Why does USA still have hungry and homeless people if ....
we have 23 to 37 billion to go towards helping other countries?
Great question. It starts at the top. Most republicans think these people are just lazy and no good. So, they are thinking why give them any help., there is already welfare. Most of these people are mentally ill and have no idea how the process works to get help. Even if they could?
That's interesting about the USA and your thoughts on this, the UK is exactly the same, perhaps with even more emphasis on the 'class' system!!
JThomp42 your comments are seriously flawed. Most republican know that many of the freeloaders are lazy and no good. These freeloaders continue to work the system because the system is flawed. No one deserves something for nothing. Jobs provide pay.
I lost my job at 60. I drew unemployment for nearly a year. Fortunately I did not need food stamps. If something happens to my wife and me, would the aid my blind son, who suffered a brain injury, be one of your freeloaders. Let's help, not judge.
tbHistorian... Your comment has proven my point. Those who are mentally Ill, including our veterans, are unable to work due to their illness. Your way of thinking has what has put them on the streets.
The unemployment rate in this country doesn't help and most new jobs are partime rather than solid full time jobs. Not all the homeless and and unemployed are mentally ill, but still cannot find jobs because there is no job growth in this country. We send billions overseas because we are the world's leader and if we don't other countries won't either. The rest of the world follows our lead. I think we should care and send money in disasters and castastrophes but I think we should start cutting back the amount pwe send and noongerstart concentrations on our own problems here in the US. It's not an easy answer.
30 % out of millions are mentally ill. This is a significant number. This includes our veterans.
Most other countries do not have the resources that we have to send help and if they do have the resources but offer no help, that speaks ill of them. I want all Americans to enjoy the good life, but I do not want to ignore the needy in any country.
How do you define "mentally ill", JThomp? Who gets to decide the definition of mentally ill?
Caleb..... it is very simple if you have been around mentally ill people. For those who have not, they cannot sympathize with nor do they want to. They are too worried about them being a burden to society. Mentally ill or not, they are still human be
Well, it's good to give and help-out. Especially since the foreign policy of the U.S. government is to invade countries and remodel their societies (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.).
I guess the help given to the Philippines after the huge storm they had, could have been given to homeless people in the United States but I think those in the Philippines were at a greater risk of dying than most people in the United States.
Most of these people suffer because the economy is at the lowest point of support for jobs. This is due to the irrational policies established by the current Executive.
The major factors creating the trend is produced by a lack of affordable housing and a despondent increase in family poverty. While it is easy to proclaim these major factors, both are a result of lack of economic growth. This is due to the lack of attention from the current administration and the declared need for a federal rather than local solution. The ridiculous political tyranny stratified by the current Executive has expanded this phenomena due to lack of credible leadership to produce advancement for jobs.
The 2013 survey of the nation’s large cities has indicated that the homeless population of the USA decreased by 0.4%. This was the result of many young single and family individuals moving back in with mom and dad.
The number of homeless individuals in families increased 1.4% at the same time. This is due to the expansion of family members by homeless couples over the same period. By the way, these homeless families received full healthcare at no cost due to their economic woes.
The USA has homeless and hungry due to the horrific dislodged forced welfare slavery that is continually propagated by politicians to prove that they are taking care of the depressed poor. Then, political opponents engage in a demented rapture proclaiming their desire to provide for all the distressed even though there is no way to achieve that objective. Non-politicians then state that many are mentally incapable of providing for themselves even though many receive free support through local nonprofit social elements.
When the private citizen orchestrates a solution to the hunger and homeless domain, the distressed individual is personally involved in their own positive advancement. This is true regardless of their supposed mental capability. Even those who need professional medical assistance are better served by the private citizen brigades rather than the politically subjugated hordes of civil servants. Due to the quash theory for civil servants, perpetuating the distress means the politically subjugated keep their jobs. Therefore, a solution for hunger and homelessness is never a major objective, even when deceitfully stated as such.
It is not the distribution of the revenue that perpetuates the hunger and homelessness in the USA, but the economic crisis is straining more families.
While I agree with much of what you say, you make it sound like the homeless reap some sort of benefit when many are collecting ZERO government assistance. Many homeless families have working adults.
The problems facing the homeless, the hungry and the unemployed have been around and developing for years. You cannot lay the blame in the lap of any single president. Such an attitude displays a lack of objectivity and an excess amount of prejudice.
I realize that everyone wants to deny the current situation by debating prior activity. However, it is the current leadership that is failing.
2008- 154,287,000 parttime 4%
2012- 139,869,000 parttime 13%
2013- 143,568,000 parttime 28%
As with all money spent there is a cost and a benefit. In our own neighborhoods, police, for example, are an expense, but one for which we hopefully also benefit through increased public safety and reduced crime.
