$250 million per year - that is $100 from every person in the GVRD. This is not even a one time payment. This in addition to the Billions already spent on poverty programs.

Give me a break! That is 1/4 of the spending budgeted for 2007 for transportation - for the entire province.

That is nearly 2% of Provincial Taxation Revenues budgeted for 2007. I haven't even looked at City Revenues, but this has to be 25% of what they generate.

You people make me sick....only $250M PER YEAR!!!! The people of this city and their attitude of entitlement. It's these very people that complained about RAV - and the 700M or so the province committed. This will help the economy, tourism, the environment and help create the foundation for an infrastructure as this town continues to boom.

No, it's not going to happen. Back in the 70s Paul Hellyer led a royal commission on housing in Canada that came back with many recommendations for assuring affordable housing. He was told in a cabinet meeting that funding it was not a cabinet priority. There is no lack of money. There is however an elite thumb on our necks. Meanwhile, the luge/bobsled run in Whistler comes in at $100 million. The federal surplus of $15 billion will be used exactly how the elite want it to be used. And the hundreds of foodbanks and soup kitchens across the country can't keep up. What a lovely democracy.

Further analysis:

There are roughly 65,000 people at risk of homelessness in Vancouver. This is the maximum number of people that can conceivably be homeless. If every one of those people became homeless - we are looking at $3,500/person/year to fund this foolish and expensive program.

Better - there are actually 2,500 homeless people in Vancouver. We are talking $100,000 per homeless person/year.

Give me a break.

Don't use this as an example. While I agree the bobled run, in itself, will not provide much value - it is necessary to the olympics.

The olympics will bring in Billions to our economy, and already have. In addition, they will leave a legacy for our grandkids. We will be able to host major winter sporting events, including adding Whistler to the luge tour. Not much, but we'll host another event ever year. Every event = tourism.

The bobsled run and one other event (can't remember it) - are the only two facilities that not expected to be overly productive assets going forward.

The Olympics will pay dividends.....

One of these days our great economic masterminds may just figure out that human labour doesn't cost anything to an economy.

It is the elimnation and misuse of humans that's expensive.

Or, shall we reactivate the gaschambers, Cap?

Ed Deak.

Cynic:

You moron - the Province of BC is spending 2-3B annually to pay interest on its debt. This is 1/3 of education spending - and equal to social services spending.

Unfortunately - you are a cynic - and you don't compehend finance. The Tories are using the surpluses to pay down debt, thus saving interest. They are using the interest savings to cut taxes. By cutting taxes, you stimulate the economy - thereby generating more tax revenues....the cycle continues.

Eventually you have Alberta - who everybody loves to hate. Lowest taxes, no interest payments, highest healthcare, education and social services programs per capita in the country....

cheap petty pieces of shit - politicians who continue to breed this misery...

Folks, as long as our immigration policies call for hundreds of thousands of new people per year, the feds and the provinces will never adequately fund welfare,,,,it's like a vicious spiral - we want more peo;le to work crap jobs, we need to import people, oh look there are too many people that want welfare, we better not fund it properly...

no it's not all about excessively high immigration levels - can you say NAFTA and the WTO and greedy business profiteers - but every policy of the fed and prov is about protecting profits not people...

Merry Fucking Christmas .... what I would give to see someone like Coleman be forced to live on the street and see how much patience he has to wait for a solution - total *******.

There always was and will always be a certain amount of destitution, caused by mental illness, substance abuse etc. These are the people who could and should be helped. But it is a well proven fact that the majority of today's problems are caused by a criminal economic system of legalized theft from the public and the environment.

When we had so called "economic protectionism" we had no homelessness, no medical waiting lists and so on and on. Businesses made good profits, while paying decent wages to employees. Manufacturing was thriving and living standards growing.

Now we have the WTO, "free trade", outsourcing, everything made in slave labour coutries, and growing, worldwide destitution with a child dying of starvation every 5 seconds.

As long as we have this, presently devastating, neoclassical market capitalist system and phoney free trade agreements of legalized theft, we can put all the monies into band-aid solutions, the situation will always worsen.

Because the purpose of "globally competive market capitalism" is to destroy private enterprise and local economies, eliminate competition, separate the producers from the users, and collectivize the market into a few hands, who can then rule who'll live, or die.

Ed Deak, Big Lake.

Poor Capitalism, totally indoctrinated with the fascist elite's drivel. Here's a finance lesson for you.

