...no. because it goes a lot farther than that. immigrants, Jews, muslims...it's all relative.

Except for when you are homeless and don't have a sink, or toothpaste.


And don't even begin to start talking about shelters, because half the time they are either stuffed or you can't go there with your family.

It's not "buying into bullshit" when those are the only options that are seemingly avaliable and that's what you've been raised with. People join gangs in the innercity because that's the only way for them to get protection/monetary support etc.



I don't even know where to get started with this one. i'll just talk from the experience of the people i have met - gang violence follows people into basic training, you can't join the army with certain medical conditions, homosexuals aren't allowed in the army...or just having moral convictions against wanting to kill. the rich shouldn't be the only people who are able to protect their values...

My past jobs had me operating an entire shipping/receiving department and closing down a movie theater. They even offered me a manager position before I had to leave back to uni.

Sounds like you have it pretty good.

join the army? join the US fucking army? yeah that's what people from the hood should do, join the US army, if they don't end up dead or severly injured or with war pyschosis they will at least have killed a few iraqs or afghans and contributed to the corporate genocide/invasion for oil. is that why we have poor people in the first place, so they can go off and die in your wars?

fuck you and your army. fuck you needle in the sway. that's one of the most disgusting things ive ever heard, even from an attention seeking cunt such as yourself.

homeless people "want" to be homeless, if they didn't they could just get a job/home.

the military is not "about killing".

you are a fucking idiot.

it's not supposed to be anyway

haha!

FROM THE NEW STATESMAN ARTICLE http://www.newstatesman.com/asia/200...world-war-iraq

The global reach of the US military today is unprecedented and unparalleled. Officially, more than 190,000 troops and 115,000 civilian employees are massed in approximately 900 military facilities in 46 countries and territories (the unofficial figure is far greater). The US military owns or rents 795,000 acres of land, with 26,000 buildings and structures, valued at $146bn (£89bn). The bases bristle with an inventory of weapons whose worth is measured in the trillions and whose killing power could wipe out all life on earth several times over.
The official figures exclude the huge build-up of troops and structures in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade, as well as secret or unacknowledged facilities in Israel, Kuwait, the Philippines and many other places. In just three years of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, $2bn was spent on military construction. A single facility in Iraq, Balad Airbase, houses 30,000 troops and 10,000 contractors, and extends across 16 square miles, with an additional 12 square mile "security perimeter". From the battle zones of Afghanistan and Iraq to quiet corners of Curaçao, Korea and Britain, the US military domain consists of sprawling army bases, small listening posts, missile and artillery testing ranges and berthed aircraft carriers (moved to "trouble spots" around the world, each carrier is considered by the US navy as "four and a half acres of sovereign US territory"). While the bases are, literally speaking, barracks and weapons depots, staging areas for war-making and ship repairs, complete with golf courses and basketball courts, they are also political claims, spoils of war, arms sale showrooms and toxic industrial sites. In addition to the cultural imperialism and episodes of rape, murder, looting and land seizure that have always accompanied foreign armies, local communities are now subjected to the ear-splitting noise of jets on exercise, to the risk of helicopters and warplanes crashing into residential areas, and to exposure to the toxic materials that the military uses in its daily operations.
_______________________________________________


Yeah man great and honourable to be in the US military! after vietnam, iraq, afghanistan, all the countless other genocide/dictator installing fun you guys have all over the world i bet its really fucking honourable. if your a psychotic imperialistic blackwater CEO who thinks you have a right to kill rape and pillage your way around the globe.

I worked in a non-profit that advocated for ex-convict rights to employment while in college, All of Us or None. Wasn't doing much other than bitch work, but the ex-convicted women that worked there were some of the nicest but hardest working women I've ever known. Unfortunately, it sounded as though their victories were few and far between.

that's really admirable. good lookin' out.

yeah all that genocide is just an unfortunate side affect.

me need the US military? well let's see... i've never fucking needed them and never will. but thanks to them/the UK there's a lot of middle eastern countries where i might not be so welcome anymore.

YEAH THINK OF THOSE AWESOME SOLDIERS WHO HELPED FEED THE STARVING VIETNAMESE PEOPLE AFTER THEY BOMBED THE COUNTRY TO SHIT! It was definitly worth invading/slaughtering so many other men women and children just so they could get a good photo op of soldiers feeding some starving kids so assholes like you back home could get all teary eyed.

HAHA! It just gets fucking better! katrina! the US military! looters!

i guess those poor blacks were the "looters" and the white folks were the "finders"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46RlBzWMGnc

actually, that story about the helicopter being shot down was made up.

here's some research for ya http://www.reason.com/news/show/36327.html

yes. it was. try reading.

again, here is the link http://www.reason.com/news/show/36327.html

why don't you try READING THE LINK http://www.reason.com/news/show/36327.html

but i should believe the made up story about people trying to shoot down helicopters tho?

again. why don't you try reading the http://www.reason.com/news/show/36327.html

your other 2 posts on this page are some of the most disgusting bile i've read in a long time. if you actually believe that bullshit right wing narrative of what happened then you could at best be said to be a deluded asshole.

here is naomi kleins' take on it http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-...t_b_77886.html

yeah good luck pulling out of her and ejaculating on your own stomach

and swa(y), walker of the dark path, continues to embarrass himself with each post.

get a room you two.

I am doing very similar work right now through AmeriCorps. I work at a home that helps ex-incarcerated female addicts, helping them transition into a stable life. And yeah, some of those women are the hardest working people I've ever met. Living on the streets isn't easy. To believe that people want to remain homeless is truly one of the most ignorant/heartless comments that I have read on this board. Occasionally there is the hippie idiot who chooses to be homeless...but you can't make those types of generalizing assumptions based on a sorry few. People who are homeless do often make decisions that force them to remain homeless...but that's because most of those people are stuck in cycles that continue to keep them down (ie drug addiction and stuff) and don't have adequete education/reasources to find ways out of their situations. It's not like a homeless person can spend hours on the Internet searching for jobs or other options.

