Covid and the homeless? A question.
- Thread starter chic
- Start date
MarciKS
SF VIP
- Location
- Great Plains
I don't know about where anyone else is but I do know that here the shelters provided masks I'm sure by donation to the homeless. They couldn't go in anywhere without one just like we couldn't. And I believe they may have even brought vaccines to them, I'm not 100% sure. They were not left to twist in the wind. They had to stay in during lock down just like everyone else.
Murrmurr
SF VIP
- Location
- Sacramento, California
Sort of similar here in Sacramento. Groups of medical students from the university took to the streets to give free vaccinations. They set up these little outdoor kiosks near the largest camps, but it was up to the people to get in line for the shots. They handed out masks, too, but of course, they couldn't make every homeless person wear them. The ones who did usually wore them around their necks all day...for weeks. They weren't given a clean one every day, so some of them got to looking pretty nasty.
It was a huge concern, especially for the university's medical department. But the city didn't have any answers except for the free vaccines and masks.
The worst part is that, after hundreds of businesses were forced to close, Sac had even more homeless people right at the peak of the pandemic.
MarciKS
SF VIP
- Location
- Great Plains
I wonder too how many of their cases and deaths were reported since they really aren't an important part of society.
I guess we may never know.
MarciKS
SF VIP
- Location
- Great Plains
Probably not chic.I guess we may never know.
In Florida, our Governor Ron DeSantis received $85.8 million to be used to care for the homeless and underprivileged population. It helped with rental assistance, emergency shelters, outreach programs, and other essential services.
I remember watching the local news that would show us the emergency shelters. The journalists spent a lot of time giving information about the services that were available to the people in need.
We also had a lot of migrants working the fields and getting sick. I remember reading that Doctors Without Borders came to help them and organized vaccinations for them.
I remember watching the local news that would show us the emergency shelters. The journalists spent a lot of time giving information about the services that were available to the people in need.
We also had a lot of migrants working the fields and getting sick. I remember reading that Doctors Without Borders came to help them and organized vaccinations for them.
I thought this also but thought I'd be censored for saying so out loud. It would be smart to study this possibility for the future to learn more about this disease but this may be too sensible for them to bother with.
MarciKS
SF VIP
- Location
- Great Plains
I am also uncertain if all states kept the homeless sheltered in place like the rest of us. That would definitely play a roll in the spread. I think there may be some articles online about the homeless during covid. You could always check.I thought this also but thought I'd be censored for saying so out loud. It would be smart to study this possibility for the future to learn more about this disease but this may be too sensible for them to bother with.
If not censored, at least condemned. I can certainly understand why you would think that. It hasn't been up long so we'll see but you know what, I really don't care.I thought this also but thought I'd be censored for saying so out loud. It would be smart to study this possibility for the future to learn more about this disease but this may be too sensible for them to bother with.
Remember, well maybe not remember, but back in the early days of Tuberculosis treatment sanatoriums were established and patients were encouraged to be outside as much as possible. Patients were advised to move to places with drier air and many recovered in those sanatoriums. Then came drugs that were effective.
Hermann Brehmer, the acknowledged originator of the sanatorium movement, opened the first-ever high-altitude sanatorium to treat pulmonary consumptives, at Görbersdorf, in the Silesian mountains, today in Poland (5). Brehmer’s initial reasoning that the physiological benefits of an active physical life at high altitude would restore health to these patients was faulty (6), but he quickly reversed course and switched to salubrious rest, chiefly in outdoor lounges and, when needed, using open-air shelters to provide optimal airy conditions; mild, calibrated exercise; and a healthful diet. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/full/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201509-632PS
That's treatment, of course, so not completely comparable, but it makes sense to me that the more air around you and the more often it is diluted and changed, the better for controlling respiratory contagion.
jimintoronto
Well-known Member
Should I point out that........Dead bodies in the USA are NOT ignored. The dead are found , Police respond and notify the Coroner, who responds to the location. The coroner and the Police are bound BY LAW to investigate the death. The Coroner's office will do an autopsy, to determine the manner and cause of death. If there is no next of kin, the body will eventually be buried or cremated at the expense of the local municipality.
Death records are kept in every part of the USA. Failing to report a death ( that you know about ) is a misdemeanor offence in most states in the USA. This is the difference between a first world country, and a third world country. To suggest that homeless people, who die, are not reported and accounted for is silly. JImB.
That is what I was thinking.... the homeless are unaccounted for in many places.
I came across an interesting site regarding COVID-19 homeless deaths: COVID-19 Homeless Deaths - Homeless Deaths Count
(homelessdeathscount.org)
(homelessdeathscount.org)
VaughanJB
Scrappy VIP
Back in 2020 experts told the rest of us that covid 19 was a highly contagious lethal air borne virus. Ok. So why weren't the homeless wiped out by it? They're still alive and apparently, the same as always. America has a shamefully high homeless population.