The main reason the elite don't support affordable housing is because mortgages are the number one source of new money into the economy. And as the debt burden worsens (debt is now about three times the money supply) ever more money needs to be injected. So what supports fatter and fatter mortgages? You guessed it, rising property values. Any initiative that impedes ever more debt money creation is not permitted.

Banking is evil. Sure, some people get to make out like bandits but there is also an ever-increasing number of losers. It's structural and guaranteed. This is not the kind of society most of us would choose. As long as the banks print our money as debt, and as long as supposedly intelligent people keep making moronic statements in support of the elite, ever increasing poverty.

Hey cappy here's another finance lesson. Simplified.

1 minus 5= minus 4
That's $1 taken from the working poor and $5 given to corporate welfare equals minus $4 for the deficit. Until the finance minister moves crap around to give us a $2 billion surplus. Only to look good for the electorate in the coming election. But alas we are wise to this B.S.

Why do you folks even recognize capitalists posts? Ignore a bully and he will go away. Your just feeding his ignorant ego.

Cappy gets a PHD in Bluster but he failed his economics course. A BC government report from 2001 estimated the costs of homelessness in social services and shelter exceeds the cost of building supportive housing (30-40,000 vs.22-28,000). Cappy will never be happy until he can live in his gated castle and pay 0 in taxes, ever fearful of the starving mob we would have in our midst.

As I wrote earlier, it is not human labour, but the elimination, and misuse of it, is that's expensive to an economy.

And the wages paid for human labour must be
tied to living costs, which are going up every day in our world of competition for bigger profits.

I other words, eliminate legalized theft from humans and most of the problems will be solved.

Ed Deak.

bpither1:

I would like to see taxes reduced to a flat tax of 25%, for corporations and individuals. I would like to see Capital Gains be reduced to 10% - capital gains is the worst form of taxation. It removes incentive to invest and take risks. Taking risks is what drives capitalism.

I would like to see social policies be designed through tax incentives and not bloated programs. For example, environmental policy - increase taxes for polluters, decrease taxes for pollution reduction.

Tourism is not a panacea that we can look to in order to cure what ails us.

As awareness of environmental problems grows there will be increasing pressure coming to bear on the airline industry and the huge amounts of pollution they spew out as well as the huge subsidies that industry lives on.

Kind of tough to reduce a country's emissions while expanding one of the worst polluters.

As prices rise dramatically the days of jetting off to Europe for a week will be over for the overwhelming majority of people. Worldwide tourism is going to decrease.

For my part of observations of this situation, I have discovered that a free mobile home (yes it was free) could not be moved to a piece of property or a mobile pad. After two weeks of constant searching, I had a short chat with a former mobile park owner.

There are 'residential development costs' that all developers have to pay, therefore it is not cost effective to even operate a mobile park any more, since these DCC's have to be paid either way...

We are removing the 'entry level' of even the simplest form of housing, no wonder there are no more low-cost housing, we collectively thru our 'tax structure' are killing it all.

250 million a year is a lot of money to spend on a problem which, even on activists' accounts, effects only 2500 people directly.

There are a number of solutions which should be explored before we get into the direct - and expensive - creation of supported housing. For example - can we buy and refurbish existing housing stock? Are there people on the margins of homelessness that could be helped by a timely rental assistance grant? Are their homeless people who, regardless of the resources available, are simply too mentally ill to survive on the streets?

If we do decide to invest in social housing we might want to take a serious look at building safe but inexpensive spaces. We might also want to look at using existing City of Vancouver real estate holdings rather than buying land at market.

In terms of funding such social housing, we might want to impose a GVRD wide 5% surtax on condo sales over, say, $300,000 with the funds going directly to social housing until 2000 units have been constructed.

Down my street in Victoria there are homeless people in a James Bay Park. The response has been a) hire security to phone the police if they see any outdoor drinking, b) banning the sale of singles (in domestic beer but not Stella (thank Heavens)) at the local liquor store. This will shift the problem, it does nothing to solve it.

Mobile home parks are now usually owned and controlled by mobile home sellers, who take only homes bought from them, which makes mobile homes very immobile.

It is a racket.

Ed Deak.

