Hey, there! Log in / Register

Ongoing influx of homeless people in Boston

The Boston Sun reports that Boston's efforts to find permanent housing for the homeless keep getting frustrated because just as the numbers of homeless people go down, more homeless people arrive in the city - driven in part by the fact that Boston has programs to house the homeless and most suburbs don't.

Neighborhoods: 
Free tagging: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Start sending bills to the deadbeat cities, towns, and states these people are migrating from. The suburbs should not be allowed to exile their own vulnerable citizens to save a buck at Boston's expense.

up
Voting closed 8

I've been away from Uhub for a while, so I've had time to build up a good reservoir of provocative statements. Here goes.

The suburbs (real suburbs, not converted mill towns) are based on the precept that people pull their own weight in just about every way possible. You're responsible for your own housing, transportation, sanitation, and just about everything that doesn't absolutely require use of public resources to accomplish. The people who live in suburbs like it that way.

Cities, on the other hand, are based on the precept of being relieved of responsibilities*. Not literal freeloading or theft, of course, but when you live in a city, you don't have to be responsible for as many things as you do when you live outside of them.

If you won't get your act together in the suburbs, there's just no place for you. That's a feature, not a bug. People shouldn't have to accommodate those whose lifestyle choices are fundamentally incompatible with the way they choose to live. Free country and all that.

You want to "fix" the homeless problem? You can't. Some fraction of people will always be in the bottom. https://quillette.com/2018/08/25/the-dangers-of-ignoring-cognitive-inequ...

What you can do to alleviate (rather than eliminate) the problem is recognize that some people benefit from more structure than others and to provide that structure through private means and in the last resort through public means.

No matter how you spin it that's going to mean putting some people away into some kind of something. We don't do that now. We used to. Then we lost the stomach for that when inevitable stories of abuse reached a threshold. So we got rid of the state institutions and let people do their own thing. And now we have methadone mile. Much better than a state institution, no?

*True story: Sometimes there is even an enforced removal of responsibility in urban environments in ways you don't expect. I used to live in a rented condo in a building where even "owners" were not allowed to do any of their own maintenance work.

Broken light switch? Leaky faucet? Broken toilet valve? In the suburbs it's a trip to the hardware store, ten minutes of work, and done. In that place, it was a whole load of paperwork, a two day wait, and more atrophy of basic household skills. There was even a policy of not doing any "auto repair" in the building garage. Didn't live there long enough to find out what that actually meant but on paper at least you'd've had to take your car to a mechanic to replace a burned-out turn signal, too.

up
Voting closed 1

Your tale is undermined by all the small, owner-occupying landlords in the city like me who do most of our own work.

Take your city/suburban false contrast parable elsewhere.

up
Voting closed 5

How many are there of you and how many are there of your tenants?

And how many of you would it take to equal the hundreds of "owners" and tenants in that one large building I used to live, of which there are many more within just a single block radius?

I'm guessing the answer is that there are a whole lot of people who just expect folks like you to take care of things for them.

up
Voting closed 2

Where is all the money for those suburbanites to "pull their own weight" coming from?

I sincerely doubt it is coming from towns that have no commercial property.

up
Voting closed 6

The services you provide to your employer, for example, are exchanged for the money in your paycheck.

The services I provide to my employer are in exchange for the money in my paycheck that I then use to pay my bills and to buy replacement toilet valves in the hardware store.

You work inside city limits. I don't. You don't have to either if you don't want to. The paycheck comes regardless wherever it is that you show up on weekday mornings.

I don't have numbers handy but I'd guess that more people who live in the Boston metro area work outside the city than inside the city.

up
Voting closed 0

Those suburban commuters freeload off of Boston taxpayers. Bostonians shovel the sidewalks, pay for the roads and police etc. And city residents pay for the homeless and drug addicts that suburbanites selfishly pawn off on Bostonians. The idea that suburbanites do all their own work is ridiculous.

up
Voting closed 0

As some regulars from the burbs have pointed out in the past, in many suburbs they have the town clear the sidewalks, while in our neighborhoods, we shovel ourselves.

up
Voting closed 4

in suburban areas don't have any sidewalks. I don't know how many towns outside of Boston clear all the sidewalks--do you have information on that?

up
Voting closed 3

I’ve also seen it in action in Woburn and read that Newton clears within walking distance of schools.

