On 12/4/03 8:20 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aaron Klemz writes: > I'd love to see some empirical (heck, I'll settle for ANECDOTAL) support for > the argument that providing adequate shelter cots for folks to avoid sleeping > outside in the winter makes more people either: > a) Give up their housing to "take advantage" of the "sweeter" shelter system, > or > b) relocate to the Twin Cities since they can now be assured of a spot in a > temporary shelter.<<< > > It's a pretty basic fundamental principle of economics that whenever you > provide a product (or service) for a price below the cost of producing it, the > quantity demanded of that product will rise to consume all of it. This is why > "emergency" food pantries continually report that their numbers of patrons > "are at record levels." > > It's also why there are always waiting lists for subsidized housing--which is > what shelter beds are. Somehow, I managed to graduate from the U of MN without taking an economics course. If M. G. Stinnett's characterization above is an accurate description of what I missed, I'm now even more glad that I didn't. To suggest that there are always waiting lists for shelter beds because some economic principle dictates it is pretty silly. While there are exceptions, I'm reasonably sure that most people do not willingly choose homelessness, even with the temptation of that chance for a free shelter bed each night. I'm also reasonably sure that given the choice, most people would prefer to have the opportunity to earn enough to shelter and feed themselves. For those of you who disagree with my presumptions, ask yourself why you're still paying your rent or mortgage when you could be snuggling up in one of those sweet shelter cots right about now? Sounds ludicrous, right? So what makes you think that those folks who are homeless think any differently than you do? Yet the answer to the problem of increasing demand for shelter beds is apparently that we must practice "tough love" and cut back on them to save these unfortunate folks from themselves. That's pretty humane. Similarly with food shelves. From what I've read in articles about food shelves in the metro area, many of the folks visiting food shelves, especially those out in the suburbs, are humiliated to be there. They never thought such a thing would ever happen to them. While I'm sure there are a few crass folks (I've actually known a couple) who don't really need help that visit the food shelves, I expect the vast majority of food shelf users are there because it's either that or go hungry. Yet it couldn't possibly be that the reason food shelf use is at record levels is because there are more folks who are struggling to make ends meet. It must be because folks are flocking to the food shelves for the freebies, even if they don't need the help. > Homelessness behavior--as with any antisocial behavior--should never, ever be > encouraged. It *should* be a tough way to live. The hardship motivates the > person to change their life in such a way as to alleviate the hardship. This > is not hardheartedness--it is caring of the most vital sort. How exactly is offering a respite from the elements "encouraging" homelessness? Does anyone really believe this? If so, I feel sorry for you. Despite what some people would like to think, homeless folks are not like the deer fenced in at the Minneapolis Water Works facility in Columbia Heights that stand around the fences waiting for folks to show up with food. Or maybe they are. Should we issue bow-hunting licenses to "thin the herd" of the homeless as has been proposed for the deer at the Water Works? (Before anyone explodes in righteous indignation, yes, I am being sarcastic) > Some may be incapable of such change because of mental illness. Of these, some > can be helped by treatment, some can't. We used to institutionalize the > latter; now we don't. And that begs the question: why do we no longer institutionalize the mentally ill who cannot be helped through treatment? I realize that can present a different set of problems, but is it worse than letting such folks wander the streets? Did we stop this practice because we wanted to demonstrate "caring of the highest sort" or because we decided that our tax dollars could be better spent elsewhere? And if the latter, what are they being spent on instead? > Help those who can be helped to rise from homelessness. For those who can't be > helped, a very limited number of shelter beds. For those such as Allison who > work to provide them, my thanks and appreciation. OK, so how do we help those who can be helped to rise from homelessness? Hand them the Classifieds section and tell them to get a job? I'm sure we all wish it were that easy. It certainly sounds like a nice sound bite, but unfortunately, actions have not followed those words. In the past few years, the services available for helping those who can be helped to rise from homelessness, like job training and such, have been cut because that was deemed politically preferable to asking those of us who do have warm homes to sleep in at night to pay an extra few bucks a year in taxes. When will we get it through our heads that for the most part, people who are homeless did not willingly choose that status? When will we figure out that many of the homeless are folks just like many of us forum participants who struggle to make ends meet and simply had a really bad break, whether it was a job loss, a medical emergency or some other major crisis? When will we open our eyes and realize that many of the homeless indeed already have jobs. They just pay so poorly that they cannot find a place where they can afford to live at the meager wages they earn? Does anyone remember the movie "Trading Places" with Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd? Maybe that's what some of our elected officials need to experience so that they can see firsthand just how easy life is as a homeless person. Mark Snyder Windom Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
