems with the people

If they have been beaten down long enough with homelessness, health problems that turn into chronic conditions, poverty level wages, no sense of community that they can fall back on, there will be something wrong with them after a while.

It's just like the psychology experiments with the baby monkeys who were isolated from their mothers and only provided a doll to hug and a bottle to suckle. They didn't thrive for lack of personal attention. After a while the baby monkey was not "fine", the problems had made it physically and mentally damaged. If it went on long enough, the problems of the baby monkey were irreparable and it died.

You can't just "fix the problem" and think that the people are all right. It's not "blaming the victim" to say "you've gotten into a bad situation and this can't continue, it's going to kill you; here's what the State can offer to help you, what are you going to do to help yourself?" It's being realistic and practical.

Like Dr. Phil would ask: "How's that meth habit working out for ya? Do you want to quit before it kills you?"

[caseycoon]

54. I wish this was required reading for everyone!

Not just here at DU, but everyone!
WOW!

[bobbolink]

66. Indeed! This comes from a talented writer, but not recognized on DU like Pitt, etc.

His writing is much more incisive, and much more thought-provoking, and certainly supports and understands those of us on the bottom rung much more than other writers.

Maybe that's why this writer isn't in the spotlight?!

Deserves a spot on Countdown!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

74. If the solution is to empower the poor, then the old idea of a

guaranteed annual income would probably be best.

It would be adjusted for the cost of living in various areas and would be enough for an individual to rent an apartment and buy food.

One of the arguments for it in those days was that cities like New York were paying so much for social services and "welfare hotels" that the poor would have been better off just getting the money.

For example, New York City spent $2000 a month per room on decrepit single room occupancy hotels. In the late 1970s, when I read this, market-rate studio apartments were going for $600, which people outside New York thought was an outrageous sum. But the point is that the city could have just given each poor household or individual $2000 a month, which would have allowed them to rent a regular apartment and buy food and clothing and a lot more. (That was the era when my grad school housemate got a job offer for $18,000 a year and thought that she had hit the jackpot.)

But the Puritans complained that the drug addicts would just spend the money on drugs and the "welfare queens" would just keep having more kids--you know all the old stereotypes. Never mind that some people CAN'T work and that most people want to do something useful.

For those who can and want to work, there's plenty of work to do. It's just that nobody is willing to pay for it. People could be put to work building housing (not the ugly dysfunctional forests of high rises that New York and Chicago put up in the 1950s, but garden apartments), repairing infrastructure, building public transit and inter-city rail, creating and maintaining parks in areas that don't have them, planting and tending vegetable gardens for their neighborhoods, any number of things.

[bobbolink]

85. Yes, Nixon, our last liberal president, had it right--a guaranteed annual income!

But, you see, then slumlords would lose their profits.

Low-income housing has become a profit-maker. "Privatising" charity is profitable. THAT'S where the objection would be!

And, you are right, the conservatives always want to hold out the stick, just like some in the thread about environmentalism, and the crap about mental illness and alkies in the shelter thread. It's that conservative RAYGUN attitude that keeps people down. Yet, the "progressives" can't seem to stand up to it, and counteract it.

As for doing something "useful" -- I've come to the conclusion that poor people who aren't able to work, but speak out against the system ARE doing something useful. Of course, they'll never get paid for it, but they are actually working on saving the soul of the nation.

Thanks for a good post! :hug:

[Naturyl]

90. Wow, this level of nail-hitting is rare

Excellent post going right to the core of an issue that is seldom recognized or understood. The whole "help" model contains an implicit presumption of superiority as well as a tendency to validate and legitimize the very system that is creating intolerable conditions. A great many poor and homeless don't need "help," they need a culture and a system that doesn't allow such conditions to exist in the first place.

[maryf]

91. thanks and kick

so glad you opened this thread back up, so many important aspects of this critical issue that folks in other threads just don't seem to get. glad to see some great material not lost to the archives. I really appreciate the opportunity to read this months later...

[bobbolink]

92. Better late to the party than never, right?

You know, there are so many of these points that are SO important, and we are SO resistent to them, and are bombarded from all directions with the very oppposite views, that it's important for ALL of us to keep refreshing on memories on the real truth of the matter.

And the truth is the whole "help" model is paternalistic, sick, and damaging.

What if "helpers" would just listen to us????

What a concept, eh?