What corporation will receive the $250,000,000 (probably an under-estimate) to poorly build these homes? Was it a contributor? After all, corporations and gov't are merely quid-pro-quo whorehouses sold to the highest bidder (in Canada and the US). When the gov't needs illegal wire-taps, Verizon and Sprint allow them secret rooms to listen in on calls. When Haliburton (and KBR) need more revenue, the gov't hands out no-bid contracts. When the gov't dislikes literature, Amazon and Wikipedia ban the book "America Deceived". We The People had our gov't (and souls) sold out from beneath us.
Final link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

Cappy, govt debt is largely a fraud. Get a copy of this DVD at http://www.moneyasdebt.net/

raise welfare rates and you will "buy" more people on welfare.

take 250 million of tax space and build free housing for people and you will "buy" more homeless people.

Its not pretty, it is economics.

The more spent on welfare the greater the size of the trap inflicted on humanity.

Cappy...hhmm... now back to the homeless.
What's your cost benefit analysis?

Logjam:

You couldn't be more correct.

Sorry:

We do NOT need ANOTHER level of Gov't, or this will end up into more mind numbing " Homeless and thus more Hopeless Alice -In -Wonderland" type - logic .

This would then be another quasi- Bill C -68 , with another useless tax -wasting black hole bureaucracy which will continually push the original objective far off to the periphery.

Need we do an archival search for Canada, B.C. and the various Local Gov'ts to see this is the same -old same- old .....all -talk all -talk ....do- studies do -studies ....= do -nothing do- nothing .....to see the same old pattern ?

If the little bits and pieces can be coalesced, then we have something called a PLAN and then a PLAN of ACTION. Why not co-ordinate the effort to addres homelessness to show it is far more effective to have a plans of action and avoid duplicity...ie stop the wasteful incarceration...the unnecessary health care costs..the emergency services etc. etc. ???

Our own Local Gov't is now creating a social housing fund levy (SHFL) to be levied on new development, which in my view exceeds its mandate. This SHFL is levied on a per sq. ft. basis ...per new living unit created. This doesn't hurt the developer, its simply downloaded onto every poor schmuck and schmuckette who is paying extra and likely added onto their mortgage costs. The acquired levies go where...into general revenue? Whats the plan? To me it was a cheap political stunt to diffuse the issue, the stunt being another Cash Grab, and possibly absolving higher levels of Gov't from what should likley be their mandates and obligations.

This results in inconsistent policies from Local Gov't to Local Gov't...if it is not co-ordinated I can see it ending up a big mess. What next ...Local Gov't brand of Education and Medicare ? This is getting into an ever -downloaded slippery -slope meets Nucking Futs !

Objectively speaking....The only thing I can think of that really stops any sort of relevant plan/active inititiative is the possible Demand Curve...and Gov't fears this as some sort of " once it is started HOW would we ever stop?" aka " precedent ".... which is something ALL Gov'ts fear...

Also, how does one deal with say smaller pockets of homelessnes. What if a town of 1000 has say 3 Homeless people....do we accomodate them locally and at what cost? ..or move them elsewhere. Is this legal? Do we thus establish and hence differentiate/define (i) Urban VERSUS (ii) Rural Homelessness ?

Also, Gov't also fear REAL quantifiable numbers, and that any pro-active initiative ...ie such as addressing homelessness ...may create numbers which ultimately embarass them, hence the fall back is keep it gray and uncertain, "guesstimates", etc. and hence the status-quo " same -old same- old" NO solution pattern.

Homelessness can be reduced a fair amount by making it easier to pay the shelter portion of welfare directly to landlords.

When drug addicts on welfare receive the shelter allowance in cash, they often spend it on drugs instead of paying their rent. After 3 months of this, landlords evict the druggies, take a loss, and in future they would rather let housing units sit empty instead of renting to people on welfare. This is unfair to people on welfare who do not use drugs, unfair to taxpayers who provide the welfare money and unfair to landlords who take a loss. It's also unfair to all honest renters who have to pay higher rents to compensate for rental losses to addicts in the same way that honest shoppers have to pay more to cover the cost of shoplifting by drug addicts.

Cycling Commuter:

A very smart idea. It would be difficult to administer, but very pragmatic. You'd also hear from the special interest groups.

I like it though. Very, very smart.

250 million divided by 2100 ( the reported amount of homeless people in the region ) is $119,047.62 each per year.
I guess you could solve the homeless problem with that, but is it very practical?