I’d like to say Brookline, too, but then again I’m think of the areas with apartment buildings, so that could be private clearing.

up
Voting closed 1

As some regulars from the burbs have pointed out in the past, in many suburbs they have the town clear the sidewalks, while in our neighborhoods, we shovel ourselves.

At the end of the day the property owner is clearing the sidewalks. Either by doing it him/herself, by hiring someone to do it, or by paying taxes to the town who in turn hires someone to do it. There just ain't no free lunch.

up
Voting closed 5

He said "sometimes," not "every single residential property in the city." So your counterexamples are meaningless. His point was describing general trends and differences, and is accurate.

up
Voting closed 0

You want to "fix" the homeless problem? You can't. Some fraction of people will always be in the bottom.

This is a perfect illustration of why we need to leave capitalism in the dust and progress to a better economic system.

up
Voting closed 5

Everyone gets to be at the bottom!

up
Voting closed 6

Everyone gets to be at the middle, relative to what we have in the US, and that is a healthy place to be. Much better than the rich pushing everyone to the bottom. Of course, demographic stats would be lost on you, so ....

IMAGE(https://satwcomic.com/art/healthcare.jpg)

up
Voting closed 3

I guess in Venezuela, everyone is in the middle...of the bread line.

up
Voting closed 3

OMG VENEZUELA IS SOSHALLLIZZZT!

Wow. Argument that can't be countered!

Except it has for a long time, but OMG SOSHALLLIZZZT

Right. Yup. Uhuh.

up
Voting closed 9

The US drains any leftist government via sanctions, then points and screams IT DOESN'T WORK!

up
Voting closed 3

But in real life the ruin usually comes first, and the sanctions come after the kleptocrats come out of the woodwork to grab up what's left of a diminishing pie.

up
Voting closed 3

...isn't commie. But, the sanctions are fun to watch, with the effect they're having on the mullahs.

A good foreign policy.

up
Voting closed 11

You posted a clever thing recently. It was basically a couple of real leftie (abolish capitalism) type pretending to be 'rednecks'. Amusing.

Venezuela is in a death spiral.

Their water distribution system is trashed, up, spotty, maybe three hours a day.
Their electrical grid is systematically blowing circuit breakers, there's a bunch of videos on youtube.
Place is going to hell in a handbasket.
Please. You're smart and it's in your field. Answer this...
When a country has gone beyond toilet paper (inconvenient) and has intermittent water and loses its power...what's next?
I can post a dozen links. Not a pretty sight.

Look, Russia has a military budget of (X) dollars. Guess the amount. Ours? About $600 billion.
We have a rough dozen aircraft carriers. Russia has one.

You really think that idiotic cartoon is on the level?

Has socialism worked anywhere?

Oh...X=$51 billion. We waste more than that.

Bad news...this pic is obsolete. It's actually quite worse.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/QbZE8H5.jpg)

up
Voting closed 4

Um, they are real. Just like I am.

You are one of those pretending to have any redneck cred because you equate such with listening to certain things, wearing certain things, saying certain things, fondling your gun like a codpiece, etc. I'm betting that you grew up getting all your food from a supermarket and never had to find your own - let alone clean it.

Let's repeat that citation so people can read it for themselves.
https://www.redneckrevolt.org/

I also highly recommend Joe Bageant's Deer Hunting with Jesus (or anything by the late Joe Bageant for that matter.

