Agree......a policy choice. But according to republicans, helping the homeless or mentally ill homeless is woke.
Most European countries like Finland are far more progressive than the United States, even college is free or very low cost. Republicans don't even want Medicaid for the poor. Complete opposite ends of the spectrum.
Well, shelter is a human right according to the United Nations.
Housing alone won't solve the problem here, especially with a third or something of the people mentally ill. But good housing would clearly help a lot.
Requiring co-signers after my folks are gone is gonna be a real insult to injury. There will be just nowhere for me to live cause nowhere is cheap enough and everywhere has requirements of income and sometimes maintenance I can’t meet.
The issue is discrimination against disabled people, source of income not being garnishable, and the rent being always more than I get in a month… somehow. And you can’t just pack us in like sardines… the more others you force me to rely on the more chances they walk out cause they don’t want to live with me
But without housing, a stable, safe place to live, all the other remedies like mental health care, food, medical assistance largely go for naught. European countries are the model for the US to follow.
Sorry for the sarcasm, Chris! I have always thought Roberts is heartless and doesn't have good control of the court. It seems impossible for him to imagine being in someone else's shoes.
Sotomayor really put a boot up Theane's backside. She deserved it. Lol.
It's cute how Theane and the city pretend to really care about the homeless in terms of where they're sleeping and their safety when in fact they despise them. The spin they put on their reasoning is so transparent!
This country needs mental health and homeless reform. I don't pretend to have all the answers but the numbers grow every year. If college graduates cant afford it, how can the homeless person ever stand a chance of getting out. They can't.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” --SCOTUS, 2024
“John Roberts displayed an alarming lack of humanity throughout the arguments on Monday”
CJ, see USCCB 👇🏻😔
“A basic moral test is how our most vulnerable members are faring. In a society marred by deepening divisions between rich and poor, our tradition recalls the story of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46) and instructs us to put the needs of the poor and vulnerable first.”
I listened to some of the oral arguments on CSPAN radio, and my non-lawyerly conclusion is that guys like Roberts, Alito and Gorsuch like to build Slippery Slopes worthy of the world’s greatest waterparks, just specially designed for their argument to slide down and end up pretty much any damn place they want them to.
Your shrewd characterization of feckless cj roberts reminds me of another moment in time - April 15, 1912. The poorer class of passengers on the Titanic were locked below and prevented from escaping on lifeboats. Movies would have us believe that there was an active effort to keep the heathens below. The author of a book called “Unsinkable” shared a different narrative - no one on the upper decks even thought about or cared for those below. They simply forgot about them. That was considered there ultimate of heartlessness.
So 112 years later, we have the us high court with an inept cj - who is as dark and uncaring as those that sank the Titanic. Some legacy for him, as the rest of us smolder.
Faux-naïf Robert’s may be the most gag inducing of them all. “What’s wrong with asking someone out for coffee?” (Counterman). “What about the small businessman with a burdensome SBA loan?” (Student debt relief)
So let's say that incarceration costs $125 - $175/day in Oregon (homeless people aren't exactly going to have the means to pay even under a pay-for-stay regime). At the lower end that's $3750/month. $45,000 a year. That's roughly the Oregon living wage: https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/41
Wouldn't it make more sense to erm...just use that money to pay for welfare to homeless people - or, more efficiently still, to house them and issue food vouchers, something which would cost, thanks to economies of scale, less money than prosecuting them and jailing them, and which would, by funding local builders and local shops, also benefit the economy?
In Colonial times, "paupers' were considered public dependents, and the towns were obligated to provide for their basic needs. The originalists on the court should consider that.
I enjoyed reading The back & forth arguments between the justices. Gorsuch seemed to be 'tossing the ball' back to the Town or State- in which case Why Do we Have a 'Supreme Court'??
This is a sad situation that has been going on for decades. Not sure what the reasons were but we used to have state mental hospitals for people with mental illnesses now closed down. Most families are not equipped to deal with mental illness especially if the person also has a drug problem. But for a Christian nation we sure are a heartless bunch.
The “Agenda 47” statement of DJT dated April 18, 2023 proposes “tent cities” on “large parcels of inexpensive land” as new destinations “to get the homeless off our streets.” Imagine the jurisprudential discussion we might hear from this court on laws implementing such a “program” as that.
Homelessness is a policy choice. Finland solved it's homelessness problem by, get this, giving them unconditional housing🤷♀️
Agree......a policy choice. But according to republicans, helping the homeless or mentally ill homeless is woke.
Most European countries like Finland are far more progressive than the United States, even college is free or very low cost. Republicans don't even want Medicaid for the poor. Complete opposite ends of the spectrum.
It's because they're psychopaths. No sympathy, no empathy, and no compassion. The cruelty is the point.
Exactly....
Well, shelter is a human right according to the United Nations.
Housing alone won't solve the problem here, especially with a third or something of the people mentally ill. But good housing would clearly help a lot.
I’m mentally ill and on SSI.