Why is it that millions of dollars are added to the Olympic event yet the poor sleep in the streets? Gordo just dropped another 8 million and a bunch of crown land to widen the road to whistler. Mustn't keep those BMW's idling down a two lane road folks. Money is being tossed around through out the province with the excuse of being Olympic related. I'm happy to see the poor out front of Gordos office making a statement even though he is in Hawaii doing whatever it is he does there. Municipal Governments must be involved as that's where the folks live, in the alleys and doorways. Every Christmas the odd politician shows up and some well orchestrated event and then they pack up for another year. The fed have lots of cash, the province has a large surplus so let's see some social housing and soon. A great society looks after the poor, the sick, not just the freidns of government

I agree that homelessness could be alleviated with more flexibiliy in current housing stock ...ie Legalize Suites in homes,... as well as the Landlord being assured of direct payment of rent.

However, not all the homeless will qualify for this sort of housing, for various reasons, and hence the need for some other Gov't initiatives as well.

In addition, it was noted on the news that some homeless did not want to access shelter, even during the recent cold weather snap. That is another issue to consider.

I just love the

I just love the rhetoric.

Mostly I love how some of you want to "send it back for more study."

People need shelter now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In small community, where everyone knows each other, there are no homeless, there are no debates or studys, nobody sleeps out at night while people indoors postulate on thier fate in voluminous documents.

Raise a glass this Christmas day, and toast the passing of your humanity.

All the wealth of the richest man in the world, is not worth the cost of one human life.

Canada now has a new precedent, allowing state sanctioned torture. Sanctioned by silence and inaction, indifference and fear. Our leaders don't have the stomach for a 911 catastrophe(inside job), but human degredation, malfeasence, and torture is well within their tools of oppression.
So far....

Just ask the indigenous peoples of Canada.

Guys, some of you haven't been around much have you? Many landlords already collect the rent directly from the gov't. Many are quite happy to rent to people on welfare because they know there won't be a problem getting the rent. The only problem being that welfare rates are rarely ever enough to cover the rent.

Also, there are poor people who aren't on welfare.

Yes Frank:

Many of us know that such a plan exists for those on welfare.

We are talking about homeless parties and whatever extenuating circumstances there may be.

As I keep alluding to on this topic, (which THE TYEE has also brought forward before), we can't assume that every homeless person will access any/all program brought forward.

For Logjam 603
At the end of the last big unpleasantness there was a major homeless problem across the country. Social housing cured the problem. Folks living in shacks and float houses along the Fraser River were 'moved' into social housing and the shacks etc. burned and bulldozed. It solved the problem then and would solve the problem now. The biggest problem with solving the homelessness now is you and your ilk.

Anarcho recommends a good dvd on money and I also recommend it to all here. It is the struggle of all money reformers to get concerned people to find out the answer to the most basic economic question: where does money come from? Once you know the answer you live on another planet. It's difficult though, because we take money for granted like the air we breathe. Suspend what you think and consider for a moment.

The banks would have us believe that they take in deposits and then lend out those very deposits. However, it's impossible to prove it, and that's because that's not what they do. When a bank loans money, they loan new money, not pre-existing money, and this is easy to prove at the Bank of Canada's website. Every loan increases the money supply by the amount of the loan, it's straight money creation. It's done by merely altering the number in the recipient's account. That's all. Aside from the relatively small amounts of cash printed by the Bank of Canada (<5% of the money supply), that's where money comes from.

Consider that this new money/loan/debt is not earned money. If I borrow $100 from you then naturally I feel obligated to pay you back, you earned that $100 with your time and energy. Conversely, the banks do nothing to justify the debt obligation. How hard is it to tap a keyboard and print numbers on a computer screen?

And now for the meat. All this new money is loaned into existence. Well, a loan is principal plus interest, but the banks only print up the principal and make no allowance for the payment of interest. So every new loan increases the money supply but the repayment demands what was printed plus more![I] The implications are staggering.

A quick look at the BoC's website shows that Canada's money supply is $975b. Give or take. Can anyone here put together a few debt statistics that quickly add up to far more than what is available to pay it off? Of course you can. The debt to money supply ratio now exceeds 3 to 1, and it's getting worse.

It's called debt slavery. Every new loan increases the money supply, but also increases the debt obligation plus interest![I] This debt obligation is the excuse for not properly funding the programs and services that we all say we want. To quote cappy, Give me a break!

Sorry, the italics aren't where I wanted them.

In a recent nation wide poll, homelessness was the number one concern of canadians, trumping even healthcare.

The elect nationwide are in direct opposition to the will of the people.
I even go so far as to say the elect worldwide.
Here is a nationwide catastrophe in the land of plenty. We Canadians live like kings compared to 95% of the rest of the world, most who live in abject poverty.
Media has subtley localized a national crisis, just as they have with the impending doom of the planets ability to sustain life.