[bobbolink]

49. MOre on "mental illness"

Besides a number of psychiatrists even questioning the idea of mental illness, I remember something a shrink I had many years ago told me.

He said he could pinpoint the day and time the decision was made to promote the psychotropic drugs, anti-depressants, etc.

It was during a convention of the Psychiatrists Association, and they had been discussing what they could do to regain their former status. You see, the social workers and psychologists had been encroaching on their territory, and because they didn't have as many years of schooling, they could charge less, so the shrinks were hurting.

SO... they decided in one of their convention groups to start promoting the drugs, as they were the ONLY ONES who could do so, and hence, would benefit.

Yes, the shrinks hand-in-hand with the Pharmcos..... when you think about it, it all makes sense.

[knitter4democracy]

50. Sam Shem writes as much in Mount Misery.

It's his sequel to House of God, his fictionalized account of his first year of residency. Mount Misery is the fictionalized account of his residency in psychology. Horrifying book. Very scary.

[bobbolink]

51. Thanks... I"ll have to look it up!

The librarians love me...

:hi:

:hug:

[knitter4democracy]

53. I'll warn you--it'll give you nightmares.

It did me. Then again, I get them easily. Still, it sure explained a lot of Hubby's residency experiences.

[bobbolink]

69. Falling into the River -- repost....

The original intent of this post, as I understand it, was to realize that "shelter" is NOT THE ANSWER! Addressing the true causes (not some fictitious propaganda!) is the answer.

This is a favorite parable of mine that originally was posted by our own Sapphire Blue. I can't find her posting of it, so this is my own wording:

Sorry, I can't find the original story now, so you'll have to do with my less than stellar rendition..

There were two fishermen walking along the river, looking for the perfect spot to cast their lines, when their heard a call for help, then saw a person being carried down the river by the swift current. They jumped in and pulled out the hapless victim, and carried him to shore.

Soon, there was another person coming down the river in the same manner, and they pulled her out, got her dried off and built a fire for the two to warm up.

Two more people came tumbling down the river, and they got both of them out.

Then another person was seen heading their way down the middle of the river. The one fisherman waded out as before, but the other one headed upstream.

"Hey, where are you going? I need your help!"

"You keep pulling them out, but I'm going to go upriver to find out why people keep falling in."

This country has all sorts of programs to pull people out of the water, some not so effective.

What we can do that's different, is head upriver, and try to do our part to find out WHY, and do our best to marshal forces to try to stop people from falling in.

The reason I wrote my story about how I became homeless was not to get pity, (although I certainly appreciate the caring!), but to explain one reason why people are falling into homelessness, and to encourage us to set to work to figure out WHAT we can do about that one piece.

If we can find a way to stop the abuse in low-income housing, which is rampant!, we can not only improve peoples' lives in the here and now, but we can help to prevent more homelessness.

What are some ideas?

How can we intervene?

Who can we arouse to take up this cause?

[knitter4democracy]

72. Shelters aren't the answer at all. We need housing.

I think we need to give up on the idea of affordable housing and think instead of supportive housing. Section 8 without the landlord. Sliding scale and free for those who are truly destitute. That's where I'd start.

[bobbolink]

82. that would be a GREAT start! So, how to do it?

My reverse gear went out this morning, so I probably won't be able to be in touch.

I'm sure that's good news for the ones who want to bash me, and insist that we're all alkies.

[knitter4democracy]

86. I'm pretty sure our city doesn't have the funds, so I don't know.

I think it needs to be federal, mostly because Michigan just doesn't have the money for anything right now. Ugh.

Dang, I'm so sorry about the car. That's really bad news. :(

[izquierdista]

78. #1 Kick out the "disaster capitalists"

If you follow the news in New Orleans about how they want to raze the low-income housing and "redevelop" the area, you will realize that these people are the enemy (not me, even though we have been going back and forth like it on this thread).

One of the premises of American capitalism is that housing is and should be a "free market" with no government intervention. Even Section 8, a government program is not the government providing housing; they work within a system of free market landlords. What would be better is to have a class of government-owned, government-provided housing; a floor or safety net to the whole system of "free market" housing. They would be the housing provider of last resort (to borrow a phrase from the banking industry that the Fed is the "lender of last resort") and would guarantee that people would be able to rent a certain amount of space that had heat and sanitation facilities. I won't get into it now, but there would have to be standards and inspections, so that the housing would not be allowed to turn into a slum. This could even be an encouragement for the free market landlords to better their social behavior; if they were subject to having their slum building condemned as unfit and their property taken by eminent domain, they might not defer so much maintenance.

