-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
podfish wrote:
Quote:
I don't know the breakdown, but I think a huge number of the homeless are 'working poor'. They can't just up & leave for elsewhere. ...
There ain't no easy solutions. What is clear, however, is that all of the presidents from the two major political parties have not taken the necessary steps to alleviate the problem since it began to be a "problem" - again - back in the 1970's. Ronald Reagan, as I suggested, made it immeasurably worse, by ending the Homestead Act of 1862.
In former eras of homelessness - such as the 1890's and the 1930's - there was some safety valve in the vastness of the country, in homeless camps & "Hoovervilles" on the edge of the city, as Woody Guthrie put it. No more...
Here is a Que of documentaries about Homelessness in Seattle, starting with "Seattle is Dying" at the top of the pile.
Most of the folks who are currently clogging up the highways and byways of Seattle are not your "working poor." They tend to be strung out on drugs &/or alcohol. I for one do not wish to see these folks put in FEMA Camps & "liquidated" (a la Nazi Germany) when the "problem" becomes more extreme than it is already.
So perhaps tent cities &/or 'tiny houses' in "new towns" for the dispossessed & dysfunctional would be the best solution. Such places would, of necessity be like the Wild West, with shoot-outs & violence a common occurrence. But Something must be done. To be a lasting solution, it must, of necessity involve more than a band-aid fix.
I seriously doubt that Trump has either the vision or the will to do this, though. But let's be honest about the democrats: Clinton & Obama blew it.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
While clearly there is a vast difference in style, obama and trump are substantially similar.
oh, I'm sure you can notice some key differences..
gasoline and tequila are substantially similar too. Both wet, clear liquids, flammable, interesting smell. But if I'm buying a bottle to take to a party with my friends, I better be really careful about which one I choose. True, neither one helps much if I'm trying to have breakfast, but even then there's a real obvious choice as to which one I prefer.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
its certainly invigorating to see so much public viewing of corruption in the Trump Presidency, i don't recall such during the previous administration. Not to mention nepotism, not since Rome anyways. And having foreign governments aid and abet your campaign, that is a real winner there. With over 12000 lies and counting, with the threat of violence during rallies, with the daily entertainment about fake news etc. With the constant distraction of all of these, there is the Americans paying for the wall, the emoluments, etc. So let's be clear, when this current "leader" has so much litigation, so many lawyers, where do you think he will end up? What will his library look like? Will they be spreading his "Art of the Deal" books in prison, where he can sign them, and sell them back to the prison? I mean, he sure will think about it. I don't recall such during the Obama era, unless you read the washingtontimes or something. I guess if the source of education of politics is washingtontimes you could argue a different viewpoint, maybe with a set of completely false "facts". When you bend the truth as much as T does, and you believe like a true believer, anything could be a fact. Climate deniers, birthers, white nationalists, and of course deplorables, all fine people. really fine.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
oh, I'm sure you can notice some key differences..
gasoline and tequila are substantially similar too. Both wet, clear liquids, flammable, interesting smell. But if I'm buying a bottle to take to a party with my friends, I better be really careful about which one I choose. True, neither one helps much if I'm trying to have breakfast, but even then there's a real obvious choice as to which one I prefer.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
Thank you, cyberanvil for bringing up the issue of liberal hypocrisy, in the context of the issue of homelessness.
Is this a good idea?
Patch: City of Cotati Urges Gov. Newsom To Sign Affordable Housing Bill
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Yes, it probably will do some good, cyberanvil - for the families of the people podfish describes as the "working poor." Others, who have fallen lower in the scales of functionality need housing too; single people & addicts. "New towns" in regions of arable land, where gardens may be established to achieve sustainable food productivity, are in order.
Most of the homeless would feel they had entered hillbilly heaven if they could have a tiny house in a planned community. -- Would that your POTUS were listening in to our conversation, and that he cared enough to do something about this enormous "problem."
-Because the past two Democrats in the Oval Office dropped the ball on this score - as they also did on the score of recycling bio-degradable garbage as bio-mass & fertilizer back onto the soil, and doing something effective to curtail green-house gas emissions.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Mmm , gas or tequila, interesting choice. While I have consumed tequila, with many regrets, I have consumed far greater amounts of gas, with far greater regret. So putting aside my emotions... my choice is is clearly gas. I would like to just consume tequila, in moderation, but unfortunatly it's very distracting from my chosen responsibilities, and gas is a necessary part of the equation. I feel real bad about this, I'm working hard to live my desire, but the complexities of the interaction between the world and my desire keep steering me to gas! So in order to accept my own choice and have some modicum of happiness in a the world I acknowledge the power of gas over tequila. Just trying not to mix the two up, that would be really bad!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
oh, I'm sure you can notice some key differences..