That really is a small percentage.

Places like these aren't by choice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/us/26tents.html

Nobody said that small percentage doesn't exist.

However, you said most homeless people want to be homeless.

Again, both that article and the one I posted before about the rise in unemployment show that reality and what you believe are completely different.

But belief does often comfort the believer so that they can keep their cigarettes to themselves.

I would think the anger would be a reaction of perceived inhospitality fueled by addiction withdrawal. Like getting pissed that you already ran out of your own cigarettes.

Perhaps they also feel condescended to in being made to feel like a begger instead of as a equal.

Of course you'll say this is all their fault. The employed are better human beings than the unemployed, right?

Do you consider your friends beggers if they ask for a cigarette or borrow a movie? Are they as despicable?

You should show hospitality because equals should respect each other, extending kindness is the first step in showing respect.

But you've said asking isn't the issue but evidently it is if perceived dependence distinguishes friends from beggers.

Equal as in equally valuable as human beings. All men are created equal, etc. Are you incapable of respect for people that have different lives as you do?

Again, I wonder what it is particularly that you love about America even though you reject the basic human decency that is the basis for equal respect under the law.

And I may harshly criticise people with whom I disagree with but that isn't the same thing as refusing to help them when they truly need it. Everything else is just bullshit to that little thing.

But whatever. You're a selfish fuck. You shrug when genocide occurs somewhere on the other side of the globe just as long as you have your truck and cigarettes.

I have called you nothing more than what you have revealed yourself to be through questioning.

Do it, you working class hero. You self-made champion.

I'm suspecting swa(y) might be a bit of a steven seagal fan.

I was taught in elementary school that part of what it means to be a decent human being is to treat yr fellow human beings with respect and by helping out as you have the means to do so.

It's sick how we have turned homeless people into a caste of their own. As a whole, we do not treat them with any bit of human dignity. Once you are homeless, it's very easy to get stuck...what do you do with blank spaces on yr resume, no previous references for a landlord, no credit etc? How do you get a job if you can't afford interview clothes, yet alone have no place to shower before the interview or to print out/work on yr resume?

I think it's pathetic that somebody would even attempt to justify homeless people wanting to remain homeless. Once again, of course there are some who are idiots...but even if half of the homeless population was homeless by choice (which is extremely far from being true), I will still make an effort to treat all of them with the respect that all human beings deserve. You never know another person's situation, ever. Especially not if you aren't willing to even talk to them. These face judgments about worthiness make the lives of homeless people are the more miserable. Close yr eyes for a moment and imagine what it would feel like to sleep out in the cold, being dismissed by everybody, pedestrians crossing the street to avoid you, having to constantly worry about being arrested for loitering, not being able to shower, having no friends or family to take care of you, fears over being murdered or raped when you close yr eyes to sleep....people in better positions are constantly justifying their bad decisions...well, i think that if i was in the position that i just described and the only thing to keep me warm during the winters/make me feel a little bit better was alcohol (plus it was cheeper/more filling than food) i would probably be a drunk, just to be able to get through my day.

Plus, what about you makes you a better person other than yr silly ownership of material possessions? (don't even try to argue that...the result will inevitably be both selfish and backwards)

I'm not sure if this happens in the US but something I've noticed about news coverage in the UK is that when a homeless person is being interviewed they very rarely give their surname. They'll simply be 'John', or 'Claire', or whatever, whereas an 'official' member of society will almost always be referred to by their full name. This can't have anything to do with anonymity because they'll almost always show them.

Just something I've noticed.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TheFoxBen again.

has anyone seen the documentary Dark Days? it's about homeless people that lived underground in New York. when asked, each of the homeless people made grandiose claims about how it's the best time in their life and how they wouldn't want to live ANY WAY else.

whether it was "gives me time to smoke crack" (seriously) or "I like to be free, man" they were all very convincing and enthusiastic about the life "they chose".

until, that is, when they were forced to move from their tunnels and given modest apartments. that's when the story changed to "oh my gawd, what was I thinking" and "I swear I'll never let it happen again".

you see, homeless people are still fucking people. when confronted or put into a position perceived lesser value, they get defensive and in no way will admit to "I fucked up" or "I don't want to be like this". however, when that stress is missing from their lives, they are able to talk more frankly about it, retrospectively.

of note: today's economy has skewed the "homeless" demographic, so of course yr going to get less of the stereotypical die-hards.

I have been volunteering on skid row (well four skid rows) here in LA feeding the homeless.. I have met A LOT of different people there.. what unites 90% of them is that if you ask them what they are about, what they live for, they will say, "Nothin" and that explains that...

where the hell have you been, suchfriends? this thread without you was like a bottomfest sans the instigator

I saw something similar, about the 'mole people' living in new york's subways.

Yes, people in a shit situation are likely to defend it or justify it in comparison with the 'straight' world, either when they see no way out of it, or out of sheer pride. this inevitably gives rise to accusations that it's 'what they want' rather than seeing their apparent acceptance merely as a syndrome brought about as a result of their situation.

It's probably to protect the "honor" of the family associated with the surname. Many homeless people are effectively disowned by their relatives for all kinds of reasons.

Yeah, that's a possibility but I really don't think it's a decision made by the interviewee so much as a general convention used by the media - who aren't generally known for protecting the honor of those they come into contact with. Also, if it occured in conjunction with the person's face being blacked out or their voice being distorted it'd make more sense. Often though, the person being interviewed is completely open about their identity and history but still, when their name comes up at the bottom of the screen they're just 'John'.

honestly I found this thread a bit boring..