View Full Forums : No really, San Francisco, how do you REALLY feel about GBW?


Panamah
03-14-2006, 09:57 PM
I got this email from a friend, very funny!

Hi,

No I'm not talking about the polls, I am talking about San Francisco.

I had seen all the bumper stickers on cars: "Darn good liar", "Somewhere in Texas a village is missing it's idiot", "BU** SH**" and the various slogans pasted in store fronts "No one died when Clinton lied" etc.

But I had to admit to being a little stunned when I was walking down 24th street early Sunday morning with Janice and the kids on our daily walk. There on the sidewalk was a little paper flag with Bush's picture on it, firmly planted in, yes, a dog turd.

You have to really not like the guy to stoop (literally) that low.

Klath
03-14-2006, 10:19 PM
http://www.madeyouthink.org/

-------
Piss Off (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/276vsdtv.asp)
A Belgian novelty shows what the good people of Brussels really think about George W. Bush.
by Paul Belien
02/22/2005 8:40:00 AM

Brussels
WHEN JOHAN VANDE LANOTTE, Belgium's Vice Prime Minister, goes to the toilets today, he finds the urinals in the offices of his ministry decorated with stickers. They show an American flag and the head of George W. Bush. "Go ahead. Piss on me," the caption says. Vande Lanotte is one of Bush's hosts in Brussels. Is peeing on your guest's head appropriate? In Belgium it is. After all, Brussels' best known statue is that of "Manneken Pis," a peeing boy.

[More... (http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/276vsdtv.asp)]

Tudamorf
03-15-2006, 03:43 AM
San Francisco is 85% democrat/liberal. Needless to say, Bush isn't very popular here. Our board of supervisors recently passed a resolution (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/01/MNGTUHGG8U1.DTL&hw=impeach&sn=006&sc=620) asking Congress to impeach him. <img src=http://lag9.com/biggrin.gif>

B_Delacroix
03-15-2006, 07:37 AM
They also voted to ban the Navy from the city, have a talk show host fired and a number of other crazy things.

Remi
03-15-2006, 09:33 AM
San Francisco is one of the conservatives favorite cities. Everytime SF does one of its things, registration in the republican party goes up. ;)

Panamah
03-15-2006, 10:22 AM
San Francisco is one of the conservatives favorite cities. Everytime SF does one of its things, registration in the republican party goes up. ;)

Really? Wow! Remarkable coincidence: Same thing happens to the Democratic party everytime the South does something like pass a law to make Christianity the state religion.

Fyyr Lu'Storm
03-15-2006, 12:40 PM
San Francisco is a great city if they took all the people out of it.

You would think that a city with that much money, and Liberal sensibilities, would find a way to take care of its homeless and beggars.

Go downtown, they are like flies.


Hypocritical liberals, if you ask me.

Maybe it is intentional, who knows, letting your insane beggars assault all the so called rich tourists. Tell ya what, I made less than what any of those things made begging last year, keep that **** off of me. Too bad I am not a druid in real life, I would sure as **** teleport that human offal to Austin Texas or Salt Lake City or even Antarctica.

guice
03-15-2006, 03:12 PM
Hypocritical liberals, if you ask me.
Then you realize it takes more than just choosing a political side to solve issues of this nature. ^_^

Surprised you'd say such a thing really. I choose no side cause I know that the correct course of action is always dependent on the situation at hand.

Vekx
03-15-2006, 04:49 PM
Then you realize it takes more than just choosing a political side to solve issues of this nature. ^_^

Surprised you'd say such a thing really. I choose no side cause I know that the correct course of action is always dependent on the situation at hand.

:texla:

Fyyr Lu'Storm
03-15-2006, 06:49 PM
Then you realize it takes more than just choosing a political side to solve issues of this nature. ^_^

Surprised you'd say such a thing really. I choose no side cause I know that the correct course of action is always dependent on the situation at hand.

You have read enough of my stuff guice to realize I don't have a "side".

