Saw a sad article on Yahoo which talks about a tent city facing possible eviction from a judge. The problem about the eviction is that it seems the complaints are from local residents who criticize the group for the filth and various regulations. But outside of stench, the truth is that it seems these people are not hurting anyone and most people in this spot are those with plain bad luck.
I’ve always had mixed feelings on the homeless problem in the US. Back when I lived near UC Berkeley for a short period, I felt that the homeless people there gave homelessness in general a horrible name. Quite a few of the squatters knowingly took advantage of the students and people visiting in the area. In some cases, it was a plain joke. I remember hearing one guy remarking, “Just hold out a cup and jiggle it around. People will toss you a coin or two.” Another kid randomly just sat down against a wall and shouted out, “Does anyone have a quarter for a beer? I don’t want food. I don’t want clothes. I just want a beer. Hey, do you have a quarter for a beer?” Also, I heard about some guy with his palm open inquiring, “Money for drugs? Money for drugs?”
Likewise, when I worked in Santa Monica, I could not help but recall the infamous South Park episode where it seemed like the country dumped all their homeless problems in that one zone. The homeless people there were not much better than those up in the Bay Area. You occasionally had some creative yet ridiculous claims like one guy with a poster that said, “Michael Jackson died the other day so I need money for a beer.”
Then you get some stereotypical low income issues where states like California end up subsidizing low income families heavily based on the number of dependents. In short, you often hear about how many illegals in particular end up having tons of kids just to get welfare checks, thus taking advantage of and ruining the welfare system set up for those who really need it.
It comes as no surprise then when an issue like the one we’re seeing in NJ comes up, there’s a lot of controversy and (sadly) apathy or even hatred. But in reading the article, it feels different in that people ended up living in that situation because, indeed, they had nowhere else to go. It’s one thing where certain individuals figure out how to take advantage of a situation and in another, people lack any options and become desperate.
What’s even sadder to me is the general bureaucratic cruelty of this country. I think other countries face similar situations, but the way America gets around their insensitive nature is by tossing out the “unsanitary conditions” argument. Of course, it’s the local residents that complain. It reminds me of George Carlin’s perception on homelessness in America where he called it NIMBY or Not in my backyard.
Many people commented how America ends up sending more money overseas rather than taking care of its own. This has been a huge criticism of America for the longest time. And it’s a real mystery but shows one of the biggest problems in government spending. When you combine that with what you’re seeing here, you really start to believe that it’s all for show. Meaning that the government overspends internationally to continue to be a face for the world. But domestically it’s utter crap.
Personally, I find it atrocious that these people aren’t really hurting anyone (supposedly) and are being evicted. The whole thing is that the country wants to put people into this productive system. If they fall off, then the country will boot them out. But if you’re in a situation like they are, where do you go? How can you be productive when you have some physical disability or lack skills? What happens when you want to be productive but lack the ability to participate?
But this is my issue with America: it’s just too fucking big to manage. I really believe that systems need to be small to effectively handle. People are just too stupid to efficiently handle large scale problems. You need to pay attention to details and not let people get lost as a number in a massive system.
Of course, this won’t change but it should change. The only argument for not changing is international diplomacy (i.e. national defense). But why unify a country under so much bureaucracy if the only pragmatic need is national defense? Why not just have the federal government manage that aspect and have states form smaller, less controlled pieces of the puzzle?
The real problems are ego and power. That’s what the superstructure is all about. The thing I see is that society is fragmenting. However, government is the one aspect really holding the world back. Not just America but all governments. With the internet, people are slowly bonding through social media and niche markets. The government at this point is more of a nuisance, serving as an outdated mediator. But the people involved in government and the system within governments no longer are capable of scaling the needs for the people of this world. Instead, communities themselves like these homeless ones or online ones do a far more effective job of managing themselves than the government.