Illegal to Feed Homeless in Parks

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

... has nothing to do with the mean-spirited legislation that we are discussing...almost made me beleive in evil...

So since you're neither evil nor mean-spirited you'll be opening a soup kitchen at your place?

[Flint]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Maybe there would just be fewer minimum wage jobs, and MickeyDburgers would cost north of $15 each.

I personally don't rate the "right to cheap and tasty fast food" very high on the big-picture scale.

[Flint]

Originally Posted by capnhowdy

Why doesn't some genius politician create a program so these people could EARN some food in exchange for grounds maintenance? I'm sure sandwiches and coffee would be cheaper than overpaying the lazy-ass city employees. At the same time it may improve their social skills and in turn be a type of therapy.

Bravo! Bravo! Thank you for saying this! Whatever happened to social policies that accomplished multiple objectives?!

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

So since you're neither evil nor mean-spirited you'll be opening a soup kitchen at your place?

While you're talking about opening soup kitchens in homes, as some sort of analogy to doing it in public parks, just remember that the people closest to being "at home" in the public park are the homeless.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

So since you're neither evil nor mean-spirited you'll be opening a soup kitchen at your place?

It's very easy and fun to criticize others and not stick out your own neck, isn't it?

[Flint]

Originally Posted by glatt

Bingo. The homeless problem really took off in the 80s when the Reagan administration drastically cut federal funding to mental hospitals. Many of the patients left the hospitals and hit the streets.

Right, when you talk about "the homeless" just remember how they got "homeless" to begin with.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by dar512

Unlikely. Homelessness is not a temporary condition for most of these folks -- it's a lifestyle.

I understand that most of these folks can't improve themselves because they have mental issues. I am compassionate to their situation. But you can't help a situation if you don't really understand it.

Who would choose a lifestyle of homelessness?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

What's *your* answer? How much per hour would minimum wage have to be before your shiny, happy fed/housed/healthcared/amenitied criteria would be met? It's obviously such a simple solution, let's see you put a price tag on it.

The collectivist crowd here seems to be doing a lot of handwaving about how if only there wasn't so much poverty, un- and under-employment and untreated mental illness, there would be less homelessness.

Duh.

Actually, my answer is to set up a regular free meal truck at the Norristown Farm Park. Maybe even leave a case of Jiffy Pop behind, so they'll start fires at night. Duh right back at ya.

The answer? Well, I don't have the means to feed them all in my home, and I have too much compassion to kill them, so it would be somewhere between the two. Maybe provide facilities (oh no! collectivism!) where they can satisfy the base of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. If that's all they want, so be it. If they want more, they can find a job, but they won't need a job that would cause a $15 McBurger, because their basic needs would be met.

BTW, if homelessness isn't caused by un- and underemployment and untreated mental illness, what does cause it?

[Spexxvet]

Maggie, why are you so against helping people? If it's the cost, it would be alot cheaper to help these folks than it has been to develop the Osprey. How about we use some of that cash?

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by HappyMonkey

While you're talking about opening soup kitchens in homes, as some sort of analogy to doing it in public parks, just remember that the people closest to being "at home" in the public park are the homeless.

I'd say that the local homeowners are the closest to being at home in the park. They effectively have a soup kitchen being set up in their backyard.

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Maybe provide facilities (oh no! collectivism!) where they can satisfy the base of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

But that's the whole point, there are facilities provided, just like there are public parks provided. Except the public parks are being usurped for other purposes.

[xoxoxoBruce]

But if you feed them they lose the ability to survive in the wild without handouts. They become dependent on people to survive and when winter comes and the tourists go home, they will suffer horribly. Well, that's why You shouldn't feed the critters in the National Parks, anyway.

Who would choose a lifestyle of homelessness?

Most of the people they kicked out, when they closed the PA State Hospitals, some years ago. These people need help but the courts have ruled you can't help them against their will. They can't be locked up unless they're dangerous to others....being a danger to themselves, doesn't count.

I've no first hand experience, but everything I've read says the shelters are generally hell holes. Your life and possessions are at risk every night you're there. We saw some of that in New Orleans where the people were tossed into the dome without supervision. Of course to make the shelters safe, you would have to run it like a jail or at least a strictly controlled dormitory. That would drive many of the homeless away, just as fast. Catch 22?

The same thing applies to any kind of structured employment, no matter what you pay. Certainly not all, but a large portion of the homeless, don't want a regular job....nothing with rules.

It's much easier to be compassionate when it's not your backyard, and doesn't create problems for you. But, if these homeless people were drawn, by the good samaritan, to the playground your kid uses, it's much tougher,...... much, much tougher. Even if you stand watch over your kid the whole time they play, you don't want Aqualung sitting on the next swing.

Aside ~Public Park, owned by the city. Public property, right?
All the public or just legal residents of that city and their guests? Who owns it, if the residents of the city paid for it? I can remember, as a kid, being shooed out of a park in a town where I wasn't a resident, for that very reason. Of course when you're a kid raised in a climate of respect for authority, legality isn't questioned.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

I'd say that the local homeowners are the closest to being at home in the park. They effectively have a soup kitchen being set up in their backyard.

Whereas the homeless effectively have one being set up in their home.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Maggie, why are you so against helping people? If it's the cost, it would be alot cheaper to help these folks than it has been to develop the Osprey. How about we use some of that cash?

You're pretty lose with the word "help", there, Scooter.

You may believe a handout is "help", and you're welcome to hand out all of your stuff that you like if you really beleive it's helpful. But since at least the Johnson administration I've seen way too much welfare state accomplish exactly nothing (other than providing employment to the useless apparatchiks that run the programs), while robbing people of their initiative and self-respect.

You can claim it's "help". I'm not convinced. And you're certainly not entitled to despoil a public park to do it.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Actually, my answer is to set up a regular free meal truck at the Norristown Farm Park.

Exactly...you're prepared to spew glib allusions as to how a civilized society would already set the minimum wage so anyone making it could live comfortably...fed, shelted, medical care and some unnamed "amenities" provided (Cable TV? Cellphone service? Crack cocaine? What?)

But you don't even know how much that would be...there's no limit to your largess with employer's money in setting the price for unskilled labor.

And don't you run with the same crowd that tells us how our economy can't afford to do without the illegals who work for less than the prevailing wages?

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by glatt

It's very easy and fun to criticize others and not stick out your own neck, isn't it?

Whom are you addressing?