It's important to remember that in that initial wave and later, Covid didn't have a 100% fatality rate, hence some homeless survived. As others have mentioned, much was spent on various programs to protect them, from housing (temporary, usually shelters) to vaccination programs. It's good to remember that in the US there have been 103m cases, and 1.1m deaths due to Covid. So, most people got over it without moving on to the next world.
A lot of the Covid story has become lost in the conspiracy theories surrounding various bits and pieces. When you consider that a new virus ran around the entire globe, we didn't know what it was, we didn't know who was in the most danger, we didn't know fatality rates, and we didn't know the best treatments. All we knew was that a new virus was out there, and people were getting very sick, very quickly. Health services couldn't cope, they were building wards in car parks to increase capacity, some hospitals ran out of oxygen, and so on. Difficult times with a lot of uncertainty.
Of course, as time went on, we learned a lot more and adjusted to the realities. Vaccines to help lessen the symptoms came to the market (in record time), and treatment protocols adjusted. Also, in subsequent waves, the virus evolved and had less of a fatality rate (not to mention, the vaccine helps too).
When it comes to homelessness, it seems the latest numbers are around 18 homeless for every 10,000 people in the US. The total is a little less than 600,000. It's also worth noting that the breakdowns by race don't tell a great story (homelessness can happen to anyone, but it's predominantly non-whites.) There are approaching twice as many males as females. The district/states with the highest number (in order highest to lower) are Washington DC, California, Vermont, and Oregon. Not coincidentally, these are also the locations with the highest housing costs.
Homelessness is dire. By the time you're sleeping in a tent, or worse, you're in a deep deep hole. Getting out of that hole is extremely difficult. The death rate for the homeless is far far greater than the general population. People point toward drugs and alcoholism, but while this is clearly a big problem, I wonder how any of us would react faced with the realities of being on the street and spending considerable time with addicts.
It's also worth mentioning the primary reasons homelessness happens. The number one reason is the lack of affordable housing, the second is unemployment, and the third poverty. Pretty simple math - businesses are driven to pay the least to increase profits, while house prices/rents have increased, until you reach a tipping point where you have the working homeless. This isn't unique to the US.
Sadly, this has become a political football, and neither side has covered themselves in glory. For me, it's not a political issue, it's a human rights issue. The country isn't owned by those doing okay for themselves, it's for everyone. Those on the streets are in need of a greater slice of aid. I've seen videos of people saying the homeless should "stop whining, and get a job". I'd sure like those that say this to go spend three days and nights living on the street.
How do you know this? How do the homeless benefit from that 36 K? It's hard to envision them any worse off than they already are so I'd like to know what exactly the government is doing for them. I don't see anything.The government currently spends about $36k per year per homeless person. I wish my social security check was that large. But of course all I did was work and pay taxes for 50 years.
Ending Homelessness
Google is your friend. And that $$ amount does not include the $$ spend by private charity.
ETA - the link takes you to site that is a strong advocate for the homeless. They certainly would not ever overstate the amount being spent.
Last edited:
Sippican
Member
- Location
- South Coast Massachusetts
Many of the homeless people I talk to say they don't want to go to shelters.
Many are run by gangs and steal anything you have while you sleep.
They feel safer on the streets....
Many are run by gangs and steal anything you have while you sleep.
They feel safer on the streets....
VaughanJB
Scrappy VIP
The government currently spends about $36k per year per homeless person. I wish my social security check was that large. But of course all I did was work and pay taxes for 50 years.
That's an entirely different thing. They're not going around handing homeless people $36k, or paying each homeless person that amount annually. That's money spread over many organizations and programs. There is also a profit motive that pushes costs higher (shelters are often run by third parties, and they have become profit centers).
It's also worth noting that programs and help varies from state to state. Rather than look at such a number and think "well, that's a lot", perhaps try thinking about it in terms of, "or we could get these people working, think how much they could contribute".
Have you ever been to a homeless shelter? They are NOT nice places, and I wouldn't feel safe staying in one. These people have nothing, and they mostly have to steal what they do have. Which means they'll even steal from each other. There are streets in California that are gang controlled - you want to pitch a tent, you have to pay them or suffer the consequences. The gangs then sell them drugs.
The thing about being homeless is, the homelessness is only part of the problem. Health, addiction, depression, etc. all weigh in.
As for the $36k, it's worth remembering that, on average, it costs $45K to keep someone in jail for a year.
The thing is, with house prices ever rising, and with them of course, land prices, there really is no way to build yourself out of the problem without lots of cash. There are some homes for the homeless going up in California right now, but before anyone suffers envy - after all, why should they get a free home? - remember that some of them are 120 sq ft.
