Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   We youth at EvC are in Moral Decline
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4058 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 121 of 253 (49355)
08-08-2003 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by nator
08-07-2003 8:19 PM


I don't disagree with you, exactly, but I think my point is being rather lost.
I talk too much, and it carries over into my writing. I was already wondering yesterday what the original point of all this was.
I don't disagree with your point, neither now that you've restated it, nor earlier. I think it was DrBill who said that the "American dream" (my words, I think, not his) is lost, and many people can't own a home anymore.
I don't believe that's true. I'm not talking about moving to a hellhole in Detroit. I'm talking about someone saying, "I don't like the way I live. I should be able to have my own home." The person who does that can still accomplish that, slowly but surely, here in the United States, even if they have to start with a minimum wage job.
They may not be able to do it in a city, but there are still plenty of nice places where a person could "pursue their dreams."
I'm not saying anything more than that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by nator, posted 08-07-2003 8:19 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by nator, posted 08-10-2003 12:27 AM truthlover has replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 122 of 253 (49481)
08-08-2003 7:47 PM


Can't say I'm an expert but I have taken surplus food from events that I was involved with to the local shelter....
Talked to the fella there who ran things, he maintained that most of the people who stay there have jobs but just can't afford to rent or buy anything.....
Now these people may not be immensely qualified but they are out there trying to pay their way and failing because the jobs they can get don't pay enough.....
Just a bit of anecdotal "evidence" from the frozen north, and no Rrhain I never published it anywhere.....

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 123 of 253 (49532)
08-08-2003 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by doctrbill
08-08-2003 12:31 AM


quote:
This is an interesting discussion but somewhat of a tangent to our theme. That those who find themselves homeless may, with some effort, allay that grief is an aside. I am expecting that the fact they are homeless in the first place indicates they have difficulty paying rent. It would seem to go without saying that people who have difficulty renting a home are in no position to consider buying one.
........And to get closer to topic, the reason many, I say many, not all, cannot pay the rent is moral depravity.
1. Drunkeness
2. Drugs
3. Laziness (let the working taxpayer support me.)
4. Dishonesty (can't be trusted in a job)
5. Thievery (again can't be trusted or record ruined for hiring) 6. Poor rent record. (ruins homes rented in past or spent rent money on drugs or boose.)
7. Flat out refusal to pay rent due even when able.
On and on the list could go.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by doctrbill, posted 08-08-2003 12:31 AM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by crashfrog, posted 08-08-2003 9:50 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 126 by doctrbill, posted 08-08-2003 11:52 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 129 by nator, posted 08-10-2003 12:09 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 141 by Mammuthus, posted 08-12-2003 10:55 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 124 of 253 (49533)
08-08-2003 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
08-01-2003 10:31 AM


quote:
Well, I thought I'd open a new topic regarding Buz's claim that we youth "don't have a clue" as to the moral decline we are in.
The title you've given to the thread is missleading in that it implys that I am calling the youth of this forum immoral, which is not the case. My statement had to do with the overall moral decline and in no way singles out any individuals or forums.
Schraf, you seem to enjoy going out of your way to misslead as to my character and things I say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 08-01-2003 10:31 AM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by doctrbill, posted 08-09-2003 12:05 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 125 of 253 (49534)
08-08-2003 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Buzsaw
08-08-2003 9:39 PM


And to get closer to topic, the reason many, I say many, not all, cannot pay the rent is moral depravity.
Then why do the people who study homelessness largely disagree?
After all it's their opinion - based on a wealth of data - that largely the reason people can't pay rent is because rent costs some 70-80% of a minimum wage income in most places, which hardly leaves room for food or health care.
Rent is outrageously high for the economy we have. If wages are down, shouldn't rent be, too?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Buzsaw, posted 08-08-2003 9:39 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Buzsaw, posted 08-10-2003 12:57 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 126 of 253 (49547)
08-08-2003 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Buzsaw
08-08-2003 9:39 PM


