Oregon bill would give homeless $1,000 a month to spend with no restrictions

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ha, yeah give them $1000 and they will kill each other off over it.

That's the point. They'd kill each over for a lot less.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

How is it human rights to take money from some people to give to others? How do you outlaw how some people wish to live? I think the Supreme Court would like to hear that argument.

Stormlover is a Russian bot apparently.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Homelessness and hunger should be outlawed.

.


So who you going to put in jail?

Watch Stormlover do this, folks.



.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Stormlover is a Russian bot apparently.

.

Programmed with the sensibilities of a six-year-old.

.

 

[SeaMajor7]

I think a basic income should be required and is an issue of human rights. Homelessness and hunger should be outlawed.

Our society could use robots and A.i to make things and to provide for the population. We all know that this tech will likely to exactly this and we will be forced to develop such a system. Lets make it humane.

Why do we need thoughtless robots?
We already have them; it is you.

 

[James California]

Oregon or bust !

 

[Independent thinker]

1) I think the homeless are about to make their way to Oregon.

2) Let’s help them get out of homelessness by requiring some work for the state (janitorial, whatever).

3) Instead of giving them that money directly, they should allocate $1200 for a cheap two-bedroom apartment for each two homeless people, and put them together. They can get the remaining $800 for food, utilities, and some clothes.

I remember many decades ago where 60 minutes ran a story about how many criminals were relocating to Portland, Oregon because jails were so crowded there you could commit all kinds of crimes and be set free with no jail time if caught. There was a big magnet there drawing criminals from all over the country. Could explain some things.

 

[Independent thinker]

I think a basic income should be required and is an issue of human rights. Homelessness and hunger should be outlawed.

Our society could use robots and A.i to make things and to provide for the population. We all know that this tech will likely to exactly this and we will be forced to develop such a system. Lets make it humane.

So, as usual, you lefties want people to get money for doing nothing, no work needed. Meanwhile, there are millions of job openings all over the country.

 

[Independent thinker]

How to get rid of the homeless cheaply.
Give them an endless supply of DHS confiscated fentanyl.

See. I'm always thinking.

Or, you could bus them to other cities.

 

[Independent thinker]

They will open the walls to get at the wiring and sell the copper wire. Stoves, ovens will be removed and sold. Water pipes, likewise. After a month, the home will effectively be demolished.

Which is exactly why this would never solve the homeless problem. Landlords aren't stupid, especially when they know the libs will be doing their best to stop evictions.

 

[Independent thinker]

For the most part these are drug addicts that do not belong on the streets

If they camp on the street arrest them snd perform drug tests

If they are clean then try to locate housing and a job

But if they are on drugs send them to a rehab camp far away in the wilderness for at least 6 months

This is actually what they need. We make this mistake with all users, not just the homeless. If you have a drug problem you should be taken off the streets for however long it takes to be released back out totally clean. We often have these stupid 30 day programs and then let them right back out after 30 days, expecting them to make weekly visits to maintain sobriety. Nothing but a farce. If you have a real problem 30 days doesn't cut it. If it takes months or years then it takes months or years.

 

[Independent thinker]

This is a good one to start with. Thanks.

I will first parse what is in the article. Because it provides a context and a cautionary tale.

The headline is a bit click baity. Something that probably drew you to it. "Oregon Bill would give homeless people 1000 dollars a month to spend without restrictions." That sounds like a terrible idea to anyone with a lick of common sense. This would include me. Since the first thing that pops in my head is homeless drug addicts using taxpayers' money to buy booze or drugs.

The thing is though when you actually read the article some context emerges that puts it in a different light.

People’s Housing Assistance Fund Demonstration Program to give 12 monthly thousand-dollar payments to those suffering from homelessness or who are on the brink of becoming homeless.

This says. It's a demonstration program. Meaning the government is studying if this works for getting people of the streets or prevent them from having to go on the streets. It also limits the assistance in time, meaning it's not a blank check.

The legislation would also require the Portland State University Homelessness Research and Action Collaborative to study how effective the long-term cash assistance program would be across different demographics and household populations, as well as consider other circumstantial elements, such as domestic violence.

This establishes a research institute tasked with finding out if the program has any success.

