Rep Al Green: Extend Free Housing for Evacuees til 2008

This is a ridiculous argument on multiple levels. Homelessness is definitely correlated with criminal behavior, but it's ridiculous to think that it's a causal relationship. The far more likely scenario is that both homelessness and criminal behavior are correlated with poverty, alcoholism, and drug abuse (which are possibly further spuriously correlated).

But let's accept your hypothesis. Let's say that if homelessness is increased, 10% of the new homeless people turn to crime (weren't involved in that crime to begin with). That means that we'll have to pay for the prosecution and jailing of that 10% of the homeless. I can promise you that the money saved by kicking out the other 90% will more than pay for that prosecution and jail time.

I'm not saying that we should quit paying for this housing. My apartment was destroyed by Hurricane Rita. Because of lack of available housing, I almost had to take a FEMA trailer. I understand the situation. But don't pretend that there is an economic incentive. That logic just doesn't hold.

 

I don't have the statistics infront of me but if I recall jailing someone is far far more expensive than providing things like rent subsidies. Anyway even if all homeless don't turn to crime there still is a cost in maintaining shelters and other problems as more people end up living and begging on the street.

 

Not just homelessness, but lack of necissities in general. If people who did have homes and didn't have to worry about whatever money they did make going towards rent, and were able to buy food, pay for training to get a better job, etc. that would help.

Remove that from them and it is going to go down hill. Ther most certainly an economic incentive. There is no question that crime and the economy go hand in hand. In the 90's when the economy was booming crime dropped immensely. They almost always go hand in hand.

 

Has anyone done stat on the percent of displaced people that found a new job?

 

Homelessness might be a deterrent but the rest of us also have to deal with the consequences of it. Jail is a deterrent too but we also have to pay for that.

My question is would you as a hardworking member of society rather be paying for jailing people and dealing with more pan handlers and people sleeping under overpasses or would you rather put money into rent subsidies?

Noone wants to breed dependency and I don't think anyone is advocating having these people live in luxury. Just because someone is getting a rent subsidy doesn't mean that there isn't going to be any impetus to not work and improve their quality of life.

 

It's been a while, but I saw a special on this. The stats that I heard (all estimates) were that around 70% of the people who had lost a job due to Katrina had found a new job. But only about 45-50% of the same group currently living in Houston had found a new job.

 

Just as a random observation, I was listening to the news coverage (Fox News) on the tornado disaster in Kansas or thereabouts -- I just caught the tail end of the report. The people in that community were already starting to fix up and rebuild. One of the residents remarked, "All we ask is that you mention us in your prayers."

What a world of difference between those residents and the residents of New Orleans.

 

I'm sure all those people will ask for is prayers. FEMA shouldn't even go there, they should just pray.

 

They asked for our prayers. Personally, they already are in mine. And, no, I don't think many, if any, of them will go to FEEBLE...I mean FEMA. I think it's called personal pride. But I hope FEMA does. They seem like people worth helping.

 

you have no idea what you're talking about if you think people want go to FEMA out of personal pride. as poor people on welfare are the only people who've ever used FEMA. that's utterly ridiculous.

when has a community ever turned down FEMA out of pride. It would be a historical first

 

Sounds like a person who is unfamiliar with the concept.

 

seriously, taking government aid has nothing to do with pride or lack of. turning down FEMA would be like turning away shelter from the red cross. it isn't welfare and it isn't intended to be.

secondly alot of FEMA aid has to be paid back if your a home owner so it isn't even a donation.

 

Correct! That's probably one of the reasons they don't want it. I will rediscover my rose colored glasses if ever any of the New Orleans residents repay a dime of the money they received. To most in New Orleans, it was a welfare bonus bonanza.

I know lots of people who pitched in to help both overall and individually, myself included, and watched the money squandered by an ungrateful populace.

 

With all due respect to the people in Kansas, Kansas isn't flooded for three weeks straight and the people there aren't being moved to another state.

Tornadoes are terrible but nothing compared to the scope of Katrina.

 

Have you been to New Orleans since?

When I was there volunteering all the people I talked to were pretty grateful.

 

I haven't been to New Orleans in years. My direct experience is with the refugees.

 

yup.. what's the point of volunteering to help refugees if they're not grateful to me

 

"refugees"?

Rocket River
you slip is showing

 

and i know lots of people who are intensely grateful. did you expect they would ALL be grateful in the same measure? they're people after all.