Freedom Is Not Free

'i Never Imagined That I'd Be Homeless'

UPDATED 01/27/1986 at 01:00 AM EST • Originally published 01/27/1986 at 01:00 AM EST
They used to be the invisible people. They had dirty coats, pants or skirts and rolled stockings, maybe a grimy hat or scarf and, like The Invisible Man in the movies, no face. You could step over them almost without a qualm because, although it was a shame, they chose to live like that. Suddenly, in the past few years, it all seems to have changed. Suddenly they have faces, like us.

The homeless of this hard winter, appearing in numbers that in some places rival those of the Great Depression, fit no stereotypes. They are young, laid-off steelworkers in Gary, Ind. who have taken to the streets so that their families can qualify for welfare benefits. They are families in Northern California's once-booming Silicon Valley where they went for promised jobs that disappeared when they hit town. They are black-and-blue women who bundled their kids off to a Washington, D.C. shelter rather than stay home with a violent husband; former mental patients who got a ticket to Houston's Greyhound bus terminal—and nothing else—upon release from an institution; 16 year olds who ran away from unhappy homes and never bargained for a cheerless winter on the streets of Seattle, and a penniless old woman who finally died last month after more than a year of living in Manhattan's Grand Central Station. And some of them are plain, old-fashioned bums. A small percentage fits that description.

The rest are the new homeless. In May 1984, the Reagan Administration estimated the country's unhoused population at only 250,000 to 350,000, but the numbers were so low that at a congressional hearing Texas Democratic Rep. Henry Gonzalez likened the figures to Nazi propaganda. Advocates for the homeless, who favor high estimates as much as the government pushes low ones, put the number at or somewhere between two and three million people. No one can actually count people who move from place to place daily or huddle under bridges in Houston or Baltimore. But 100 or so reports on the subject agree: The number of people seeking shelter has increased dramatically during the past few years. In New York City there were 700 homeless families in shelters in 1983; in 1985 there were more than 4,000. Eighty percent of the shelters in Chicago reported an increase in demand for beds for 1985: 16,000 people were turned away because of overcrowding last year. A UCLA study says that 64 percent of the homeless in L.A. have been on the street less than a year, 25 percent have finished high school and 7.1 percent hold bachelor's degrees or higher. Nationally, the average age of the homeless is 34, a new low; 21 percent are families; and in some cities as many as one-third are Vietnam vets. "Homelessness is a massive epidemic," a congressional committee report declared last April, "so overwhelming that the problem must be treated as a national emergency."

Somehow it just doesn't make sense. These are supposed to be the proud, made-in-America years. We're the country that raised all that money for the starving in Ethiopia. How can this happen here?

One answer is that there aren't enough low-cost living spaces anymore. During the 1970s urban renewal did away with a million or so rooms—about half the country's total—in hotels that used to rent single rooms to poor people. In Detroit, nine vacant housing units are destroyed or upgraded in price every day. In Miami there is a waiting list of 15,000—and a delay of up to 25 years—to get into 6,000 low-income units. Moreover, as rentals become scarce, rents go up. In 1980 seven million families paid more than half their income for housing; many eventually lost their homes and couldn't find a cheaper place to live.

At the same time, the federal budget since 1983 has slotted only $70 million a year for direct aid to the homeless, about one-third of what New York City alone spent in 1984. The new street people aren't getting many other benefits, either. Many, perhaps most, receive no public assistance, including food stamps and Social Security. Some don't know how to get benefits; others don't qualify because they lack a permanent address. Most cities give the homeless even shorter shrift and spend nothing on them. Thousands jam understaffed private shelters that scrape by with no public funds.

Probably the greatest contributors to the size of the homeless population, however, are state mental hospitals. In the '50s and '60s, as new drugs were found to help the emotionally disturbed cope with their problems, hospitals released more and more patients. President Kennedy signed a bill to create a network of aftercare centers to help these people rejoin society, but only about 700 of the estimated 2,000 centers required were actually built. Left to fend for themselves, many of the mentally ill forget to take their medication (or are robbed of it), become disoriented and end up in shelters. "We encounter nightmare cases," says Seattle advocate Ken Cole. "People who have been off desperately needed medication for months or even years."