Similarly, much of our foreign aid, at least theoretically, is intended to help make the world a place where people and goods are safe and free to move about. We benefit from that as much as anyone. I don't know if the benefit is greater than the cost, but it certainly isn't only a cost.
Aside from that, I try and view the world as a neighborhood. If my neighbor's house floods I will do what I can to help them out. And yes we have some people in this country not doing well, we are still, in our metaphorical neighborhood, the mansion on the block. We have an enormous capacity to help out others, and in my opinion, have a duty to.
That doesn't mean all our foreign aid is well spent, but I do agree with the concept. That also doesn't mean we should have hungry people. But hungry people isn't due to a lack of ability to feed, It is a choice. We could if we wanted to feed everyone, employ everyone, and have universal access to healthcare and education, but...we'd rather buy bombs and jets.
If we cancelled all foreign aid, do you suppose a single dollar of that would go towards hunger in America? probably not. It's more likely to go towards trying to get one of our gazillion dollar planes actually up in the air or building monuments to Ayn Rand.
I believe to help people is they must learn to help themselves in order not to go hungry or being homeless. There are aids going around in the world but if the people themselves are not doing something for themselves then the situation will remain the same.
I believe one of the best method of helping people is to provide shelters and creating jobs where they can survive by helping themselves. Teach them skills and they can earn their living. But then there will always be people sitting around doing nothing ... relying on others.
I was born in 1951. When I was 6, our first shopping center opened. Soon there were men there, without legs, selling pencils and using scrub brushes to propel their legless bodies on planks of wood with roller skate wheels. They are gone. They died.
These are great people who learn skills to help themselves. I am proud of them for what they did to support them.
Often the political advantage of doling out financial aid to other countries and governments is greater than simply helping those within our own country. This doesn't make it right, but this is the case oft times. The majority of politicians only care about issues that they think will advance their careers help them grow in popularity. Old habits are hard to break. It's time the People break their habits for them.
The US has been giving aid for foreign countries for a 100 years. Future President Herbert Hoover organized 80 billion pounds to those affected in Europe during the War. US became a world leader, by default. There were poor then and more private organizations helped.
Poverty rates have slowly increased since 1972 and a sharp increase since 2008. Accordingly, funding has also increased at increasingly higher rate.
It is hard to defend for more revenue when the poverty rate continues to increase as the economy falls and rises.
Also, the Federal government is inefficient and fraud diminishes the effectiveness. Private organizations should help the poor and it should be done locally. They are more efficient, fraud will be greatly reduced and, more importantly, those that receive the help could very well become more likely to reduce the help and some, eventually, could become in a position to return the favor. Employment, which generally parallels poverty, will always create and resolve the situation.
Very good question. I think it boils down to gov. priorities. All those billions that go to fund other nations (some of which are very unfriendly to us) could be reinvested in our own people and their needs. The other thing I personally have seen that leads to poverty in the U.S. is the tax break incentives that tempt industry leaders to set up business overseas. We also have a fed that has put a stranglehold of red tape on practically every facet of industry and business in this country.
I hate the idea of poverty and homelessness happening anywhere; but charity should begin at home and extend from there. One does not escape a hole in the ground by digging down.
I think some of the answers are a little naïve.
The latest figures indicate that there are 610,000 homeless people living in the US.This figure is an estimate based upon data collected at homeless shelters across the US, and it counted the people staying in the shelter as well as those turned away at shelters that were at full capacity. But this figure at least gives us a guideline as to how many people are actually homeless in the US.
Many of the people in the US are homeless due to factors which cannot necessarily be changed by throwing money at the situation. This includes people who 'choose' to be homeless: those who are substance abusers who are not interested in changing their lifestyle as well as those suffering from mental illness issues who would not agree with being confined in a mental institution and choose to live on the streets instead.
Although a number of homeless people in the US are veterans, recent progress in numerous programs indicate that there has been a 24% decrease in the number of homeless veterans in the US during the last year, which is an encouraging figure.
Reporter Jason Willick, a senior staff reporter with The Daily Californian, did some on-the-scene research with homeless people in Berkeley, discovering that many of the homeless people in that area of California chose to be homeless as a matter of preference: it allowed them to 'buck the system' by taking advantage of free food and allowed them to panhandle passersby. It's an interesting article entitled "Homeless by Choice" if anyone is interested in reading it.
Thanks for the question: you are going to continue to get some good debate on this point~~
Government priorities, while having a basic control on funds and even citizens. We cannot have everyone living well, or that will throw of the power structure.