The truth is that billions of us will be exterminated through this indifference, as have 10's of millions so far this century. But elite businessmen will continue to exist and have their property rights protected at a level greater than that of a human life. Steven Harper eluded to this most recently as he continues to focus his power on removing human rights and social justice initiatives, while massively funding the military and a war. Whilst dreaming of the not too far off days when the property of the rich will be protected in the charter. And so, the desensitization has begun.
They have yet to figger out a way to profit from homelessness, and so it languishes. They cant profit in medicine, because the homeless will be healthier. They can't profit in security and policing because people in homes means order and peace. They can't profit from transportation because the poor are using already subsidized transit. They can't profit from human labour because a large portion are ill and unemployable, with many only partially employable. They can't profit from taxation for the same reasons. They can't profit from food because the poor rely on food banks and charities. They can't profit from fear because there will be peace in the heart of the city. They can't profit from telecommunications because the poor can't afford basic luxurys like a phone or computer. They can't profit in social administration and justice, because there would be social justice.

The earth itself is in rebellion and groans with the pains of birthing a new humanity within us. We now see the disease in society as we see it on the scarred polluted earth and ourselves, riddled with the cancers of the industrial age.

Not long ago people aged gracefully, reaching old age with health and wisdom intact. Today multitudes of diseases take hold of the young, middle aged and old, riddling them with cancers and tumors and diseases unheard of untill the industrial economic complex setup its machinery of death and malfeasence.

We have been robbed of our birthright and our health, but heck I got an SUV to go whatever I want cause I got to get my piece of the pie, thats what the media tells me I want.

Not that we will succeed to convince the elect/elite, but that we might comfort each other in these cold dark days ahead as we watch our aged parents who fought for and built this country seperated to die alone, while health board spokespersons assure us costs are a priority as they are acting on our behalf.

well that was a nice rant, but then again, its all tied together.

$100 a year. Big deal. That is like 30 lattes. Skip one every nine days. It would be good for you.

Just get a less expensive car and drive a wee bit less. Its not going to kill you.

It is pathetic in a society that is as rich as we are that there is not housing for everyone.

They dont tell you that doing nothing costs $200 a year

Hey Gordon, that was eloquent.

Since the B.C. Legistlature is hardly ever used anymore and we still pay for heating it and maintaining it, why not put it to good use and house a lot of homeless people there?
The Senate is another redundant government building that many of the homeless could find shelter in.

rac:

we are talking 100K/year per homeless person. This is not a $250M one-time payment.

forget it. what does this tell us about our society? that we are willing to invest more than the average, honest hard-working family makes in an entire year?

100K - ha ha - that is more than the average family makes - and by quite a bit too!!!

Hell - i'd encourage my kids to go homeless, ride the gravy train - spend 10 years living frugally - and they'd be able to start a nice little business!!

Capitalist,

the honest hardworking family of MAN,
not the collaberative business family created by a wedding of convenience.

Whos gonna wipe your ass when your 85 and they moved your wife to the facility across the province, your business partner?

ha ha ha ha

crap I meant to say 85 and still delusional.

Capital Gains are no different than any other form of income. If you believe in fairness and equity you believe all income should be treated the same.

And, you can't multiply either.

3200 x 100,000 = 320,000,000 not 250,000,000.

Is it your math or your reading that's deficient Cappy? The essay clearly states:

The homeless count classified 2,100 persons in the region as homeless; in addition to the 1,100 living on the street

And of course, as a number of other comments point out, the numbers of persons who are at risk of becoming homeless and for whom a program of decent integrated and affordable social housing would be a great improvement are not included in the aggregate figure of 3,200.

This is, of course, the kind of silly and irresponsible comment people like you make because you really aren't prepared to confront the pathology of your own philosophy of greed and selfishness.

You certainly haven't improved since you ceasd to be Mabellbc. Just like David Emerson, the invisible member for Kingsway, you never confront your own pathology, do you Cappy?

fix homelessness? not a chance. anyone see the guy on the news last night admitting that he chose to be homeless because he wanted to 'find himself'. as long as we allow a-holes like these to suck off the hind teat of gov't this problem is unsolvable. the worst of it is that scumbags like that one give the wrong impression to the public, thereby harming the chances that the truly needy will get the resources they deserve.

