People are doing strange things to save money (dumpster diving, no TP)

The economy is taking a toll on average Americans. With gas prices up dramatically, everything else has been sucked into the whirlpool of rising prices of almost all products: groceries, airline tickets, clothing, soap.....toilet paper.

Several web sites have appeared to give suggestions on how to survive in this Turbulent Economy. One is called "Dumpster Diving" and it gives tips on how to find perfectly good food, or slightly good food and have a delicious meal. Other web sites show you how to be Chic & Homeless, by giving tips on how to live in your car. To stay clean, you go to a Comunity College into the Locker Room & clean up, or get a membership at a health club for use of the shower.

Here are some of the things I've picked up on recently, where people have changed their lifestyle to accomodate the New Harsh Reality:

1) You see many more people looking scruffy, unshaven. Carrying large black plastic bags that rattle. Those bags are usually filled with pop cans and soda bottles, which can be returned for small amounts of cash.

2) I've heard that some people have stopped using toilet paper, or they use rags to wipe themselves with. This is actually not a strange practice; in China they do it all the time. They have a handkerchief which they use to dry themselves with, fold it up, and put it back in their pockets. Or: people go into public restrooms, take a large bunch of paper towels (the TP roll is usually fastened on to a bar) and bring them home.

3) Some people have an odor about them. One man that I run into regularly, smells like a campfire. Then he covers up the 'camping' smell with men's cologne, and it smells worse. There are quite a few homeless people in our community.

3) People don't use their washer so much. I went into a laundry mat recently, and the washers were stuffed with so many clothes that it was just this swirling dirty mess that hardly moved around. Those clothes did not come clean. I also see more clothes hanging up to dry, rather than the dryer.

4) People are eating a lot more Top Ramen. For weeks, months at a time. The problem with noodles is that there is no nutrition in them, just a bunch of salt.

Any observations?

Anyone reading your message--including myself--has enough money for a computer and some manner of phone hook up or cable (which means they can also afford an apt.) Even those at an Internet cafe has a hook up elsewhere, so perhaps things are not as bad as you're trying to paint them.

I know of no places in America where, if you knocked on a church door-- or nearly any house--and said you were starving, the people there wouldn't fix at least a peanutbutter sandwich for you, or give you an apple or handful of crackers....

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And not being full of shit.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

But I still know bullshit when I see it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

How does it make you feel that so many more Americans liked President Clinton more than Bush?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Yet, I've managed to stay on this board since 2001.

And you are definitely full of shit. You can barely stumble through your first post without stepping directly into it. Then you manage to fling around the shit you bring in here and try to tell everyone it isn't yours.

People expect other people to not be loaded down with crap, unless of course those people belong to the Republican Party.

Good day, and good luck.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Enjoy your stay.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

How do you feel about historians picking Bush as the worst US president ever?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Historians will always consider that Bush was the worst president ever.

I'm sure it was earth-shattering.

he is no more

It was "historians always say that."

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

When you're right, you're soooo right!

:hi:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

and you deny it, even saying that you've worked with the homeless

says it all

You and "shitty ass" just go together.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You can only reply to your own posts?

Eh, typical. To afraid to fight in Iraq. To afraid to have a real debate.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I haven't been to Iraq, and I've never support the fiasco.

And you've thus far failed to actually debate anything.

Where in the OP did she say that everybody was doing this? Looks like you swallowed your own exaggerations.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

No, you spoke of how anybody reading the message must have a computer and is therefore well off and the OP untrue.

How old are you?

I'm guessing 8th or 9th grade based on the use of logic.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

problem.