Sadly, the elites need the down trodden..
It allows them too function on tyrannical levels, without response. Those in DC for example can talk a good game and score votes, but rarely act to better the plight of the American populace, from the poor to the middle class.
We are peasants.
Now, I do not want tax payer assistance or aid, that is not what I am referring to. I would like less regulation and allow the markets to run freely. This allows for personal responsibility and chance to succeed, while growing jobs.. Therefore yanking people out of poverty and from living under bridges.
Though, our government these days, and illegally so, is pushing for Marxist idealism, creating two classes. One of political clout and wealth, and the rest of us.
They will control, via the state, our finances, individuality, and health. Not only is this dangerous, but like the child who keeps touching the hot stove, will give us the same result as it has with other nations throughout history. This system ends with dictators, poverty levels uber high, sickly masses, arrogant ruling class, crime spikes, and finally death.. all while losing your voice and individual rights. This will push more people into the red, if you will.
Charity, as with what is going on with the tornado victims of late, is best to assist those in need or poverty stricken. The will of the people is strong without government intrusion. Hell, they cannot function well enough with their social programs. Look at the mess called Obamacare and the out of control welfare state, costing us tax payers I might add. Debt rising and GDP at a stand still and/or tumbling on occasion.
Point is: The government must go back to design, and worry about protecting citizens from enemies, whether at home or abroad. Let the markets and business do their jobs. Employment will rise. So will pay checks. Trickle down economics is always blasted by liberals, but led to the working class' success. As well as small and large business owners. This is a good thing. Keep government out of the help game and rely on one's self or those who are charitable.
The government utilizes the foreign aid as a scapegoat measure, also to promote a false front of being good neighbors and such. It is of very little substance, as said before, especially when you have so many on the home front hurting and struggling to get by.
They, in the great federal entity, do not care one iota about us citizens. The flawed human condition has created this, along with the supposed power these elected officials receive. They work for us, although hard to tell at times. Their acts are for votes and personal gain. Not all politicos are like this, but many, many are..
Again, to keep in the good graces of the world court, we will spend outwardly instead if internally. I just wish they in Washington, and in many cases state level would quit spending altogether.
Help the poor fellow citizens, but of your own good faith and finances. Whether buying a gift for Christmas for a hurting family, or a turkey for Thanksgiving. Donate clothes.. But keep government and their shady FEMA trucks or poverty pimps away!
peeples...I believe I have questioned this very thing, for decades. Such a seemingly "unnecessary" shame for this country to carry. It is nothing that can or should be understood. Hunger and Homelessness should simply NOT exist in the U.S.A. Why does it still exit? Why has it ever?
Rather than suggest explanations for this social injustice.....which do not come easily to most sane individuals, I find I respond with more questions. Unwilling to accept this reality, 90% of us, remain astonished and confused.
Is it human greed? Lack of empathy, compassion and concern? How do those IN POWER, see this, know this and yet, continue to allow this inhumanity to go on.....while they pour our country's money, elsewhere in the world?
Individuals, groups and organizations can do only so much...and of course we should always continue. However, it is long long overdue that a nationwide solution come, with the money, power and dedication required to wipe hunger and homelessness OUT...in OUR country.
Your question IS THE question of all others. It should be asked loudly and often, followed by VOICES, demands, support and action. As with so much, this requires each one of us to shout and shake it up.
by Theresa Collins13 months ago
Why do some families of the mentally ill turn their backs on them?I have seen many people who are truly, seriously, mentally ill with diagnosis such as Schizophrenia have no one, absolutely no one. Their families have...
by Mike Russo2 years ago
Let's face facts people. The 2nd amendment was written for another time and another place. It has no place in today's world. It is causing mentally ill people to commit mass killings. The gun...
by Luciendasky8 years ago
With the recession going on, I have noticed several new cardboard signs asking for food, money or gas. How do you distinguish the real from the fake, and what should you do to help them?
by Reality Bytes6 years ago
Protesters decry beating of Calif. homeless manAMY TAXIN, Associated Press, GILLIAN FLACCUS, Associated PressUpdated 02:48 p.m., Saturday, August 6, 2011FULLERTON, Calif. (AP) — Angry protesters gathered Saturday...
by RodneyBlaec Rainey4 years ago
Should homelessness be criminalized?Last week Columbia, South Carolina joined Miami and Tampa, Florida in officially criminalizing homelessness. Over the weekend Raleigh, NC police stopped a church group called...
by Michelle Zunter2 years ago
More gun violence very close to where I live yesterday. Most weapons, including guns, are available to anyone in this country at any given time. But what about the people who are using the guns? Are they mentally ill?...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.