gasoline and tequila are substantially similar too. Both wet, clear liquids, flammable, interesting smell. But if I'm buying a bottle to take to a party with my friends, I better be really careful about which one I choose. True, neither one helps much if I'm trying to have breakfast, but even then there's a real obvious choice as to which one I prefer.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
cyberanvil cited two links:
I opened up these links and read the articles, cyberanvil. I can't tell you that the contents of those articles leaves me with any confidence that the current POTUS either understands the gravity of the problem or the length and depth of it. For he says:
Quote:
"It's a phenomena that started two years ago. It's disgraceful. I'm going to may be and I'm looking at it very seriously, we're doing some other things that you probably noticed like some of the very important things that we're doing now. But we're looking at it very seriously because you can't do that..."
Well, I've got News for Mr. Trump. The problem of Homelessness in America did not start two years ago - though it did begin to get considerably worse two years ago, after he became president. Which fact should give him some cause for thought. But the POTUS fobs off the blame for the homeless crisis in the cities of the west coast on the "liberals" who are running San Francisco, and Los Angeles. He could have added, Portland, and Seattle, also - for they have all reached Crisis level.
Quote:
TRUMP: And, you know, we're really not very equipped as a government to be doing that kind of work. That's not really the kind of work that the government probably should be doing. We've never had this in our lives before in our country. And it's not only those few cities, it's a couple of other ones.
CARLSON: No, it's a lot of cities.
TRUMP: At the same time, most of our cities are doing great. But if you look at some of these, they are usually sanctuary cities run by very liberal people and the states are run by very liberal people. But the thing that nobody can figure out is do these governors or mayors, do they really think this is a positive? Do they really think this is okay? Because it's not. It's destroying their city. And it's destroying a whole way of life, and it's not our country. It's not what our country is all about.
-The implication being that the "liberals" are making this all happen in order to make Trump look bad. What a massive ego that man has. -And what a tremendous lack of empathy for the downtrodden. He has never in his life been in a situation where he has had to sleep in a car overnight. He has always slept in swank hotels.
I have a suggestion for the sitting POTUS - for the current one, and also for all who may come: Build "new towns" for the homeless and the dispossessed. It is not alright that tens of thousands of people are living in squalor and desperate poverty on the streets of our cities.
Most of the homeless in the United States of America have gravitated to the West Coast. This is primarily because of Climate. In the South, the police tend to arrest & deport the homeless - at least as far as the county line."Move on, move on, keep moving..." Winters in the Midwest and the East tend to be brutal and sometimes deadly for those who live out-of-doors.
The West Coast also has the preponderance of Timber lands owned by the huge timber corporations that grew up in the late nineteenth century - in violation of the Homestead act of 1862.
Under the terms of the Homestead Act of 1862, no one person was allowed to acquire more than one hundred and sixty acres of the "Public Domain." Of course there were many, many violations of these terms - and the Pacific Railroad Act - also of 1862 - gave millions of acres and whole sections (square miles) in a vast checkerboard throughout the West to the Railroad Barons. O well, "White Man speak with forked tongue." What else is new?
But the Homestead Act - although it was rescinded by Ronald Reagan in 1981 - may yet supply the legal leverage whereby sufficient Lands may be wrested from the grip of the Timber Corporations; Lands on which "new towns" that could house the homeless might be established.
There is no statute of limitations on Fraud - and it is clear, from the confessions of one Stephen Puter, that the vast holdings of the Timber Corporations, e.g. Weyerhauser, Georgia-Pacific, Louisiana-Pacific, et cetera, were all acquired by Fraud. Stephen Puter was the fixer, or comprador, for the plutocrats who acquired the millions of acres of timber lands in the Pacific Northwest in the late nineteenth century, in violation of the Homestead Act of 1862.
Those plutocrats lived in places like Hyde Park, Chicago, and Beacon Hill, Boston, and never had to venture out of their mansions to do the dirty work of Acquisition. It was all done for them by Stephen Puter - who was also made the fall guy when these nefarious doings became public knowledge. He wrote his book as a "tell all" from prison, after he was made to walk the plank & take the fall.
In 1908 there were a series of Class-Action Lawsuits that sought to free these lands from the ownership of the Timber Corporations. One of the last things that Teddy Roosevelt did when he left office, however, was to quash those lawsuits.