Panamah
03-15-2006, 08:23 PM
LOL! :lmao: Hee, hee! That's good. I'm going to have to get a rag to clean the soda off my screen.

Arienne
03-15-2006, 09:30 PM
Hey Panamah! When you're done, send it my way, please. :D

Tudamorf
03-15-2006, 09:33 PM
You would think that a city with that much money, and Liberal sensibilities, would find a way to take care of its homeless and beggars. Go downtown, they are like flies.Homelessness is a long-standing historical problem in San Francisco (going back a century or more), so there is no overnight fix. There has been huge progress in the past couple of years, though, through an initiative that cuts cash payments to them while simultaneously offering housing. (Believe it or not, until that initiative was passed, the City would pay homeless $410/month in welfare, whereas other counties would only pay $59. Now it's $59.)

Fyyr Lu'Storm
03-15-2006, 10:42 PM
I don't care about how much welfare they get.

The can make 300 bucks a day, tax free, begging off of people in the Garment district, easy.

Then sleep on grates at night.


Last time I was there, they were 3 deep on people. 3 beggars at a time hitting on the same mark. And SF does nothing about it. Guess that is liberal compassion for ya.

I, one the other hand, would build some huge public storage like buildings out in the south end of town, out behind the Cow Palace or something. At least give them someplace to sleep out of the rain. Run a BART spur out, but not one back in. But noooo, tent cities are an evil thing, though it would not be tents, but 10x20 insulated rooms with light and a hotplate, and a toilet and a bath. 50 cents a square foot per month it could cost.

Letting them sleep on grates and public doorways makes so much better sense, and is much more compassionate.

Tudamorf
03-16-2006, 12:35 AM
Heh. If they really made $9,000/month tax free, they would be able to afford a hotel room easily. They don't, and they can't. The $410/month welfare was a big draw. For example, local drug dealers made particularly good business on welfare check days.

You're also assuming they're all rational people who <i>want</i> to find housing. Many of them, especially the hard core ones, refuse assistance. Many are also seriously mentally ill and/or drug dependent.

It's a far more complex problem than you think.

guice
03-16-2006, 12:45 AM
You have read enough of my stuff guice to realize I don't have a "side".
Sorry then. I took your statement as a bash against Liberals (as a Conservative). I, personally, don't base anybody based being "Liberal" or "Conservative" since I choose to take no side. I just assumed others were like that as well. /shrug


I agree with Tudamorf. A very, very large percentage of homeless folks aren't homeless cause they got the short end of the stick; they are there because of issues like drugs, illness or just feel more comfirtable that way.

I remember hearing about a test done in a city like NY where they took like 100 or so homeless people, gave them an apartment and a job. 1 out of 10 homeless people maintained their jobs post 30days. The rest got their pay checks and went right back onto the streets. After hearing about that, I lost all respect for the homeless.

Lets not also forget about people that pretend to be homeless to rake in $300+ a day, tax free.

MadroneDorf
03-16-2006, 02:05 AM
The only homeless I really care about are the War Vet ones, the rest we should ship to mexico as a foreign exchange program for all their illegals

I'm sure there are some who are legimately on bad luck and really try hard to establish a home and a job, but generally most arn't.

Arienne
03-16-2006, 08:24 AM
Fyyr, the fact that there is a visible homeless population in ANY town or city demonstrates that the citizens DO care about the homeless. When I lived in the Bay Area I saw people feeding and helping the homeless daily. You are making the false assumption that all these people WANT to be off the streets. Honestly, the climate in that area is almost perfect for year-round outdoor living and a lot of people who have been on the streets can't easily adapt even to a night in a shelter.

Klath
03-16-2006, 08:51 AM
I remember hearing about a test done in a city like NY where they took like 100 or so homeless people, gave them an apartment and a job. 1 out of 10 homeless people maintained their jobs post 30days. The rest got their pay checks and went right back onto the streets. After hearing about that, I lost all respect for the homeless.
Can you cite a source for this test? I'd love to read it over and see what factors were accounted for. There are a lot of mentally ill people in the ranks of the homeless and that would put them at a disadvantage as far as holding down a job.

