So hand him a cheeseburger and a cup of coffee. Yeah, you would have to make an effort.Charity Watch and other services target those. 25 to 35 percent overhead is supposed to be a good yardstick. It's better than handing ten bucks to a guy on the street and having him use it to buy drugs.
There's an initiative on our state ballot this year proposing we build massive 4-stage treatment centers. Stage 1 is Intake, where the homeless person's most urgent needs are assessed. Stage 2, the person is transferred to the appropriate on-site services, either mental-health, substance abuse rehab, medical, or employment services. Stage 3 is to maintain those services until the person completes them successfully, and Stage 4 is transferring them to one of the on-site apartments. At that point they're supposed to be clean and sober, reasonably healthy, and either employed or in a job training program.My solution...tax the rich 80% EVERYWHERE. Use this money for community development. Create affordable housing, and half-way houses. Find jobs for these people, and get them medical and mental health care. These people are our relatives.
Just out of curiosity, at what number do you consider someone being rich?My solution...tax the rich 80% EVERYWHERE. Use this money for community development. Create affordable housing, and half-way houses. Find jobs for these people, and get them medical and mental health care. These people are our relatives.
For sure! The people falling into the 32% + tax brackets often pay a lower percentage than those in the 12-22% tax brackets. The IRS tax codes consist of almost 7,000 pages, with 10 times that many in other tax regulations. 99.9% of the code is tax dodges and loopholes for the wealthy....which just coincidently happen to "own" virtually all of the politicians.Everyone will invest in this endeavor, not only the wealthy. "Tax the rich" is BS. They're already in a way higher tax-bracket than the average person. The key is to make sure they can't legally avoid paying the taxes they owe.
$400,000 a year. Plus, 70% tax on $200,000 and 60% tax on $100,000 and no tax on $30,000 or less
70% on $100,000 annual income??? I'm wondering where you got that figure, because no.Does that include state and local taxes? Because in someplace like California or New York you'd be paying about 70 percent on $100,000. So you'd have $30,000 to live on, in an extremely high-cost location.
Presto! You just created another poor person with your tax scheme.
Anybody threatened with an 80 percent tax will move to the country of his or her choice. Even in a high tax country like Denmark the top rate is "just" 55%.
My solution...tax the rich 80% EVERYWHERE. Use this money for community development. Create affordable housing, and half-way houses. Find jobs for these people, and get them medical and mental health care. These people are our relatives.
To be blunt, that is insane. Many people have saved all their lives and put money into an IRA. When the hit 72, they have to take a distribution based on their age. That money is counted as income.$400,000 a year. Plus, 70% tax on $200,000 and 60% tax on $100,000 and no tax on $30,000 or less
I agree. If there is someone cursing repeatedly in a clearly psychotic state, like what went on behind my work place for days a couple of years ago, this individual has no capacity to care for themselves on any level. He finally quit. I don't know if he moved on or was finally taken away.I think the homeless need "tough love." Before the usual suspects pile on, let me explain.
Most (not all) homeless people have drug, alcohol or mental illness problems. Sometimes all three. They need food and shelter, but above all they need treatment.
I think people have a right to use public streets, parks and thoroughfares without stepping over bodies, stepping on needles, stepping in human waste. I think local governments have not only the right but the obligation to keep people from sleeping in public places. Tent cities in parks?
It takes money, lots of money, to treat people. Less money to feed and house them. But getting them off the streets saves money -- it cuts down on crime and on costly ER visits, which everybody pays for. Every city has unused buildings that can be converted to decent shelters. They don't have to be LA-style $750,000 per unit apartments for the homeless. I believe Denver and other cities have had success in providing homeless people with modest, one-bedroom apartments. Living conditions in these places must be supervised as well.
The money is available. What's lacking is the political will to deal with the situation.
That said, God bless Dseag and others for their compassion.
And rents keep going up and California, the liberal state, allowed it.