Because nobody's said "universal" or even suggested it.

and I've seen people doing all of the above

I happen to be in my house
on my computer
on my internet connection

but those facts don't take away the fact that over the last 6 years my income hasn't kept up with inflation
fuel, utilities, and food all cost more

we are at war spending billions we don't have that our children will be paying for (probably grandchildren(

we are destroying our world's climate

and we have a fraud as pResident, who was appointed in 2000, stole it in 2004 in Ohio, and is looting our treasury, making the rich, richer, and the poor, poorer.

so you can hide in your little fantasy world and say that the OP's world doesn't exist

but if you really worked with the homeless then you'd know it isn't bullshit

if there is one person that goes hungry in he wealthiest country in the world, it is a criminal act!

Peace, and may you wake up and smell the coffee some day!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I can read

you're talking band aid solutions "compassionate conservativism"

I'm talking about social reform

fixing the problems

use other's computers.

Things are shitty and getting shittier.

Do you really mean to argue that becuase a starving person can beg a cracker and get it, that things aren't so bad?

Lockstep is not so much required as is a little less horseshit.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

People saying things like "yeah, well, at least we're not as bad as Afghanistan."

It strikes me as profoundly stupid logic.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"Well people aren't starving to death, are they? So it's no big deal."

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And it's still right up there, in all its profound glory.

I see things getting worse around me, more and more every day.

It's really sad - the richest country on earth, and yet we neglect our most precious resource: people.

It's true. The country's most important asset is its people. Look at Japan. They are a country of 188 million people (?) have hardly any natural resources, they import everything, and yet they have the world's #2 economy.

That country invests in its people, unlike us.

"I know of no places in America where, if you knocked on a church door-- or nearly any house--and said you were starving, the people there wouldn't fix at least a peanutbutter sandwich for you, or give you an apple or handful of crackers.... "

How many times have you tried this lately???? Churches refer you somewhere else, an agency with cut funding and no resources left.

Churches and homes *used* to feed people.... that was a generation ago. No longer.

As for your topic line..... good way to discount poor people.

As I said, maybe you should give this a try before you say such things. You clearly don't know the current situation. This is the age of "compassionate conservatism", ya know..... what a lovely contradiction in terms!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It's clear you aren't in touch with what the reality is. If you had concern for homeless people, and were actually investigating resources, you would know different. MUCH different.

Your "the poor you always have with you" was a complete tipoff. Not exactly a compassionate statement. Quite in line with "compassionate conservatives", who are anything but.

We're all going around with shitty asses, eating garbage--and it's George Bush's fault. OKay? That do it for ya?

I guess this would require you spending time in a library, but anyway... notice when a homeless guy walks into a library for a nap or whatever, and he obviously hasn't bathed in months, and the whole library fills with stink? Well, that homeless guy has an excuse- he's homeless.

What's your excuse?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Thank you for posting that!:applause:

You've been pegged, and since you're here to take up our time with silliness rather than to actually converse, I won't play that silly game.

You gave yourself away a little too quickly.

Just a tad too obvious.

Here's hoping you find a heart somewhere along the line.

TaTa

BTW, bobbolink- Welcome to DU. :hi:

like utility bills to prove you live in the zip code they serve.

kinda hard to do if you have no address.

the fact that there are homeless in a country as wealthy as America is a CRIME in and of itself

people die from lack of health care
poor nutrition


and you worked with homeless in Denver you say?

"the poor will always be among us"

WHY???????

and Convention Center.

Now killing themselves because they have no where to live, and no way to survive.

I'm not far behind them, and I can tell *many* stories that refute the ridiculous claims that have been made here.

Thanks for understanding. You don't know how much that means!

:hi:

I have a little cushion there, but not like I used to have

(badly, I might add) Here ya go: "Whoever welcomes this little child in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. For he who is least among you all—he is the greatest."

Luke 9:48

Btw, as is the usual fundie crap, you took your "there will be poor always" quote out of context.

approach, in some circles.

Interesting how the true message seems to have been lost.

I wish Jim Wallis were more well known, and heard!

:hi:

from one of the "geezers." :hi:

another "geezer" here....

"Too soon old, too late schmart".

