I am stimulated to create this thread by Makapule's challenge:
Certain websites estimate we have 20,000 homeless, fewer than many other warm-climate states. I think the estimate is under-represented.
Who TF are "you Baggers?" Certainly I'm not one, but the accusation seems to hang on me! It's like me calling Makapule "You Nazis."
Not only obvious and deliberate baiting, but close to the "No Make Huhu" rule! Get real and aware! I thought you, Makapule, were against baiting, at least your responses seems to indicate so:
I am a Cultural Anthropologist, and unlike theoretical economists, like Mata claims to be, I'm there, on the ground, with my population, examining the criteria. Shame on you for NOT BEING there! And then challenging we who have been there to go there. Sounds like baiting, and hypocrisy!
First of all;, those with no income pay no taxes, except sales tax.
Next. Homeless either congregate in groups or seek seclusion, as they choose.
I spent a few weeks on and off, with the group who camped under the hau trees past Waianae. They managed their encampment quite well, they ejected unpleasant or non-conformative factions quickly and with a sense of unity. They worked together in a way I have rarely seen before. They didn't give a shit about taxation, because most of them were jobless.
As for those few who had jobs, some paid their taxes (few) and others figured without a permanent address that they would not be tracked down, and if they did would plead ignorance (I sent in my forms!), and would pay when and if they could.
I also interacted with beach and park dwellers all living alone - or not in a group, at least - and their unanimous comment was that the State was not caring for them, so they had no obligations to help the State! (Such obvious logic!).
Now that he State is taking more aggressive steps to help homelessness, that will change (hopefully). New homeless facilities and new low-income units are becoming available. At least we hope.
What do we need?
1. More jobs.
2. More affordable housing.
3. Relaxed habitation criteria.
4. Approved areas where homeless can easily access and live in the interim.
That's where I'm at.
1. Homelessness in inexcusable, from the viewpoint of the State of Hawaii.
1.a. It drives away tourist ism, which is our financial life blood.
1.b. It demonstrates that Hawai`i is financially intractable.
1.c. It shows tourists that we are a THIRD-WORLD-state!
1.d. It invites homeless immigrants to come and 'share the wealth.'
2. Homelessness demonstrates a need to NOT live normally, which collapses proposition 1, and allows lawlessness.
We need to determine:
1. Will we house the homeless, temporarily, then permanently,
2. Will we provide avenues for the homeless to become productive citizens, either here or there?
3. Will we eliminate the homeless with the Matapule Death Ray (or the Kaonohi death ray), or the Frankie Death Ray?) or the newmayor Death Ray?
#############\
\1. Done that,been there, don't work.
2. Seems the most reasonable path, yet....
where are the jobs? where is the housing???
3. We tried the death ray in VietNam, it only had 50% efficiency. Reports from Iraq and Afghanistan are yet inconclusive.
Certain websites estimate we have 20,000 homeless, fewer than many other warm-climate states. I think the estimate is under-represented.
Originally posted by matapule
View Post
Not only obvious and deliberate baiting, but close to the "No Make Huhu" rule! Get real and aware! I thought you, Makapule, were against baiting, at least your responses seems to indicate so:
I am a Cultural Anthropologist, and unlike theoretical economists, like Mata claims to be, I'm there, on the ground, with my population, examining the criteria. Shame on you for NOT BEING there! And then challenging we who have been there to go there. Sounds like baiting, and hypocrisy!
First of all;, those with no income pay no taxes, except sales tax.
Next. Homeless either congregate in groups or seek seclusion, as they choose.
I spent a few weeks on and off, with the group who camped under the hau trees past Waianae. They managed their encampment quite well, they ejected unpleasant or non-conformative factions quickly and with a sense of unity. They worked together in a way I have rarely seen before. They didn't give a shit about taxation, because most of them were jobless.
As for those few who had jobs, some paid their taxes (few) and others figured without a permanent address that they would not be tracked down, and if they did would plead ignorance (I sent in my forms!), and would pay when and if they could.
I also interacted with beach and park dwellers all living alone - or not in a group, at least - and their unanimous comment was that the State was not caring for them, so they had no obligations to help the State! (Such obvious logic!).
Now that he State is taking more aggressive steps to help homelessness, that will change (hopefully). New homeless facilities and new low-income units are becoming available. At least we hope.
What do we need?
1. More jobs.
2. More affordable housing.
3. Relaxed habitation criteria.
4. Approved areas where homeless can easily access and live in the interim.
That's where I'm at.
1. Homelessness in inexcusable, from the viewpoint of the State of Hawaii.
1.a. It drives away tourist ism, which is our financial life blood.
1.b. It demonstrates that Hawai`i is financially intractable.
1.c. It shows tourists that we are a THIRD-WORLD-state!
1.d. It invites homeless immigrants to come and 'share the wealth.'
2. Homelessness demonstrates a need to NOT live normally, which collapses proposition 1, and allows lawlessness.
We need to determine:
1. Will we house the homeless, temporarily, then permanently,
2. Will we provide avenues for the homeless to become productive citizens, either here or there?
3. Will we eliminate the homeless with the Matapule Death Ray (or the Kaonohi death ray), or the Frankie Death Ray?) or the newmayor Death Ray?
#############\
\1. Done that,been there, don't work.
2. Seems the most reasonable path, yet....
where are the jobs? where is the housing???
3. We tried the death ray in VietNam, it only had 50% efficiency. Reports from Iraq and Afghanistan are yet inconclusive.
Comment