The issue of homeless citizens in California has been a long lasting one. According to Douglas A. McIntyre “The Department of Housing and Urban Development put out a report about the status of homeless people in the United States. With California leading the nation in homelessness.” Despite these numbers reducing it is still a major problem with 113,952 people homeless inside California borders as of 2014 according to the report.
-considering you are focusing on the two sides, what stats or info can you include that speaks to that? I'm thinking along the lines of California budget numbers, charities for the homeless, money that goes to resources for the homeless in California, the amount of people in Cali that are in the highest tax bracket, etc.
People see the issue on two different sides. On one side of the argument they see people living on the streets as an eye sore, inconvenience, or threat of some kind. The other side sees the homeless as victims of certain circumstances that need a helping hand. But I think both sides would agree that they need to get off the streets and be placed into a stable living situation.
-I'm separating these sections because you transition to new topics.
Sadly, only one side is more likely to contribute to that end result. California is heading in the right direction by reducing the homeless population over recent years. Unfortunately, the resources that are available to the homeless are greatly limited (what are these limited resources?). They are on a first come first serve basis. Many times shelters have to turn away homeless people because they are at max capacity. Which shouldn’t be the case because of how financially well off many Californian residents are. There are so many wealthy Californians in Southern California alone. There is no reason the local homeless population couldn’t be dramatically reduced if people just cared about their fellow man. -how does this idea that well off Angelinos should help out the homeless? why should that obligation be theirs? Also, what would money do or buy? what resources or help is already out there is an example of what isn't working so that you can offer a solution as to what can be improved
-is this population not the same that usually assumes negative stereotypes about the homeless? can you make a connection to that?
If the people really cared about their community, and wanted to better it they would just simply have to give. Give of their money and time. More money means more resources for homeless men, women, and children. But thats not our society now a days. That first group wants the “problem” gone but they aren’t willing to help the situation.
-what about those that don't have the means too?
-do you think that awareness of negative representations of the homeless is a factor in seeing them as an "eye sore" and if so, can another thing to add to helping out financially be spreading awareness and thinking more critically about the reality at hand in our communities
They leave the burden on the elected officials of the community to handle what is really everyones responsibility. We are all human beings trying to get through life. Why should we step on top of those put in situations less fortunate than our own, rather than give a helping hand? Especially if we have the means to do so. We are responsible for our fellow man.
Question for you, do you think that those with the financial stability to help out the situation ever really see the homeless? Do homeless people really affect those that are that well off? Do you mean upper or middle class?
-considering you are focusing on the two sides, what stats or info can you include that speaks to that? I'm thinking along the lines of California budget numbers, charities for the homeless, money that goes to resources for the homeless in California, the amount of people in Cali that are in the highest tax bracket, etc.
People see the issue on two different sides. On one side of the argument they see people living on the streets as an eye sore, inconvenience, or threat of some kind. The other side sees the homeless as victims of certain circumstances that need a helping hand. But I think both sides would agree that they need to get off the streets and be placed into a stable living situation.
-I'm separating these sections because you transition to new topics.
Sadly, only one side is more likely to contribute to that end result. California is heading in the right direction by reducing the homeless population over recent years. Unfortunately, the resources that are available to the homeless are greatly limited (what are these limited resources?). They are on a first come first serve basis. Many times shelters have to turn away homeless people because they are at max capacity. Which shouldn’t be the case because of how financially well off many Californian residents are. There are so many wealthy Californians in Southern California alone. There is no reason the local homeless population couldn’t be dramatically reduced if people just cared about their fellow man. -how does this idea that well off Angelinos should help out the homeless? why should that obligation be theirs? Also, what would money do or buy? what resources or help is already out there is an example of what isn't working so that you can offer a solution as to what can be improved
-is this population not the same that usually assumes negative stereotypes about the homeless? can you make a connection to that?
If the people really cared about their community, and wanted to better it they would just simply have to give. Give of their money and time. More money means more resources for homeless men, women, and children. But thats not our society now a days. That first group wants the “problem” gone but they aren’t willing to help the situation.
-what about those that don't have the means too?
-do you think that awareness of negative representations of the homeless is a factor in seeing them as an "eye sore" and if so, can another thing to add to helping out financially be spreading awareness and thinking more critically about the reality at hand in our communities
They leave the burden on the elected officials of the community to handle what is really everyones responsibility. We are all human beings trying to get through life. Why should we step on top of those put in situations less fortunate than our own, rather than give a helping hand? Especially if we have the means to do so. We are responsible for our fellow man.
Question for you, do you think that those with the financial stability to help out the situation ever really see the homeless? Do homeless people really affect those that are that well off? Do you mean upper or middle class?
http://247wallst.com/economy/2014/10/31/20-of-nations-homeless-are-in-california/
No comments:
Post a Comment