:)

in my parish people even w.out a library card can get on internet free of charge

is that really so unusual that we must assume that everyone on the internet is housed?

in the 90s there were a number of primitive web sites and prototypes of "blogs" by homeless or traveling people, perhaps there still are, but internet is too big now and i wouldn't know where to find them

hell i've even MET in real life a homeless man i first encountered on the internet

Think they'll give you a sandwich then? Maybe with rat poison in it.

How would you like to live like that? Not knowing where you were going to get your next meal, or where you would lay your head at night? That's no way to live, and you know it.

If you think Americans should live like that, then maybe you don't belong in America. That's a typical neocon idea--let them fend for themselves and most people are really better off than that. That's bullshit and you know it.

the methadone i take for chronic pain does a number on my metabolism that sees to that.

i got into this practice long ago, in leaner times...when i had to make sacrifices to afford pot.

but- i got good enough at it that i still do it myself, even tho i don't have to.

I keep a pretty short haircut and would like to cut it myself with my Wahl trimmer but can't figure out how to do it in the back?

Any advice?

a bathroom mirror that hinges in two places(three vertical strips that you can then arrange like the mirrors you use in the store to try on clothes), and good peripheral vision.
i use scissors and a hairbrush.

Not saying it doesn't happen, though.

I have started hanging my laundry, but that is more because of the time of the year. I may well save $25 a month by hanging laundry, but it isn't yet going to make or break me.

Makes a huge difference in our household. It's meat for 4-5 meals, it's 1/3 the cell phone bill, it's half a tank of gas....

We're pinching pennies, and cutting every corner we can.

The dryer beats up and ages clothing. Except towels and jeans.
I try to let my clothing air-dry, when possible.

But, most people don't give a rip, because they see clothes as cheap and disposable goods. Food is not.

Right now is the best of all possible worlds, when people can choose which clothes to hand-wash, which to machine-wash and machine-dry, and which to dry-clean. When have we had that in human history, combined with the flood of inexpensive clothing?

On the food forum, a discussion was started about whether or not to buy salted or unsalted butter, and then whether or not to use kosher or table salt, and I thought goodness -- we're so very well off, even those of us of relatively modest means.

I do know that there have been a few discussions lately on the GD about obesity. Poor diet among poor people has been discussed.

Eating a lot of fruits and vegetables is a priority that I refuse to give up, only because I'm not destitute, but top ramen continues to be a staple food for poorer folks.

i'm tired of having something that fits perfectly get eaten by the dryer

you can always stick something in the dryer on fluff for a few moments if it dries too stiff but once it has been dried out of shape by the stupid dryer and it's something you really like, you're screwed

when things get bad they're usually the first casualties, I'm speaking from experience, wiring together glasses that should have gone to the dump years ago, and dentist become a luxury, along with toothpaste.

of the GOP , expect it to continue. More and more wealth concentration that leaves more and more poverty. The tax cuts thet the GOP have done is just one example of this wealth favoritism masquerading as an economy boooster. Thats pure hogwash and Its a proven fact. Clinton raised taxes and the economy boomed like it never has before. All we get from these cuts is growth thats less than the population growth. If theyre only getting a 3 % growth rate, thats not even keeping up with the rising population.

Things I do:

1) Don't run the AC unless absolutely necessary.

2) Don't leave any lights on all day/night.

3) Give myself a firm but fair budget for non-essentials and stick with it (currently I'm at $60 a week). Whatever doesn't get spent on essentials goes in a savings account that I don't have immediate access to, so I can't impulsively spend what I don't have.

4) Keep credit card balances low or non-existent. Charing inevitably makes things more expensive.

5) Plan all meals for the week ahead of time and shop accordingly, rather than just guessing. I can usually find most of the stuff I need on sale.

6) Pay the bills on time.

7) Never stop saving. I get paid once a month, and the day after I'm paid a chuink of my paycheck is automatically deducted and deposited into my retirement accounts and cahs reserves and things like that. The benefit here is twofold: You learn to live on less AND you're saving money. So if I do have a rough month ahead, I can put a stop on my auto-deposits or I can get to that money I've saved if I absolutely need to.