Here is a link to the pdf of Stephen Puter's {very important} book, "Looters of the Public Domain." I hope that some retired leftover idealist lawyers from the 60's take up this Issue and run with it.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
I admire your scholarship and good writing, Mayacaman.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
cyberanvil cited two links:
I opened up these links and read the articles, cyberanvil. I can't tell you that the contents of those articles leaves me with any confidence that the current POTUS either understands the gravity of the problem or the length and depth of it.
What I find funny is that Newsom and all the other Progressive pundits like to trumpet how CA is an economic powerhouse (thank you Silicon Valley and Hollywood). And yet, the State wants federal handouts. What's up with that? Perhaps the Bullet Train wasn't a good idea after all.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Cyberanvil, you have such a gift for saying so little and riling up responders to write so much!
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
.... yet, the State wants federal handouts. What's up with that?....
the state wants some of the money it's contributed to the national pool to be spent back here where most of it comes from. It's kinda like if you and a couple of buddies bought the pizza for the whole group and were looked at funny when you ate a slice.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by occihoff:
Cyberanvil, you have such a gift for saying so little and riling up responders to write so much!
You seem to be one who would likes a discussion, an exchange of ideas. A noble endeavor. However, due to the intransigence of certain people this is impossible in most cases. Still, to point out flaws is not ignoble. Responses are illuminating.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
cyberanvil cited two links:
I opened up these links and read the articles, cyberanvil. I can't tell you that the contents of those articles leaves me with any confidence that the current POTUS either understands the gravity of the problem or the length and depth of it. For he says:
Does Ben Carson clear up your qualms?
https://video.foxnews.com/v/60888694...#sp=show-clips
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
the state wants some of the money it's contributed to the national pool to be spent back here where most of it comes from. It's kinda like if you and a couple of buddies bought the pizza for the whole group and were looked at funny when you ate a slice.
So would the Feds wanting some Bullet Train money back be similar?
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Jefferson Donley, aka, "cyberanvil" wrote:
Secretary Carson sounds good, Jefferson - But where are these "clean places" where they intend to put the homeless? - In 'clean' FEMA Camps? I'll suspend judgement on what he is saying now - to FOX News - until we see the results.
Obviously the city governments can not deal with the crisis on their own. It is a social crisis; not solely a civic one. And the Crisis is certainly not peculiar to "sanctuary cities" run by "liberals" - as Donald Trump has implied.
As I have suggested, above, "Land Reform" is in order - the severing from the timber corporations of some of the lands that they obtained by Fraud, in violation of the Homestead Act. "New towns" must be built, in which those folks who are currently on the streets may obtain permanent housing.
I agree with Doctor Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that "the need is overwhelming, and that in a country like ours with so many resources and with so much wealth, it really is abominable." Spot on. This is a rich country, and these things should not be.
But I disagree, strenuously, that it is not the responsibility of the Federal government, and that "these are local problems." Let this Administration put their money where the mouth is, if as they say, they want to fix it, with permanent solutions. That's my position, Jefferson. How do you like them apples? Care to comment on my several points?
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
But I disagree, strenuously, that it is not the responsibility of the Federal government, and that "these are local problems."
sure, let's assume the problem is to be solved locally. The right is quick to say, "can't solve the world's problems -- all the poor people will flood in here!". So turn it around. The solution they propose is to pick and choose who they care about -- which is usually an exclusive bunch, who somehow, in ways beyond their ken, always seem to look a lot like them and share their values -- and put up barriers to keep everyone who doesn't fit their criteria away. And we've seen what lengths they're willing to go to, and how easily they abdicate any responsibility. It's always someone else's fault -- though they forget that even if that's true, responsibility isn't located at a single point.
Responsibility is like gravity. Big objects have a lot. Every object has some. There's no end to it, either - theoretically a little bit of earth's gravity spreads out across the whole universe, though the effects are much stronger when you're close. To things that are very close by, small objects can have very noticeable effects, but they can easily be overwhelmed by the impact of the massive objects nearby.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
Jefferson Donley, aka, "cyberanvil" wrote:
Secretary Carson sounds good, Jefferson - But where are these "clean places" where they intend to put the homeless? - In 'clean' FEMA Camps? I'll suspend judgement on what he is saying now - to FOX News - until we see the results.
Obviously the city governments can not deal with the crisis on their own. It is a social crisis; not solely a civic one. And the Crisis is certainly not peculiar to "sanctuary cities" run by "liberals" - as Donald Trump has implied.
As I have suggested, above, "Land Reform" is in order - the severing from the timber corporations of some of the lands that they obtained by Fraud, in violation of the Homestead Act. "New towns" must be built, in which those folks who are currently on the streets may obtain permanent housing.
I agree with Doctor Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that "the need is overwhelming, and that in a country like ours with so many resources and with so much wealth, it really is abominable." Spot on. This is a rich country, and these things should not be.