Stormhaven
03-16-2006, 09:15 AM
Not every teenager is a gang member, and not every homeless person is a shyster. Unfortunately, there are enough examples of both that the stereotype can be considered accurate to a degree. While I'm sure that there are plenty of homeless people who are actively looking for a way out of their current situation, there are also plenty who are more than content with their lot in life.

The example "test" that guice is citing is not just something they've done in NY, it's a favorite of both local and national news programs. Growing up, I can remember various examples from shows like 20/20, Primetime and Nightline. They all follow the same pattern - a hidden camera captures the reporter asking one of those "Will work for Food" guys to come do a job and he will be paid in food or cash. Usually the jobs are pretty simple, like mowing a lawn, garbage pickup, or car washings - the jobs close by, ie: walking distance. The majority of the people asked turn down the job offer and instead stay on their street corner because it's more lucrative. In other examples, the beggars turn out to be "professional beggars" - I can remember one where the local ABC news caught some guy walking back to his Lexus parked a few blocks away, after his hard day of panhandling. From what I can remember, no more than 1 in 20 of the "Will Work For Food" guys actually showed up for the job instead of staying for the free ride.

In addition, they also usually find that it's nearly impossible to go hungry in the large cities. Private and Publicly funded Kitchens can usually be found for all three meals, seven days a week. In Dallas, I can remember the only time we ever heard about the shelters being full were during the really bad cold snaps or heat waves. Not only that, but most shelters reported that their "residents" would make sure to leave before the mandatory job placement assistance workers tried to get them a job.

Panamah
03-16-2006, 10:04 AM
I'm a little skeptical of your story Guice. I mean, would you give up a free apt where it is warm and you have a bed to sleep in for the luxury of sleeping under a bridge?

Remi
03-16-2006, 10:58 AM
The only homeless I really care about are the War Vet ones, the rest we should ship to mexico as a foreign exchange program for all their illegals Guess I should be in Mexico right now. :P I was homeless last year living in a homeless shelter. I'm not mentally ill (well, at least I pretend not to be), not an alcoholic, not a drug addict. I'm a white collar worker, with a graduate degree, and I couldn't get a full time permanent job despite looking for a few years. I found plenty of temp jobs but those weren't enough to survive on. Even McDonalds refused to hire me because as they said, while I was more than competent to get the job done, they didn't believe that I'd stay long enough to justifty the time and expense of training me. Unfortunately, between that type of comment or "you are way overqualified and won't be happy here", and "Sorry we aren't hiring right now", life was looking bleak for finding work.

I wasn't the only white collar worker at the Shelter, and in fact there were quite a few of us there. Most of us were aged 45 and above and had been laid off from our prior jobs. We were in a place that not one of us ever imagined we'd ever be in. Broke and Homeless.

All in all, it was an amazing experience, and I'm a better and stronger person for having survived it. But it was also degrading, humiliating, and out right dangerous, and I'm grateful for all the services that helped me while I was in that situation.

But my point is, like with most other situations, there are usually a good number of exceptions to the stereotype. Homeless encompasses a very large group. The "street people" (e.g. those sleeping under bridges rather than in a shelter) are only a sub group of the homeless. I think if I had been sent to Mexico, I might have had a more difficult time getting back on my feet.

As an aside, if you are looking for some worthy groups to give charitable contributions, the Salvation Army and Goodwill are doing an amazing job helping people in bad situations to get back on their feet and out of the "system". I can't say enough positive things about both of these organizations and the good they are doing. They walk the walk.

Panamah
03-16-2006, 11:01 AM
I'm sorry to hear you went through that, Remi. Things better now?

It really is pretty shocking that most people are only a few paychecks away from being homeless.

guice
03-16-2006, 11:03 AM
I'm a little skeptical of your story Guice. I mean, would you give up a free apt where it is warm and you have a bed to sleep in for the luxury of sleeping under a bridge?
Unable to pay the rent. They place wasn't 100% free. It was setup for them with a job capable of paying it. They choose the life of the street over maintaining rent.

