Billbobaggins Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 I need your help, having a bit of a debate, where people think that us people with a spare room should downgrade to 1 bedrooms to solve the homeless issue. So i replied what next sharing a hospital bed to solve the overcrowding issue there. Anyhow they replied with this.. They write....... A accurate analogy would be that you have one person occupying a four bed ward and refusing to swap for a private room, pay more or allow the other three beds to be used. How can i come back with a logical reply to that ^^, they are very irritating, but perhaps the private room is selfish lol in some way? . Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LunaRufina Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 "A accurate analogy would be that you have one person occupying a four bed ward and refusing to swap for a private room, pay more or allow the other three beds to be used." No, not accurate. You do pay more. You pay for what you have. It's yours. You own it. A more accurate analogy would be "Oh hey, you can't have kids, have one of mine" Because it's the same idea. Everything does not automatically belong to everyone because some people are down on their luck. I don't look down on people, nor do I necessarily blame them for being in bad situations such as homelessness, but that doesn't mean that I need to sacrifice my ability to have a den, office, guestroom, sewing room, game room, or completely empty room in which I like to count air space. I also would LOVE LOVE LOVE to know how having an assload of two bedroom houses and apartments is going to automatically solve homelessness. If you just take the US [and I don't know if that's what country you are talking about, but that's where I live so that's what *I* talk about] there are already enough homes [just as there are plenty of children waiting to be adopted]; not enough money, education, people who care, or general resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billbobaggins Posted June 29, 2012 Author Share Posted June 29, 2012 Thanks Admin I got stuck brain fry lol. cheers, PPS I agree re 2 bedrooms its just to funny for words.... But i cannot get through to them..They think only having 1 room for 1 person is fair, anything above is selfish ! so one person 2 rooms 2nd room should be occupied...if not selfish LOL unbelievable, they mean anywhere in the world...It's very strange, but i just got stuck on that part thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirazh Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 While it is true that some peole who are homeless are only so because of lack of availability of affordable housing, like low-income families, the solution IMHO is more social assistance, low income housing opportunities, cooperative housing properties, etc. It is true that many who cannot afford to live solo share accommodations instead. But many, many homeless people have multiple factors and barriers in their lives, it is not so simple as some 'one room one person' math problem that utterly fails to take the vast variances of the human experience into account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wj74 Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 And considering that a good portion of the homeless don't have a job and would be hanging out in your house all day while you go to work (at least while they are unemployed), possibly mentally ill or on drugs/alcoholic. Dealing with your own crazy is one thing, but taking on some unknown person with issues is asking a whole lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wj74 Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 And with the hospital room analogy, you don't have a choice to not share a 4 bed room. You either pay for a private room if available, or the hospital fills the other 3 beds. Too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notfred Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Really simplistic thinking here. 40-50% of the homeless are seriously mentally ill. Forcing them into housing is not the solution to their situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indigo 'n dye Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Really simplistic thinking here. Aye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirazh Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Apologies for my earlier unclear post -- the subsidised housing suggestions are strictly for the working homeless, which I have been in the past and my sister's family also. When there are other issues going on, additional support is needed. Shelters, food, showers, health clinics that do cheap to free dental and medications, laundry facilities, available clothing, mental health including trauma support, job skills support, and more. I lived homeless for a year in my teens, as in shelters and parks, and even not taking addictions and severe mental illness into account, it is incredibly difficult to go 'get a job' as some say when you haven't eaten in a long time, sleep in a park, have dirty and wrecked clothes, hav no resumes or knowlege of how to make one, no phone number for people to call you back, etc. There is temping and construction, I have done both, but again you at least need to not smell too bad and often safety gear which is pricey, like steeltoed boots. Then of course mental illness and addictions, often going hand in hand, add further complications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.