Users who Dugg This
adam jones
11736 Followers
Comgen & Dr. Socks' love child
12547 Followers
Russ Smith
18392 Followers
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
12264 Followers
Jeff Flowers
18282 Followers
Janine Kahn
6178 Followers
Adnan Shaffi
2940 Followers
Skateboard
3879 Followers











anomaly100Mar 17, 2011
Bad idea IMO. There are resources such as "Ready willing and Able" (in NY) that help the homeless get to work and save their money for them. Most of them are ex-cons and they work for their money.
mmaineMar 17, 2011
Sounds like it might encourage more panhandling.
bobosmitorMar 17, 2011
Might motivate them to work.
Closed AccountMar 18, 2011
might motivate them to sleep on the street
daimposterMar 18, 2011
it's a horrible idea. i don't want homeless people begging for money and bothering residents and I don't want them having to be forced to sleep on the street.
The goal is to get them jobs and a place to stay. Not sure how charging poor homeless people for shelter will get them a job or help them provide a place to take shelter.
filtersfastMar 17, 2011
I'm not sure where I stand on this, honestly... I'd be interested to hear what someone who has been homeless before would say about it, though.
quaestor44Mar 18, 2011
I doubt people that have the physical and psychological fortitude to break out of poverty would frequent digg.
robertisaarMar 18, 2011
well, i lived in a somewhat mobile car for a couple months.... does that count?
quaestor44Mar 18, 2011
For some reason my edited comment showed up as an entirely new comment...thanks digg.
Back on point: Were you starving and crippled by tuberculosis?
robertisaarMar 18, 2011
starving, yes
TB, no
quaestor44Mar 18, 2011
I doubt that people who have the physical and psychological fortitude to break out of poverty would frequent digg.
Closed AccountMar 18, 2011
I have been homeless in LA. Asking the homeless to pay for their shelter is a bad idea. And if you have never seen skid row - do yourself a favor and go see it.
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
I have been homeless. I moved to Arizona in pursuit of my daughter which is 1200 miles away from home. I arrived with $200 and was homeless for a few days. The first thing I did was find a public park and I took a sponge bath from the faucet and shaved. From there I went searching for a job.
You would never have guessed passing me on the street that I was homeless. I didn't beg or ask for anything from anyone except prospective employers.
I hate this idea for quite a few different reasons. Doing the math on this is quite revealing. So much so that I decided to write an article in response.
http://weirdcrap123.blogspot.com/2011/03/bookuss-reply-to-why-charging-homeless.html
filtersfastMar 18, 2011
GREAT article! Thanks for sharing.
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
Most Welcome! Thank you for reading. :)
Closed AccountMar 18, 2011
Homeless people, I hope that you can read this!
corinthosMar 18, 2011
I have a friend I went to high school with who moved to LA and is homeless because he chose to be. He's a DJ and makes pretty decent pay. He bought a van he rarely sleeps in because he games the system to get a bed provided at a shelter instead and mostly mooches off free programs and churches to get free food and a shower.
He pays a guy at a car dealership to let him store his equipment in the basement. He's actually saved about $120,000 in the bank in the past 5 years by doing this and for some reason he likes it.
The only things he spends money on is entertainment and clothes.
sbuckley00Mar 18, 2011
I would be ashamed to say I have a friend like that.
flawlessflawMar 18, 2011
Oh so I guess all homeless are DJs that wear designer clothes.
paintballer747Mar 18, 2011
that's so messed up
sbuckley00Mar 18, 2011
My take: Let us stop anything in the USA that included the title of "WAR" in it. Once the money spent on these programs is not being used, we can use it to feed all starving people. The money could easily be used to help these people get back on their feet.
shingoexMar 18, 2011
War on crime, war on cancer?
