Homeless in Seattle

On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:59:44 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

A new shirt and skirt,or trousers, at
Christmas...

And the youngest slaves got long shirts and no pants. I read a memoir
in which a former slave remembered tucking his "slip" into the pair of
pants kept for slaves sent on errands, to make it look like a shirt.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

On Monday, April 22, 2019 at 4:15:05 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 13:49:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:33:02 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:01:42 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 9:48:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Some posters here have gone on and on about homeless people, and
specifically homeless people in Seattle.

Here are interesting details about one of them:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...ss-in-seattle/

--
- Frank Krygowski

This is pretty much the same in every single state controlled by Democrats. It is a sickness that cannot be cured.

So the staggering number of homeless in Texas can be cured? Why is homelessness so low in Bernie Sanders' home state of Vermont? https://www.usich.gov/tools-for-action/map/#fn[]=1400&fn[]=2900&fn[]=6000&fn[]=9900&fn[]=13500


-- Jay Beattie.

Come on Jay, Vermont has a relatively tiny population and it is a state that makes Washington state look like Hawaii. And yet Vermont has about half the RATE of homelessness as Washington. Oregon with a little better weather conditions than Washington has a little worse homeless rate.

You can check out the weather in those areas - while Vermont has bad weather in the winter, relatively New Hampshire has a long sea coast heated by the Gulf Stream and the slightly better weather translates into more homeless.

Err... New Hampshire's "long seacoast" is 18 miles long :-)
The average daily highs in that area are (average December, January
and February) 35 degrees (F) and nightly lows are 12 degrees (F).

It is strange, growing up in New Hampshire there just didn't seem to
have been any "homeless". There were "Hobo's", who were homeless, but
they migrated to more hospitable climes during the winters.
--

Cheers,

John B.

I misread that large number of homeless from Massachusetts to New Hampshire.. The homeless ratio is actually very low. Mass. is pretty surprising so I guess they have some large cities in which they can seek shelter from the conditions.

But it is NOTHING like the west coast. San Francisco is the Homeless city by the bay and LA is incredible. When you can drive for 3 miles on main streets with each side of the street lined with homeless tent shelters it makes you want to cry. The real basis for all of this is illegal immigration.

On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 9:48:39 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 8:48:08 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/22/2019 10:42 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 22:10:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/22/2019 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/22/2019 6:15 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 13:49:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:33:02 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:01:42 PM UTC-7,
wrote:
On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 9:48:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
Some posters here have gone on and on about homeless people, and
specifically homeless people in Seattle.

Here are interesting details about one of them:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...ss-in-seattle/


--
- Frank Krygowski

This is pretty much the same in every single state controlled by
Democrats. It is a sickness that cannot be cured.

So the staggering number of homeless in Texas can be cured? Why is
homelessness so low in Bernie Sanders' home state of Vermont?
https://www.usich.gov/tools-for-action/map/#fn[]=1400&fn[]=2900&fn[]=6000&fn[]=9900&fn[]=13500



-- Jay Beattie.

Come on Jay, Vermont has a relatively tiny population and it is a
state that makes Washington state look like Hawaii. And yet Vermont
has about half the RATE of homelessness as Washington. Oregon with a
little better weather conditions than Washington has a little worse
homeless rate.

You can check out the weather in those areas - while Vermont has bad
weather in the winter, relatively New Hampshire has a long sea coast
heated by the Gulf Stream and the slightly better weather translates
into more homeless.

Err... New Hampshire's "long seacoast" is 18 miles long :-)
The average daily highs in that area are (average December, January
and February) 35 degrees (F) and nightly lows are 12 degrees (F).

It is strange, growing up in New Hampshire there just didn't seem to
have been any "homeless". There were "Hobo's", who were homeless, but
they migrated to more hospitable climes during the winters.


more homeless update:

https://700wlw.iheart.com/featured/s...-poop-problem/

To paraphrase Mark Twain (or perhaps someone else): Just like the
weather, everybody talks about the homeless problem but nobody does
anything about it.