buzsaw writes:
... the reason many ... cannot pay the rent is moral depravity.
Is this supposed to reflect the compassion of Christ?
For someone who gives lip service to Christian ideals, you are certainly quick to heap scorn upon the unfortunate. Even so, your satanic attitude is founded in little more than scandalous rumor. If you could reform all the degenerates you think are out there, it would do little to assuage the horror of homelessness.
I am reminded of a local family who lost their home and their bank account on the day their son was arrested for selling marijuana to a friend at school. They were unaware of their sons activity in this regard but nonetheless lost everything all at once. They had no place to stay. No money for food. No money to hire an attorney. It was the so-called "morality" of our drug laws which brought this upon them.
Where is your Jesus when we need him? Apparently not with you.
db
------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Buzsaw, posted 08-08-2003 9:39 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by truthlover, posted 08-09-2003 11:11 PM doctrbill has replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2764 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 127 of 253 (49548)
08-09-2003 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by Buzsaw
08-08-2003 9:48 PM


buzsaw writes:
The title you've given to the thread is missleading in that it implys that I am calling the youth of this forum immoral, which is not the case. My statement had to do with the overall moral decline and in no way singles out any individuals or forums.
The hazard of making broad generalizations is that someone out there is actually included. When you say, the youth don't have a clue, the young may take it personally. Do you think your words have no effect on others?
Schraf, you seem to enjoy going out of your way to misslead as to my character and things I say.
What misleading? Is there anyone here who doesn't get the same impression? It is a pleasure to attack the venemous rhetoric and self-righteous vehemence which you set before us.
db
------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Buzsaw, posted 08-08-2003 9:48 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by nator, posted 08-10-2003 12:21 AM doctrbill has replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4058 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 128 of 253 (49681)
08-09-2003 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by doctrbill
08-08-2003 11:52 PM


It was the so-called "morality" of our drug laws which brought this upon them.
I'm not following the story. Did the parents get fined for the kid's crime? Did the police confiscate the parents' house? Did the parents just happen to lose the house on the same day, and you're pointing out that they couldn't get a lawyer? Could you fill in the blanks for me?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by doctrbill, posted 08-08-2003 11:52 PM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by doctrbill, posted 08-10-2003 3:59 PM truthlover has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 129 of 253 (49690)
08-10-2003 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Buzsaw
08-08-2003 9:39 PM


Add to your list, Buz:
National Coalition for the Homeless Page Not Found - National Coalition for the Homeless
Domestic violence (women are forced to leave their homes with nothing in order to save their lives)
Low/stagnating wages combined with increased housing costs
Devastating illness
Decline in public assistance/safety net
Lack of low-cost housing
Mental Illness
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-09-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Buzsaw, posted 08-08-2003 9:39 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 130 of 253 (49692)
08-10-2003 12:21 AM
Reply to: Message 127 by doctrbill
08-09-2003 12:05 AM


Couldn't have said it better m'self.
I like you DrBill.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by doctrbill, posted 08-09-2003 12:05 AM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by doctrbill, posted 08-10-2003 6:01 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 131 of 253 (49693)
08-10-2003 12:27 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by truthlover
08-08-2003 10:56 AM


quote:
I talk too much, and it carries over into my writing.
Nah, I don't think you are too wordy.
There are others here MUCH worse than you in that regard.
quote:
I was already wondering yesterday what the original point of all this was.
I don't disagree with your point, neither now that you've restated it, nor earlier. I think it was DrBill who said that the "American dream" (my words, I think, not his) is lost, and many people can't own a home anymore.
I don't believe that's true. I'm not talking about moving to a hellhole in Detroit. I'm talking about someone saying, "I don't like the way I live. I should be able to have my own home." The person who does that can still accomplish that, slowly but surely, here in the United States, even if they have to start with a minimum wage job.
My point is, what if they don't ever get much further than that minimum wage job?
quote:
They may not be able to do it in a city, but there are still plenty of nice places where a person could "pursue their dreams."
I'm not saying anything more than that.
I dunno.
When our economy rather relies on the idea that thousands and thousands of people being out of work is equal to "full employment", and safety nets are evaporating left and right, I'm not sure I believe you that everyone can own a home.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by truthlover, posted 08-08-2003 10:56 AM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by truthlover, posted 08-10-2003 9:30 AM nator has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 132 of 253 (49700)
08-10-2003 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by crashfrog
08-08-2003 9:50 PM