8) Realize that lots of expenses you think are essential really arent't.

1. Don't run AC unless absolutely necessary. (I assume this goes for heating as well.)
Many people live in areas of the country wherein they could die without these things so, for many, this is not an option much of the year.

3. Budget away but many people don't have $60.00 a week for non-essentials. I know I don't. If I had an "extra" $60.00 a week I'd be spending it on food.

4. Many people are SURVIVING on credit cards due to loss of job, reduction of hours, reduction of wages, downsizing, major health crisis -- take your pick. I know I was paying for my groceries via my credit card until they cut me off. Now we just go without; however, it's been a marvelous weight loss program.

5. Plan all meals ahead of time? Nice. Provided one isn't working 2-3 jobs to make ends meet. If so, that might be a little difficult.

6. Pay bills on time. Provided the money is there to pay them.

7. Never stop saving? You're kidding, right? When it comes to a choice between you and your family eating or putting money in a savigns account I think MOST people would put it towards buying food.

You don't seem to understand how desperate it has gotten out here and offering condescending suggestions certainly doesn't help. Most people are not stupid or lazy as you want to make them out to be. There just isnt' enough money because middle class jobs have disappeared.

between the muddleclass and lower........

Sad, and amazing.

I've been saying for the past 5 years that it's becoming Darwin's Law, or the Law of the Jungle. Things are going to get really lean.

So if we figure out how to do it now, we should be able to ride out the storm further down the road.

there were stories of women (newly poor) living out of their cars, keeping up appearances by making up at dept. store cosmetic depts each morning.

There was a nice looking (as in, she looked like a decent person), middle aged lady who slept in her car on the blocks of Noe / Castro neighborhood.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=2136629

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2775237

http://www.stretcher.com/index.cfm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And something everyone needs to read:

Advice for the New Poor, by Ductapefatwa

http://ductapefatwa.blogspot.com/2003/11/advice-for-new-poor-part-1-some-advice.html

(The link is directly above in Lars39's post)

They can't stand homelessness because they think their system is so fair and perfect. The hypocrisy of hidden homelessness must be perpetuated (with, for instance 12 new police officers in San Francisco devoted full-time to quality-of-life crimes while the log of unsolved murders grows...) Otherwise, it would start to look like we're living in the third-world banana republic that we've actually become.

Good, decent, muddleclass liberals don't want to know about it, either. There is, for example, a huge gap of understanding between the reality and what people in churches know about the situation. And, when confronted with that gap, they get very defensive. Most of these people most likely vote in the D column, and probably are compassionate. But, they certainly don't have a true grasp on the facts, nor do they feel compelled to take action.

I don't know the answer to that. It all seems hopeless.

Brought to you by city government a.k.a. big real estate developers, they think that the problem will go away with a bunch of home construction, it's all part of the big lie that keeps the shadow state booming and homelessness a criminal act... Meanwhile, the Salvation Army is running a lot of "government" programs... We should be a lot more concerned with this than we are.

available for "faithbased programs". They could be building low-income housing, as one facet of dealing with homelessness. In times past, they built hospitals, and now is the time to realize they need to be providing actual housing. But, they absolutely cannot fathom it.

You are so right that liberals are still part of the problem! It's amazing to me how much liberals DO NOT understand about homelessness! Yet, they also don't seem to be interested in learning more and doing more. It's just not "sexy" enough.

Thanks, Jeb. I appreciate your reply. I agree with your statement that we should be a lot more concerned than we are. Any ideas in how to get that concern spread about?

Grassroots politics. If we were the ones feeding and housing the homeless they would become our constituents. Instead, They get their basic needs met by the other side. Now a lot of homeless people have had their rights rescinded penally, but a lot of them haven't, and they could sure help swing some local elections for the progressives. We would also get a lot of political capital in the form of legitimacy if we were out there actually doing something about social problems instead of just proposing policy. The fundies realize this, and note that their policy proposals are taken more seriously than ours. If people could see that they get something out of helping the homeless and advocating for their rights, more people would get involved.

