I saw a meme about housing those that call themselves refugees. Apparently the United Stats has erected a tent city for them. The question was if we could do that for them why can't we do it for the homeless veterans? On the surface it seems like a valid question but that isn't the way I see that. My remark was if you did that then the homerless wouldn't be homeless anymore, they would just live there. In so doing we would also have to have a cafeteria, medical facilities and cable television. It was a bit of a snarky response but one I believe is correct. At the least that is the empirical view. It would be really no different than subsidized housing, well except for one big difference. it would not be a subsidy, it would be straight up charity.
Now you could argue that our Veterans deserve charity. I could argue that every human being is deserving of charity. Is one demographic more deserving than another? When you start classifying such it is a very slippery slope. Are homeless veterans more deserving than refugees? Are we going to say that because a refugee chooses that status, it is their choice to be homeless? As harsh as that sounds I can understand the logic in that. The question is are our veterans also choosing to be homeless? Or are they being forced into homelessness? Well, nothing is 100%, there are always exceptions to the rule. I did a brief search on the internet concerning voluntary homelessness and actually found very little data about that. It is a " thing " among some young people who identify themselves as " crusty " or " crunchy " or some other terms to describe their choice to be homeless. Apparently a California thing centered mostly in Berkley, go figure right? But anyway, there are those that choose this as a way of life. I had written about such a while back in a story I called Hobo to Homeless. Hobo's were what we called transient workers back in the day. It wasn't a good thing to be a hobo and most were frowned upon by the public in general. There did come a time when they were the stuff of folklore and legend, almost lovable characters. Think, Freddie the Freeloader, a beloved character played by Red Skelton. I do wonder when we transitioned from that mentality to labeling them as homeless and deserving of charity. Just what shift took place? Why do we automatically assume that a person that is homeless has been forced into that position? That certainly wasn't the thinking back then. Could it be that these " homeless " people have discovered that as well? What I mean is that charity is forthcoming merely for the surrendering of your dignity? Yes, I'm talking about the victim mentality. Oh poor me, I'm a veteran or whatever and deserve so much more. An exploitation of our fellow mans' charity? Keep in mind I did say nothing is 100% so I'm not saying all of them are like that. I just question how many make a conscious decision in that regard? As I said there is apparently little actual data in that regard, at least little that I found. I did find that homelessness has been steadily decreasing over the last ten years. That is in direct correlation with subsidized housing and other charitable venues, again, go figure right? If I can get it for free, or very little effort, why struggle right? I'll surrender my dignity for whatever I can get and then complain about a loss of dignity to gain even more. That's how these folks wind up with cell phones, automobiles, housing, food stamps and free cable television! We certainly wouldn't want them to feel any less about themselves! After all, it's not their fault is it? Truth is, we just don't really know do we?
There is always two sides to every story. How did we reach the point were we automatically assume everyone is a victim? When did we remove personal choice and accountability from that equation? We aren't even supposed to consider that possibility today. If they are a veteran it is assumed they suffer from some traumatic stress disorder or other psychological effects from war! You know it is possible to be a veteran and not ever been engaged in any violent conflict whatsoever. Yes, it's true. Is the veteran that served at home, stationed in the United States less a veteran than one that served overseas? Is a decorated combat veteran more deserving than one that isn't? That is the issue I have with these blanket statements about veterans Understand I am a veteran myself, a twenty year veteran in fact. I take full advantage of every benefit I am afforded as such. I do so without shame or reservation. I earned that. That doesn't entitle me to any special treatment! Being a veteran isn't an excuse, it is a honor and a privilege. Not everyone qualifies for that distinction and I am grateful that I did so.
To return to the question though, why don't we build a tent city for our homeless veterans? I would say there are plenty of resources for these folks if they choose to avail themselves of them. That they choose not to do so I can't explain. Is it a choice on their part? Are they capable of making such a choice? Indeed should we judge that at all? Is the offering of assistance enough or should we force them to be " helped? " You will have a home if I have to lock you in one! Is that the mentality? Consider this. If free housing, free medical care and free money were given to you upon demand would you still choose to work? If so why? In my experience people pretty much do whatever they have to do. The majority will choose to do more. There will always be those that settle for whatever the can get with the least amount of effort. Start giving it out for free and that's what you'll end up with, freeloaders. The problem then becomes how to separate the two. Who needs help and who just wants a little more? Is more ever enough?