But I disagree, strenuously, that it is not the responsibility of the Federal government, and that "these are local problems." Let this Administration put their money where the mouth is, if as they say, they want to fix it, with permanent solutions. That's my position, Jefferson. How do you like them apples? Care to comment on my several points?
Nice to hear your view point. It's obvious that you hear, but do not see.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
human beings deserve a place to have shelter, no matter their degrees of mental health or economic tier. So it seems to me it is everyone's benefit for all to share in the responsibility. Didn't the federal government originally create a mental health system, and wasn't it the federal government that abrogated it? ( carter, reagan). Didn't HUD just this year plan to cut 20% for housing? ( Carson?). Cutting housing runs up prices, so hence more homeless. I've advocated since it came to my attention the tiny home concept. Cuts to mental health probably adds to the issues of homelessness.
I think there are special areas around Santa Rosa that could commit to the homeless include the fairgrounds, where buildings already exist. It seems to me there would be plenty of crafty people who would volunteer their skills and time if there were leadership and guidelines to accomplish it.
Blaming government, leaders is shunning our own responsibilities. Would there be any leaders here? Is it only greed and landowners that stands in the way? Is it not in my neighborhood political status quo that stands as obstacles to end homelessness? I am positive this is something that all of us who are concerned could do and say things that would lead to some thing that is beyond criticism.
What concepts and ideas do you have that could end homeless now? It seems to me a venture fund with its goal of collecting the monies for a township enterprise could do something, and perhaps alleviate risk by setting monetary goals for those who used the project and paid back something? I am thinking of people who used such a project and got jobs and so forth...Funding for such from the feds could not be refused either. Neither a sales tax to increase the fund.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
Jefferson Donley, aka, "cyberanvil" wrote:
Secretary Carson sounds good, Jefferson - But where are these "clean places" where they intend to put the homeless? - In 'clean' FEMA Camps? I'll suspend judgement on what he is saying now - to FOX News - until we see the results.
Obviously the city governments can not deal with the crisis on their own. It is a social crisis; not solely a civic one. And the Crisis is certainly not peculiar to "sanctuary cities" run by "liberals" - as Donald Trump has implied.
As I have suggested, above, "Land Reform" is in order - the severing from the timber corporations of some of the lands that they obtained by Fraud, in violation of the Homestead Act. "New towns" must be built, in which those folks who are currently on the streets may obtain permanent housing.
I agree with Doctor Ben Carson, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that "the need is overwhelming, and that in a country like ours with so many resources and with so much wealth, it really is abominable." Spot on. This is a rich country, and these things should not be.
But I disagree, strenuously, that it is not the responsibility of the Federal government, and that "these are local problems." Let this Administration put their money where the mouth is, if as they say, they want to fix it, with permanent solutions. That's my position, Jefferson. How do you like them apples? Care to comment on my several points?
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Jefferson Donley, aka "cyberanvil" wrote:
Quote:
Nice to hear your view point. It's obvious that you hear, but do not see.
"occihoff" aka Dr. Richard Hoff, wrote:
Quote:
Cyberanvil, you have such a gift for saying so little and riling up responders to write so much!
Please elaborate on exactly what it is that I do not see, Jefferson. Your cryptic sayings are sometimes a bit obscure.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
eddierosenthal wrote:
Quote:
human beings deserve a place to have shelter, no matter their degrees of mental health or economic tier. So it seems to me it is everyone's benefit for all to share in the responsibility. Didn't the federal government originally create a mental health system, and wasn't it the federal government that abrogated it? ( carter, reagan). Didn't HUD just this year plan to cut 20% for housing? ( Carson?). Cutting housing runs up prices, so hence more homeless. I've advocated since it came to my attention the tiny home concept. Cuts to mental health probably adds to the issues of homelessness.
I think there are special areas around Santa Rosa that could commit to the homeless include the fairgrounds, where buildings already exist. It seems to me there would be plenty of crafty people who would volunteer their skills and time if there were leadership and guidelines to accomplish it.
Blaming government, leaders is shunning our own responsibilities. Would there be any leaders here? Is it only greed and landowners that stands in the way? Is it not in my neighborhood political status quo that stands as obstacles to end homelessness? I am positive this is something that all of us who are concerned could do and say things that would lead to some thing that is beyond criticism.
What concepts and ideas do you have that could end homeless now? It seems to me a venture fund with its goal of collecting the monies for a township enterprise could do something, and perhaps alleviate risk by setting monetary goals for those who used the project and paid back something? I am thinking of people who used such a project and got jobs and so forth...Funding for such from the feds could not be refused either. Neither a sales tax to increase the fund.