What party can call itself Democratic when it lets the soul of the nation's poorest go to its bitterest enemies?

I think the New Liberals tend to have a technocratic faith in government--that if we just get upright, competent people and give them lots of money, problems can be "fixed." Not so homelessness. Homelessness arrives just ahead of really massive social and economic changes, and ends when the changes take hold. There isn't a lot we can "do" about the existence of homeless people, but we can do so much to make their lives better--and, in the process, get them on our side.

I'm a bit confuddled, because it seems like you're saying much the same thing I am, yet I don't at all believe "There isn't a lot we can 'do' about the existence of homeless people....."

Seems clear to me that what we *can* do is to build more low-income housing! That's for starters. We're woefully short on housing... 2 and 3 year waiting lists for an apartment obviously causes homelessness, so I don't see how there isn't much we can do.

Could you please clarify?

Otherwise, what you have said is so important...... crossing off poor folk, and letting them know they're not important to the party (then, of course, blaming them for not voting, or assuming they vote for the reichwing! I've heard that a lot on DU, too!)

Thanks for your replies!

:hi:

low-income housing fills up with a different population than you see on the streets. There would certainly be less homelessness if subsidized housing drove all rents down. But one of the problems with government housing programs is that they require you to participate in a government program. Most of the people on the street are either unable or unwilling to do that, usually because of bureaucracy, rules, and treatment at the hands of program staff. The people who are skilled at operating within these confines spend little time on the streets. Not only are they the ones who can work the existing programs, they are also pre-adapted for McDonald's-type jobs that may become available. But the great majority, who are in my view more "normal" psychologically--valuing their privacy, etc.--are unable to navigate the system and can't even take advantage of the few open slots.

These are signs of a deeper social malaise than just not having a roof over one's head. The government that supposedly represents these people has become a hostile alien being to them. The only way out is to build completely new and independent institutions that gradually earn the trust and respect of the homeless. And this is equal in my mind to building a new society in the rubble of the old one.

or alkies or .... maybe not too bright.

ONe of the problems of talking about homelessness is that there are different issues that make up those on the street, just as in any subset of society.

However, it's one of my pet peeves that homeless people get categorized so quickly as either stooopid, or substance abusers. While there are those on the street who maybe fit those descriptions, there are many others who don't at all.

For your consideration: a large group of those now homeless are those who have been hit hard by a medical emergency, and are not able to work, either for the time being, or permanently. There is NO low-income housing for them. NONE. They go from shelter to shelter, or head for the woods, because they have to wait out that list to get into an apartment, as I mentioned above. A lot of these are women, some with children, some 50, 60 or 70 years old.

There USED to be an adequate amount of low-income housing, back in the day when the Dems considered that an important issue to back. No longer! There simply is not enough housing for those who need it, so they go without, and their health deteriorates further.

I will be honest---it bothers me immensely that this issue is not understood by the few who even bother to talk about it, and most don't even care enough to talk about it.

What I WILL agree on, if this is part of what you're saying, is that all assistance programs, whether it's for single mothers who escaped an abusive situation, or disabled or aged people, is that they whould receive enough money monthly to be able to rent a decent apartment on their own, rather than to have to rely on specifically low-income housing. AFDC and Disability *used* to be enough to rent your own apartment. That is no longer the case. But, realistically, getting changes in a LIVING WAGE for those on assistance, while certainly just and necessary, is less likely than acquiring more low-income housing.

I can see how you got that vibe in the context of the discourse.

I'm saying homeless people don't want to be treated like children or criminals, which is all government or big-charity programs are good for at this point. Because government programs are a slave to politics, and politics are biased toward punishing and marginalizing the poor, I don't really see how those chains can be broken. Administration by a government that includes only New Democrats and Republicans will never be friendly to poor people.