Apparently the homeless have existed in the U.S., essentially since
the place was first settled and substantial numbers of the
"immigrants" were actually Vagabonds, an English term to describe
those without a job or place to live. According to:
http://www.earlyamericancrime.com/co...ges/overview-2

"From the time of the first settlers to the American Revolution, close
to three quarters of all immigrants to the thirteen American colonies
arrived on American shores without their freedom, coming over as
slaves, convicts, or indentured servants. Even during the seventeenth
century only 33 percent of immigrants to America were free"

Of course, once an indentured servant completed his indenture he might
be given land, there was plenty of it about, and with the ownership of
"property" gain the privilege of voting.

I suspect that the modern "homeless" may well be simply a part of the
urbanization of the country. When a large majority of the population
lived on farms there was always work to be had but when the big move
to the cities (where the money is) there were fewer unskilled jobs
available. Than came the decentralization of factories and cities like
Detroit almost literally died with the loss of work.

Now of course, with computerization there is even fewer jobs available
and more of them require specialized technical knowledge that just
isn't available to all and sundry. There are, for example, some 50,000
licensed taxi drivers in New York City. With the advent of driverless
vehicles some 50,000 might be out of a job. Is there any work
available for them?

I agree, that's probably one of the roots of the problem. And I don't
see it getting better.

Our economic system generates more profits to those who reduce expenses,
and employees are seen as expenses. In a three shift factory, one robot
can easily replace three workers, and probably more. It can often pay
for itself quite quickly even without the benefits of more consistent
operation, better quality control, etc.

But even the most charitable auto manufacturer (for a wildly theoretical
example) couldn't say "I'm not going to use robots. I'm going to
continue giving people jobs by doing things by hand." If the company did
that, it would soon go bankrupt.

The problem isn't just robots, though. It's all through commerce.
Grocery stores and hardware stores near me have more "self checkout"
stations than cashier stations. I no longer get to call a company and
have a receptionist direct my call; instead, I listen to a minute of
menu choices and try to navigate to my intended contact by pressing
buttons myself, or by shouting into their voice recognition system.

This trend even infects volunteer work. Our club newsletter used to be
done by a team of friends working at someone's kitchen table, doing
literal cut-and-pasting. (The newsletter won a national award back in
those days.) Now it can be done only by the few club members with
Desktop Publishing experience.

But take heart. The rich are getting richer at an ever faster pace, so
all is not lost. :-/

We have historically low unemployment and tying homelessness to the non-availability of jobs is difficult. A more serious problem is that existing jobs do not pay enough to keep up with escalating housing prices. You have to wonder, however, how many homeless are economically displaced versus drug addled or insane. Very few of the homeless I see are simply down on their luck and unable to find a cheap apartment. It's not Hooverville out there -- it looks more like a scene out of the Walking Dead. I have no idea what one does for those people within the confines of modern morality.

-- Jay Beattie.

Well, I agree with you but I see several illegal families to a home. This allows them to pay a great deal more for housing than Americans who will not share housing as easily.

Here's he problem: the jobs that a large number of illegals are capable of doing are much better done with automation. If we did not have this cheap labor force we would convert assembly lines etc. to automation.

The Democrat claim that we need a cheap labor force is a farce. Gavin Newsom going to Central America and telling people there that California needs more labor should end up with him in prison.

On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 10:07:43 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 7:48:30 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/23/2019 7:52 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 11:00:21 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Our economic system generates more profits to those who reduce expenses,
and employees are seen as expenses.
--
- Frank Krygowski

Yes, one of the economic problems with slavery. There are many moral problems
with slavery of course. But in current and even past times when
employees can be paid a subsistence wage or minimum wage, it is much
cheaper to hire people at poverty wages than it is to have slaves.
Slaves, because they are personal property, require food, housing,
medical care. All of which adds up to much more than subsistence
wages paid to desperate employees. Employee wages are of course a tax
deductible expense. Not sure how slave owners dealt with slave upkeep
expenses. Actually not sure when the US started the federal income
taxes. Maybe it was after slavery officially ended.

:-) A federal income tax was originally enacted on October 1913.

According to:
Slave Prices in the Lower South, 1722-1815
Peter C. Mancall, Joshua L. Rosenbloom, Thomas Weiss
University of Kansas

In 1815 the median price of a male slave was $500 (which is !$7,958.44
in 2017). Salaries for a skilled craftsman, in Massachusetts, in 1815,
was in the range of $2.00 a day, for unskilled workers it was in the
$1.00 a day range.