That pile of money looks familiar, btw - like, what happened with hyperinflation when the US messed around in South American governments at one point. Has nothing to do with anything that any intelligent person would call socialism, but keep moving those goalposts!

up
Voting closed 3

"I'm betting that you grew up getting all your food from a supermarket and never had to find your own - let alone clean it."

Well, as a point I made in another thread...I grew up aroun' heah. Never had to kill my food first, unless it was an apple or something.
As far as the redneck revolt or whatever the hell it is..."White working class participation in state and paramilitary organizations and formations like the Ku Klux Klan, the Minutemen, the U.S. Armed Forces, and the Council of Conservative Citizens has undermined the struggle for freedom among all people."

Commies, preaching armed revolt. If they hate the US military the way they say, well, that ain't good.
I don't deer hunt. I leave the deers in the woods for the poor people of Maine. Or the Blue Hills.

The pile of money? Pics a few months old. Those are bolivars. I'd capitalize that, but they're not worth it. It's what happens in a late stage socialistic worker's paradise. They use them for toilet paper, I guess.

They can't afford crayons to add zeroes to the denomination.

Oh, BTW, their inflation has nothing to do with the US. It's an entirely self inflicted wound. The NY Times (you've heard of them) ran a bunch of articles about how bad things are there. Check it out, tough reading, but you're a revolutionary redneck, you can handle it.
Here, have some fun with their electrical system...and no Carrington event in sight...https://twitter.com/straton_ec/status/1035618403460018177/video/1

Q: What did socialists use before candles?
A: Electricity.

More LULZ: https://babylonbee.com/news/ocasio-cortez-praises-venezuela-for-making-e...

Goalposts are just fine where they are. The Venezuelan trainwreck is just getting into full swing. Not fun to watch. Thank God President Trump sent a Navy hospital ship in their general direction. They're going to need it.

up
Voting closed 2

But it's not because of socialism. Just ask Denmark: their socialism is going strong. People there are healthier, happier, and more free than Americans.

Venezuela is going to hell mostly because of mismanagement, corruption, and populism. Sound familiar?

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/06/venezuela-popu...

up
Voting closed 3

Venezuela is a country that elected a socialist that basically subsidized the whole country on one of the biggest (but not the best of quality) oil reserves in the world. Place worked at $90/bbl, but that has since changed.
Chavez would nationalize whole industries, make them government run. I'll assume that's socialism, or communism, but then I'm not a Really Smart Person with a degree in international politics.
The USSR fell apart without the west firing a shot. It could have been worse.

I fear for the people trapped in the Worker's Paradise that is what's left of one of the richest countries in South America.

"Venezuela is going to hell mostly because of mismanagement, corruption, and populism. Sound familiar?"

Yup. I just skimmed the link you provide in the Atlantic. It blames " Venezuelan government’s failed socialist policies...currency controls, farm and factory nationalizations, government control of food distribution, and the like."
Then it blames curruption: " It is also the product of government corruption, cronyism, and plain incompetence; by one measure, corruption is more widespread in Venezuela than in any other country in the Americas."

When people get hungry, they get crooked, but Roman said it, "But in real life the ruin usually comes first,..."

Well, I guess we'll just have to keep trying socialism until we get it right. CLUE: It ain't Nicaragua.

"But it's not because of socialism. Just ask Denmark: their socialism is going strong. People there are healthier, happier, and more free than Americans."

Well, they're a small capitalist nation that has a strong safety net for its citizens.

Oh, maybe I should say had.

Due to an influx of immigrants, they...evolved.
http://cphpost.dk/news/socialdemokratiet-back-stringent-measures-towards...
"Repatriation rather than integration
First and foremost, Socialdemokratiet agrees that when there is peace in a country the focus ought to be on finding ways to repatriate this kind of refugee rather than integrating them in Denmark, as has been the focus hitherto.
READ ALSO: Danish MP says all refugees should be deported
“We think it is right and proper to regard this group as something special and something where the primary focus ought to be on them going home,” said Tesafaye."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/denmark-a-social-welfare-uto...
Well...
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/denmark-integrating-immigrants-h...
The last one is worth a read, just skim the first page or so, lots of cultural info on Denmark.

