Anyone who has visited Los Angeles in the last decade knows there is a homeless problem. Apparently since COVID it has gotten even worse.
A lot of homeless people have come from colder states where winter can be a literal death sentence for a homeless person. It might get chilly in Southern California, but never deathly cold. A lot of homeless people have moved to the LA area, and you see them everywhere. Below is a fairly typical sight on a freeway overpass. This one happens to be on North Bronson Ave.
Here is a shot a few yards further north on Bronson.
You can now see on the left of the photo, Celebrity Centre LA.
Continuing half a block north on Bronson is the parking lot for Celebrity Centre, with a large (empty) yellow tent erected in it.
A closer view of the tent with their slogan proudly and prominently displayed.
Of course, the tent is erected within their steel, spike-topped fence in a parking lot that you have to be granted permission to access through an electric gate.
The people inside the bubble world of scientology are of course completely oblivious to the irony of this.
100 yards down the road people are living in makeshift shelters. Scientology pitches their large, expensive tent on their own property and it sits empty while proclaiming “something can be done about it” and patting themselves on the back while telling themselves what wonderful humanitarians they are, handing themselves plaques and medals that prove it.
Here is the real humanitarian equation: Los Angeles has an excess of homeless people. Scientology has an excess of empty buildings (and tents). And never the twain shall meet.
Because despite their claims of being “The largest humanitarian force on earth” they view the homeless as DB’s (Degraded Beings) who should “get a job” and stop being “out-exchange.”
This is a perfect microcosm of scientology. