IT HAS COME TO THIS: The NYT is the biggest shit sandwich on this entire planet
(media.patriots.win)
Comments (621)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
“Homeless person” is leftist newspeak. The goal is to distract from the actual issue and assert their problem is “lack of home”, which is incidental.
The correct terminology is VAGRANT. If that isn’t accurate enough for you, you can use the more specific term: ADDICT.
Also, untreated crazies. It's no coincidence that the vagrancy problem exploded after most of the asylums were shut down.
Small number of them are just organically crazy, I’m sure. But consider the effects of years of severe drug and alcohol abuse. It destroys the central nervous system. These “crazies” are mostly long time addicts that have lost their minds due to constant chemical poisoning.
I was homeless for a short time after I got out of the military. I definitely was not an addict or vagrant. These things do happen to good people.
This is why people who experience these issues need to be categorized. A person who just fell upon hard times is obviously easier to help than an addict or someone who is a danger to society.
True
So you were living in the streets and pooping on the sidewalks and begging on the street corners, leaving heaps of garbage everywhere you went?
None of that. I was homeless, not a pig. It was during the 80's recession.
That's my point. Not having a place of your own and using the system to help you get back on your feet is one thing, the term "homelessness" is a code word for the precious addict class that is used as a political tool.
Yes, I remember when they were just bums.
For sure. The “homelessness” issue opens up a huge source of untraceable tax dollars extracted from people who look at a person living in the streets and imagine “it can happen to YOU” and are willing to throw endless amounts of money at the problem to assuage their guilt and fear.
Meanwhile unscrupulous politicians and their cronies can rake in endless piles of cash and accomplish absolutely nothing.
Oh you fed a guy on the street? That’ll fix the problem... fucking imbeciles.
I'd like to point out that "homeless person" has been replaced with "person experiencing homelessness." Not supposed to say homeless person anymore.
For me, I'm fine with "homeless" as a term. I work with them a lot. It's a large mix of problems. Some are addicts, many of them are addicts or alcoholics. Huge addiction problem overall.
There are also the mental illness cases. Sometimes I believe that mental illnesses in street people can be a symptom of the substance abuse which can largely recede after sobriety, given a few years. They literally cannot take care of themselves anymore in many cases.
Then you have the medical problems and the minority of them who actively choose to live homeless lives.
I want to fix the problem for all of them. It seems like it would have to be somewhat strategically aggressive in almost every case. They would need to be broken down into categories, different destinations for each type. You probably have a dozen types of problems to sort out. Then you can get to work with healing them and let them rebuild. The drunks and the addicts would be the easiest for the short-term, and some of the hardest for the long-term I believe.
Guarantee if the US got serious about stopping the flow of drugs into this country and taking out the criminal cartels producing them, the “homelessness epidemic” would improve very quickly.
People choose drugs over comfort, safety, basic human needs, therefore they’re living in the streets because anything other than getting high doesn’t matter. It’s the power of addiction.
I recall seeing crackheads in Chicago missing limbs and being confused as to why this was so common. It was explained to me that in the BRUTAL Chicago winters they have shelters that will take them in, but they are not allowed to get high in them. So they choose to stay out in the deadly cold and get high and get frostbite and lose a foot, leg or arm.
That hit me hard. I decided to quit smoking pot that day.
That's a great decision for you!
I think that cutting the flow of drugs would help immensely. On the other hand, once the addiction exists already then just cutting off the flow won't solve it on an individual level.
I view it as a separate topic although one does affect the other. It's more of a distinction between "how the problem started" than "how we solve the problem" for me.
Yes, thank you. I agree. We need aggressive measures and research to help these people. Just throwing more money at this is not the solution, and a PC view of things just smothers any real attempts to treat it.
We have to remember that it is not humane or caring at all to just leave people outside on the streets when they are no longer capable of caring for themselves. Later, after healing is done, they can be able to reassert their will.
This is an approach which would be highly unpopular.
In several Dem shitties, they've begun "homing" the vagrantariat in luxury hotels (on the taxpayer dollar, goes without saying) and are SHOCKED when the lifestyle does not simply resolve itself.
This is a bigger issue than even that. These addicts that are being housed in hotels and fed free drugs are the primary source of recruitment for the riots.