And since about the mid 90s, the Employment Development Department has been equally useless. All they do is hand out applications for social benefits. Actually, they don't even do that anymore. It's self-serve - walk in and grab the forms, take 'em home and fill them out, wait for the benefits to roll in. Life is good.My solution would be to close the Department of Education, which has a $130 billion budget and educates no one. It provides do-nothing jobs for idiot bureaucrats. Take the $130 billion and use it on the programs you described. There are about 550,000 homeless people in the US, so that works out to something like $250,000 per person. That ought to be more than enough to help everyone.
She's homeless and disheveled. She has no place to shower. Many places now don't even let customers use the bathroom since COVID. Though admittedly perhaps she could find someplace else to do her business but women can't just point and pee like men. Anyway...who's going to give her a job Ben? Would you? C'mon man...keep it real !! Unfortunately her situation, regardless of how she landed there, makes her "less than" in other people's eyes. Like Dseag said.."There but the grace of God, go I". You'd better hope you don't wind up homeless. There are so many people who have become homeless when never in their wildest dreams did they ever expect to. And I bet some of them had looked down their noses at the homeless.Many of these homeless people are really inconsiderate of others. The woman peeing on the sidewalk is a good example. And they don't seem to want to do anything to help their own circumstance. Many of them don't want to work. They've completely given up on life, or that's how it seems.
I'm all for helping people help themselves. But someone who doesn't want to better their situation and wants to bring others down to their level by exposing them to, in the case above, their urine and stench, I have no empathy. I don't want to have to deal with them when I go out, if I did go out.
What we have is a breakdown of society. The rich are getting richer while the rest of the population falls behind, which is the result of decades of illogical economic policies. Obviously, they're not working, yet people continue to support and tout the "benefits" of those policies without, it seems, the ability to see the effects of those policies on society.
Thank you for your good common sense. Most people just don't THINK.She's homeless and disheveled. She has no place to shower. Many places now don't even let customers use the bathroom, though admittedly perhaps she could find someplace else to do her business but women can't just point and pee like men. Anyway...who's going to give her a job Ben? Would you? C'mon man...keep it real !! Unfortunately her situation, regardless of how she landed there, makes her "less than" in other people's eyes. Like Dseag said.."There but the grace of God, go I". You'd better hope you don't wind up homeless. There are so many people who have become homeless when never in their wildest dreams did they expect to. And I bet some of them had looked down their noses at the homeless.
Now, I do agree that some have sunk so deep, lost hope or whatever and they don't take steps to improve their situations if they get the opportunity to. I've personally knew someone who had the opportunity to either stay in a shelter or live with a woman who was into him. He refused to do either and stayed on the street until he found a home in jail. But it's wrong to generalize that all homeless people don't want to help themselves When someone is homeless, obviously money is an issue. How can they get clothes to wear to a job interview? How could they qualify to rent an apartment with the stringent criteria these days, not to mention the exorbitant rents?
Just like Native reservations.....My solution but not uniquely my idea. Create economic refugee camps on abandoned military bases and other similar locations. Build/renovate military style barracks housing, on site day care facilities, kitchens, etc. Focus *all* government, religious, medical, mental health and other charitable aid and volunteers on these camps. Your church want's to feed the homeless — donate money and/or come volunteer at the kitchen etc. The day care facilities can be partially staffed by camp residents who are willing to do the job so that others can go out and find work if they wish. Maintenance jobs etc, can also be staffed by those who are willing to do the work (and get paid). All properly supervised by proper professionals.
Sweep the streets clean of any and all panhandlers, homeless people, urban campers, etc. Everyone is taken to one of the local economic refugee camps where they are guaranteed subsistence level living - safe place to sleep, sanitary facilities and basic nutrition. If that's what they want — to simply exist — then they are free to do so at these camps, no hassle and no questions asked.
If they don't like the subsistence level living in the camp, then they are free to go get work or find other arrangements. The camp gates are never closed and never locked - but they will NOT be allowed to live on the streets, parks, sidewalks , etc. Anyone found there will be summarily returned to the camp.
This keeps the streets and public places clean, provides subsistence level existence for those who seem to want it and a chance to do better for those that do not. It focuses all money and aid in one place for economy and efficiency of scale, instead of a thousand individual efforts scattered all over.
This is a broad overview — but it's probably already too long...