Now you could argue that our Veterans deserve charity. I could argue that every human being is deserving of charity. Is one demographic more deserving than another? When you start classifying such it is a very slippery slope. Are homeless veterans more deserving than refugees? Are we going to say that because a refugee chooses that status, it is their choice to be homeless? As harsh as that sounds I can understand the logic in that. The question is are our veterans also choosing to be homeless? Or are they being forced into homelessness? Well, nothing is 100%, there are always exceptions to the rule. I did a brief search on the internet concerning voluntary homelessness and actually found very little data about that. It is a " thing " among some young people who identify themselves as " crusty " or " crunchy " or some other terms to describe their choice to be homeless. Apparently a California thing centered mostly in Berkley, go figure right? But anyway, there are those that choose this as a way of life. I had written about such a while back in a story I called Hobo to Homeless. Hobo's were what we called transient workers back in the day. It wasn't a good thing to be a hobo and most were frowned upon by the public in general. There did come a time when they were the stuff of folklore and legend, almost lovable characters. Think, Freddie the Freeloader, a beloved character played by Red Skelton. I do wonder when we transitioned from that mentality to labeling them as homeless and deserving of charity. Just what shift took place? Why do we automatically assume that a person that is homeless has been forced into that position? That certainly wasn't the thinking back then. Could it be that these " homeless " people have discovered that as well? What I mean is that charity is forthcoming merely for the surrendering of your dignity? Yes, I'm talking about the victim mentality. Oh poor me, I'm a veteran or whatever and deserve so much more. An exploitation of our fellow mans' charity? Keep in mind I did say nothing is 100% so I'm not saying all of them are like that. I just question how many make a conscious decision in that regard? As I said there is apparently little actual data in that regard, at least little that I found. I did find that homelessness has been steadily decreasing over the last ten years. That is in direct correlation with subsidized housing and other charitable venues, again, go figure right? If I can get it for free, or very little effort, why struggle right? I'll surrender my dignity for whatever I can get and then complain about a loss of dignity to gain even more. That's how these folks wind up with cell phones, automobiles, housing, food stamps and free cable television! We certainly wouldn't want them to feel any less about themselves! After all, it's not their fault is it? Truth is, we just don't really know do we?
There is always two sides to every story. How did we reach the point were we automatically assume everyone is a victim? When did we remove personal choice and accountability from that equation? We aren't even supposed to consider that possibility today. If they are a veteran it is assumed they suffer from some traumatic stress disorder or other psychological effects from war! You know it is possible to be a veteran and not ever been engaged in any violent conflict whatsoever. Yes, it's true. Is the veteran that served at home, stationed in the United States less a veteran than one that served overseas? Is a decorated combat veteran more deserving than one that isn't? That is the issue I have with these blanket statements about veterans Understand I am a veteran myself, a twenty year veteran in fact. I take full advantage of every benefit I am afforded as such. I do so without shame or reservation. I earned that. That doesn't entitle me to any special treatment! Being a veteran isn't an excuse, it is a honor and a privilege. Not everyone qualifies for that distinction and I am grateful that I did so.
To return to the question though, why don't we build a tent city for our homeless veterans? I would say there are plenty of resources for these folks if they choose to avail themselves of them. That they choose not to do so I can't explain. Is it a choice on their part? Are they capable of making such a choice? Indeed should we judge that at all? Is the offering of assistance enough or should we force them to be " helped? " You will have a home if I have to lock you in one! Is that the mentality? Consider this. If free housing, free medical care and free money were given to you upon demand would you still choose to work? If so why? In my experience people pretty much do whatever they have to do. The majority will choose to do more. There will always be those that settle for whatever the can get with the least amount of effort. Start giving it out for free and that's what you'll end up with, freeloaders. The problem then becomes how to separate the two. Who needs help and who just wants a little more? Is more ever enough?
No comments:
Post a Comment