War on poverty? That's quite the contradiction...
sbuckley00Mar 18, 2011
Good point... I guess I did not think that comment through.I was mainly speaking of the war on drugs and actually fighting war, such as the one in Iraq. We spend way to much money in these areas and could use it to help in better ways. IMO.. thanks for setting me straight on the obviousness of my blunder. :-)
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
As long as they only charge those with jobs... But I might have a little bit of an issue with it...
7$ a night times 30 days = 210$ That's 210$ less that a homeless person will have at the end of the month to get into a new place...
Tough one that is...
davidnivenMar 18, 2011
Or buy alcohol or cigarettes like most of them do.
flawlessflawMar 18, 2011
And that is the glorious result of your 5-year-study or just a biased opinion based on personal experience?
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
And if my little sub article didn't convince you. Please allow me to put on my tinfoil hat for moment.
With all the home foreclosures from the recession and unemployment rates going up, there is a larger number of homeless people. Not drug addicts, but people going through a hard time. How many people did BP lay off?
According to the article, the homeless shelter admitted that it costs $25 a day to house a homeless person. So that is what they are asking from taxpayers.
$25X30=750 a month I'm no genius but I think some people actually live on that amount singly...
However, the shelter has only 1 electric bill, 3 HUGE meals a day for everyone, and reusable things after people move on.
Lets say that a person pays their dues of $5 dollars a day and pays $150 dollars that month. The lack of funding makes them stay homeless for an extra 2 weeks. That's an extra $375 dollars the homeless shelter gets from the state for that one person alone. That means the tax payers have paid more money keeping this person housed, than the person paid to be housed.
Lets say that the homeless shelter has room for 50 people, and we already said that one person gets the shelter $750 a month. That would make the income of the shelter $37,500 per month.
That was $37,500 per month in expenses they asked the state for because that is what they claim it costs to house 50 people.
This is looking more and more like a con rather than philanthropic endeavor.
Now that I have actually ran the numbers. I'm appalled and outraged that the government has figured out a way to make money off of the homeless. After that they have figured out that they can make more money off of the ones that have jobs, and are getting out of the rut. Making money off them keeps them homeless for a little longer thereby making them more money.
This is dirty unethical business, and I'm outraged. Simply put, this is a business plan to keep the money coming in. A different plan could put these people back into society quicker thereby strengthening the economy faster.
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
A Facebook poll went viral before the polls were made impotent which asked if welfare recipients should be drug tested. 95% of people said yes. Yet to date, there has never been a proposal for a law like that. Makes one wonder doesn't it.
As for a homeless person buying alcohol or cigarettes. It is their money, and therefore I would respect their choice on what to do with it. For the $2 a day that is. However I do not believe this to be the case. I believe that most homeless people are down and out. Not lazy drug addicts that could get a job if they wanted to. Granted, we do have those.
I was homeless once. It only lasted a couple of days when I moved to Arizona to follow my daughter when my ex-wife moved. I got there with no place to stay. I had $200 or so and the first day after spending a night there was to wash up in a park restroom with a rag. I shaved, and even got checked out by a park worker. However, he didn't bother me, and let me continue to make myself look presentable. I immediately went out looking for a job. You would never have been able to tell that I was homeless. I didn't beg for anything.
My point is simply that making a generalization like that is dangerous as looks can be deceiving. Next to that, how do you feel about others who tell you how you should be spending your money?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gabebensonMar 18, 2011
f**king bulls**t.
fauozMar 18, 2011
What society call homeless people are not necessarily homeless. Many just do not want all the responsibility and burden of keeping track of bills, taxes and all that stuff. They actually enjoy living with nature. They do need a safe spot to sleep, protection from severe weather, a decent meal and take a shower and common contact location. Just some simple living and basic shelter without burden is whats needed.
neekorissMar 18, 2011
i've worked skid row with homeless organizations. the majority of the people there are drug addicts. if they have money for drugs, they can get a couple bucks for food and shelter
goddess1019Mar 18, 2011
Something about this just strikes me as wrong. What about homeless kids? If a single mom of 3 kids finds her self in the unfortunate position of homelessness, is she going to have to come up with 28 bucks a night? That could be difficult to do. Are they just S.O.L? All I see this doing is creating more pan handlers. There has to be some other way.