Five million Danish would fit in Massachusetts.

(Insert Dunkie's joke here)

up
Voting closed 1

Chavez would nationalize whole industries, make them government run. I'll assume that's socialism, or communism, but then I'm not a Really Smart Person with a degree in international politics.

Socialism is a system in which the state controls the means of production. Chavez-ism is a system in which the state seizes the means of production and gives them to the dictator's buddies. They're sort of related, but only sort of.

up
Voting closed 0

I suggest if you want to live in a communist country then you move to one. Your 5 choices: China, N Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba. I will volunteer to set up a go fund me account on the condition you post once a week on UHub, assuming that it isn’t censored, on what it is like to live there.

up
Voting closed 4

That you not conflate communism and socialism.

up
Voting closed 4

Yes, one is merely a stepping stone to the other.

up
Voting closed 6

Communism is an extreme form of socialism, yes, but countries that are more socialist than ours, are not (and will probably never) be communist. And in the U.S. we have government programs that borrow from socialist principles (i.e. social security, the military/defense, public school system, just to name a few).

up
Voting closed 3

That's why all of Scandanavia has a wall around it.

Yeah. Sure.

up
Voting closed 3

Wait, so instead of everyone being at the bottom, everyone..oh, right.

up
Voting closed 2

No, everyone isn't at the bottom under capitalism.

https://money.cnn.com/2016/06/21/news/economy/upper-middle-class/index.html

up
Voting closed 4

Hey, since you despise socialism so much, why don't ya give up your social security benefits?

up
Voting closed 2

Like a good reason to zero out all those suburban cherry sheet balances

up
Voting closed 2

"Local aid" is a scam that empowers the state and local bureaucracy. Let municipalities collect payroll and sales tax instead of funneling money up and down through more and more layers of government. Same thing for vehicle excise taxes.

I'll remind everyone here that normal states have this thing called "county-level government" that levies taxes and provides services that are too big for a municipality to handle but too localized for the state to run efficiently. Oh wait Massachusetts had that and it was treated like a big feeding trough, same as the rest of government in Mass was. Oh well. Keep reelecting Democrats though.

up
Voting closed 4

Now either supply statistics on why local aid does/does not work or move to a "normal state" or something.

The doctrine of home rule predates the revolution. That doesn't make it good or bad, but it does make it an entrenched system of governance that ain't going away soon. In the New England experience, counties are a superfluous unit of government aside from the court systems, and some states have completely removed that level of governance as it proved to be a hive of corruption (see: Connecticut).

I can't say I am convinced that either system is better, having lived with both. Apples and oranges, really, given geographic distance and relative population distribution.

up
Voting closed 4

to be convinced of the fact that local aid is a political football between the State House, the State Senate, the Governor, and cities and towns? A distribution on a binary random variable which, if 1, means it is a football and if 0 means it isn't? OK:

P(0)=0
P(1)=1

I've lived under both too. Three levels of government worked just fine in Pennsylvania. All three levels of government served as a check on the other two. Elections were (and are) more competitive, both intra- and inter-party and the roads weren't pockmarked with holes and cracks because of some 17th century jurisdictional pissing contest that keeps somebody's cousin employed.

up
Voting closed 6

Just make your case using facts, not rhetoric you made up.

I'd be interested to see the results as I don't really know if things are better or not.

up
Voting closed 7

https://taxfoundation.org/publications/state-local-tax-burden-rankings/

This one is a a fewbyears out of date, but:

Pennsylvania: 10.2pct state and local tax burden.
Massachusetts: 10.3

In Pennsylvania the state income tax and sales tax is low and counties and municipalities can levy additional sales and income taxes as well as property tax. Bedroom communities and counties rely on property taxes and flat levies like school taxes, big cities with a sizeable renter population impose additional sales and income taxes.