In response to Cycling Commuter's idea (old or not) that welfare payments go directly to Landlord's, Capitalism says "...you'd also hear from the special interest groups". I am assuming he means social advocates, unions, etc. Part of the whole homeless situation, in part and as I see it, is that our provincial government spends too much time pandering to it's own "special interest" groups, i.e., the tourism lobby and any other "special interest" groups (read financial contributors) to whom they pander.

Cappy, you say all this money being pumped into the Olympics is an investment and will pump all kinds of money into the economy, etc. Unfortunately, the lions share of that money will line the pockets of the provincial governments buddies (again read financial contributors) and the homeless situation will, in all probability, be even worse. It sure as hell won't be any better.

Take the fallen trees from from Stanley Park, get some nails and get at 'er. I'll help. Somebody get off their thumb and do something, for chr*st's sake.

Anarcho and cynic, jeez it's good to see that you guys understand that when people get a mortgage for a couple hundred grand the bank merely creates the money by adding your name next to this amount--out of thin air. Everybody thinks they just lend out money from their supply or that of their customers.

Not how it works!

So the money supply is increased by increasing the debt; and the banks get to own the a huge equity in your property, too--equity that they've created out of thin air and also charge interest on money they've created out of nothing.

But don't go asking your loans manager about this. It's a secret, eh.

You guys are absolutely correct. Nice to see you understand what's up with this stuff.

says Elliot.

I can see that growing up project still isn't working our for you dude - back to the sports pages - your little anecdotes are kind of pleasant there.

This was also posted here

This was also posted here almost a week ago - and the Tyee editors have also tied a link to the same story on the sidehoard.

I don't suppose you've read it have you Cappy?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/magazine/17charity.t.html?_r=1&em&ex=1166590800&en=5d7424fbecae9fc2&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin

I think they should be given surplus shipping containers. They are built of steel, are well insulated and are cheeeeeep.

Millions are piling up in Long Beach and maybe even in Vancouver from the cheap Chinese goods that we all buy from Wallymart.

Stack them up and you got better architecture than a lot of existing neighborhoods, too.

jwstewart
there is a guy in Victoria who is using shipping containers to build an experimental dwelling there -
Only some of them are insulated - most aren't. But, you're right, they do have potential but only after a lot of very constly changes and adaptations.

Simply making containers available to the poor as an alternative to squats would just be the first step in creating favelas like they have in Brazil.[/I]

Or maybe a Yurt. I stayed in a rented Yurt, it was quite comfy. I would take it over a heating grate any day.

http://yurtco.com/

2500 yurts would cost less than 250KK dollars, for sure.

They can be made locally, maybe even use pine beetled wood.

Everybody wins.

That's a good looking Yurt. As long as they put a few of them in Gordo's back yard I'm all for it.

Hey RAC
"$100 a year. Big deal. That is like 30 lattes. Skip one every nine days. "

Why dont you skip one every 4 and a half and put in $100 for me too.
Better still, why don't you just pay all my taxes so we can build more shelters and create even more poverty and ghettos. Why don't you and the rest of the social engineers get out of my wallet.

"It is pathetic in a society that is as rich as we are that there is not housing for everyone."

Whats more pathetic is why I am expected to buy housing for someone else when my own family and the two other families my income tax is supporting are barely making ends meet. Oh well, I suppose I could work 60-80 hours a week instead of 50. How selfish of me.

Listen - we aren't putting people in yarts or shipping containers. Let's stop being silly.

Clearly, there is a solution here. We have to weigh the benefits vs. the costs. Honestly, taxes aside, we cannot allow ourselves to become like Amsterdam. They are so liberal about everything and they have the most f*ccced up 1st world society in this planet.

If you tolerate and embrace poverty, you will only find more of it. The invisible hand I always speak of....people will always do what is best for them. A guy that makes $10/hr. still works. However, if you make it comfortable for him to go without a job - he will not work!!

We need to create a society which embraces hard work and risk taking, yet takes care of the underpriveledged.

We have to motivate as many people as possible to make the right, honest choices in life - not pander to the ones that don't - because the more we pander, the more there are.

Vancouver is the drug capital of Canada because we have let it become so. End of story.

Shipping containers?

Nope, we have them on park benches and in back alleys - you phony.

Cappy, you're the biggest panderer I know.

And you can't even add.

“But my ardor for action is daily more and more excited when I consider what our future condition of life must be, unless we ourselves assert our claims to liberty. For since the government has fallen under the power and jurisdiction of a few, all the rest of us, however brave and worthy, have been regarded as a mere mob, without interest or authority. Hence, all influence, power, honor, and wealth, are in their hands; to us they have left only insults, dangers, prosecutions, and poverty. To such indignities, after having been the sport of other men’s insolence, will you submit to resign a wretched and degraded existence with ignominy?