Requiring co-signers after my folks are gone is gonna be a real insult to injury. There will be just nowhere for me to live cause nowhere is cheap enough and everywhere has requirements of income and sometimes maintenance I can’t meet.
I'm in the same situation 🫂 Stay strong 💪 Stay safe💕
It would solve a massive chunk of it. But the problems that lead to homelessness are multiple and systemic.
The issue is discrimination against disabled people, source of income not being garnishable, and the rent being always more than I get in a month… somehow. And you can’t just pack us in like sardines… the more others you force me to rely on the more chances they walk out cause they don’t want to live with me
Absolutely a huge part of the problem 🫂
But without housing, a stable, safe place to live, all the other remedies like mental health care, food, medical assistance largely go for naught. European countries are the model for the US to follow.
Sorry for the sarcasm, Chris! I have always thought Roberts is heartless and doesn't have good control of the court. It seems impossible for him to imagine being in someone else's shoes.
Sotomayor really put a boot up Theane's backside. She deserved it. Lol.
It's cute how Theane and the city pretend to really care about the homeless in terms of where they're sleeping and their safety when in fact they despise them. The spin they put on their reasoning is so transparent!
This country needs mental health and homeless reform. I don't pretend to have all the answers but the numbers grow every year. If college graduates cant afford it, how can the homeless person ever stand a chance of getting out. They can't.
And disabled need the systems cities have…
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” --SCOTUS, 2024
“John Roberts displayed an alarming lack of humanity throughout the arguments on Monday”
CJ, see USCCB 👇🏻😔
“A basic moral test is how our most vulnerable members are faring. In a society marred by deepening divisions between rich and poor, our tradition recalls the story of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46) and instructs us to put the needs of the poor and vulnerable first.”
https://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catholic-social-teaching/option-for-the-poor-and-vulnerable
Roberts is an arrogant piece of shit.
I listened to some of the oral arguments on CSPAN radio, and my non-lawyerly conclusion is that guys like Roberts, Alito and Gorsuch like to build Slippery Slopes worthy of the world’s greatest waterparks, just specially designed for their argument to slide down and end up pretty much any damn place they want them to.
I wonder how many empty
buildings there are in Grant's
Pass that could be used as
city shelters, so their parks
and public spaces appear
pristine?
My mouth actually dropped
open on Robert's remarks.
Your shrewd characterization of feckless cj roberts reminds me of another moment in time - April 15, 1912. The poorer class of passengers on the Titanic were locked below and prevented from escaping on lifeboats. Movies would have us believe that there was an active effort to keep the heathens below. The author of a book called “Unsinkable” shared a different narrative - no one on the upper decks even thought about or cared for those below. They simply forgot about them. That was considered there ultimate of heartlessness.
So 112 years later, we have the us high court with an inept cj - who is as dark and uncaring as those that sank the Titanic. Some legacy for him, as the rest of us smolder.
For all the Catholics aka Christians (including Roberts) on the Court, what would Pope Francis say? What would Jesus say?
Well the Bible says this:
https://www.openbible.info/topics/homelessness
Faux-naïf Robert’s may be the most gag inducing of them all. “What’s wrong with asking someone out for coffee?” (Counterman). “What about the small businessman with a burdensome SBA loan?” (Student debt relief)
Just thinking for a minute...the City seems to be saying "we'll jail homeless people".
Oregon State Corrections says it costs roughly $173/day to house someone in jail: https://www.oregon.gov/doc/Documents/agency-quick-facts.pdf. Compare that with the average cost ($ 75/day) in county jails in Oregon provided for in this 2002 report: https://multco-web7-psh-files-usw2.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/budget/documents/6_oregon_county_jails_final.pdf once you adjust for inflation is c. $135.
So let's say that incarceration costs $125 - $175/day in Oregon (homeless people aren't exactly going to have the means to pay even under a pay-for-stay regime). At the lower end that's $3750/month. $45,000 a year. That's roughly the Oregon living wage: https://livingwage.mit.edu/states/41
Wouldn't it make more sense to erm...just use that money to pay for welfare to homeless people - or, more efficiently still, to house them and issue food vouchers, something which would cost, thanks to economies of scale, less money than prosecuting them and jailing them, and which would, by funding local builders and local shops, also benefit the economy?
In Colonial times, "paupers' were considered public dependents, and the towns were obligated to provide for their basic needs. The originalists on the court should consider that.
I enjoyed reading The back & forth arguments between the justices. Gorsuch seemed to be 'tossing the ball' back to the Town or State- in which case Why Do we Have a 'Supreme Court'??
This is a sad situation that has been going on for decades. Not sure what the reasons were but we used to have state mental hospitals for people with mental illnesses now closed down. Most families are not equipped to deal with mental illness especially if the person also has a drug problem. But for a Christian nation we sure are a heartless bunch.
The “Agenda 47” statement of DJT dated April 18, 2023 proposes “tent cities” on “large parcels of inexpensive land” as new destinations “to get the homeless off our streets.” Imagine the jurisprudential discussion we might hear from this court on laws implementing such a “program” as that.