miraculous free market: 5x more vacant homes than homeless people

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by rickyb, Mar 9, 2015.

  1. rickyb

    rickyb Well-Known Member

    miraculous free market efficiencies: there are 5x as many vacant homes as there are homeless people...according to Amnesty International USA.

    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/more_vacant_homes_than_homeless_in_us_20111231

    n the last few days, the U.S. government census figures have revealed that 1 in 2 Americans have fallen into poverty or are struggling to live on low incomes. this supports my quote that 50% of america is in or near poverty.

    approximately 3.5 million people in the U.S. are homeless, many of them veterans. It is worth noting that, at the same time, there are 18.5 million vacant homes in the country.
     
  2. Sportello

    Sportello Well-Known Member

    There are many examples that show 'giving' homeless people homes, actually has lower costs to the government. The Republicans would never go for that.
     
  3. rod

    rod retired and happy

    What's this "giving" homes to the homeless BS-----why not make them at least work for it?
     
  4. DriveInDriveOut

    DriveInDriveOut The One Who Knocks

    Totally agree. When I'm at church and someone tries to hand me the collection plate, I slap the thing straight to the ground and yell FREEEEEEEDOMMMMM!!!!!!!! My wife won't go to church with me anymore.
     
  5. rod

    rod retired and happy

    you da man
     
  6. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    What's this giving taxpayer money to the banks BS?

    Why is one treated as so wrong and a violation of the "free market" while the other is all but ignored and without thought considered evidence of a "free market"?

    If you are going to intervene in the market regardless, give the money to the troubled homeowners to pay off their homes as the banks then get the money anyway. People still have homes, bank books balance, property values may go down a touch from boom demand drop but not plummet, local govt's don't take a hit from loss of property tax revs and now with no house payment, many will have extra income each month to keep the economy going to some degree. Folks still with house payments with better economy wouldn't be as economically stressed. People stay in jobs, food stamps and unemployment funds don't take the hit, people aren't eating up savings and 401k's and the Occupy and Tea Party groups would have to find something else to do. Maybe Obama doesn't get electe........wait, that means McCain and Palin..........GAWD DAMMIT, WE'RE F'ed EITHER WAY! ;)

    The problem with this country is it wants to play Statism or maybe a form of technocracy but is too F'ing stupid to play it out in such an easy way that everyone wins. But since everyone doesn't win, maybe that sez something about the statism that is being played out?

    And if you want to offer that the banks do work for it, well consider this part of the work ethic picture. When the Federal Reserve System and it's member banks were granted exclusive monopoly over our monetary system, a dollar had the value of a dollar. Today it is worth something around $.03, compare the value of the dollar over time to the growth of the Federal Debt and see if a bell doesn't go off. So if one is judged on performance as a measure of work, the homeless may have an argument as it relates to value. Then again maybe that is saying something about the banks and the monetary system we have!

    A purely side note, a true free market would never have a monopoly central banking system in the first place but why let facts get in the way.
    :peaceful:
     
  7. rod

    rod retired and happy


    You make a valid point about giving money to banks and big businesses. In a perfect world only the truly needy would be given "free" stuff. I guess I'm too jaded having seen too many plain lazy people who wouldn't take a job if you gave them one but they would take a free house in a heart beat---------------------------------------if someone would pay their utilities and stock the refrigerator with food stamp goodies.
     
  8. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Is the problem really them or is it the system itself that they have grown up in which teaches them learned helplessness and promotes the idea of absolute dependency? Why do we not see them as a customer of a malevolent business out to build its own profit center in the same way a Walmart, UPS or other business? Why is Walmart evil for selling big screens and X-boxes so people sit on couches and do nothing yet our welfare system does the same and with Food Stamps, it's been shown that Walmart is one of the biggest revenue and profit benefactors. And if no food stamps and other welfare supports, how could the welfare community go to Walmart and buy big screens and X-boxes too?

    As I said before, in whose pocket does the welfare dollar finally come to rest in when it stops its travels?

    Follow the money!

    Not to mention that in political narratives, one side treats them as incapable and/or to stupid in taking care of themselves and fights anyone who attempts otherwise and the other side demonizes them as less than human. Hell of a trap if you ask me!
     
  9. superballs63

    superballs63 Well-Known Troll Troll

    Cool, maybe I'll buy a few houses for dirt cheap. I hear Detroit has block upon block of houses needing to be refurbished, I mean burned to the ground.
     
  10. rickyb

    rickyb Well-Known Member

    this post was not about giving stuff away.
    this post is about how people who are homeless are obviously in need of a home, and how there are 5x more homes sitting unused, and the "Free market" still cant put 2 and 2 together.

    another thing i heard was there is roughly 20% workplaces sitting unused, and 20% of people were looking for work (or so) and the free market again fails to deliver.
     
  11. oldngray

    oldngray nowhere special

    Haven't you ever heard about the homestead programs in many cities where they sell vacant homes for about a dollar on the condition the new owner has to fix up the place and live there for a minimum number of years? Many homeless people choose to be homeless. A high percentage of those people have some form of mental illness and can't function in normal society.
     
  12. rickyb

    rickyb Well-Known Member

    so your saying all of the people who are homeless have mental illness?
     
  13. oldngray

    oldngray nowhere special

    You really need to improve your reading comprehension.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • List
  14. rickyb

    rickyb Well-Known Member

    u should try just reading and learning something for a change. and giving a straight answer instead of sarcasm.

    some of the people who are homeless in america are sane and many may be families, they likely got a fraudulent mortgage and lost their job or some combination. no doubt alot of homeless have mental problems.

    have you seen homeless shelters? people may pick being homeless in the street because the living conditions in shelters are so poor. im no expert on homelessness though.
     
  15. oldngray

    oldngray nowhere special

    Your first correct statement. You are no expert.
     
  16. realbrown1

    realbrown1 Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.

    These homes may be vacant, but the are all owned by someone.

    You want to seize these homes from people to give to other people?
     
  17. realbrown1

    realbrown1 Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.

    Pretty much, yes.

    Otherwise the wouldn't be homeless.
     
  18. rickyb

    rickyb Well-Known Member

    they are probably owned by banks.
     
  19. realbrown1

    realbrown1 Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.

    If they are owned by banks, it is still their property.
     
  20. rod

    rod retired and happy


    So you are saying that someone who has busted his butt all his life and owns a vacant house should just go up to the first homeless person he sees and hand him the keys? I don't think so.