I totally agree, with you, Ed, that "blaming government, leaders is shunning our own responsibilities. Would there be any leaders here? Is it only greed and landowners that stands in the way? Is it not in my neighborhood political status quo that stands as obstacles to end homelessness? I am positive this is something that all of us who are concerned could do and say things that would lead to some thing that is beyond criticism."
My best suggestion for the long-term solution is simply to re-institute the Homestead Act, and for a progressive coalition of lawyers {retired progressives would be appropriate} to go to work on the points of leverage to take on the issue of wresting lands away from the timber corporations who stole the Lands from the "Public Domain" in the first place. There are hundreds of thousands of acres of such lands throughout the Pacific Northwest that would be appropriate places for new townships.
Stephen Puter's seminal book, "Looters of the Public Domain" tells the story in all the grimy details. That account, +Plus+ the legal fact that there is no statute of limitations on Fraud, seem to be the two salient points of legal leverage. From talks with homeless advocates in Sonoma County, in decades past, I gather that one of the main obstacles to a permanent solution in Sonoma County has been the nimby factor - the chorus of "not in my backyard" property-owners. This will continue to be an obstacle, no doubt.
That is one reason why I advocate the humane solution of tiny houses in intentional, monitored communities in the near-wilderness of former timber-lands. The Timber Corporations have looted the forests long enough. - Five, six, seven generations of trees? They already got their moneys' worth out of their theft.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
We are then talking decades of legal obstacles, with no local incentive to get action on what is RIGHT NOW an aggravation for everyone. And shedding responsibility and handing it over to legal authorities is another in a pattern of inaction for taking responsibility OURSELVES. I personally would not take delight in that as the only course of action, but only as a secondary course. Fight the big corporations certainly has its appeal, like fighting PG&E or Chase, they have plenty of lawyers to recruit. It makes more sense ( at least to end the frustration and to feel like something will get done) to get funding for some sort of non profit that would buy and build on the current turf for the immediate interest of the homeless and the community. When i said "township" i did not mean to set off those neurons firing about timber and the homestead act, but to implicity mean Santa Rosa and its surrounds.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
eddierosenthal wrote:
I totally agree, with you, Ed, that "blaming government, leaders is shunning our own responsibilities. Would there be any leaders here? Is it only greed and landowners that stands in the way? Is it not in my neighborhood political status quo that stands as obstacles to end homelessness? I am positive this is something that all of us who are concerned could do and say things that would lead to some thing that is beyond criticism."
My best suggestion for the long-term solution is simply to re-institute the Homestead Act, and for a progressive coalition of lawyers {retired progressives would be appropriate} to go to work on the points of leverage to take on the issue of wresting lands away from the timber corporations who stole the Lands from the "Public Domain" in the first place. There are hundreds of thousands of acres of such lands throughout the Pacific Northwest that would be appropriate places for new townships.
Stephen Puter's seminal book, "Looters of the Public Domain" tells the story in all the grimy details. That account, +Plus+ the legal fact that there is no statute of limitations on Fraud, seem to be the two salient points of legal leverage. From talks with homeless advocates in Sonoma County, in decades past, I gather that one of the main obstacles to a permanent solution in Sonoma County has been the nimby factor - the chorus of "not in my backyard" property-owners. This will continue to be an obstacle, no doubt.
That is one reason why I advocate the humane solution of tiny houses in intentional, monitored communities in the near-wilderness of former timber-lands. The Timber Corporations have looted the forests long enough. - Five, six, seven generations of trees? They already got their moneys' worth out of their theft.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
....My best suggestion for the long-term solution is simply to re-institute the Homestead Act, and for a progressive coalition of lawyers {retired progressives would be appropriate} to go to work on the points of leverage to take on the issue of wresting lands away from the timber corporations....
that's got the germ of a great idea in it. I'm not sold on the idea that most homeless people would be happy with brand-new homogeneous communities of people in similar situations. I also think there's a huge range of levels of initiative and enterprise in the homeless population. People without means have huge barriers to accomplishing anything; for example, lack of a car can prevent you from holding a job.