“Who in the world can endure that they should have a superfluity of riches, to squander in building over seas and levelling mountains, and that means should be wanting to us even for the necessaries of life, that they should join together two houses or more, and that we should not have a hearth to call our own? They, though they lavish and abase their wealth in every possible method, yet cannot, with the utmost efforts of caprice, exhaust it. But for us there is poverty at home, debts abroad; our present circumstances are bad, our prospects much worse; and what, in a word, have we left, but a miserable existence?

“Will you not, then awake to action? Behold that liberty, that liberty for which you have so often wished, with wealth, honour, and glory, are set before your eves. All these prizes Fortune offers to the victorious. Let the enterprise itself, then, let the opportunity, let your poverty, your dangers animate you far more than my words. Unless, indeed, my expectation deceives me, and you prefer to be slaves rather than masters.”

extracted from Catiline's Exhortation to Conspiracy [year 63 BC]

There is no such thing as the State
And no one exists alone;
Hunger allows no choice
To the citizen or the police;
We must love one another or die.
- Auden 'September 1, 1939.'

We have a megaphone and an exhortation to conspiracy; what's the next step?

Good stuff, Kram, and very poignant. I guess unfortunately the more things change, the more they stay the same. Fortunately, however, what goes 'round, comes 'round.

Capitalism;

I would enjoy putting you in a shipping container, I don't think it's a silly idea at all.

In fact since they can only be unlocked from the outside, it would be ideal for you.

I haven't been following this thread but $250 a year for the 2100 or so "homeless" on Vancouver amounts to over $109,000 a year each.

I don't know how this number was arrived at and I suspect it is generated by the poverty industry but there is one thing for sure:

No government will ever go for this and nor should they. They are accuntable to taxpayers, not 2100 drug addicts. I would rather see more university spaces, for example.

You sure haven't wm. Read a little more closely; like cappy, you haven't got denominator right ----> it's 3200 people and that's a number which doesn't include any of the thousands of souls who are less than a cheque (or another closed SRO hotel) away from being homeless.

Trust you guys to try the simple dirty analysis and ignore the rest of the problem, and the essay. Just like your take on taxes.

Anyone who buys a product and/or service in Canada is a 'taxpayer'.

The attitude of us versus them serves no one.

Alcibiades, even at your figure of 3100, and I don't know where you got it, that represents about .012% of the population of the lower mainland. No government in the world is going to devote that kind of rescources to that proportion of the population. It would simply be irresponsible.

For the "one paycheque away" drivel: I have some news for you. Get an education. You will make a much better living if you get one.

I don't buy excuses.

working man
The 3200 figure is in the text. Did you not read it? You have to add 2100 + 1100 - think you can handle it? And that's 3200, not 3100 - can you not even hold the number in your mind that long?

As to some people being close to the edge: Not very long ago you were whining about how close you came to losing everything in the commodities recession of the 90s.

Remember? Were you just whining then? Did you have no education then?

OH no, it was all GLEN CLARK'S fault then, wasn't it working man. Maybe blaming Glen Clark and the NDP was just an excuse, working man

You are such a bloody phony.

Maybe you should have lost it all - then you might have some compassion and understanding.

You ARE an excuse: An excuse for an adult. You don't read, you can't add and you have no empathy for your fellow man.

Have a lovely Christmas.

ONLY 250 million. Even if "they" (who is really we, after all) spend every cent on eradicating homelessness in one fiscal year, there will still be homeless, still poverty pimps bleating for another "only" 250 million for some other cause du jour. There are too many people making their living off beating this drum for it ever to end. Plenty of jobs in Fort Mac, Calgary and Edmonton. No one guarantees you a job where you are, sometimes you have to go get it. Lots of others have, my own two kids included. Funny how things improve when you pick yourself up, dust yourself off and get to work.

Here is the Real problem wm, capy, iamc, and the rest of you money mongers these sites just might shake UR ideologies up a bit.

http://www.cfoss.com/

http://www.moneyasdebt.net/

http://canadianactionparty.ca/cgi/page.cgi?zine=show&aid=236&_id=65

It is a disgrace. Canada such a rich nation and we squabble whether or not we can or want to afford doing something about homelesness. The poor endure all kinds of insults. The rich, on the other hand, scream their heads off when something is taken from them - something they stole in the first place. Have we no longer got a conscience? Are we so blinded by money that we can't even see the corpses we step over? We outnumber the "elites" by far, so what are we waiting for???

