What Comes First?

The Street or the Drugs? And the answer is the "Street" as many find themselves there because of domestic violence,disabled, low income, family violence, child sexual abuse, child abuse, minimum wage earners, war vets, seniors, youth to name a few who find themselves on the streets as they slip through the gapping holes in the system. Its what happens when you put people, young and old alike in an environment that isn't healthy and there is little hope as unable to afford the rents.

Liberal's Olympics Inflicts Homelessness

Now thats more the truth Bobby Peru as it isn't the Mayor who created the problem he is just trying to ease the problem. As land developers go for the big bucks and rents continue to climb while seniors find themselves out in the cold along with the young who can't make a living on min wage.
Are BC residents really proud of having the worst possible conditions in Canada for its low income residents and small children who are often better off dead. Or how about war vets who can't find a safe place to lay their heads or the disabled or the sick and infirm? Oh and addiction often starts at the Doctors office and works itself to the street as government creates an environment condusive to addiction as it leaves citizens without hope as $20 food crisis grant for the month can either buy you a Macdonald's burger for the month or a hit of crack. I wonder what government was thinking?

Economic reality

You raise very real problems, 'morechatter', but the economic realities are simply cold, hard logic. Downtown Vancouver property or Vancouver property in general is simply too expensive to be used for social housing. If average, non-druggies, working people can't afford to live downtown, why should druggies and the homeless be granted housing as if it is a God given right?

It's all a matter of opportunity cost. Suppose the govt doesn't release land to developers and reserves it for social housing. The cost is not only forgone income, but the creation of a slum in the middle of what has already become expensive neighbourhoods. Unfortunately, the reality is that poor people should live further away from Vancouver and live in cheaper areas.

And, many of the homeless, as I've said, are druggies who need hospitalization and treatment. The poverty pimpers like to cover up this reality, trying to fool us into believing that the homeless are just sober people a few paychecks behind rent.

Living Downtown?

Why are the homeless downtown? Do you think it might be the resources available to them are located right in the midst of all the filth and dirt as the homeless are placed into the slums. Its dosen't help when places like St James have workers selling crack either in the slums as workers cash in on the plight of the homeless. A coicidence government gives the exact amount for a hit of crack and calls it food money for the month? And who are the homeless? Bobbies says its not people who can't afford the rent who are homeless despite having no where to go or the money to rent a place? Where do people go who can't afford the rent after losing their jobs or being cut off ei or assistance or help to Bobbie's house?
Oh and Bobbie being sober or being straight dosen't mean your going to be homeless now does it? The premier has a nice home despite being a drunk and so do many others who dabble and dipp into coke and crack as its those with money who do drugs and have real nice homes and lots of cash. The homeless could never afford to do the drugs these guys do and thats a fact as those nice homes in Victoria are often engaged in keeping the crack habit going only I like staying alive so we will live that to the police, ha ha because police are to busy giving out tickets to the homeless to bother with the real corruption.

And Bobbie

There is no a couple a paycheques behind in your rent its 5 days and your out after the first, its the BC residential tenancy act which is only to happy to help out with the increased homeless.

and bobby #2

bobby peru,
i haven't lived in vancouver for quite some time, but seattle shares some similar issues and your spouting off about the terrors of what would happen if we *gasp* provided housing for the druggies is perhaps a bit misguided. there's starting to be some evidence that shows otherwise.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/404451_alcoholic01ww.html

We coud try...

Well, Bobby peru, thankfully you are not a policy maker, and your version of "cold, hard logic" is definitely cold, but your armchair rants aren't necessarily logical.

I'm a non-druggie who works full-time and pays taxes, but I certainly do support affordable housing initiatives, various types, including low-barrier for those struggling with addiction.

Judging all addicts as druggie freeloaders, as you seem to be doing is pure ignorance. Have you walked a mile in the shoes of one who struggles like a homeless addict, like someone with mental health issues, like someone who used to be a taxpaying working person who befell any number of lifechanging crises that could end one on the street? Didn't think so...

The healthcare costs associated with the HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, 'street-feet', and other painful, debilitating and dangerous diseases is astronimical.

All I'm saying is we could at least try a housing first approach. Treat people with respect, even if we don't agree with or understand how they got into thier predicament. Give people something to be proud of, something to protect, and many of them will. Some won't, but many will. We could at least try.

Housing it real

Like I said, I'm not against housing, it's the type of housing. The type I mean is hospitalization, institutionalization- meaningful steps towards rehab. Merely giving them housing and letting druggies wander about, scoring their next high among the rest of us is unacceptable. And the protests from Vancouverites who have had temporary, open shelter established among them have made that abundantly clear.