Also, the homeless are Americans, and most hold strongly the notion of self-reliance. If you give them land to build houses on, they will do it: witness the "tent cities" that have grown up throughout the West. I see the homeless as the beginning of the next America, which will be built on the wreckage of this one--in the urban "rust belts" and the dead small towns that have become hinterlands to Wal-Marts. We should embrace the homeless' autonomy and their potential when given opportunities. Existing programs don't do that, and it's hard to imagine that new ones would if they are run through the public sector.

This is going to happen regardless of our efforts. By reaching out to the homeless and helping to guide them as they build their communities, we can take control of the future. We can claim legitimacy. The fundies get that point and work at it every day. So where are the liberals and progressives? We're arguing policy, not building communities.

Affordable housing as an entitlement will never come through any US legislative body without severe strings attached to it. People with kids will get priority, people whose disabilities are officially recognized will get priority, even alcoholics and drug addicts (if they are "clean") will get priority. The single, average joe (or increasingly "average jill") who's out there always gets bumped to the bottom of the list, and eventually gets fed up. Immigrants who accept bureaucracy as a fact of life are better at the process than native-born Americans.

The only way affordable housing can serve the people on the streets is if it used to manipulate the housing market as a whole. That would be political suicide, since most voters are homeowners who do not want to see their value diminished.

You have said so much in this reply that I hardly know where to begin. I truly wish that DU would have a comprehensive discussion on homelessness, as there is so much that is misunderstood, but as you can see, it's not important to most people. I hope that we can find a way to spark more discussion on this! I appreciate your replies.

First -- of course, you are entirely correct in your assessment of how people are treated. If you're going to receive help, you must be punished for it. You'd think that would be the credo of the RW, but the Dems do and think the same way. Then wonder why people don't do as well as they think they should. Duh!

While I'm interested in your theory of how homeless people themselves could "solve" the problem, it's at least far off in the future for this to happen. I will completely agree that there has to be at least some avenue for the people themselves to have some say over how a given program is to be run. Treating people like children and defectives is certainly self-defeating, at the very least.

However, I come back to -- what happens right now? Are you advocating just letting people die until/if they can figure out a way to be self-sustaining? Remember... I'm also talking about the woman I mentioned who became very ill and has lived out of her car and small trailer for 3 years. I'm talking about the woman I mentioned who was in a bad wreck and left braindamaged and hasn't had anywhere to live except a shelter for 2 years. I'm also including me-- who left an abusive situation and have been homeless for 7 months. Do you seriously wish all of us to continue to deteriorate and die unless we can somehow magically come up with our own solution? Because surely you know that we're fresh out of beaver pelts in this country, and just staking a claim in the wilderness isn't exactly possible.

I will say again that there is DESPARATE need for more low-income housing for people such as the three of us I have mentioned. Telling us to create some tent city in some inner city somewhere and be vulnerable to the inner-city crime and cops isn't exactly realistic, is it?

Do we really deserve to just be ignored and to die? Really?

"So where are the liberals and progressives? We're arguing policy, not building communities."

EXACTLY!! I've tried to talk to "progressives" until I'm out of oxygen, but they're just not interested. It's not sexy enough -- only issues like the war, and immigration and gay marriage warrant their attention. Churches? Naw... fear has taken hold, and they just don't get it.

Building communities... you see, that's the way to break through all the garbage that's going on, but I don't see many people able to even begin talking in that way. So, until that happens.............?

On the Pacific Coast there's nothing intrinsically wrong with living outdoors. Some people love it. You can survive the weather year round, and the cheaper housing we have is crap, so the "problem" of homelessness is really a set of problems associated with homelessness. Mostly, the punitive actions of cities against the homeless. I remember bringing a grad student from the Midwest to a right-to-sleep protest in California. She was amazed that people would be demonstrating for the right to be on the streets. In colder climates the winter is deadly and everyone needs a warm place to go. I haven't really worked much with those populations so I can't tell you exactly what they need.