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
I don't think children would be turned away with or without money. I did do the the math on it though, and ABackwards... http://weirdcrap123.blogspot.com/2011/03/bookuss-reply-to-why-charging-homeless.html
nick041Mar 18, 2011
If they have money, why the would they stay in a homeless shelter? Better question, why is there a cost of living? I fail to understand why society has made life a privilege.
nullcodesMar 18, 2011
How about giving the homeless a place to shower and wash clothes? That would go a long way .. and it wont be overly expensive either. And make it a requirement that they do that or it will get done for them rudely.
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
I LOVE that idea... Not quite the forceful part... But a place to shower, wash clothes, shave... Dude that rocks right there...
twitterfollowersMar 18, 2011
its not good, there should be some humanity
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
Yeppers, I wrote an article in contrast to this article... LOL, what can I say... I did the math and it's not looking pretty... http://weirdcrap123.blogspot.com/2011/03/bookuss-reply-to-why-charging-homeless.htmlComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
goweigusMar 18, 2011
This is not a way to deal with why they need the homeless shelter.
iambookus322Mar 18, 2011
Here is an article I wrote in response to this article. http://weirdcrap123.blogspot.com/2011/03/bookuss-reply-to-why-charging-homeless.html
Please feel free to stop by my profile and Digg this article. :)
To copy and paste:
This is my reply to Why Charging The Homeless Is A Good Idea by Jonathan Berr at http://www.walletpop.com/2011/03/17/why-charging-the-homeless-for-shelter-is-a-good-idea/
If an establishment is running low on money, then they have the right to charge. It's their establishment, and I have no problem with that. They want to charge $7 a day, $5 for the shelter and $2 saved for the resident. That $5 will help cover the cost of housing an individual, and it will help offset whatever budget cuts are imposed by either less donations or pullbacks from the state.
The $2 I have a huge problem with. Homeless people are still people and they deserve basic human dignity and respect. They can save and manage their own money. There are plenty of view points one can take to argue that. But if it were my money, I would want to manage it. No one but me has the right to manage my money. This obviously excludes those with a mental illness who needs someone to manage their money for them. But homelessness does not automatically equal mental instability.
Some people will say that a homeless person will spend their money buying alcohol or cigarettes. It is their money, and therefore I would respect their choice on what to do with it. However I do not believe this to be the case. I believe that most homeless people are down and out. Not lazy drug addicts that could get a job if they wanted to. Granted, we do have those.
I was homeless once. It only lasted a couple of days when I moved to Arizona to follow my daughter when my ex-wife moved. I got there with no place to stay. I had $200 or so and the first day after spending a night there was to wash up in a park restroom with a rag. I shaved, and even got checked out by a park worker. However, he didn't bother me, and let me continue to make myself look presentable. I immediately went out looking for a job. You would never have been able to tell that I was homeless. I didn't beg for anything.
If a homeless person wants to learn to budget then someone can volunteer to teach them how. I would like to volunteer the person who suggested to do it for them whether they need it or not. It's the old "Teach a man to fish." adage.
In 30 days or roughly one month a homeless person will pay $150 dollars to the shelter when paying the shelter $5 a day. To a person who is going through a hard time, it may set them back a month or two in getting a new place. Since the article states it cost about $25 a day to house a single person, this may or may not make sense. To a person who is trying to get back on their feet as quickly as possible, this is a bad idea. To a person who is milking the homeless shelter for a cheap place to stay, it is a good idea to help cover the costs.
For a family of four paying $5 each at $20 a day is $600 dollars a month. They can have their own place for that, but if they get caught in the shelter paying their dues, they won't be able to get into an apartment very easily. So basically for the people who are just in a rut, it will cost more to charge them than it will to let them save their money and get out of being homeless. This is just using the information the article is giving.
