New program launching in Indianapolis to provide safe place for people living in cars

[firecadet613]

So if someone is incapable or unwilling to purchase or rent property then they have no right to exist outside of an institution in this country. Got it. Produce for the system or face what, execution? Exile? Incarceration? Those are the only acceptable outcomes in your world.

Live in a hotel. Camp in a friends yard. Live in an RV (and rent or buy a space in the campground). Live on your boat (still need a place to keep it in a marina). The public domain is for the public. If one person gets to live for free in a public space, why shouldn't everyone?

And, I'll also add, this will not happen anywhere close to me. I'm more off the beaten path than you and I can state this isn't a good thing to allow - look at California and Seattle if you need examples.

As someone who spent their career in law enforcement, how can you have these viewpoints? You've never trespassed someone? Evicted someone?

When your position is the same as California leftist judges you may need to rethink it…

Amen...

Again, says who? Work or you cannot exist.

Who gets to determine who gets a free ride and who doesn't?

 

[firecadet613]

I'm beginning to wonder if @phylodog doesn't just take the opposing viewpoint just for arguments sake.

 

[phylodog]

Live in a hotel. Camp in a friends yard. Live in an RV (and rent or buy a space in the campground). Live on your boat (still need a place to keep it in a marina). The public domain is for the public. If one person gets to live for free in a public space, why shouldn't everyone?

Who’s donating RV’s, hotel rooms, etc?

And, I'll also add, this will not happen anywhere close to me. I'm more off the beaten path than you and I can state this isn't a good thing to allow - look at California and Seattle if you need examples.

As someone who spent their career in law enforcement, how can you have these viewpoints? You've never trespassed someone? Evicted someone?

I haven’t advocated for legalized trespassing, that’s the folks like want to put words into my mouth.

Amen...

Who gets to determine who gets a free ride and who doesn't?

Who gets to decide how long a person can exist in one place if they’re not on private property?

I don’t post to be the contrarian, the vast majority of the time I am with the majority opinion here. Sometimes I post to try to get people to question the system. The system has produced millions of homeless and as much as many here want to dismiss that as being the fault of the homeless, most of the time it is not. Many are too busy taking all they have for granted to consider a different perspective. I don’t particularly care if it’s a popular opinion.

 

[Ingomike]

I haven’t advocated for legalized trespassing, that’s the folks like want to put words into my mouth.

You have advocated for trespassing on public property.

Who gets to decide how long a person can exist in one place if they’re not on private property?

The representatives of the people through various laws.

I don’t post to be the contrarian, the vast majority of the time I am with the majority opinion here. Sometimes I post to try to get people to question the system. The system has produced millions of homeless and as much as many here want to dismiss that as being the fault of the homeless, most of the time it is not. Many are too busy taking all they have for granted to consider a different perspective. I don’t particularly care if it’s a popular opinion.

Yes, it is their fault if they are homeless with all the private and government programs available to help people. But, as was said in this thread, many don’t want that help.

 

[Ingomike]

The public domain is for the public. If one person gets to live for free in a public space, why shouldn't everyone?

That this is a controversial point on INGO baffles me.

 

[phylodog]

You have advocated for trespassing on public property.

I've advocated for people being allowed to use public property if they have no alternative. Institutions aren't an alternative to most who would qualify, they sound great to those who wouldn't step foot in one

Yes, it is their fault if they are homeless with all the private and government programs available to help people. But, as was said in this thread, many don’t want that help.

I don't blame them. Spent any time in one? I'd much prefer to live in my car or under a bridge.

 

[phylodog]

That this is a controversial point on INGO baffles me.

I don't find it controversial. If someone chooses not to purchase or rent a domicile, where else are they to go? You don't want them on your property and I don't blame you so where then? Debtor's prison? That's what homeless shelter's may as well be if you're going to require people to either pay for housing or live in one.

 

[Ingomike]

So if someone is incapable or unwilling to purchase or rent property then they have no right to exist outside of an institution in this country. Got it. Produce for the system or face what, execution? Exile? Incarceration? Those are the only acceptable outcomes in your world.