Administration sources argue that unemployment, which dropped from 7.4 percent last January to 6.9 percent by December, is not a factor. "If we had any homelessness created by the economy, that homelessness would have been totally resolved," says June Koch, a Reagan Administration spokeswoman. "If there was a problem, it's well over, but probably there wasn't a problem." Shelter workers in areas where industry has faltered say otherwise. "Five years ago we would have people from the local labor pool in looking for people to work," says Alice Gertz, a social worker with Cincinnati's Salvation Army. "Today there are no spot-level jobs and few entry-level jobs. But people want to work."

In Europe, homelessness has grown for many of the same reasons as in the U.S.: cutbacks in low-income housing and deinstitutionalization of mental patients. Rough estimates place about 25,000 homeless in Paris, 27,500 in London and 20,000 in Rome. But these cities tend to manage the problem better. A recent survey found that all but 200 people found housing on one particular night in London, most with government aid.

There are a few bright spots in the bleak U.S picture. California, one of six states to target money for the homeless, budgeted $34.9 million for low-income housing and $9.6 million for shelters this fiscal year. New York City's Mayor Koch signed a freeze on the demolition of single-room-occupancy hotels and promised to renovate 4,000 apartments a year for low-income housing. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation have begun a five-year, $100 million program to improve housing and care for the mentally ill in eight cities.

Such scattered programs can't change the basic prospect: The crisis may well grow worse. The Human Resources Administration predicts that homelessness in New York City will have risen by 500 percent between 1980 and 1987. People without boots cannot pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Whether it comes from cities, states, the nation or private effort, they need help. Until they get it, they have no place to turn but the cold mean streets.

'i Never Imagined That I'd Be Homeless' : People.com

I think I found the free/dom.
 
NEW YORK; REAGAN'S HOMELESS
By Sydney H. Schanberg
Published: February 4, 1984

On Tuesday morning, President Reagan said on ABC's ''Good Morning, America'': ''What we have found in this country, and we're more aware of it now, is one problem that we've had, even in the best of times, and that is the people who are sleeping on the grates, the homeless who are homeless, you might say, by choice.''

Early Wednesday morning, an as yet unidentified woman in her late 50's or early 60's was forced by railroad police to leave Grand Central Terminal, where, as a homeless person, she was taking refuge from the cold. That was 1:45 A.M. An hour and a half later she was discovered dead, slumped on the sidewalk just outside one of the station's doors. The Medical Examiner's report said she had heart disease and acute bronchopneumonia and that her death was ''cold-related.''

Her ''choice'' was to stay inside Grand Central Terminal. She did not choose to be on the frozen sidewalk.

We have been told, endlessly, how amiable, agreeable and downright pleasant this President is. But if your amiable Uncle Harry said some of the things this President and his friends have been saying, you'd think he had lost his marbles. If your child said them, you'd send him to his room without dinner for telling lies.

Another President, Herbert Hoover, said some pretty odd things too. When asked, during the Depression, why so many people were selling apples on the streets, he said: ''Many people have left their jobs for the more profitable one of selling apples.'' He also said: ''Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes, for example, are better fed than they have ever been.''

Hoover wasn't as affable as the current President, not such a swell guy - and he didn't have television - so he was defeated by the voters in 1932.

Just a few weeks ago, Edwin Meese 3d, the President's friend and counselor and Attorney General-designate, sought to emulate Hoover by saying that ''we've had considerable information that people go to soup kitchens because the food is free and that's easier than paying for it.''

What President Reagan and Mr. Meese and others in the Administration have tried to do is go to the far end of the hunger/homeless spectrum and cite examples of freeloaders or mentally ill people whose situation they describe as endemic, insoluble and not this President's fault or responsibility. It won't wash.