It is perfectly legit to question if this is a good way to spend public funds. We probably will never achieve a consensus on this considering both our ideologies.

I personally think that letting the government assist homeless people or people about to become homeless for a short time, so they can get back on their feet is an idea that is worth trying. Providing it is coupled with a way to carefully monitor it. So they can determine if it has success in certain demographics. This is important because it might be successful in some areas but be terrible in others. It might for instance have a marked effect in preventing people sliding into homelessness but have absolutely no effect in getting people out of homelessness. (I'm giving this opinion specifically, so you can address it if you want, and we can continue this premise if you think we can form a consensus on this point?)

What we might be able to agree on is that homelessness is a problem and that we need to figure out if there's anything we can do about it as a society. Is this something we can both agree on?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a study to know this is stupid.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Or, you could bus them to other cities.

.

They already do that.

I lived first in Seattle (most of my adult life) and then more recently in Port Angeles, on the North Olympic Peninsula, and knew someone who worked in a drug rehab in PA, who confirmed that both Seattle and Portland authorities frequently shipped their homeless junkies to that facility for very minimal rehab, only to be spit out on the streets of PA at the end of their time in the facility.

When we moved there, PA was a sweet, clean small town and within two years was just a mini version of Seattle and Portland, with derelict RV's parked everywhere, out of which tons of drugs were sold.

Now I live in a smaller town of about a thousand people, in the Midwest, and if someone wanders into town without an obvious reason for being here, the sheriff's department posts a lookout to the townspeople on Fascistbook and will initiate a conversation with the individual within the hour, usually about where the highway is and the fact that they need to be on it ASAP.

It's good to feel safe again.

.

 

[Independent thinker]

In effect a state subsidy for the heroin and meth trade

Yeah. It's totally amazing how the leftist idiots accuse corporations of being on corporate welfare by not paying their employees enough who then have to get government benefits and yet these very same leftist idiots are just fine letting the government subsidize the illegal drug trade and Mexican Cartels.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or a study to know this is stupid.

.

And useless word salad which addresses nothing.

.

 

[Independent thinker]

Another dumb-as-hell liberal 'throw-money-at-the-problem' idea that was NOT thought out and does NOTHING to fix the real, underlying problems.

Ascwith most libeal ideas, their INTENTIONS - which they demand to be judged on, not the results - are good, but good intentions can't overcome failed policy.

But but but the only reason their failed policies don't work is because they didn't do enough of their failed policies. Their obvious solution is to double down and do more of what doesn't work because surely if you do more of what doesn't work, it will work.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

But but but the only reason their failed policies don't work is because they didn't do enough of their failed policies. Their obvious solution is to double down and do more of what doesn't work because surely if you do more of what doesn't work, it will work.

.

Right?

.

 

[Independent thinker]

How is giving money people with addiction issues humane? Homelessness will never totally disappear, there are those that prefer that way, I volunteered to help get people off the streets, some would rather live in the streets, some are addicts with no real reason to get sober, some are hard workers down on their luck, some are unmotivated to better themselves, some refuse to conform to social constructs, some are mentally ill, so many reasons why they are there, throwing them money will no solve the issue, why do you think it would?

Exactly. It sounds like parents with a loser son or daughter (or transgender LOL) where the parents keep giving them money and it never stops because just giving them money only teaches them to not solve their problems because their parents will just keep giving them more money.

 

[Lisa558]

I remember many decades ago where 60 minutes ran a story about how many criminals were relocating to Portland, Oregon because jails were so crowded there you could commit all kinds of crimes and be set free with no jail time if caught. There was a big magnet there drawing criminals from all over the country. Could explain some things.

Pre-Covid, I was planning a cruise that stopped in Portland and San Francisco (among other ports) but off course it didn’t happen. Now you couldn’t PAY me to spend my tourist dollars in those cities.

(San Diego would have been nice, though.)

 

[Independent thinker]

How is it human rights to take money from some people to give to others? How do you outlaw how some people wish to live? I think the Supreme Court would like to hear that argument.

Apparently you don't understand socialism. You take from the rich and give to the poor and that turns us into a Utopian society where everything is perfect and there are no problems.