We're generally accepting of the idea that public funds go to supporting the homeless, and many of us would be interested in committing even more if it was effective. Also, it's better if it's in the form of investment rather than subsistence payments. How about if we modify the Homestead Act to support conversion of underutilized land for housing and small businesses? I'm not opposed to a little punitive repossession either. So property that's in city limits but isn't used beneficially (yea, big brother gets to decide..) can be acquired by eminent domain and converted to housing, services for those who need it, and incubators for small, possibly unprofitable but valuable, businesses. This horrifies those who think "if you can pay for it, you get to do it - if you own it, no-one can ever take it away". But sadly for them, I and many others don't find Ayn has any real monopoly on god's ethical plan.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
eddierosenthal wrote:
Quote:
...Fight the big corporations certainly has its appeal, like fighting PG&E or Chase, they have plenty of lawyers to recruit. It makes more sense ( at least to end the frustration and to feel like something will get done) to get funding for some sort of non profit that would buy and build on the current turf for the immediate interest of the homeless and the community. When i said "township" i did not mean to set off those neurons firing about timber and the homestead act, but to implicity mean Santa Rosa and its surrounds.
In theory, I agree with you totally, Ed - it should happen here, in our County. Just as, years ago, Willie Brown and the other Democrat mayors in San Francisco should have allowed the old Armory Building in the Mission District to be converted into a hotel for the homeless. It could have been done. But there will always be those in the neighborhood who will stand up at the Board of Supes & the City Council Meetings to protest, "Not in my backyard..."
If you can find a piece of ground in the environs of Sonoma County where small houses can be built for the homeless, I'm all for it. -But experience militates against that likely-hood, unfortunately. There are tens of thousands of acres in Mendocino County however, that were obtained by the timber corporations in violation of the Homestead Act, that would do very well for the purposes under consideration.
I think that the progressives should move on this one, without waiting for Trump &/Or the Feds to do anything. -Because you are correct, Ed : "...shedding responsibility and handing it over to legal authorities is another in a pattern of inaction for taking responsibility OURSELVES. I personally would not take delight in that as the only course of action, but only as a secondary course...."
Pushing from below is the proper course on this one. So the question then becomes: "Where are the idealist lawyers of yesteryear" ?
Build the proper Homeless Coalition with a Radical Agenda, & the World will Beat a Path to your Door
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
even if there were places out of the city in a pleasant area, where you could build thinking that the homeless would go there willingly there would be no infrastructure for them, no hubbub. It would be really like dropping an alien into the world, too confusing for them. Its going to take plenty of compassion and thoughtfulness, and those nimby ites need to be shouted down then. They need to be shamed, afraid to say. The old offices on chanate, which used to house offices for mental health could be used. For c* sake, even the bird sanctuary came up with enough funding to stay and build, even a bigger place then they had. County property is out there. Greed is everywhere.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
I think we've stumbled on to a Subject - the Crisis of Homelessness - that has got traction - and deserves its own thread. It is a Subject whose time has come - indeed, it is past time. Since many of us feel passionately about the Issue of Homelessness, and seek Answers and Solutions, I move that we move this conversation over to a New Thread, since it is peripheral to the original conversation that was started by Ken Burgess, "Discussions with Trump Supporters." Thank you, cyberanvil, for bringing up this topic in the general discussion.
So saying, I have Initiated the Thread, "Open Committee Toward Solutions On the Homeless Crisis." If that sounds portentous, I apologize. I would like to see it become an Open Air Talk Shop on the Homeless Crisis - where concerned Citizens can offer Solutions on how to build Permanent Communities for the Homeless - and also Where, locally, the Homeless may be satisfactorily housed, in the Present.
cyberanvil wrote:
podfish wrote:
Quote:
that's got the germ of a great idea in it. I'm not sold on the idea that most homeless people would be happy with brand-new homogeneous communities of people in similar situations. I also think there's a huge range of levels of initiative and enterprise in the homeless population. People without means have huge barriers to accomplishing anything; for example, lack of a car can prevent you from holding a job.
We're generally accepting of the idea that public funds go to supporting the homeless, and many of us would be interested in committing even more if it was effective. Also, it's better if it's in the form of investment rather than subsistence payments. How about if we modify the Homestead Act to support conversion of underutilized land for housing and small businesses? I'm not opposed to a little punitive repossession either. So property that's in city limits but isn't used beneficially (yea, big brother gets to decide..) can be acquired by eminent domain and converted to housing, services for those who need it, and incubators for small, possibly unprofitable but valuable, businesses.
eddierosenthal wrote:
Quote:
even if there were places out of the city in a pleasant area, where you could build thinking that the homeless would go there willingly there would be no infrastructure for them, no hubbub. It would be really like dropping an alien into the world, too confusing for them. Its going to take plenty of compassion and thoughtfulness, and those nimby ites need to be shouted down then. They need to be shamed, afraid to say. The old offices on chanate, which used to house offices for mental health could be used. For c* sake, even the bird sanctuary came up with enough funding to stay and build, even a bigger place then they had. County property is out there. Greed is everywhere.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
Please elaborate on exactly what it is that I do not see, Jefferson. Your cryptic sayings are sometimes a bit obscure.