The whole idea is enough to get both left and right apoplectic. The right-wingers will rail about all sorts of nonsensical issues, claiming that the government is 'interfering' with the free market, even though it is a classic case of market failure. But even the left (as shown in this thread) can be sidetracked by wondering if the state is being authoritarian or too "parental". If the community (or any government agency) is going to provide housing, they need to make reasonable assurances that it is having the desired effect. If you think that requiring substance abuse treatment or some other social services is too intrusive, then that's too bad, they are not going to just give you a place to stay and let you do whatever the hell you please.

Another part of the problem is that in America, very little property in a city actually belongs to the city. City Hall, the police station, the library, the parks, that's about it, but not any of the buildings in the downtown commercial area. The city of Henderson, NV used to own a few dozen houses that were on the street next to the main downtown area; they bulldozed them and put in a parking lot for the court building and jail. I'll admit that the 60 year old houses were ready to be demolished, but a better use (since many homeless live a couple blocks away, in back of Wal-Mart) would have been to put in some higher density housing, maybe some 2-story townhouse like buildings and keep the title to it. Have the city stay in the landlord business instead of giving it up by demolishing what they had. If the city is actually in the landlord business, then they are much more able to provide housing to their citizens who need it instead of lame excuses.

[bobbolink]

83. By continuuing your RAYGUN shit about alkies, and dissing me, you ARE

choosing to be the enemy.

And I'm done with you, and you not only don't want to listen to reason, just like the RAYGUN dems, but you don't give a shit how much your words hurt me, and others like me.

So, keep up the shit, and keep hurting people. I guess it gives you power.

Now to hit that little red "x" by your name...

bye...

[izquierdista]

84. Truth hurts

Must have hit a nerve. Accept some help before it's too late.

[NMMNG]

87. I worked in a family shelter for a nearly two years

It was in a small city and from what I've seen and heard it seems it was a bit better than many, but it was still a shelter. It wasn't a home and people still had to crowd whole families of 4-5 into one room, or smaller families of 1-2 would have to share a room with one another. It was mostly women and children with an occasional father in the mix.

It's deplorable the way we treat our own citizens, the way we let them down, while we easily find money to destroy and kill foreign peoples and nations at the drop of a hat. We have the money for Congress to sit around making frivolous resolutions while millions go to bed hungry in shelters--if they have beds at all. And RRRWers scream about the sanctity of the fetus then turn their backs on it the second it's born because it's now a "burden on society".

How foul humans can be.

[bobbolink]

88. "How fowl humans can be" Sadly, that is so very true... kick 'em while they're down...

When, oh when, will we ALL get the idea that HOMES not shelters is the answer for all???

It's just getting worse and worse.

Thank you for working in that shelter, and trying to add a bit of humanity.

And thank you for saying how pathetic it is!

[Aliens_UFOs_Facts]

93. Yes, More People Should Volunteer.

Yes, More People Should Volunteer.

Although, I've noticed that people are so busy working trying to afford
gasoline, real estate, electricity, drugs, fruit and vege, etc,
that they rarely have time for kindness from their heart or volunteer efforts.

[bobbolink]

94. Volunteer for what?

What is needed is HOUSING.... it's all very clear, for those who care to see.

We don't need volunteers to keep us in line, to tell us when to go to bed, when to get up, when to eat, how to breathe.

WE NEED HOUSING!

It's very simple.

It's very clear.

[shrike]

95. I interviewed a man who helps run a local not-for-profit for the homeless

It's been a while, but I can recall him telling me that the reasons for homeless are many.

Occasionally a family becomes homeless when their place burns down and their insurance company either won't pony up or is dragging its feet.

Sometimes it's a family, or individual, where the breadwinner lost a job and the family loses its home/apartment.

Sometimes the individual IS mentally ill.

Sometimes there are drug and alcohol problems. Sometimes 2 and 4 are combined.

There are rules in place to protect the many from the few, he said. The biggest problems are theft and violence, although, as I've said, the many suffer from the actions of only a few.

Most people with drug and alcohol problems he's dealt with have been eager to get into treatment programs, he said. (They're provided free of charge.)