For homeless people who cannot afford rent there are federal assistance HUD programs to help out. Evidently many choose not to have a home. Must be they choose to not interrupt their lifestyle or do things like seeking work.
quote:
The McKinney Act requires that first priority for occupancy of SRO units be given to homeless individuals. However, HUD will also provide rental assistance for homeless individuals currently residing in units who are eligible for Section 8 assistance.
Additionally, at least 25% of the units proposed for assistance must be vacant at the time of application so that a significant portion of those served are homeless individuals. An application that has a vacancy rate lower than 25% will be rejected. Finally, when current occupants vacate assisted units, these units must be filled with homeless individuals identified through the recipient or owner's continuing outreach effort.
Depending on the circumstances arising from the rehabilitation, current residents who are not eligible for Section 8 assistance may remain in the building (but without HUD assistance) or may receive relocation payments and assistance. Because relocation requirements are complex, please contact the Field Office Relocation Specialist or an experienced government relocation agency in the planning stage of your application.
Homeless Person
Homeless persons are those who:
are sleeping in places not meant for human habitation, such as cars, parks, sidewalks, and abandoned buildings;
or are sleeping in emergency shelters.
This includes persons who ordinarily sleep in one of the above places but are spending a short time (30 consecutive days or less) in a hospital or other institution.
Other Homeless Persons
Persons are also considered to be homeless if they:
are graduating from transitional housing specifically for homeless persons; or
are being evicted within the week from private dwelling units and
no subsequent residences have been identified; and
they lack the resources and support networks needed to obtain access to housing; or
are persons being discharged within the week from institutions in which they have been residents for more than 30 consecutive days; and
no subsequent residences have been identified; and
they lack the resources and support networks needed to obtain access to housing.
Not all persons being evicted from private dwelling units or all persons being discharged from institutions are homeless. Applicants who propose to serve these populations must make clear in their applications that they (a) understand that persons are eligible only if they have no subsequent residence identified and lack the resources and support networks needed to access to housing and (b) propose to serve only eligible persons. Applicants that are selected for funding will be required to have documentation of how it was determined that such persons did not have the resources or support network needed to obtain housing.
In summary, a person is homeless if, without the HUD assistance, they would have to spend the night in a shelter or in a place not meant for human habitation.
The intent of these policies is to help persons who lack shelter. The Department administers other programs to serve persons who are poorly housed or need supportive housing but are not homeless, such as HOME, public housing, Community Development Block Grants, and Supportive Housing for Persons With Disabilities. Contact your HUD field office for more information about those programs.
SRO Program Page
Content updated April 5, 2000 Back to Top
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
451 7th Street S.W., Washington, DC 20410
Telephone: (202) 708-1112 TTY: (202) 708-1455
Find the address of a HUD office near you
Privacy Statement
Home
[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 08-10-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by crashfrog, posted 08-08-2003 9:50 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by nator, posted 08-10-2003 1:30 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 133 of 253 (49701)
08-10-2003 1:30 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by Buzsaw
08-10-2003 12:57 AM