"Are we so blinded by money that we can't even see the corpses we step over? We outnumber the "elites" by far, so what are we waiting for???"

Like all other good do-gooders, probably for someone else to get out of bed to organize and for "the government" to pay for it. Funny how working hard and making a good living for myself and my family can make me an undesirable in some peoples eyes. The real people who founded this country would be so dissapointed in most of their offspring.

So steveoverhere, you see yourself as part of the ruling 'elite' in this country.

One thing I can almost guarantee you is that if you actually do work hard you're not.

You might want to be a trifle less solipsistic and realize who the elites actually are and how they make their money and avoid paying any taxes. It is those people that vera's referring to, or I miss my guess.

You probably just have unrequited dreams of entering that top 5% someday. You should get over it. On average, upward mobility hasn't existed since the 70s in this country - despite the politicians’ lies.

steveoverhere huh ruling 'elite' must be getting lonely "overthere" as middle class become more and more have nots, super rich have no god but $$$.

I started working at 9yrs delivering papers at 15 went to work at a BC famous carhop drive-in at 18 joined the military as a peace keeper in Europe.
21 track gang for a railway, then a surface diamond driller next underground as a hard rock miner
Back to BC as a laborer then a sawmill, back underground as a miner finally a 4yr apprenticeship for Journeyman carpenter
I'm on a CCP now $860. a month to exist on.
These maggots get $1,000. a month just for a car plus all the other so called perks?
Grand theft of taxpayer bucks!
I can look back with a clear Conscience!

steveoverhere that last blog was directed at you!
Happy "2007 For the People By the People"

BC Dude- so I suppose that the right wing side of me would take you to task over not planning to look after yourself better while you were working but I do understand the situation you're in. I watched my Dad do the same thing and chose to look after myself first while I'm in my "earning years". It may have been a symptom of the times you grew up in, but a lot of men/women of that age were of the opinion that everyone else would look after them in their old age- as we know- the only person you can trust is yourself. Unless I miss my guess, CPP was never intended to support you 100% but to supplement income, investments etc etc.
I don't spend my income foolishly, indeed as much of it as I can stand goes into savings and RRSP's for myself. Does this make me a capitalist tool? I believe I should recieve the benefits of my labours. I don't mind sharing with those in need- in fact at a 50+% income tax rate, I think I already do share a significant chunk of my income. What I don't like is people engineering ways of taking more. They all start with "It will only cost xxx million.....

I do agree that a small minority of lazy good for nothings are abusing the system.
The Can'tWest empire always puts a bad slant on the so called less fortunate people of our society but a society that ignores these less fortunate will soon implode!
History all over

Harper is using OUR CCP to follow Bush to the Empire!
Old news but still happening I think if Canadians knew this, the backlash would resonate through OUR Federal goverments and OUR Provincial/dicktator but not a word in OUR Can't West so called news.

"We kill at every step, not only in wars, riots, and executions. We kill when we close our eyes to poverty, suffering, and shame. In the same way all disrespect for life, all hard-heartedness, all indifference, all contempt is nothing else than killing. With just a little witty skepticism we can kill a good deal of the future in a young person. Life is waiting everywhere, the future is flowering everywhere, but we only see a small part of it and step on much of it with our feet." : - Hermann Hesse, German poet and novelist.

http://thetyee.ca/Views/2004/10/17/PensionsIntoWeapons/

A great new site for real news!
http://www.iwtnews.com/home

steveoverhere
You may be at the top marginal rate of tax, but I'll wager you don't pay anywhere nearly 50% of your earnings in income tax.

Most people just don't understand the tax system very well.

Just to make those tax rates perfectly clear - I'll post the following comparative data for you:
British Columbia – 43.7 %;
Washington State – 38.6%;
Oregon – 47.6 %
California – 47.9%
Texas – 38.6%
Alberta – 39.0%
Ontario – 46.4%
Quebec – 28.2%

This information, by the way is contained in the 2004/05 Provincial budgetary plan.

The Quebec figure above is wrong.
I meant to type 48.2% - not 28.2%.

I doubt the Spelling & Grammar Police would have caught that one - sorry.

These are, by the way, the top mariginal rates in each of the jurisdictions listed. If you don't know what that means then stop back in before this thread is retired and I'll explain.