Here it's fairly clear: toilets, above all; lockers, showers, a place to sit, newspapers, shaving kit and other grooming supplies, fresh clothes, hot meals and canned food, basic health care, legal advice, camping equipment, drinking water, and above all a place to go where they can't be evicted by the cops. None of this is expensive enough to inspire people to write grants. The churches are providing the bulk of these kinds of services. But some of them are liberal churches, and there are also some progressive groups (Food not Bombs) getting involved.

As far as the cases of disability you mention, I hate the fact that our society just throws these people away. What I've seen a lot is disabled homeless people finding caregivers who are also homeless--actually the opposite usually happens, the caregiver finds the person in need. I can think of a lot of long-term situations where a wheelchair-bound, developmentally disabled, mentally ill, alcoholic or otherwise impaired person was kept alive by a group of other homeless people. This is the rule, not the exception; the exceptions I've seen are where the disability makes the person impossible to be around. It's not an optimal situation--people are not getting the medical care they need--but it's in some ways better than the situation for housed disabled people. At least the homeless disabled person is never alone and is genuinely cared for. The same could probably not be said of the person housed through a program whose caregivers are clinicians of various kinds. Once again, the point is community; and it's not about how the community looks, it's about how it lives.

Barring lethal weather, life on the streets doesn't have to be horrible. We in the houses make it horrible by fearing, condemning, disrespecting, sometimes attacking, and mostly by pushing further out the people who find themselves out there.

Since you are against low-income housing, and believe that homeless people must remain on the street and suffer, there is nothing more for me to discuss.

I do hope you realize that your position is very similar to libertarians, who want NO MORE LOW-INCOME HOUSING. Power to the
RW.

I just don't think low income housing can reduce or eliminate homelessness.

On edit: Also, my comments are contingent on the political climate. With free-market fundamentalists in control of both parties in the government, we will never see a significant increase in housing subsidies. My recommendations are until this cycle is broken, which would mean more sweeping social changes than the re-institution of one program.

Including me, which you expressed no concern or compassion for.

All your ideology aside, if politicoes, such as those right here at DU would take this up with as much interest as they do gay marriage, etc., then, yes, there would be a difference. Same with churches.

It's that nobody gives a rip, and your post was in the same vein. And, yes, of course, I take that personally, as I gave my personal experience. It's appalling to me that I can talk about my own personal experience in that way, and not have ONE concern expresssed!

That's why I don't blame the RW for everything.... it rests squarely on the shoulders of the "progressives" as well. Deafening silence says so much.

With that, I give up. I'm not here for anyone's entertainment.

I've been homeless too, and my situation would not have been helped by a government housing program. The amount of rent I could pay was zero, and the amount of interference I wanted in my life was zero as well. I needed to do without housing during a transitional period, and it opened my eyes to the way homeless people are abused by law enforcement.

But I don't really trade in personal experience or anecdotal evidence on this issue. Programs should certainly be expanded, but my personal quest is for homelessness to be decriminalized. Also, for the Democrats and others on the left to claim the homeless as a natural constituency and moral responsibility--which right-wing organizations have already been doing for a long time. That is all.

Also sorry about your personal tragedy and those of your friends, but this is a political discussion board. You won't last long here if you take things too personally. I am one of the few people here interested in what you want to discuss, and it would be great for me if you could stay. I hope you've found a stable situation and wish the best to your friends. In general, if you need general moral support from people, the DU Lounge is a great place!

