its pretty simple: put them in houses.

Sounds simple. How many houses do you have to put the "homeless" in? How many have you housed? Do they ever turn you down? How do you determine eligibility? Simply being homeless? Do you have rules for their behavior when you put them in your home? Would you have the government force them to live in your home or would it be optional (or be contingent upon their following some sort of rules imposed by the government or you)?

its not complicated. we have more empty houses than we have homeless vets. there is no scarcity of homes in the USA. we have enough. you put them in houses.



only a government bureaucrat would figure out a way to make sure bureaucracy is somehow more important than basic human morality.

Who is we? Are you part of an investor group for homes?

Only a person that thinks spending other people's money is the solution to everything would think that houses are free or owned by some sort of collective (vacant or otherwise) ...and that they have a vote in how those houses (owned by others) are used.

How many homeless do you house to salve your "morality"?

Help me understand. Are you advocating the solution is to do nothing? Just let them suffer without help or compassion?

we. the united states.

why do you think our veterans dont deserve housing, while millions of homes are kept empty to drive up the price of housing?

why do you think bureaucracy is more important than human rights?

i believe our vets deserve housing, and i believe we can make that happen. the math checks out, we have the houses. we merely lack the political will to do it. and by that i mean we lack the political will to put veterans above land lords.

I have no problem with you buying homes and giving them to whomever you please (whether you feel they deserve them or not).

A free home is not a "human right".

"We" don't have the houses...and your math is flawed. The owners of the houses have them. Unlike you, landlords do provide housing for the homeless.

The government has failed every time it has tried to provide housing ...and every time it has chosen to redistribute money (at the behest of those that are happy to spend the money that others worked and sacrificed to earn/accumulate).

Why not keep it in the private sector and house a few homeless yourself? I am sure there are plenty like you that could do the same. Calling for the government to give away even more money is self-defeating (and even encourages poor decisions). Eventually you run out of other people's money...and if you take excessive amounts to redistribute, those "other" folks simply refuse to work harder and smarter than you (or the homeless) ...and it dries up. A recipe for creating even more homeless.

because the united states asked them to pay the ultimate price, the united states should provide them with housing if they need it. that does include me. i am a citizen of the united states.

why do you think we shouldn't provide housing to our vets? why dont you think thats a right they have earned? why do you think a landlord has more rights than a vet?

housing is 100% a human right, but its esp a human right for a veteran of this country. its a shame that you fail to support your fellow servicemen and women.

Your question is pretty global...so hard to answer. Most folks are homeless because we encourage it with bad policy. Rewarding folks for poor decisions is not the solution. Helping them make better decisions is the answer. Sometimes that includes suffering from mistakes. One can be compassionate without rewarding bad behavior. IMHO, compassion is less about helping people become/remain comfortable as a burden on society, and more keeping them from doing so (long string of poor decisions) in the first place.

thats not an answer.

This may be the single most ignorant post ever on this website

VERY high bar to clear, cocker is here now, and we used to have dipso

Wow

The US did not ask them to pay the ultimate price...it asked them to make the enemy pay the ultimate price. It simply asked them to potentially risk their lives in the service of their country. A brief period of service does not entitle them to a lifetime of free stuff (including housing). It expects them to leave the service afterwards and live productive lives.

A landlord has the same rights as a vet. The ownership of their property and the ability to use it as they see fit. No, vets did not earn the rights to other people's stuff.

No. Free housing is not a human right...for a vet or otherwise. My fellow servicemen and women have plenty of avenues of support already. They do not need someone else's home any more than I do. Of course, I realize your actually argument is housing all homeless and vets are just your "go-to" argument...to try to tug some heartstrings. We don't need help from folks that simply want to use the very vets they distain.

As noted, as far as I could tell, IMHO, I did not serve with anyone in the military that was clearly exhibiting mental illness. Obviously, I could not read their minds, but anyone that behaved the least bit strangely or struggled were quickly identified and received help.

Similarly, I served with tens of thousands of people (all-volunteer force) over 4 decades and do not know of a single one that is homeless...or considered mentally ill. The ones that I come into contact with have all been relatively healthy and relatively wealthy compared to their counterparts that did not serve.

How exactly would a mentally ill person become homeless if they made no mistakes? It seems that the very definition of "mentally ill" would include doing just that.

So if someone is drowning you'd simply say, "they made a bad decision," and not render aide?

And I'd be interested In hearing examples of those policies that reward people for poor decisions are. I'm not aware of any.

Edit: I'm not arguing. I'm asking these earnestly.

I have never used veteran's benefits other than a VA home loan, but the number and scope are myriad...from education to health care...as well as job programs (including preference for Federal jobs). The VA holds many, many events and informational programs about benefits and sends out constant emails about them. It would be a massive effort just to keep up with all the programs. See the monthly and weekly ones below (that they just sent me):

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USVAVBA/bulletins/3a7f9be

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USVA/bulletins/3a7d8b8

If they were attempting to drown themself, I might not dive in and allow them to drown me as well.

Almost any social welfare program rewards people (with other people's money) for making poor decisions.

I appreciate the answers, but they don't help me understand your position. Is your premise that homelessness will go away if welfare is eliminated, that nothing happens to us outside our immediate control, or that poor decisions are solely due to poor character?

A drowning person will drown the rescuer to save themselves. (This isn’t about swimming).


Also, association is a huge aspect that often sours youth….

yeah we are really seeing the true colors of finstone now. one ive been alluding to for a while, something that makes a lot of people really uncomfortable.

its shocking even finstone's patriotism and support for the military can't even supersede his more basic tendencies towards this ism.

of course we did.

its amazing to me that even your patriotism and support for the troops isnt enough to override your basic nature.