Roughly the same tax burden as a function of per capita income, but three levels of government and the roads aren't third world nearly as often as they are here. Oh and the trains generally run on time too and no housing shortage because zoning and transportation are the purview of counties and not every individual 5 sq mile township.

up
Voting closed 4

That's a start. A good start because it generates more questions.

I wish I had to time to take some of what you posted and look at it in terms of population numbers and population density. See which system is most effective according to how many people it serves (is one better than another for a larger or smaller population?) and according to population density (does one system better serve sparse populations and another better serve concentrated populations?).

I spent a fair bit of my youth in places that were literally dots on a map - something my MA born and raised husband couldn't wrap his mind around until he saw his first city limits sign and asked "what town are we in now?".

It might make you feel better to know that Franklin County has aggregated a number of services across the county via their regional planning association rather than have each community handle its own because it has made certain things like housing and public health more sustainable.

up
Voting closed 9

☐ Representative democracy
☐ Random numbers
☐ Arithmetic
☐ Democratic socialism
☐ Federalism
☐ Suburbs
☐ John Silber
☐ Vehicle excise taxes
☑ Alligators, crocodiles, caymans, and gharials (?)

up
Voting closed 2

If your steely eyed suburban Ayn Rand type hero who lives in say, Watertown, falls of a ladder, gets an opioid scrip and then due to genetic propensity towards addiction suffers a total fall from grace and into homelessness, guess where they end up?

In Boston.

And yes, if you don't provide services, those people will leave your town. But they did come from it.

How about we put a $100 fee on all flights in and out of Logan for all you John Galts out there who thrive outside of the terrible, terrible city and those of us who live in Boston pay the usual ticket price. I mean, why didn't you put an airport in YOUR town you measly little taker? You should have planned better. Same thing for BIDMC and B+W. Go to the Acton hospital pal, stay out of the city. Etc...

up
Voting closed 5

pay for making your mental wall around the city-state of Boston into a real physical one, with battlements and towers? And alligators, crocodiles, caymans, and gharials to patrol the rivers and streams surrounding your castle-upon-a-hill?

And also: Watertown is a suburb? Get out of the concrete jungle man! There's a whole world out there!

up
Voting closed 7

I couldn't follow your POV.

Somewhere in your comments you say something like, "You choose to live in a city; if you don't like it, move."

You choose to live in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where by desire and law, we provide support to our fellow citizens (and, not citizens).

If you don't like it, move.

up
Voting closed 5

and said "bravo".

I will counter you and her with :

Luke 3:10-11 English Standard Version (ESV)

"And the crowds asked him, “What then shall we do?” And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics[a] is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”

up
Voting closed 7

The suburbs (real suburbs, not converted mill towns) are based on the precept that people pull their own weight in just about every way possible. You're responsible for your own housing, transportation, sanitation, and just about everything that doesn't absolutely require use of public resources to accomplish. The people who live in suburbs like it that way.

Translation: "When Grandma falls ill, we can dump her in the nearest city, offloading our obligation to provide for her care onto the residents of that city."

There are certain obligations that we as a society, acting through a legitimate democratic process, have agreed that everyone needs to shoulder. You can't declare your suburb to be an obligation-free zone. Don't like it? the world is full of libertarian paradises like Somalia that would be delighted to have you.

up
Voting closed 6

Regional funding, regional programs, regional temp housing.

up
Voting closed 2

You also support "sending them to an island somewhere?" Sounds like u are pretty happy with what's happening on the US/Mexican border too?