Worse, it appeals to and encourages instincts of callousness and even meanness in the body politic. This President says he wants to spur voluntarism - private charity - as an alternative to Federal aid. But how does depicting the homeless as either fakes or derelicts by choice help to promote private philanthropy? Yes, of course there are men and women among the homeless who do not wish to go to public shelters because of the violence and filth and thievery they frequently find there, and yes, there are some mentally disoriented people who resist going to any shelter at all. But this is only a small part of the homeless picture and it does not excuse the President's ridiculous and harmful remarks. These sidewalk people did not start out being homeless. Many factors contributed to their decline, and three years of Mr. Reagan's policies are not the least among them. His latest proposed budget seeks cuts in nearly every program that would benefit poor, low-income or homeless people: food stamps, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, job training and funds for low-income housing. When Mr. Reagan assumed office in 1981, New York City was housing 2,700 single men and women every night in municipal shelters. Now, with the numbers of homeless rising and the city forced to expand its capacity, the figure is over 6,300 per night. And this is but a fraction of the total roaming the city. Some estimates put the city's homeless at 40,000 or more, and nationally the calculations range from 500,000 to two million. Over a single frigid weekend in New York City recently, the Medical Examiner reported that six people had died from exposure in subways, in abandoned buildings and on the streets. There is nothing new anymore in this. That is why the death of the woman Wednesday morning on the sidewalk outside Grand Central drew little notice. Though her name is still unknown, what is known about her suggests she was not giving up on life. According to other sidewalk people, the clothes she was wearing - a blue parka, white sweater and beige checked pants - were new to her and she had very recently been deloused and had her white hair cropped close. All of which points to a visit to some shelter or charity home. It is neither amiable nor acceptable for anyone to dismiss such people as ''homeless by choice.'' Even under the exaggeration-and- baloney standards allowed during Presidential campaigns, this President ought to be held to account for the absurd things he says, especially when people are cold and hungry - and some of them are dying.

NEW YORK - REAGAN'S HOMELESS - NYTimes.com

Those were the days.
 
Here's something that'll really agitate you commies. The electoral map after the 1984 election. Biggest electoral landslide in history. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[image remove]

He was running against Walter Mondale. It probably didn't hurt that he had the previous Directory of the CIA as his VP.
 
August 3, 1981, over 85 percent of the 17,500 air traffic controllers go on strike for better working conditions and improved wages. Ronald Reagan outraged with the strike informed the air traffic controller to return back to work with in 48 hours or the government would assumed the striking controllers had quit.

By the end of the week over 5,000 PATCO members (Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization) has received dismissal notices from the FAA. The Federal Courts ordered the union leader to send their workers back to work.

However, union leaders refused to do so. At which time the courts began jailing union leaders, fining the union per day at close to one million dollars a day. The unions strike fund of more than 3 million dollars was frozen.


This force the airline industry to cut back services of over 50 percent. Supervisors were required to fill those position left by the striking controllers. They were assisted by military controllers. Reagan called for a meeting with the press. Reagan stated to the press that Congress in 1947 passed a law forbidding strikes by Government employees. Reagan read aloud the non-strike oath that each air controller, and indeed any federal employee, must sign upon hiring. Reagan further stated the strikers are in violation of the law, and if they do not report for work within 48 hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated. Many of the PACO strike members did not return back to work and as a result were fired.

The Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization or PATCO was a United States trade union which operated from 1968 until its decertification in 1981 following a strike which was broken by the Reagan Administration. The 1981 strike and defeat of PATCO has been called "one of the most important events in late twentieth century U.S. labor history."

PATCO was founded in 1968 with the assistance of attorney and pilot F. Lee Bailey. On July 3, 1968, PATCO flexed its muscles by announcing "Operation Air Safety" in which all members were ordered to adhere strictly to the established (though impractical) separation standards for aircraft. The resultant large delay of air traffic was the first of many official and unofficial "slowdowns" that PATCO would initiate. In 1969 the U.S. Civil Service Commission ruled that PATCO was no longer a professional association but in fact a trade union.


