Like a 'B' grade horror movie...

Damocles said:
Dependency does not equal freedom. And "we" are the people on the board that understand that you don't "get it". Often when practicing freedom one runs upon risk that associates with it, it is often scary to some people to take risks. The government is here to save you from taking risk, or responsibility.
Click to expand...


Are you railing against the evils of the bankruptcy code here?
 
I am moving to NYC to become homeless! Can some of you really not see how this would work as a motivator to stay poor and homeless? Christ, most of us that bust our asses every day don't live that nice. I have no problem with the city paying for some temp housing, maybe an efficiency or one bedroom where a mother and her kids can sleep and cook and get out of the elements, but 2700 a month for a luxury condo, people are NOT going to work to get out this "predicament"
 
Watermark said:
Is it really the worst thing that you guys can imagine, that the homeless are being treated too nicely? Maybe it's wastefully excessive, but mostly I would concentrate on the billions conservatives hand out to corporations and rich people each year. You guys pick on the homeless. That's the difference in our values.
Click to expand...
I am not picking on anybody. I am questioning the logic behind paying 2700 per month when my bet is MUCH less can do the same job, though less luxuriously, and do it for more people and maybe even save some money. Christ I could probably panhandle enough living expenses to be able to live it up at the government's expense.
 
Watermark said:
Is it really the worst thing that you guys can imagine, that the homeless are being treated too nicely? Maybe it's wastefully excessive, but mostly I would concentrate on the billions conservatives hand out to corporations and rich people each year. You guys pick on the homeless. That's the difference in our values.
Click to expand...

you mean like obama giving corps billions in bailouts....:pke:
 
Socrtease said:
I am not picking on anybody. I am questioning the logic behind paying 2700 per month when my bet is MUCH less can do the same job, though less luxuriously, and do it for more people and maybe even save some money. Christ I could probably panhandle enough living expenses to be able to live it up at the government's expense.
Click to expand...

The story h as been updated to reflect that the city pays zero in additional rent for these luxurious accommodations:

The city pays its standard rate of $90 a night per apartment to a contractor called Bedco, which also provides security and social services.
Click to expand...

So the only real argument against this is that the accommodations are too good to provide to homeless people. I guess one can get upset about that but it seems kind of stupid. The condos are empty. There are lots of homeless people. Why not use the available space for the same rate as any other?

Maybe the homeless ought to be required to stay on the streets notwithstanding the fact that there are places for them to stay because the places for them to stay are too nice. Is that what should happen?
 
Socrtease said:
I am not picking on anybody. I am questioning the logic behind paying 2700 per month when my bet is MUCH less can do the same job, though less luxuriously, and do it for more people and maybe even save some money. Christ I could probably panhandle enough living expenses to be able to live it up at the government's expense.
Click to expand...


No. The city pays the same here as it does elsewhere.
 
ib1yysguy said:
You get more retarded by the day. Denying that Republicans give out billions to corporations and the wealthy is too stupid (I thought) even for a Southerner to attempt.
Click to expand...
You appear to be changing your tune little by little. First it was Conservatives, now its Republicans. Eventually you'll get somewhere close to the truth. :)
 
Southern Man said:
You appear to be changing your tune little by little. First it was Conservatives, now its Republicans. Eventually you'll get somewhere close to the truth. :)
Click to expand...

Since you, sir, are a Republican first and a conservative second (despite what you'll tell us), you have no valid criticism to make.

There is no material distinction between someone who votes 100 percent for Republicans and calls themselves a "conservative" and a Republican.

The people you vote for give billions and billions to the wealthy and corporations. It's welfare for the wealthy. This is a fact. I know you like those, so hang onto this one and think about it a little.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Since you, sir, are a Republican first and a conservative second (despite what you'll tell us), you have no valid criticism to make.

There is no material distinction between someone who votes 100 percent for Republicans and calls themselves a "conservative" and a Republican.

The people you vote for give billions and billions to the wealthy and corporations. It's welfare for the wealthy. This is a fact. I know you like those, so hang onto this one and think about it a little.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be nice if you cold define me in the mold of your tiny closed mind, in order to help you win an argument once in a while. Sorry, but the game ain't set up that way. Try again.
 
Southern Man said:
Wouldn't it be nice if you cold define me in the mold of your tiny closed mind, in order to help you win an argument once in a while. Sorry, but the game ain't set up that way. Try again.
Click to expand...

Dude, you're a stereotype of yourself. You don't leave any work for me to do.
 
If all they are paying is 90 per month then I guess I have no objection financially. Still, what would make a person WANT to leave these digs and get a job that will NEVER pay them enough to live a similar place?
 
Socrtease said:
If all they are paying is 90 per month then I guess I have no objection financially. Still, what would make a person WANT to leave these digs and get a job that will NEVER pay them enough to live a similar place?
Click to expand...

You can answer the question yourself if you think about why you haven't already called them to see if you can get a spot yourself.

Also, where's this retarded notion come from that the homeless are all just lazy and need to get out and go to work? Mental illness is the #1 cause of homelessness, not laziness. And it's pretty hard to hold a job if you think it's 26-o-clock.
 
Watermark said:
Is it really the worst thing that you guys can imagine, that the homeless are being treated too nicely? Maybe it's wastefully excessive, but mostly I would concentrate on the billions conservatives hand out to corporations and rich people each year. You guys pick on the homeless. That's the difference in our values.
Click to expand...
Except it isn't. I also concentrate on that waste. It is again the government coming to save us from the risk inherent in the practice of the freedom we are so proud of yet work so hard to remove.
 
Socrtease said:
If all they are paying is 90 per month then I guess I have no objection financially. Still, what would make a person WANT to leave these digs and get a job that will NEVER pay them enough to live a similar place?
Click to expand...
Maybe they'd prefer a different color of carpet. *shrug*
 
Damocles said:
Except it isn't. I also concentrate on that waste. It is again the government coming to save us from the risk inherent in the practice of the freedom we are so proud of yet work so hard to remove.
Click to expand...


Again, are you railing against the bankruptcy code here? Do you want to institute debtor's prisons? Seriously.

There are all sorts of very good capitalistic reasons for the government to "save people from the practice of freedom" and the government does so through myriad ways, the least objectionable and pernicious of which to me is providing nightly shelter for the homeless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top