Seriously, get a grip...

up
Voting closed 5

Well, since the bridge is out...

up
Voting closed 2

...

up
Voting closed 9

Quincy's NIMBYism regarding the Long Island bridge has been unhelpful, but it does have Father Bill's Place at least.

up
Voting closed 5

Quincy, in fact, has a shitload of homeless services. Quincy, in fact, is a much more affordable city to live in vs Boston / Brookline / Cambridge /Somerville. If they want to brag about being truely diverse, which Quincy actually is, BBCS need to get their shit together. The cities that struggle with socioeconomic stratification and a faux sence of diversity are always the ones that brag about being progressive.

up
Voting closed 7

This problem is getting out of hand. The state should require all cities and towns provide affordable (not free) housing and free job training (and maybe some rehab) and all able bodied people who are homeless should be shamed. We accept bad behavior too easily when we should be aiming our resources to those who really need it and discourage those who don't. There are some homeless who just need to get a job but we are too polite to say that. If you are able to commit crimes (as most do), you are able to get a job. Now, you are all going to attack me for saying this and the bums will continue to run things.

up
Voting closed 3

All able-bodied people should be shamed? How would that work?

up
Voting closed 3

Speaking as someone who has some hobo-ing experience on their resume - cities are the worst place to be without a fixed abode. Concrete jungle. There may be a few services, but its a crowded field and you get treated like a number, and it's just really rough.

Much better for people who are temporarily adrift is small towns and rural areas. The costs are much lower and there is a lot more opportunity to meet someone who might pay you a couple of hundred bucks a week to do odd jobs or maybe have room and board. It's more down to earth in small towns. If they trust you, people will be more likely to give you a helping hand if you're earnest and just trying to get by. Small towns and rural areas are just kinder and gentler. Suburbs suck, they're heartless.

If you have serious drug and substance problems or messed up ongoing relationship issues, things are more complicated. A lot of the people without addresses who cling to cities are like that. People who can get their act together would have a better shot going to smaller places.

up
Voting closed 5

What percentage of the homeless are struggling with addiction and repetitive relapsing? Are they capable of being good and responsible tenants? Combine that with mental illness and it doesn't paint a pretty picture for the numbers.

up
Voting closed 5

I agree we will always have people who live on the street by choice but this region seems to attract them.

True story, a fellow officer responded to a minor domestic argument between "street people" and the male was a 7' tall African American. The officer, an old-timer and probably not very PC, said, "you should have played basketball." The man replied "I did play briefly for the Chicago Bulls but I'm broke and homeless now, I came to MA because I heard they have the best homeless benefits."

Many of the hotels and larger restaurants feed them as a tax write-off. I recall eating McDonalds in the cruiser when a Marriot truck asked for directions to a shelter, delivering "lobster tails and shrimp" leftover after a function. Enough is enough. In the old days each town maintained the welfare office at City/Town Hall now it's a free for all, flocking to Boston. The intersection panhandling is dangerous and out of control also. God only knows how many Level 3 Sex Offenders are on the street. Friends in the Sexual Assault Unit say the shelters are full of them from everywhere. They get kicked out at 7 am and are on the streets all day while staff makes the beds.

up
Voting closed 14

If Adam posted something about a food truck specializing in banana cream pie, Fishy would find hisself a special way to do a racism in comments!

Perhaps the housing crisis x opioid shit show has a bunch to do with people living on the street, hon? Maybe?

Oh but SEVEN FOOT TALL BLACK GUY coming here for the enormous welfare benefits - never mind that a nondisabled adult doesn't qualify for state aid in MA, and a disabled adult (2 year wait) gets the same federal benefits that anyone in any other part of the US does (plus the extreme cost of housing). Yeah. Okay. LOL. John Silber already went there, got his ass thrown to the curb for it.

up
Voting closed 4

Are you said that you can't blame him for all of society's woes anymore?

Of course it takes too long if you're playing by the rules. But if you don't have to pay taxes on the panhandling income you get from standing on Rt 2 and Alewife or Rt 30 by the where the Pike lets out with a fake baby bump strapped to your belly or a superfluous crutch under your shoulder then it's OK if the government check doesn't come on time. I mean you gotta pay a cut to the mob boss that lets you stand on that corner but it beats honest work, doesn't it?

up
Voting closed 1

In his campaign for governor, Silber specifically made a comment about "all these refugees coming to Massachusetts for the benefits". It was one if his many dimwitted asshole comments that helped cost him an election.