{shrug} I'm guessing we all know that being homeless isn't fun, even though many homeless prefer that lifestyle. And I really don't need any advice about how to think about the money being spent. It isn't "an entirely different thing", especially since you stated homeless "are in need of a greater slice of aid".
If $36k isn't enough, how much is enough? And can we match my social security payment to whatever you propose? The average social security payment is about $1,700 a month, $20,400 a year, so we will have a ways to go.....
If $36k isn't enough, how much is enough? And can we match my social security payment to whatever you propose? The average social security payment is about $1,700 a month, $20,400 a year, so we will have a ways to go.....
Last edited:
VaughanJB
Scrappy VIP
We're going to have to agree to disagree here, I think. There is nothing I covet from the Homeless. No dollar given to them as aid would compensate me for the lifestyle they have to lead. And no single homeless person will ever be handed that money. It's given by way of a roof over their head for the night, food, maybe some healthcare etc. It's not cash. And of course they're in need of greater aid - they have almost literally nothing. I can't compare my lifestyle with them.
As for many homeless preferring the lifestyle - I'm a little shocked you'd write that. I mean, a homeless person might prefer to be on the street than spend a night sleeping with a bunch of thieves who want to steal the little you've got, give threats of violence, or be around constant drug use - but that's not choosing the lifestyle. Desperate people do desperate things, but I doubt anyone today is evaluating their life and actively choosing to go live in a tent city.
I guess I don't get this envy when it comes to aid for the homeless. Or begrudging them help. It seems, and I could be wrong, that you're saying, "well, they've been given a 120 sq ft home, where's my 120 sq ft home?
It's also worth remembering that the US spends $100bn annually on corporate welfare. There isn't an overarching assessment of how much is spent on what, it's just lots of pots of money. Either way, you and I don't need lifting from poverty and homelessness, so yeah, we should spend that money on them, and only them (we won't get that money). There is always someone (not you!) who'll say something like, "if we didn't spend the money on X, there'd be more for Y". Well, that never actually happens. It's not the way the government finances things. Any money saved is just as likely to go on road signs, better food for people in jail, or to more corporate welfare.
How much is enough? Well, for sure, you'll never be able to give a home to everyone. There will always be people homeless. The trouble today is that the number is increasing year after year. This is a sign of a systemic problem, mostly that the cost of housing is increasing. But do I think we can do better than having tent cities all over the country? Sure I do. There isn't a single answer or solution though.
sorry, but there's no envy here. Just stating facts. When I lived in Hawaii, it was not uncommon for folks to hitch hike, and I picked up a few. On average 2 out of offered to sell me drugs, and they were all homeless by choice. Lots of the homeless folks on the Islands scrapped together enough money to fly there from the mainland, knowing they would be homeless. It is a choice.
And the rate of homelessness hasn't changed in the last few years. It is 0.18%, which means that 99.82% of Americans are not homeless. Please let that sink it. The cost of housing hasn't changed that number on a national basis. Sometimes, we have to move to where we can afford to live. The big run up in homelessness was when the courts said we can't lock up someone just because they're crazy. (See O'Connor v Donaldson, 1975)
And "corporate welfare" has nothing to do with homeless. That's just a red herring folks use when they don't have the facts to back up what they have said. For example, Washington D.C. was cited as a high housing cost and high homeless population. Yet the vacancy rate for rentals has held steady at little under 9%. So while some may be forced out due to rent increase, someone else moves in.
As you might conclude, I don't have a lot of sympathy for the homeless. Mostly, they are where they are because of mental illness, drug abuse, or the decisions they made. And let me add that if you think we should do more, feel free to do more. Work at a food bank, Give to a food bank. Donate to a homeless shelter in your city. Take a homeless person or family into your own home. What's stopping you?
So I ask again if $36k isn't enough, how much should it be? Give us your number.
And the rate of homelessness hasn't changed in the last few years. It is 0.18%, which means that 99.82% of Americans are not homeless. Please let that sink it. The cost of housing hasn't changed that number on a national basis. Sometimes, we have to move to where we can afford to live. The big run up in homelessness was when the courts said we can't lock up someone just because they're crazy. (See O'Connor v Donaldson, 1975)
And "corporate welfare" has nothing to do with homeless. That's just a red herring folks use when they don't have the facts to back up what they have said. For example, Washington D.C. was cited as a high housing cost and high homeless population. Yet the vacancy rate for rentals has held steady at little under 9%. So while some may be forced out due to rent increase, someone else moves in.
As you might conclude, I don't have a lot of sympathy for the homeless. Mostly, they are where they are because of mental illness, drug abuse, or the decisions they made. And let me add that if you think we should do more, feel free to do more. Work at a food bank, Give to a food bank. Donate to a homeless shelter in your city. Take a homeless person or family into your own home. What's stopping you?
So I ask again if $36k isn't enough, how much should it be? Give us your number.