Posted by
Katy Grimes on Wednesday, April 22, 2009 5:07:53 PM
Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson is facing and trying to deal with Sacramento's expanding "Homeless" problem.
One of the discussions that is not taking place about Sacramento's homeless is that thousands of vagrants who refuse to work, are filling up shelters, making it mpossible for those who are truly in trouble, to get better quality services and care.
What do we do about this and why do so many "homeless" get away with their lifestyle?
For starters, most of the homeless already receive financial assistance through either Social Security and/or county welfare. They can pay for a home of sorts, they just refuse to. In Toronto, city officials advertised that they would give money and/or $100 pre-paid Visa cards to people who agree to pretend they're homeless when cities conducts their needs assessments of those without shelter. If this is taking place in Canada, it's probably already happening in America - especially with Federal funds involved.
Wanted: Fake homeless | Toronto & GTA | News | Toronto Sun
Then there are the poser homeless... those panhandlers who are not really homeless but panhandle for drug money. Never give panhandlers money. Money should only go to legitimate charities, and preferably charities that do not take government money.
Anytime people receive something for nothing, it only makes the problem worse. Sacramento should get more creative with our homeless problem: offer people help for work or volunteerism - you give, you get. Sacramento has thousands of charities that need help in addition to the areas that city cutbacks are affecting: park maintenance, road work, revitalization and cleanup, just to name a few.
According to many Homeless advocates, there is a small group of homeless, many of whom are involved in heavy drug use, who don't want any help. But there is yet another group of individuals who are chronically homeless; they have been living in the streets, parks and shelters for long periods of time. Homeless Studies report that, although this group of homeless only makes up 10 percent of the homeless population, it uses 50 percent of the homeless resources.
Supporting my argument for private charities to deal with the homeless, James L. Payne author of The Culture of Spending: Why Congress Lives Beyond Our Means, writes: "Why do government welfare programs keep failing? Much of the problem can be summed up in one word: dependency. Government programs reinforce social pathologies they are trying to cure: they pay people for being out of work-and encourage unemployment; they pay people to have children they can't support-and encourage larger welfare families.
Nowhere is this pattern more dramatically illustrated than in programs to provide shelter for the unhoused. Governments keep increasing their efforts, only to reap ever-growing numbers of homeless. In New York, for example, to help street people the city has built 26,700 units of permanent housing, and has provided 23,000 temporary beds. Yet after spending $2 billion on these programs, the city's homeless problem is more acute than ever, with 50,000 now sleeping on the streets. The mayor's own commission on the homeless concedes defeat: "The current system must be seen as the failure it is."
At the root of the failure of the government programs is irresponsible giving. When a person gives away his own, hard-earned funds, he wants to get full value for his sacrifice. He wants to make sure he is really helping someone, and not just throwing his money down the proverbial rat hole. In government welfare programs, legislators and administrators are not spending their personal funds. They are spending tax dollars, money taken involuntarily from other people. Hence, they lack a keen, personal interest in seeing that welfare dollars are spent constructively.
Until we tell the homeless "as long as you refuse to participate in your own financial, mental and emotional recovery, we will not help you. If you accept the responsibilities as a member of a civilized society, we will assist."
Any handout should have strings attached. When our kids use to whine that we always attached strings to our loans, my husband and I smiled and told them to get used to it. We allowed them to work off debt, and we encouraged them to work for something they wanted, often matching them dollar for dollar. We liked incentives. We did it to teach work ethic. Our government hands money out for the opposite reason - dependency.
Are you listening Mayor Johnson? If you really want to offer assistance to the homeless, offer them work in exchange for housing and food. Eventually some will choose independence, some will drop off the radar and some will at least have food and shelter. Don't feed the habit, feed the ethic.