So yes, as the North had learned, hiring help was cheaper...

? If you paid $500 for a slave you had him for the rest of his life.
You'd spend that much on an unskilled worker in a year and a half, and
have to keep on spending. True, there would be some cost in housing and
feeding a slave, but it seemed they tended to minimize that expense.
Then there was the possibility of profiting by breeding.
--
- Frank Krygowski

John B. wrote that the daily wage of unskilled labor was $1 per day. Lets say $250 per year. And I have read many, many times that in olden times that laborers earned just barely enough to survive. Everything they earned was used for housing, food, etc. Nothing was leftover for savings. So I think we could estimate the slave owner costs for keeping one slave for a year at about $250. The same wages paid to an unskilled laborer. Back in the 1700-1800s time period I doubt the cost of living was that different across the states.

So a slave owner pays $250 to house and feed his slave each year. A unskilled wage earner is paid $250 each year. And he uses every penny of this to live on. But the slave owner has to pay $500, two years wages, up front to get the slave before he pays the $250 annual cost to keep the slave. Seems the slave owner starts $500 in the hole. And of course the slave owner also has to pay for management, guards to make the slaves work.

In most situations, slavery was not the economic godsend some people seem to imagine. And remember slavery also existed simply because there was not enough labor, people to do the work. That is the better reason for slavery to exist in the USA. But if there are enough laborers (northern factory towns), then slavery loses its economic advantage.

My grandfather on one side was a steam plant engineer and made enough in the Sugar Mill in Salinas to retire at about 50, buy a home in Oakland and live the rest of his life reasonably comfortable.

On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 9:59:14 AM UTC-7, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:59:44 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

A new shirt and skirt,or trousers, at
Christmas...

And the youngest slaves got long shirts and no pants. I read a memoir
in which a former slave remembered tucking his "slip" into the pair of
pants kept for slaves sent on errands, to make it look like a shirt.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

There were a whole lot of stories about slavery that were mostly not true. While Plantation owners owned many slaves and treated them rather badly, only 10% of people owned slaves and only 1% owned more than one slave. For the most part slaves were little more than farmhands and often even ate at the same table. Actual farm hands were treated the same way.

There can be NOTHING said good about slavery but the immense exaggerations of slavery should be somewhat understood by the fact that when freed, many slaves took the names of their "masters". Would you do that if the SOB treated you badly?

writes:

On Monday, April 22, 2019 at 4:15:05 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 13:49:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:33:02 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:01:42 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 9:48:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Some posters here have gone on and on about homeless people, and
specifically homeless people in Seattle.

Here are interesting details about one of them:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...ss-in-seattle/

--
- Frank Krygowski

This is pretty much the same in every single state controlled
by Democrats. It is a sickness that cannot be cured.

So the staggering number of homeless in Texas can be cured? Why
is homelessness so low in Bernie Sanders' home state of Vermont?
https://www.usich.gov/tools-for-action/map/#fn[]=1400&fn[]=2900&fn[]=6000&fn[]=9900&fn[]=13500


-- Jay Beattie.

Come on Jay, Vermont has a relatively tiny population and it is a
state that makes Washington state look like Hawaii. And yet
Vermont has about half the RATE of homelessness as
Washington. Oregon with a little better weather conditions than
Washington has a little worse homeless rate.

You can check out the weather in those areas - while Vermont has
bad weather in the winter, relatively New Hampshire has a long sea
coast heated by the Gulf Stream and the slightly better weather
translates into more homeless.

Err... New Hampshire's "long seacoast" is 18 miles long :-)
The average daily highs in that area are (average December, January
and February) 35 degrees (F) and nightly lows are 12 degrees (F).

It is strange, growing up in New Hampshire there just didn't seem to
have been any "homeless". There were "Hobo's", who were homeless, but
they migrated to more hospitable climes during the winters.
--

Cheers,

John B.

I misread that large number of homeless from Massachusetts to New
Hampshire. The homeless ratio is actually very low. Mass. is pretty
surprising so I guess they have some large cities in which they can
seek shelter from the conditions.