In 1990, you and your family were probably in that "bin" that he was attacking, so maybe I shouldn't blame you for something you aren't old enough to remember. However, best to find your clue before you spew.

up
Voting closed 5

I don't recall you ever having asked for permission before, so why stop yourself now. We all work and pay taxes. Fake baby mama and her friends probably not so much. If Silber was against that, I would've been for him.

up
Voting closed 14

If I recall correctly, Democrat nominee Silber's biggest blunder was snapping at media darling at the time Natalie Jacobsen on channel 5, on the eve of the election, when asked to describe his strengths and weaknesses. He went wild. He also called the English Department at BU "a damn matriarchy" because it was mostly women teachers feuding with him. Voters found Democrat Silber unsuitable for many reasons but the refugee comment wasn't one of them. Republican Weld seemed like the safer choice. It also didn't help Silber that Senate President Billy Bulger was his biggest booster at a time when his brother Whitey was becoming known as a serial killer with a free pass.

As for finding racism in my description of a 7' African American professional basketball player becoming homeless and coming here for the benefits (and probably other reasons) you cheapen the label racism when none was intended. Plenty of white professional athletes now broke and homeless too. No racism whatsoever but continue plying your trade.

up
Voting closed 3

Well, in the old days, they used to feed lobsters to the homeless and jailed.

What exactly is wrong with not throwing away food, you muppet? I'm sure all those people are so happy with their third hand, old seafood. And I'm glad you're clear that you think lesser folks deserve absolutely zero humanity or creature comforts.

up
Voting closed 4

I'm glad you're clear that you think lesser folks deserve absolutely zero humanity or creature comforts.

You made a quantum leap from what I wrote. I always enjoyed helping the homeless and getting those who wanted into a safe shelter and food but there is certainly a subculture who enjoy being homeless. When they are provided long term free room and board and great meals, who would leave or aspire to find a home or job? This is especially true if they are getting social security disability, Salvation Army, Catholic Charities or some other benefit to keep cash in pocket during the day and wander around the city while staff make the beds. My point, apparently lost on you, was to make homelessness less attractive. I feel sorry for the truly mentally ill dumped on the streets when Dukakis closed the mental health hospitals.

up
Voting closed 3

Punitive forever prison records for minor offenses.
Excessive "sex offender" labeling of anything remotely tied to the urogenital system
Minimum wage that doesn't pay for basic needs - some of those who are homeless are employed, some have more than one job.
Lack of treatment capacity
Lack of psychological care services
Lack of comprehensive public transit
Housing crunch created by outdated zoning and NIMBY nonsense
Lack of investment in public housing options that raised many out of poverty

Etc.

In other words, it doesn't become a way of life for people because of charity - it becomes a way of life because of the stupid things that people like you want to believe are true, but are not.

up
Voting closed 4

My point, apparently lost on you, was to make homelessness less attractive.

I think "mode of survival of last resort" is a lot more accurate characterization than "attractive lifestyle choice."

Homelessness is not remotely attractive. Nobody who is not significantly damaged in one way or another chooses it voluntarily.

up
Voting closed 1

better do it and decrease the surface population.

up
Voting closed 7

So, the solution to homeless people is to ignore them and they'll go away?

I love this idea that somehow suburbs exist where people all pull their own weight. Generally they're just more effective politically at externalizing (or avoiding) the social costs of their policies, mainly to maintain their relative wealth and comfort.

Try putting landfill or electric generation plant in Dover and you'll see how that works. So Boston gets penalized for actually trying to help people and being relatively effective at it. That sound fair to you?

up
Voting closed 0

If you’re all such specialists then either run for office and make the change you seek or find employment/volunteer in the system where you can help make a difference one life at a time. Sitting there, blood boiling, commenting hour after hour is just such a waste of energy. Reading these useless comments is worse. Happy Labor Day all.

up
Voting closed 3