One cannot simply just exist, a human being is not a rock. They need space to exist in, they need food to sustain, they need a place to use the bathroom. There are very few habitable places in this country where there are unowned spaces that one can exist in. Therefore the whole concept of a right to just exist without work or space doesn’t exist simply because humans must have resources to exist. Those encampments are not existing, they are taking resources from others…

 

[TheSpookyCat]

One cannot simply just exist, a human being is not a rock. They need space to exist in, they need food to sustain, they need a place to use the bathroom. There are very few habitable places in this country where there are unowned spaces that one can exist in. Therefore the whole concept of a right to just exist without work or space doesn’t exist simply because humans must have resources to exist. Those encampments are not existing, they are taking resources from others…

The right to exist is determined by God, not local landowners.

These people are not “taking resources from others”, they are being allowed to utilize an idle public resource…by the legitimate public authority …to keep vulnerable people from having to sleep in places where they are neither welcome nor safe. This is an expression of compassion, not communism.

The automotive homeless are not the bums you seem to think they are…and I think you already know why from your own personal experience:

Even a “free” car costs a lot of money to keep. If you don’t keep the registration up it will get impounded when it’s parked, if you don’t keep minimum insurance it will get impounded when you get pulled over. “Cheap” cars (the kind typically owned by people who have no choice but to sleep in them) are the most likely to require frequent repairs, and taking care of these things takes recurring income.

These people have jobs, the problem is bigger than that.

My grandfather drove a forklift at a warehouse for 45 years. That job bought him a house at age 22, allowed him to keep a stay-at-home wife who raised three kids, send those kids to college, and retire with a pension.

That type of opportunity was gone by the time I was old enough to work

I have a college degree, I started working in my field immediately after graduation. My wife works a full-time job, I wasn’t able to buy a house until I was 40, and I’ll never retire.

Kids getting into my line of work now are carrying $100k in college debt for the same starting wage I made 25 years ago.

The automotive homeless are not an illustration of personal moral failure…they are damning evidence of our country’s current economic failures, and a terrifying glimpse into how easily ordinary people can slip through the cracks.

Remember…there but for the grace of God go I.

 

[phylodog]

One cannot simply just exist, a human being is not a rock. They need space to exist in, they need food to sustain, they need a place to use the bathroom.

Space which must be obtained from someone else? Without space, they have no right to exist is what you're saying. Maybe we should start mandatory abortions for any child without a guaranteed piece of real estate waiting on them when they arrive. That'd solve the problem.

There are very few habitable places in this country where there are unowned spaces that one can exist in. Therefore the whole concept of a right to just exist without work or space doesn’t exist simply because humans must have resources to exist. Those encampments are not existing, they are taking resources from others…

So one must labor for someone else to exist in this country. You like to poke me for not answering questions so how about addressing mine?

What are you going to do with the people who don't want to work for this system? You operate under a set of assumptions because that is the framework you've been raised in and apparently cannot see out of. Since leaving people alone who aren't on your property isn't an option, what are you going to do with the people who won't do things your way? Debtor's prison? If they're committing no crime and not on private property what harm are they doing to people who have every comfort imaginable?

I'm not saying anyone has any responsibility whatsoever to help anyone else, that's an individual decision. I take issue with people holding their nose in the air, passing judgement on people less fortunate and demanding they be moved out of their sight. You can justify it anyway you want to but it doesn't make it less pathetic.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

If they're committing no crime and not on private property what harm are they doing to people who have every comfort imaginable?

If I'm walking down a public sidewalk on the way to my job, and they're living on/ defecating on that sidewalk where I have to walk (did I say, "to my job"?), then I'd say that's causing me harm. I shouldn't have to worry about walking through a pile of crap on a public right of way.

 

[foszoe]

If I'm walking down a public sidewalk on the way to my job, and they're living on/ defecating on that sidewalk where I have to walk (did I say, "to my job"?), then I'd say that's causing me harm. I shouldn't have to worry about walking through a pile of crap on a public right of way.

Isn't that a crime? Defecation?