I have seen homeless dudes sleeping on the sidewalks of Boston when it
was well below 0F. Sometimes they freeze and die. I know of a few
homeless encampments near me (much more suburban than Boston), and more
that have been broken up. I don't see any of them camping in the woods
during the winter; I'm not sure where they go.

But it is NOTHING like the west coast. San Francisco is the Homeless
city by the bay and LA is incredible. When you can drive for 3 miles
on main streets with each side of the street lined with homeless tent
shelters it makes you want to cry. The real basis for all of this is
illegal immigration.

I have known a fair number of both homeless people and illegal
immigrants. I have never known a homeless illegal immigrant. Being
visibly homeless exposes a person to much more police interaction than any
illegal immigrant would want.

Maybe that's just my idiosyncratic experience.

On 4/24/2019 11:59 AM, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:59:44 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

A new shirt and skirt,or trousers, at
Christmas...

And the youngest slaves got long shirts and no pants. I read a memoir
in which a former slave remembered tucking his "slip" into the pair of
pants kept for slaves sent on errands, to make it look like a shirt.


Also common in other parts of the world then for the poorer
classes, see the French expression, / sans culottes /

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 24/04/2019 2:03 p.m., AMuzi wrote:
On 4/24/2019 11:59 AM, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2019 14:59:44 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote:

A new shirt and skirt,or trousers, at
Christmas...

And the youngest slaves got long shirts and no pants.Â* I read a memoir
in which a former slave remembered tucking his "slip" into the pair of
pants kept for slaves sent on errands, to make it look like a shirt.


Also common in other parts of the world then for the poorer classes, see
the French expression, / sans culottes /


Sans coulotte literally means "without pants" but what it referred to
during the French revolution was the lack of the fancy knickers and
leggings that the aristocracy wore.

Today it still means the poorer class as you say but not to imply that
they are pantless. g

On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 12:22:03 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 9:48:39 AM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 8:48:08 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/22/2019 10:42 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 22:10:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 4/22/2019 8:13 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 4/22/2019 6:15 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 13:49:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:33:02 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, April 19, 2019 at 12:01:42 PM UTC-7,
wrote:
On Thursday, April 18, 2019 at 9:48:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
Some posters here have gone on and on about homeless people, and
specifically homeless people in Seattle.

Here are interesting details about one of them:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...ss-in-seattle/


--
- Frank Krygowski

This is pretty much the same in every single state controlled by
Democrats. It is a sickness that cannot be cured.

So the staggering number of homeless in Texas can be cured? Why is
homelessness so low in Bernie Sanders' home state of Vermont?
https://www.usich.gov/tools-for-action/map/#fn[]=1400&fn[]=2900&fn[]=6000&fn[]=9900&fn[]=13500



-- Jay Beattie.

Come on Jay, Vermont has a relatively tiny population and it is a
state that makes Washington state look like Hawaii. And yet Vermont
has about half the RATE of homelessness as Washington. Oregon with a
little better weather conditions than Washington has a little worse
homeless rate.

You can check out the weather in those areas - while Vermont has bad
weather in the winter, relatively New Hampshire has a long sea coast
heated by the Gulf Stream and the slightly better weather translates
into more homeless.

Err... New Hampshire's "long seacoast" is 18 miles long :-)
The average daily highs in that area are (average December, January
and February) 35 degrees (F) and nightly lows are 12 degrees (F)..

It is strange, growing up in New Hampshire there just didn't seem to
have been any "homeless". There were "Hobo's", who were homeless, but
they migrated to more hospitable climes during the winters.


more homeless update:

https://700wlw.iheart.com/featured/s...-poop-problem/

To paraphrase Mark Twain (or perhaps someone else): Just like the
weather, everybody talks about the homeless problem but nobody does
anything about it.

Apparently the homeless have existed in the U.S., essentially since
the place was first settled and substantial numbers of the
"immigrants" were actually Vagabonds, an English term to describe
those without a job or place to live. According to:
http://www.earlyamericancrime.com/co...ges/overview-2

"From the time of the first settlers to the American Revolution, close
to three quarters of all immigrants to the thirteen American colonies
arrived on American shores without their freedom, coming over as
slaves, convicts, or indentured servants. Even during the seventeenth
century only 33 percent of immigrants to America were free"

Of course, once an indentured servant completed his indenture he might
be given land, there was plenty of it about, and with the ownership of
"property" gain the privilege of voting.

