OT: Homeless Epidemic

C

Cursitor Doom

Guest
https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
 
On 7/19/2019 7:33 PM, Cursitor Doom wrote:
https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.
Click to expand...
Dr. Drew is concerned the exploding Rat population is going to lead
to a plague epidemic.
> https://youtu.be/Iv_kNfMCBM4?t=54

Mikek
 
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:24:34 -0500, amdx wrote:

Dr. Drew is concerned the exploding Rat population is going to lead
to a plague epidemic.
https://youtu.be/Iv_kNfMCBM4?t=54
Click to expand...

Bill Sloman will be gloating over that.




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
 
On Saturday, July 20, 2019 at 11:54:36 AM UTC+2, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:24:34 -0500, amdx wrote:

Dr. Drew is concerned the exploding Rat population is going to lead
to a plague epidemic.
https://youtu.be/Iv_kNfMCBM4?t=54

Bill Sloman will be gloating over that.
Click to expand...

One has to wonder why Cursitor Doom might think that. I'm decidedly unsympathetic to the noxious rodents who infest this group, but since they do include Cursitor Doom he might not have noticed the connection.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> wrote in
news:qgtnh4$lmo$6@dont-email.me:

https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in
California have warmer weather to be homeless in.
Click to expand...
But they are brainless idiots. I heard stories from homeless folks
that "went their" to see. They said that folks at one 'location'
were all defecating and leaving it outside their tents. Like that
was the standard procedure!

Meth cookshops, redlight tents, robberies and thefts.

Fuck talking about the rats, the human rats are worse!
 
On Saturday, 20 July 2019 16:58:51 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 00:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
curd@notformail.com> wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.

"Build it and they will come."

SF does not desperately need more housing. The demand is essentially
infinite. What SF needs is fewer jobs.
Click to expand...

Here the whole thing is political. Almost every homeless person qualifies for housing benefit, which pays for a modest flat on a sink estate. They're not all mentally well enough to get through the process though, & the benefit system likes to play games with people. Reality is the govt could give them free housing of a much cheaper nature if they wanted to sort the social issue out, just a minimal room & toilet & timeshared shower. We have lots of homeless because, despite protestations to the contrary, the government chooses to have it that way.


NT
 
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 00:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<curd@notformail.com> wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.
Click to expand...

"Build it and they will come."

SF does not desperately need more housing. The demand is essentially
infinite. What SF needs is fewer jobs.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics
 
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 09:39:13 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

On Saturday, 20 July 2019 16:58:51 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 00:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
curd@notformail.com> wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.

"Build it and they will come."

SF does not desperately need more housing. The demand is essentially
infinite. What SF needs is fewer jobs.

Here the whole thing is political. Almost every homeless person qualifies for housing benefit, which pays for a modest flat on a sink estate. They're not all mentally well enough to get through the process though, & the benefit system likes to play games with people. Reality is the govt could give them free housing of a much cheaper nature if they wanted to sort the social issue out, just a minimal room & toilet & timeshared shower. We have lots of homeless because, despite protestations to the contrary, the government chooses to have it that way.


NT
Click to expand...

Homelessness is approaching a billion dollar industry in SF. The money
goes to "providers", fat-cats who run non-profits, lawyers,
politicians, landlords, psychologists, therapists, all sorts of
well-housed prople. Numbers run like $100K/year per homeless person.
It's like the gourmet cheese business, where the homeless people are
the cows.

Now people who are "housed" in vehicles will get free RV parks. We can
put up billboards all over the Americas, "Free RV parking and services
in San Francisco."






--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
 
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 09:39:13 -0700, tabbypurr wrote:

Here the whole thing is political. Almost every homeless person
qualifies for housing benefit, which pays for a modest flat on a sink
estate. They're not all mentally well enough to get through the process
though, & the benefit system likes to play games with people. Reality is
the govt could give them free housing of a much cheaper nature if they
wanted to sort the social issue out, just a minimal room & toilet &
timeshared shower. We have lots of homeless because, despite
protestations to the contrary, the government chooses to have it that
way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that and the fact that the EUSSR says we have to take all comers
regardless of the consequences. And this is one of those consequences.