Can you cite a source for this test?
Oh god, if I can find it. I was hearing about this approximately 5 years ago, at the least, while in Denver during the time when Denver was working on passing a bill that would make street corner pan handling illegal. Bill would make it illegal to pan handle or sell anything on a street corner where a car would not be able to safely pull over out of traffic to perform business.

Arienne
03-16-2006, 11:06 AM
I'm not sure that I dis-believe it, Panamah, but I would like to see the study if it does exist. Change is unnatural to most people when it comes to their living conditions. You get a certain comfort with "home" whether in a box under a bridge, an apartment or a house. It's hard to just up and move if you don't really feel you have to... people tend to gravitate to the things and places they know best and are most comfortable with. Also, consider that to move to an apartment takes them away from their friends and companions and throws them into a strange community that probably pretty stand offish at first to strangers.

I'd probably go back to the streets if I was a part of the study. People tend to take the path of least resistance. Learning a whole new way of living with a month as the "success or failure" determination is tough. I would wonder how persistent the people conducting the test were with the people in the study. Did they just toss things at them and leave them to it? Did they say "Ok... fine" if one "failure" said he felt more comfortable back where he was? Did anyone try to further the study for several months or a year?

It's all good and well to say "there was a test", but without details, how do we REALLY know it was a failure because the subjects of the test didn't want a new life? Tests fail for many reasons. How did they even choose who they would use as subjects? I can speculate all I want... we all can... but without any more info than "I saw somewhere... years ago.... there was a test of an unknown number.... and it proved...."

Panamah
03-16-2006, 11:22 AM
Ok, well I don't have a hard time believing that some street people would prefer (that isn't really the right term) to stay on the street versus having a low paying job and barely scrapping by and giving up their drug or alcohol habit. But if they had a safe, warm place to live for free, I don't think they'd be on the street. We've got a lot of them that are also mentally handicapped and we can't force them into places of care any longer.

Remi
03-16-2006, 11:36 AM
I'm sorry to hear you went through that, Remi. Things better now?

It really is pretty shocking that most people are only a few paychecks away from being homeless. Oh yah! I'm good now. I actually lasted 3+ years without a fulltime job before running out of options. I'm back on my feet now. I actually took advantage of the situation to get most of my debt fully (except credit card fees) paid off before reassimilating into society. Just needed someone to hire this old woman and take advantage of all her experience! ;)

(p.s. I was one of those homeless folks driving around in a lexus sports coupe! LOL)

Remi
03-16-2006, 11:56 AM
What keeps the street people from accepting housing assistance are the "rules" they would have to follow if they came inside. Those folks offering housing, or shelters, all have rules. They have to to enable an eclectic large group of people to sleep/eat/live together. Rules can include doors locked at 7:00, lights out at 9:00, wake up at 6:00, chores (e.g. mop floors, clean bathrooms), etc. Nothing unreasonable. All are designed to instill a little discipline and living skills. But most of the street people I met didn't want any rules. They didn't want to be told, for example, when to be in, that they have to be sober (at least sober enough to not fall down), that they can't go out to smoke, and/or no fighting. They don't go for public housing because again, they would have to be sober to qualify and have at least a part time job to pay a minimum rent. You really can't provide a *safe* warm place to sleep without some rules. And it's the rules that keep the street people from staying there.

Panamah
03-16-2006, 12:17 PM
Yeah, that's why I don't think you can solve the homeless issue until you can solve the drug/alcohol issue first.... unless you solve it on their terms. Give them a place to live with no rules. I heard something recently about how much money we spend in health care on homeless people that it would be less expensive to house them and give them free preventative care than to deal with them as we presently do. I think they did this test in NYC, but not 100% certain.

I had an alcoholic brother and he would have rather accepted a life that would be intolerable to most of us versus getting off the booze. It killed him before he was living on the streets full time, but I'm sure he would have gotten to that point eventually.