On March 25, 1970, the newly designated union orchestrated a controller "sickout" to protest many of the FAA actions that they felt were unfair, over 2,000 controllers around the country did not report to work as scheduled and informed management that they were ill. Controllers called in sick to circumvent the federal law against strikes by government unions. Management personnel attempted to assume many of the duties of the missing controllers but major traffic delays around the country occurred. After a few days the federal courts intervened and most controllers went back to work by order of the court, but the government was forced to the bargaining table. The sickout led officials to recognize that the ATC system was operating nearly at capacity. To alleviate some of this Congress accelerated the installation of automated systems, reopened the air traffic controller training academy in Oklahoma City, began hiring air traffic controllers at an increasing rate, and raised salaries to help attract and retain controllers.

In the 1980 presidential election, PATCO (along with the Teamsters and the Air Line Pilots Association) refused to back President Jimmy Carter, instead endorsing Republican Party candidate Ronald Reagan. PATCO's refusal to endorse the Democratic Party stemmed in large part from poor labor relations with the FAA (the employer of PATCO members) under the Carter administration and Ronald Reagan's endorsement of the union and its struggle for better conditions during the 1980 election campaign.

On August 3, 1981 the union declared a strike, seeking better working conditions, better pay and a 32-hour workweek. In doing so, the union violated a law {5 U.S.C. (Supp. III 1956) 118p.} that banned strikes by government unions. However, several government unions (including one representing employees of the Postal Service) had declared strikes in the intervening period without penalties. Ronald Reagan, however, declared the PATCO strike a "peril to national safety" and ordered them back to work under the terms of the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. Only 1,300 of the nearly 13,000 controllers returned to work. Subsequently, Reagan demanded those remaining on strike return to work within 48 hours, otherwise their jobs would be forfeited. At the same time Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis organized for replacements and started contingency plans. By prioritizing and cutting flights severely, and even adopting methods of air traffic management PATCO had previously lobbied for, the government was initially able to have 50% of flights available.

On August 5, following the PATCO workers refusal to return to work Reagan fired the 11,345 striking air traffic controllers who had ignored the order, and banned them from federal service for life (this ban was later rescinded by President Bill Clinton in 1993). In the wake of the strike and mass firings the FAA was faced with the task of hiring and training enough controllers to replace those that had been fired, a hard problem to fix as at the time it took three years in normal conditions to train a new controller. They were replaced initially with nonparticipating controllers, supervisors, staff personnel, some nonrated personnel, and in some cases by controllers transferred temporarily from other facilities. Some military controllers were also used until replacements could be trained. The FAA had initially claimed that staffing levels would be restored within two years; however, it would take closer to ten years before the overall staffing levels returned to normal. PATCO was decertified on October 22, 1981.

Some former striking controllers were allowed to reapply after 1986 and were rehired; they and their replacements are now represented by the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, which was organized in 1987 and had no connection with PATCO. In 2003, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, speaking on the legacy of Ronald Reagan, noted: Perhaps the most important, and then highly controversial, domestic initiative was the firing of the air traffic controllers in August 1981. The President invoked the law that striking government employees forfeit their jobs, an action that unsettled those who cynically believed no President would ever uphold that law. President Reagan prevailed, as you know, but far more importantly his action gave weight to the legal right of private employers, previously not fully exercised, to use their own discretion to both hire and discharge workers.

Air Traffic Controllers Walk Reagan Fires PATCO Strikes

Yeah, destroying the middle class.
 
Five myths about Ronald Reagan's legacy
  1. Reagan was one of our most popular presidents.
  2. Reagan was a tax-cutter.
  3. Reagan was a hawk.
  4. Reagan shrank the federal government.
  5. Reagan was a conservative culture warrior.

Those five pretty much cover every reason conservatives think Reagan is some sort of demigod.
Top five reasons Raygun was an antichrist.
1. He sold chemical weapons to Iraq, sold other weapons to Iran in the Iran/Iraq war.
2. He sold cocaine with Noriega to get money for weapons for the contras.
3. Promised to balance the budget, but almost tripled the national debt instead with $300 billion annual deficits.
4. Closed the insane asylums and threw the nut jobs out in the street.
5. Gave the Afghan Taliban $2 billion worth of weapons and called them freedom fighters.
 

Forum List

Back
Top