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
 
On Saturday, 20 July 2019 20:20:31 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 09:39:13 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Saturday, 20 July 2019 16:58:51 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 00:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
curd@notformail.com> wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.

"Build it and they will come."

SF does not desperately need more housing. The demand is essentially
infinite. What SF needs is fewer jobs.

Here the whole thing is political. Almost every homeless person qualifies for housing benefit, which pays for a modest flat on a sink estate. They're not all mentally well enough to get through the process though, & the benefit system likes to play games with people. Reality is the govt could give them free housing of a much cheaper nature if they wanted to sort the social issue out, just a minimal room & toilet & timeshared shower. We have lots of homeless because, despite protestations to the contrary, the government chooses to have it that way.


NT

Homelessness is approaching a billion dollar industry in SF. The money
goes to "providers", fat-cats who run non-profits, lawyers,
politicians, landlords, psychologists, therapists, all sorts of
well-housed prople. Numbers run like $100K/year per homeless person.
It's like the gourmet cheese business, where the homeless people are
the cows.

Now people who are "housed" in vehicles will get free RV parks. We can
put up billboards all over the Americas, "Free RV parking and services
in San Francisco."
Click to expand...

And you get extorted to pay for all the bs


NT
 
On Saturday, July 20, 2019 at 6:39:18 PM UTC+2, tabb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, 20 July 2019 16:58:51 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 00:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
curd@notformail.com> wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.

"Build it and they will come."

SF does not desperately need more housing. The demand is essentially
infinite. What SF needs is fewer jobs.

Here the whole thing is political. Almost every homeless person qualifies for housing benefit, which pays for a modest flat on a sink estate. They're not all mentally well enough to get through the process though, & the benefit system likes to play games with people. Reality is the govt could give them free housing of a much cheaper nature if they wanted to sort the social issue out, just a minimal room & toilet & timeshared shower.
Click to expand...

It is called a poorhouse, and Britain used to have quite a few of them.

> We have lots of homeless because, despite protestations to the contrary, the government chooses to have it that way.

"Care in the Community" seems to be cheaper than institutionalising non-violent lunatics - your "not mentally well enough to get through the process".

Poorhouses and lunatic asylums do have their weak points - the UK government's choice to phase them out wasn't entirely irrational.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 14:53:35 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr@gmail.com wrote:

On Saturday, 20 July 2019 20:20:31 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 09:39:13 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:
On Saturday, 20 July 2019 16:58:51 UTC+1, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 00:33:40 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
curd@notformail.com> wrote:

https://tinyurl.com/y62k8x3z

And to be fair, London's no better! At least the homeless in California
have warmer weather to be homeless in.

"Build it and they will come."

SF does not desperately need more housing. The demand is essentially
infinite. What SF needs is fewer jobs.

Here the whole thing is political. Almost every homeless person qualifies for housing benefit, which pays for a modest flat on a sink estate. They're not all mentally well enough to get through the process though, & the benefit system likes to play games with people. Reality is the govt could give them free housing of a much cheaper nature if they wanted to sort the social issue out, just a minimal room & toilet & timeshared shower. We have lots of homeless because, despite protestations to the contrary, the government chooses to have it that way.


NT

Homelessness is approaching a billion dollar industry in SF. The money
goes to "providers", fat-cats who run non-profits, lawyers,
politicians, landlords, psychologists, therapists, all sorts of
well-housed prople. Numbers run like $100K/year per homeless person.
It's like the gourmet cheese business, where the homeless people are
the cows.

Now people who are "housed" in vehicles will get free RV parks. We can
put up billboards all over the Americas, "Free RV parking and services
in San Francisco."

And you get extorted to pay for all the bs


NT
Click to expand...

Well, we pay sales taxes mostly, plus a few small extra assessments on
property taxes to reduce liberal guilt. The income tax is the same
across California.

We're pretty happy here, because we avoid the seedy parts of town.