I suspect that the modern "homeless" may well be simply a part of the
urbanization of the country. When a large majority of the population
lived on farms there was always work to be had but when the big move
to the cities (where the money is) there were fewer unskilled jobs
available. Than came the decentralization of factories and cities like
Detroit almost literally died with the loss of work.

Now of course, with computerization there is even fewer jobs available
and more of them require specialized technical knowledge that just
isn't available to all and sundry. There are, for example, some 50,000
licensed taxi drivers in New York City. With the advent of driverless
vehicles some 50,000 might be out of a job. Is there any work
available for them?

I agree, that's probably one of the roots of the problem. And I don't
see it getting better.

Our economic system generates more profits to those who reduce expenses,
and employees are seen as expenses. In a three shift factory, one robot
can easily replace three workers, and probably more. It can often pay
for itself quite quickly even without the benefits of more consistent
operation, better quality control, etc.

But even the most charitable auto manufacturer (for a wildly theoretical
example) couldn't say "I'm not going to use robots. I'm going to
continue giving people jobs by doing things by hand." If the company did
that, it would soon go bankrupt.

The problem isn't just robots, though. It's all through commerce.
Grocery stores and hardware stores near me have more "self checkout"
stations than cashier stations. I no longer get to call a company and
have a receptionist direct my call; instead, I listen to a minute of
menu choices and try to navigate to my intended contact by pressing
buttons myself, or by shouting into their voice recognition system.

This trend even infects volunteer work. Our club newsletter used to be
done by a team of friends working at someone's kitchen table, doing
literal cut-and-pasting. (The newsletter won a national award back in
those days.) Now it can be done only by the few club members with
Desktop Publishing experience.

But take heart. The rich are getting richer at an ever faster pace, so
all is not lost. :-/

We have historically low unemployment and tying homelessness to the non-availability of jobs is difficult. A more serious problem is that existing jobs do not pay enough to keep up with escalating housing prices. You have to wonder, however, how many homeless are economically displaced versus drug addled or insane. Very few of the homeless I see are simply down on their luck and unable to find a cheap apartment. It's not Hooverville out there -- it looks more like a scene out of the Walking Dead. I have no idea what one does for those people within the confines of modern morality.

-- Jay Beattie.

Well, I agree with you but I see several illegal families to a home. This allows them to pay a great deal more for housing than Americans who will not share housing as easily.

Here's he problem: the jobs that a large number of illegals are capable of doing are much better done with automation. If we did not have this cheap labor force we would convert assembly lines etc. to automation.



Really? Please point me to the automatic MACHINE that picks fruit trees such as orange, apple, grape vines. Or tomatoes. California and Florida and many fruit/vegetable states are heavily dependent on immigrants (legal or illegal) to carry on their economy. And don't forget the groundskeepers and cleaning immigrants working at Trumps's Florida golf course. Do machines automatically cut grass, rake leaves, clean bathrooms, make beds? Please point them out.




The Democrat claim that we need a cheap labor force is a farce. Gavin Newsom going to Central America and telling people there that California needs more labor should end up with him in prison.

On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 12:14:33 PM UTC-5, wrote:

But it is NOTHING like the west coast. San Francisco is the Homeless city by the bay and LA is incredible. When you can drive for 3 miles on main streets with each side of the street lined with homeless tent shelters it makes you want to cry. The real basis for all of this is illegal immigration.


Did a simple Google search on the makeup of the homeless population. My search results said 49% were WHITE. I think we can safely say whites/Caucasians are not illegal immigrants. My results also said blacks and Indians are over represented in the homeless population compared to their total population percentage. I think we can safely say blacks and Indians are also probably not illegal immigrants. So are you just lying to us and making up lies when you say "The real basis for all of this is illegal immigration."

Besides, all the illegal immigrants shack up with their relatives who illegally immigrated the year before. They're not homeless.