Nothing is wholly obvious without becoming enigmatic. Reality itself is too obvious to be true
Enigmatic
Introspection is fueled by the Enigmatic.
Does that help you Mark?
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Nothing is wholly obvious without becoming enigmatic. Reality itself is too obvious to be true
Enigmatic
Introspection is fueled by the Enigmatic.
Does that help you Mark?
Nope. Too enigmatic.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Hey You - My Liberal, Democrat Party Friends, who think, that by selecting some new Democrat to run for President to defeat Donald Trump, you will make things right...
Just consider that the following Speech was made in 2010, in Front of the White House, at a time when the "Democrat" Obama was the President:
https://www.facebook.com/SoapboxStand/videos/2194948560617172/?v=2194948560617172
At that time, the U.S. Government was spending over Seven hundred (700) million dollars every day on the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - the Wars that had been started by W, and that Obama had promised to End...
Did Obama ever consider that he could have ended Homelessness in America with that sort of expenditure?
The man who made this speech was arrested immediately afterwards.
Donald Trump, also ran & was elected on the promise to " End New World Order Wars" - Yet, so far, he has vetoed two bi-partisan bills that were passed by both the House and the Senate to de-fund the sale of Arms to Saudi Arabia in their ongoing, barbaric & bloody War against the Rebels in Yemen. So far, he has not bombed Iran. Let us give thanks for that.
Get a clue, kids : The two major Parties in Amerika are the Two wings of the Same Bird of Prey.
&, As Randolph Bourne wrote, long ago, "War is the Health of the State."
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
i tend to agree. but what, after listening to the inspiring speech from Mike Prysner, or reading the very articulate and inspiring articles at the fb PSL site ( Party for Socialism and LIberation) what can we do? Do you think, like i do, that Intellectualism is dead here in amerika?; reading Aleksandr Solzhenitsym doesn't produce freedom, Tom Cruise speech in Born on the Fourth of July didn't end war. Joining a nudist colony doesn't produce real change. Meditating doesn't produce reality for the meditator usually as well. But yes revolution of the interior of our consciousness, or the activity of the one, such as one like Greta Thunbert, can capture us. Perhaps. There would have to be a generational change, one that defies the traditional military industrial complex to lead us away from that bipartisan culture, to allow for a real change. We likely will not see it, and perhaps if the planet survives there will be human survivors after that apocalyptic end time... As for reality or what is , that thread of thought, of your perception of it, deserves to be examined by the SELF, as we all seem to be living in our OWN. "We are domesticated animals, revolving in a cage which we have built for ourselves - with its contentions, wranglings, its impossible political leaders, its gurus who exploit our self-conceit and their own with great refinement or rather crudely." - Jiddu Krishnamurti
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
Hey You - My Liberal, Democrat Party Friends, who think, that by selecting some new Democrat to run for President to defeat Donald Trump, you will make things right...
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by eddierosenthal:
...what can we do? Do you think, like i do, that Intellectualism is dead here in amerika?;...
sorry, did I miss it when it came by? Did it stay long? damn.. would a been nice to meet up.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
eddierosenthal wrote:
Quote:
i tend to agree. but what, after listening to the inspiring speech from Mike Prysner, or reading the very articulate and inspiring articles at the fb
PSL site ( Party for Socialism and LIberation) what can we do? Do you think, like i do, that Intellectualism is dead here in amerika? ...There would have to be a generational change, one that defies the traditional military industrial complex to lead us away from that bipartisan culture, to allow for a real change. We likely will not see it, and perhaps if the planet survives there will be human survivors after that apocalyptic end time... As for reality or
what is , that thread of thought, of your perception of it, deserves to be examined by the SELF, as we all seem to be living in our OWN.
Your question, "What can we do?" puts us all on the spot, Ed. - Myself, as well. I cited that speech and agree with just about every word in it, and yet, I probably would not see eye to eye on all of the points of doctrine of this "Party for Socialism and Liberation" that Mike Prysner, the speaker who made that speech, is a member of.
Looking at the picture on the facebook page of the PSL, I noticed a young woman with a PLO flag. That's just one issue I would tend to differ on, since I do not support a bloody revolution to "Liberate Palestine." Instead, I support the less bloody expedient of a Federation of the Israelis & Palestinians, with a joint capital in Jerusalem, a Common Constitution & Bill of Rights, One schedule of Law for everyone from the River to the Sea, & Two mayors in Jerusalem, {with a padded room for group therapy, as our friend, Michael Bridge, has so brilliantly suggested.}
Realistically, Socialism does not get very much traction in Amerika these days among the "working class" {though its popularity seems to be growing in the younger generation.} We are all witnesses to the fact that the bogus Populism of Donald Trump has far more appeal. The reasons for this are many, and could fill several thoughtful books...