There is just so much money here it's astonishing. Of course it can't
last.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics
 
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 20:02:39 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<curd@notformail.com> wrote:

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 09:39:13 -0700, tabbypurr wrote:

Here the whole thing is political. Almost every homeless person
qualifies for housing benefit, which pays for a modest flat on a sink
estate. They're not all mentally well enough to get through the process
though, & the benefit system likes to play games with people. Reality is
the govt could give them free housing of a much cheaper nature if they
wanted to sort the social issue out, just a minimal room & toilet &
timeshared shower. We have lots of homeless because, despite
protestations to the contrary, the government chooses to have it that
way.

Yeah, that and the fact that the EUSSR says we have to take all comers
regardless of the consequences. And this is one of those consequences.
Click to expand...

Does your use of the word "we" mean that you have returned to the UK?

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:03:40 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard wrote:

> Does your use of the word "we" mean that you have returned to the UK?

No, and I have no plans to. But wherever I may be in the world, I'll
always be British and identify as such. Except when I'm travelling on my
second passport for safety reasons, but that's another matter.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
 
On Saturday, July 27, 2019 at 5:04:00 AM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:03:40 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard wrote:

Does your use of the word "we" mean that you have returned to the UK?

No, and I have no plans to. But wherever I may be in the world, I'll
always be British and identify as such. Except when I'm travelling on my
second passport for safety reasons, but that's another matter.
Click to expand...

Cursitor Doom clearly has no shame about trashing the UK by presenting himself as British. His ignorance and his passion for right-wing misinformation are faults which do show up in a small (if vociferous) fraction of the UK population, but he isn't representative. Neither is Boris Johnson, but you'd have to be nuts to take on the job of leading the Conservative Party and being Prime Minister at this particular moment, and complaining about the nature of the lunacy that lets him take on the job would be a bit churlish.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 19:03:55 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<curd@notformail.com> wrote:

On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:03:40 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard wrote:

Does your use of the word "we" mean that you have returned to the UK?

No, and I have no plans to. But wherever I may be in the world, I'll
always be British and identify as such. Except when I'm travelling on my
second passport for safety reasons, but that's another matter.
Click to expand...

Come back and pay your taxes, you tight fisted git.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
On Thu, 01 Aug 2019 16:14:37 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard wrote:

> Come back and pay your taxes, you tight fisted git.

I beg your pardon?? I don't owe *any* taxes to the UK exchequer (or that
of any other jurisdiction for that matter!)





--
Leave first - THEN negotiate!
 
On Friday, August 2, 2019 at 4:53:39 AM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Thu, 01 Aug 2019 16:14:37 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard wrote:

Come back and pay your taxes, you tight-fisted git.

I beg your pardon?? I don't owe *any* taxes to the UK exchequer (or that
of any other jurisdiction for that matter!).
Click to expand...

Does that mean that you don't have any income?

> Leave first - THEN negotiate!

For the UK - which doesn't have a lot to export - negotiating after leaving the EU is likely to leave the politicians doing the negotiation having to cope with hurry-up calls from a starving population.

Boris Johnson wouldn't worry. He has a lot of fat reserves to work through and is happy to lie to people who are less well-padded, but saner negotiators would be put under pressure. Though most of them would have bailed out some time ago, and presumably immigrated to countries where sanity in politicians was more highly valued.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 18:53:35 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<CD@noreply.com> wrote:

On Thu, 01 Aug 2019 16:14:37 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard wrote:

Come back and pay your taxes, you tight fisted git.

I beg your pardon?? I don't owe *any* taxes to the UK exchequer (or that
of any other jurisdiction for that matter!)
Click to expand...

Come back anyway. The thicko brekshitters here would welcome you with
open arms.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
On Fri, 02 Aug 2019 09:33:32 +0100, Pomegranate Bastard wrote:

Come back anyway. The thicko brekshitters here would welcome you with
open arms.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting to see if Britain actually Leaves or not *before* I make any
such decision. IF the wishes of the voters are respected, as I EXPECT
them to be (if the UK is a true democracy) then you may well see your
wish granted! Nice to know I'm still popular with Remoaners like
yourself. :-D




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top