 

[Route 45]

I think a good balance is probably somewhere between IngoMike Acres HOA-controlled Stepfordville and Wild Phylotown.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Isn't that a crime? Defecation?

Depends on the jurisdiction. In San Francisco, LA, Portland, Seattle? Nope. At least not one that's prosecuted. Doubt that it's even prosecuted in Indy.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Isn't that a crime? Defecation?

I hope you mean "public" defecation. Because if it's just regular defecation, I'm going away for life. And I have a never-ending supply apparently. People are always telling me I'm full of ****.

 

[phylodog]

So what's the answer? This country (blame whomever you want) has pushed hundreds of thousands into homelessness over the past four years and the answer is to continue to punish them? Continue to push them anywhere but here? At what point do you think that's going to begin to cause bigger problems?

There's a bigger picture/problem to be addressed, kicking the first to go down isn't going to help or fix anything.

 

[foszoe]

So what's the answer? This country (blame whomever you want) has pushed hundreds of thousands into homelessness over the past four years and the answer is to continue to punish them? Continue to push them anywhere but here? At what point do you think that's going to begin to cause bigger problems?

There's a bigger picture/problem to be addressed, kicking the first to go down isn't going to help or fix anything.

It is hard to reconcile a viewpoint that says the government is pushing everyone down the scale of economic wellbeing without accepting that some people will end up at the bottom. But also believing that the poor have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[phylodog]

It is hard to reconcile a viewpoint that says the government is pushing everyone down the scale of economic wellbeing without accepting that some people will end up at the bottom. But also believing that the poor have no one to blame but themselves.

There's always going to be those at the bottom, always. I'm not one to believe it's the government's job to take care of them but we're 100 years past that point. I'm also not one to believe punishing them for it is helpful or just.

 

[jsharmon7]

The right to exist is determined by God, not local landowners.

These people are not “taking resources from others”, they are being allowed to utilize an idle public resource…by the legitimate public authority …to keep vulnerable people from having to sleep in places where they are neither welcome nor safe. This is an expression of compassion, not communism.

The automotive homeless are not the bums you seem to think they are…and I think you already know why from your own personal experience:

Even a “free” car costs a lot of money to keep. If you don’t keep the registration up it will get impounded when it’s parked, if you don’t keep minimum insurance it will get impounded when you get pulled over. “Cheap” cars (the kind typically owned by people who have no choice but to sleep in them) are the most likely to require frequent repairs, and taking care of these things takes recurring income.

These people have jobs, the problem is bigger than that.

My grandfather drove a forklift at a warehouse for 45 years. That job bought him a house at age 22, allowed him to keep a stay-at-home wife who raised three kids, send those kids to college, and retire with a pension.

That type of opportunity was gone by the time I was old enough to work

I have a college degree, I started working in my field immediately after graduation. My wife works a full-time job, I wasn’t able to buy a house until I was 40, and I’ll never retire.

Kids getting into my line of work now are carrying $100k in college debt for the same starting wage I made 25 years ago.

The automotive homeless are not an illustration of personal moral failure…they are damning evidence of our country’s current economic failures, and a terrifying glimpse into how easily ordinary people can slip through the cracks.

Remember…there but for the grace of God go I.

This is the most accurate representation so far. Sometimes we like to tell ourselves how we are successful because of our hard work and sacrifice but forget how very fortunate we are to have had the opportunities we’ve had. Lots of hard-working people are just a couple missed paychecks away from living in a car.

 

[phylodog]

This is the most accurate representation so far. Sometimes we like to tell ourselves how we are successful because of our hard work and sacrifice but forget how very fortunate we are to have had the opportunities we’ve had. Lots of hard-working people are just a couple missed paychecks away from living in a car.

I didn’t see the post until you replied to it and I agree. The same basic premise of what I was attempting to get people to see. A human born into this earth does not need another human’s permission to exist - laws be damned. This isn’t China yet and I’d prefer it not go any further in that direction.

We've created a system in which most believe participation (get a job, pay taxes, rent property from the government and call it yours) is mandatory. I say it is not.