To quote the bottom "Most are not destitute and have possessions such as cars. Those people should have to pay something toward their housing, even if it's a nominal amount. It teaches them self respect and that there is no such thing as a free lunch." What kind of prejudicial crap is that? The next line says something about most homeless people are willing to pay their own way. Most people do have self respect, and if they can help they will. I agree completely with that.
NOW HERE IS THE TRICK!!! This entire article is a manipulation. The first sentence of the last paragraph is "There has to be a limit to taxpayer generosity". Targeting the taxpayers right there, and everyone is concerned about their pocketbook.
Right now the government is doing cutbacks all over the place. One of the easiest places to cut is homeless shelters. Who cares about the homeless? So why not convince tax payers that we can "Help" the homeless "learn" good money saving values and other such things. That way the burden doesn't fall on the taxpayers as hard as it does now?
This is all a money ploy, and the article was written to ask the public for permission to tax the homeless a little more. Anything that can be exploited will be exploited. Please allow me to put on my tinfoil hat for moment. With all the home foreclosures from the recession and unemployment rates going up, there is a larger number of homeless people. Not drug addicts, but people going through a hard time. How many people did BP lay off?
According to the article, the homeless shelter admitted that it costs $25 a day to house a homeless person. So that is what they are asking from taxpayers.
$25X30=$750 a month. I'm no genius but I think some people actually live on that amount singly...
However, the shelter has only 1 electric bill, 3 HUGE meals a day for everyone, and reusable things after people move on.
Lets say that a person pays their dues of $5 dollars a day and pays $150 dollars that month. The lack of funding makes them stay homeless for an extra 2 weeks. That's an extra $375 dollars the homeless shelter gets from the state for that one person alone. That means the tax payers have paid more money keeping this person housed, than the person paid to be housed.
Lets say that the homeless shelter has room for 50 people, and we already said that one person gets the shelter $750 a month. That would make the income of the shelter $37,500 per month.
That was $37,500 per month in expenses they asked the state for because that is what they claim it costs to house 50 people.
This is looking more and more like a con rather than philanthropic endeavor. What if it is a con? What if it only costs $15,000 dollars a month to house and feed 50 people in a controlled environment. That's a profit of $17,500 a month. Which is of course a guess, but my point is clear.
Now that I have actually ran the numbers. I'm appalled and outraged that the government has figured out a way to make money off of the homeless. After that they have figured out that they can make more money off of the ones that have jobs, and are getting out of the rut. Making money off them keeps them homeless for a little longer thereby making them more money.
This is dirty unethical business, and I'm outraged. Simply put, this is a business plan to keep the money coming in. A different plan could put these people back into society quicker thereby strengthening the economy faster.
Disclaimer: There are true philanthropists that help the homeless. However, this article does us the favor of showing us how our corrupt government can even take advantage of people in the worst of situations.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
neondistractionMar 19, 2011
Go sell crazy somewhere else you f**king spammer, we're all full up here.
iambookus322Mar 23, 2011
Oh, now now now... the article being spammed as you say was a direct reply to the article being shown. Not only that, I only commented with it on posts that were undecided. To give an opposite opinion as it were so people have the option of viewing two different points of view and coming up with their own conclusion...
If I were spamming, I would be pushing some irrelevant crap. Which makes me wonder, can you read?
anotheredheringMar 18, 2011
I love the incompatibility between 'charitable' Christian(s) and their Free Market Fundies. It always ends up in cognitive dissonance.
simonjester666Mar 18, 2011
So Hawaii gets to just ship their homeless off the island to the mainland, I wonder if we can get away with that here in Georgia, We will just ship them to Florida, No one will notice and they will be warmer.
iambookus322Mar 23, 2011
To those who think I spammed on this one. I do apologize as that was not my intent. I wrote the article in direct response to this article, and offered it up as an opposing opinion for those who would like to balance and weigh in before taking a stance on this issue.
But I only got one complaint so I think I'm doing alright.