I remember how surprised I was to learn how many apartments the group provided. These went to families (children were NEVER put into shelters, NEVER), and although singles might have a chance if an apartment went vacant, this almost never happened.

This group was continuously strapped for money, I remember, and had to count on the kindness of strangers. His biggest problem, he said, was scrambling for furniture, appliances and clothing.

[bobbolink]

96. There is only ONE reason that people are homeless---

LACK OF HOUSING!

All those things you mentioned happen in other countries, but the people aren't homeless.

All those categories serve only ONE purpose... to separate the "worthy" from the "unworthy".

It's time to change the paradigm of thinking about homelessness!!

[Jerouse79]

97. We need a stronger system for all

I've been homeless with two children before and It's terrifying. Even in the shelters there are so many rules you live in terror of doing the wrong thing. While residents, we were required to take a course called "challenge to change" change what? The fact that my son is mentally disabled and does not do well with strangers making it almost impossible for him to attend day care or school? Employers get a bit angry when you have to leave work early every other day because your son has bitten another child or attacked the teacher. We were forced to leave a shelter because I enrolled my disabled son in public school and not the shelter's charter school.
In England, the village councils have publicly funded housing in place. Don't forget they also have a well funded public health system as well.
Even though I have an apartment now, I still have nightmares of ending up homeless again. I do think that the lack of decent housing in this country is a tragedy that needs to be addressed in real terms.

[tosh]

98. Welcome to DU, Jerouse79

:hi:

and thanks for reviving this thread.

There are many points of view here on the origins, the circumstances, the status quo responses, etc., but indeed we need a stronger system FOR ALL and as Bobbolink points out, the need is for MORE HOUSING.

[bobbolink]

99. Jerouse79, Welcome to DU, and the Poverty Forum!

:toast: :bounce::toast: :bounce::toast: :bounce::toast: :bounce::toast: :bounce::toast: :bounce::toast: :bounce::toast: :bounce:

YOU are the person we need to hear from!

YOUR VOICE is important to us!

Please, consider writing your experience as a separate post in GD... it needs to be HEARD!! So many STILL think shelters are the "answer", and we need to disabuse them of that faulty thinking!

:yourock:

[caseycoon]

100. A big WELCOME to DU!

:hi:
So glad to see you bring this all up again. The shelters are in NO WAY an answer to what is happening. They are dangerous, horrible places. Thanks to folks like you we can get the word out (again) to those who think they are just fine.
We are so desperately in need of affordable housing for all. Instead, we have less housing & more homeless people each year. It's truly heartbreaking!

Thanks, Jerouse79, for telling your story! It would be great if you posted your experience as a new post in General Discussion so as to reach even more folks. The way this country treats poverty is a sin & a shame.
:toast:

[maryf]

101. Welcome

Thanks for sharing of yourself, it can be a hard thing to do!

[dajoki]

102. Welcome to DU Jerouse79...

Thank you for sharing your story, it is very important that we hear more of what is actually happening to people across the country. Your post hits home with many of us and we are fed up with these issues being ignored by the media and the politicians. Good luck and I hope everything works out well for you and your son so those nightmares can go away. Stay in touch if you can!!
:grouphug:

[Jerouse79]

103. Thank you for your warm welcome

It means a lot. My son has finally settled into a good pattern of behavior and things are going okay now.
One of the major problems i faced while homeless was finding the programs that already existed. Sometimes rules would be there that would directly counteract the ultimate goal of self sufficiency for their own purposes. The school rule at the shelter in san diego was in direct violation of the mckinney-vento act, which i didn't find out until later.
It would be a big help to a lot of people if there was a central database of all the agencies that assist people, a national 211 service. Some communities have their own but a national one would be great.

[dajoki]

104. I have been asking for that...

for the longest time, one place where you could go to find out ALL that is available to you. It seems that the poor, homeless and disabled are left to fend for themselves when it comes to assistance. It wouldn't be that hard for the government and each state to have ONE central location where you can access all of the information and instructions to help everybody to get everything they are entitled to. I am happy to hear that things are going better for you now and I hope it will continue. Good luck and please keep posting(or PM, if you like), there are a few of us here who really care, and our prayers are with you.

[crownchakrabound]

105. I want to volunteer at a vegetarian soup kitchen in a nearby suburb

I just feel that it would be better for the homeless to eat that type of food, along with cheaper for the organization. Good for you for caring!