Here's some links from a formerly homeless community in Portland, Oregon to give you a better idea what I'm talking about:

http://dignityvillage.org/photos/strawbale/index.html

http://dignityvillage.org/photos/cdc/index.html

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

By the way, try registering a freerepublic dot com and saying that you think Clinton was a good president.

seems like this thread is a magnet for "those" types

they have one car and drive everybody to work...

i am not seeing more dumpster diving, i'm seeing less

dumpster diving is most successful in a rich society, with lots of waste

in the last 10-15 years, dumpster diving has really dived in how profitable it can be -- why? because companies began to fear people re-selling the items on ebay and (before ebay) in the flea markets and black markets, in a richer society, this small amt of competition didn't matter, in a society where people simply don't make the same relative income they did in 1975, it can matter a lot

i gave up dumpster diving years ago, just not enough money in it any more

plus more and more businesses, especially the groceries, at least around here, will destroy or "compact" the food -- so the whole free food has been over for many years, hell, it has been 15 years AT LEAST since our local groceries got compactors to prevent anyone getting free food or even getting food only fit for feeding chickens

dumpster diving is one of those little secrets to living cheaply that was only popularized after it wasn't any good any more and there was no more harm in letting the regular people know about it -- because there were no more goodies to compete for anyway

i would say if you are observing more dumpster diving now, it is not because there is more dumpster diving, there is much much less and more people chasing fewer goods, but for whatever reason you are just seeing and hearing about it more

Lately any large object we put out with the trash gets picked up before the trash truck gets here--the old ceiling fan from the 80s, the end table clawed by cats, dirty rugs, anything.

Also, in the Pittsburgh area, Goodwill is closing stores and donation centers because donations are down:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06166/698386-85.stm

a few years back during Mardi Gras.

We got to the bakery and it was closed, but as we pulled around the back we noticed boxes and boxes of every kind of King Cake you can imagine carefully wrapped in plastic, decorated with beads, and stacked next to the dumpster. They were only a day old. I think we got 30 of them.
We ate King Cake for weeks.

They were like 14 or 15 dollars each and if the bakery had been open we could have afforded maybe one between us all.

i bet they were hoping someone would take them and enjoy them, i knew a lady who worked in a bakery and after awhile she had all she could eat and everyone she knew had all they could freeze of the day-old baked goods so this would be a way to give away what employees etc. couldn't freeze

i learned to make a pretty mean bread pudding from such items as king cakes, cinnamon rolls, etc, you'd be surprised what you can do with them even if they have been frozen

a far cry from what you have nowadays w. even the durn wendy's has a lock on its dumpster so nobody can get a bite of free food or any of the cups w. the coupons on them -- i was shocked at how bad it has gotten and how inaccessible the dumpsters are when i went on a recent run

i just don't understand the mentality of spoiling food by putting it in the compactor, splashing chlorine on it. etc just to keep it from someone else but around here seems like they all do it now

and any dumpster holding non-food items is locked like it's fort knox!

god forbid we should keep a useful item out of the landfill

In my case, it is a sign of an environmental CONSCIENCE. I often do handwashing of undies and dry them on a wooden dryer rack in my bathroom. I can do shirts and other woven cotton items also - in my (GASP!) kitchen sink, and then hang them out on my (another GASP!) clothesline to dry.

I also make and USE my own laundry soap. And hand soap. And lots of other things.

I happen to LIKE making some things rather than purchasing them. I sleep better at night knowing I have made these choices, even though they require EFFORT and do not necessarily save me lots of money.

Using a cloth to wipe, rather than toilet paper, may seem icky to modern Americans, but did you ever stop to consider what people did long before there WAS such a thing as toilet paper?? They washed off with water and then dried with a cloth. Which they no doubt laundered with homemade laundry soap, lol. Much nicer for Mother Nature, BTW.

On the way back from a church function. I told her I don't spend money on movies since I am unemployed. Oh, and she is, too, but said that is one thing she will spend money on.

To me, it is a luxury, and I can do without..same with going out for dinner. Totally unnecessary.

I am toying with the idea of a clothesline, since I have a natural gas dryer!

Freedom isn't free.

If it's too expensive where you live - move.


_____________________________ (fill in with your favorite Randite comment)


blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa
blaa blaa blaa

damn! i always miss the good stuff.