quote:
For homeless people who cannot afford rent there are federal assistance HUD programs to help out.
Except that many of these programs have long, long waiting lists. Read below.
National Coalition for the Homeless Page Not Found - National Coalition for the Homeless
quote:
Housing assistance can make the difference between stable housing, precarious housing, or no housing at all. However, the demand for assisted housing clearly exceeds the supply: only about one-third of poor renter households receive a housing subsidy from the federal, state, or a local government (Daskal, 1998). The limited level of housing assistance means that most poor families and individuals seeking housing assistance are placed on long waiting lists. From 1996-1998, the time households spent on waiting lists for HUD housing assistance grew dramatically. For the largest public housing authorities, a family's average time on a waiting list rose from 22 to 33 months from 1996 to 1998 - a 50% increase (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1999). The average waiting period for a Section 8 rental assistance voucher rose from 26 months to 28 months between 1996 and 1998.(4)
Excessive waiting lists for public housing mean that people must remain in shelters or inadequate housing arrangements longer. For instance, in the mid-1990s in New York, families stayed in a shelter an average of five months before moving on to permanent housing. Today, the average stay is nearly a year (Santos, 2002). Consequently, there is less shelter space available for other homeless people, who must find shelter elsewhere or live on the streets.
A housing trend with a particularly severe impact on homelessness is the loss of single room occupancy (SRO) housing. In the past, SRO housing served to house many poor individuals, including poor persons suffering from mental illness or substance abuse. From 1970 to the mid-1980s, an estimated one million SRO units were demolished (Dolbeare, 1996). The demolition of SRO housing was most notable in large cities: between 1970-1982, New York City lost 87% of its $200 per month or less SRO stock; Chicago experienced the total elimination of cubicle hotels; and by 1985, Los Angeles had lost more than half of its downtown SRO housing (Koegel, et al, 1996). From 1975 to 1988, San Francisco lost 43% of its stock of low-cost residential hotels; from 1970 to 1986, Portland, Oregon lost 59% of its residential hotels; and from 1971 to 1981, Denver lost 64% of its SRO hotels (Wright and Rubin, 1997). Thus the destruction of SRO housing is a major factor in the growth of homelessness in many cities.
Finally, it should be noted that the largest federal housing assistance program is the entitlement to deduct mortgage interest from income for tax purposes. In fact, for every one dollar spent on low income housing programs, the federal treasury loses four dollars to housing-related tax expenditures, 75% of which benefit households in the top fifth of income distribution (Dolbeare, 1996). Moreover, in 1994 the top fifth of households received 61% of all federal housing benefits (tax and direct), while the bottom fifth received only 18%. Thus, federal housing policy has not responded to the needs of low-income households, while disproportionately benefitting the wealthiest Americans.
quote:
Evidently many choose not to have a home. Must be they choose to not interrupt their lifestyle or do things like seeking work.
Declining wages, in turn, have put housing out of reach for many workers: in every state, more than the minimum wage is required to afford a one- or two-bedroom apartment at Fair Market Rent.(1) In fact, in the median state a minimum-wage worker would have to work 89 hours each week to afford a two-bedroom apartment at 30% of his or her income, which is the federal definition of affordable housing (National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2001). Currently, 5 million rental households have "worst case housing needs," which means that they pay more than half their incomes for rent, living in severely substandard housing, or both. The primary source of income for 80% of these households is earnings from jobs. In 1998, this was the case for only 40% of households with worst case housing needs. This represents a 40% increase in working households with worst case housing needs from 1995 to 1999 (U.S. Housing and Urban Development, 2001).
The connection between impoverished workers and homelessness can be seen in homeless shelters, many of which house significant numbers of full-time wage earners. A survey of 27 U.S. cities found that over one in four people in homeless situations are employed, a significant increase from 1998 (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2000). In a number of cities not surveyed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors - as well as in many states - the percentage is even higher (National Coalition for the Homeless, 1997).
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-10-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Buzsaw, posted 08-10-2003 12:57 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4058 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 134 of 253 (49715)
08-10-2003 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by nator
08-10-2003 12:27 AM


I dunno. When our economy rather relies on the idea that thousands and thousands of people being out of work is equal to "full employment", and safety nets are evaporating left and right, I'm not sure I believe you that everyone can own a home.
Ok, let's leave that one there.
My point is, what if they don't ever get much further than that minimum wage job?
Why would that happen, other than the mental illness you mention? Even at McDonald's you get raises and progress over time. My wife was working at McDonald's when I met her. She was 20, and she was making more money than I was.
Interestingly enough, as an aside, that was in Germany (since Europe's been discussed in this thread), and she was making less than she would have been in the U.S., but she was making more than my landlady's son, who was around thirty. He was making DM 2700/mo (in 1987), and I remember wondering how he was making ends meet with the amount of money the German government must have been taking from that 2700. He had a wife and new baby. He did seem to be doing fine, though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by nator, posted 08-10-2003 12:27 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by nator, posted 08-10-2003 12:52 PM truthlover has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 135 of 253 (49747)
08-10-2003 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by truthlover
08-10-2003 9:30 AM


quote:
Why would that happen, other than the mental illness you mention? Even at McDonald's you get raises and progress over time. My wife was working at McDonald's when I met her. She was 20, and she was making more money than I was.
Do you really think that working at McDonalds is a career path that sets up lots of undereducated people for success.
Read Eric Schlosser's "Fast Food Nation" sometime. McDonalds has consistently moved towards less and less training for it's employees in order to cut costs.
quote:
Interestingly enough, as an aside, that was in Germany (since Europe's been discussed in this thread), and she was making less than she would have been in the U.S., but she was making more than my landlady's son, who was around thirty. He was making DM 2700/mo (in 1987), and I remember wondering how he was making ends meet with the amount of money the German government must have been taking from that 2700. He had a wife and new baby. He did seem to be doing fine, though.
Could it be because the taxes the German government take out of his earnings go towards services that actually benefit him, such as national health care and low-cost, subsidized transportation and housing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by truthlover, posted 08-10-2003 9:30 AM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by truthlover, posted 08-11-2003 10:33 PM nator has not replied
 Message 139 by truthlover, posted 08-11-2003 10:37 PM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024