Post by eric on Oct 16, 2014 9:20:57 GMT -8
I'll begin with a conspiracy theory because in my damaged mind and through my experience it highlights some important prerequisite ideas,
In my involvement with people on the streets in various towns I've come to believe people are products of their environment. The infrastructure in which we live mixed with human nature has powerful implications. If you want to control a populace controlling the infrastructure in which they live is a good place to start.
I thought about this after speaking to a lady on a bus selling me on PBS's documentary on how the mason's run the world. i thought, "How does a construction company even place themselves in a position to have any power like that?"
By no means a conclusive thought but it is the only way I can see such a thing being possible.
1) Separate people and they stop sharing with each other making it easy for a select few to capitalize on their lack of sharing. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
2) Separate people and feed them soft news and they become disinterested, feel alone in their opinion, and stop debating thereby never reaching a general consensus. In ancient Athens democracy was ran by most every able man participating in debate and discussion until a consensus was reached. Then instead tallying disinterested votes, laws would be passed according to such a consensus. And yes, unlike politicians who only want to promote their agenda, a consensus is generally reached when citizens put rational thought into debates and informing each other
3) Due to the lack of sharing and lack of communication people start to see competitors instead of neighbors.
....Yeah I'm becoming a paranoid old man.
"No community is easier to govern than one that rejects the very concept of community." - Stephen King
_________________________
IDEA TO STOP HOMELESSNESS
This was my reply to a local news paper,
RE: "One Small Step" [News, Aug 20], regarding the idea of erecting tiny houses as a potential solution to homelessness.
DEAR [Portland] MERCURY—One should be skeptical of any housing plan for the homeless introduced by a mayor who has never once, that I've seen, been remotely involved in actually getting to know the homeless on these streets, and who is practically best friends with the landlord association. What about converting a warehouse-like structure into a large room full of bunk beds? It may seem like a recipe for disaster, accommodating so many in one space, but my experience has led me to [believe] that people are products of their environment, and in a humane living situation tend to share with each other and get along. It happens every night in countless missions across the country—only difference is that missions subject grown men to curfews, enforced chapel services, all-day lines, and disrespect.
Yoshi
.........If you want to change homelessness you have to change the system not just give a hand out that will be gone tomorrow. You need an idea that will survive a capitalistic society and thus it needs to have the appeal of making money as well as helping people. Charging one or two hundred would not only be affordable and of interest to many on the streets, but could also generate more profit than dividing a place up into apartments (you do the numbers).
Most homeless have learned to do away with the concept of privacy- really it is something we're used to but is not neccessarry. They are however concerned about having a home base; a place to be during the day instead of wondering around and wasting what little money they might have, a place to store a few bags worth of stuff instead of stashing them in bushes, a place to shower and take a rest (without looking over your shoulder all night long) when needed, and a place to regroup and organize so you can go to work on getting yourself out of that position. Most people don't appreciate how exhausting and even expensidve it is to actually try to accomplish something on the street. Imagine being sleep deprived and carrying everything you own with you everywhere you go and wondering around urban areas packed full of nothing but for-profit businesses looking for a place to just get through the day.
Even renting a small 8*3 ft square of land and a small locker would go a long way to virtually kill homelessness in the sense that people have a place to GO without being on the run, a place to store their stuff, a place to sleep without looking over your shoulder all night long, and god forbid; drink a beer without being arrested. It certainly makes more sense than waiting for a few junkies hiding in the woods to make the news and to ruin things for everyone because they hid in the woods and generated a disgusting amount of garbage. Why not instead be able to offer campers garbage service for a fee? why not have an inspector come out to make sure people keep a camp site up to basic code? why not work with such people instead of against them?
The thing is when people go to try to solve homelessness they think top down; how to bring the american dream to the bottom of the barrel? But if we were to instead approach it bottom up we would simply make room for them and their way of life in the society we created. That is a much bigger help than any charity could ever be.
In my involvement with people on the streets in various towns I've come to believe people are products of their environment. The infrastructure in which we live mixed with human nature has powerful implications. If you want to control a populace controlling the infrastructure in which they live is a good place to start.
I thought about this after speaking to a lady on a bus selling me on PBS's documentary on how the mason's run the world. i thought, "How does a construction company even place themselves in a position to have any power like that?"
By no means a conclusive thought but it is the only way I can see such a thing being possible.
1) Separate people and they stop sharing with each other making it easy for a select few to capitalize on their lack of sharing. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
2) Separate people and feed them soft news and they become disinterested, feel alone in their opinion, and stop debating thereby never reaching a general consensus. In ancient Athens democracy was ran by most every able man participating in debate and discussion until a consensus was reached. Then instead tallying disinterested votes, laws would be passed according to such a consensus. And yes, unlike politicians who only want to promote their agenda, a consensus is generally reached when citizens put rational thought into debates and informing each other
3) Due to the lack of sharing and lack of communication people start to see competitors instead of neighbors.
....Yeah I'm becoming a paranoid old man.
"No community is easier to govern than one that rejects the very concept of community." - Stephen King
_________________________
IDEA TO STOP HOMELESSNESS
This was my reply to a local news paper,
RE: "One Small Step" [News, Aug 20], regarding the idea of erecting tiny houses as a potential solution to homelessness.
DEAR [Portland] MERCURY—One should be skeptical of any housing plan for the homeless introduced by a mayor who has never once, that I've seen, been remotely involved in actually getting to know the homeless on these streets, and who is practically best friends with the landlord association. What about converting a warehouse-like structure into a large room full of bunk beds? It may seem like a recipe for disaster, accommodating so many in one space, but my experience has led me to [believe] that people are products of their environment, and in a humane living situation tend to share with each other and get along. It happens every night in countless missions across the country—only difference is that missions subject grown men to curfews, enforced chapel services, all-day lines, and disrespect.
Yoshi
.........If you want to change homelessness you have to change the system not just give a hand out that will be gone tomorrow. You need an idea that will survive a capitalistic society and thus it needs to have the appeal of making money as well as helping people. Charging one or two hundred would not only be affordable and of interest to many on the streets, but could also generate more profit than dividing a place up into apartments (you do the numbers).
Most homeless have learned to do away with the concept of privacy- really it is something we're used to but is not neccessarry. They are however concerned about having a home base; a place to be during the day instead of wondering around and wasting what little money they might have, a place to store a few bags worth of stuff instead of stashing them in bushes, a place to shower and take a rest (without looking over your shoulder all night long) when needed, and a place to regroup and organize so you can go to work on getting yourself out of that position. Most people don't appreciate how exhausting and even expensidve it is to actually try to accomplish something on the street. Imagine being sleep deprived and carrying everything you own with you everywhere you go and wondering around urban areas packed full of nothing but for-profit businesses looking for a place to just get through the day.
Even renting a small 8*3 ft square of land and a small locker would go a long way to virtually kill homelessness in the sense that people have a place to GO without being on the run, a place to store their stuff, a place to sleep without looking over your shoulder all night long, and god forbid; drink a beer without being arrested. It certainly makes more sense than waiting for a few junkies hiding in the woods to make the news and to ruin things for everyone because they hid in the woods and generated a disgusting amount of garbage. Why not instead be able to offer campers garbage service for a fee? why not have an inspector come out to make sure people keep a camp site up to basic code? why not work with such people instead of against them?
The thing is when people go to try to solve homelessness they think top down; how to bring the american dream to the bottom of the barrel? But if we were to instead approach it bottom up we would simply make room for them and their way of life in the society we created. That is a much bigger help than any charity could ever be.