As far as what can be done, I certainly don't pretend to have all the answers. Socrates was good at asking Questions, and Plato took up the method of his teacher. So I think it is important, first, that we ask proper Questions, & that we Question Everything - all of the so-called "established" truths, & all of the old theories about History & Society.
One of the things I do think that We (it would take a Movement) might be able to do something about is this issue of Homelessness, that our Trump-supporting sparring partner, cyberanvil, brought into the discussion. As I have already stated, there are points of legal leverage whereby Justice may be served to the homeless and dispossessed in America.
Land Reform is one arena where change may happen. It is, theoretically possible, precisely because there are these points of legal leverage... We do not have to wait for it to come from the Federal government, either - because it will not. It must come as a groundswell from the proverbial "People."
As to you question, "Is Intellectualism dead in amerika?" - I would answer, "Not quite." We can't afford to let it die, either; though it has been many years since the (former) Mediterraneum Café on Telegraph Avenue resembled the Cafés of the Left Bank in Paris, or the Areopagus of old.
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
yes i was a frequent member of the disestablishment who frequented that cafe. Now it's sort of millenial depresso spot. I don't think i can fault anything you just said. I have nieces and newphews who are much more into freeing the Palestinians, but as an older generation i tend to side with the victim hood of Israel, although i also have compassion for Palestinians, they do themselves no good by having leaders who are probably in the minority, but rule with money from the Saudis. Let me be clear, i am no expert in this area. But likely the Israeli Lobby is too strong in America, and the Hamas are doing far too little with capital that comes from Saudi Arabia. Sometimes i think too much like a secular jew, and sometimes i get too rabid to defend Israel. I am on a roller coaster there. As i drove by the leftovers from the fire at the Fountaingrove, there is land there that would be nice to have a little village scene for homeless. Several tiny homes could be placed there, within easy walking distance of Kaiser. In my fantasy i see it, and knowing it is a fantasy.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Mayacaman:
Your question, "What can we do?" puts us all on the spot, Ed. ...
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
dude, really? you think that was an accidental slip of the tongue? or an inadvertent reveal of my true feelings after all? I won't claim it's all that eloquent of a response, but it's not intended to be read without some sense of context either. If you're happy with 'gotcha', go to town with it.
A belated thank you. I feel so much better now. :yippee:
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
-
Re: Discussions with Trump supporters
eddierosenthal wrote:
Quote:
yes i was a frequent member of the disestablishment who frequented that cafe. Now it's sort of millenial depresso spot. I don't think i can fault anything you just said. I have nieces and newphews who are much more into freeing the Palestinians, but as an older generation i tend to side with the victim hood of Israel, although i also have compassion for Palestinians, they do themselves no good by having leaders who are probably in the minority, but rule with money from the Saudis. Let me be clear, i am no expert in this area. But likely the Israeli Lobby is too strong in America, and the Hamas are doing far too little with capital that comes from Saudi Arabia. Sometimes i think too much like a secular jew, and sometimes i get too rabid to defend Israel. I am on a roller coaster there. As i drove by the leftovers from the fire at the Fountaingrove, there is land there that would be nice to have a little village scene for homeless. Several tiny homes could be placed there, within easy walking distance of Kaiser. In my fantasy i see it, and knowing it is a fantasy.
Sorry, Ed, but I have been occupied with my family; my daughter and grandchildren being up from Brazil, and so I did not find time to answer you in a timely fashion.
If you care to weigh in on an earlier thread that I initiated on resolving the "problem" in Israel / Palestine, please feel free to contribute to that thread. At best we can vent our feelings and offer up insights. We can be sure that both the C.I.A. / State Department, & the Mossad are listening in. So tread lightly...
As far as building tiny houses on the burned out hill by Fountaingrove goes, Yes, is is a beautiful Idea. But somehow, I think the Board of Supes wouldn't go for it. They "don't want poor people living in rural Sonoma County" - that's a candid quote that I heard, as recounted by a mound-system contractor who shared it with me, of what he heard from one of the Supervisors back in the 1980's...
If they don't want poor people living in "Rural Sonoma County" how much {more or less} do they want them living within Santa Rosa City Limits, in permanent housing? Your guess is as good as mine.
Please continue to dialog on the subject of finding solutions to the Homeless Crisis on this other thread I initiated. Thank goodness, it is getting some traction.
Something has got to change.
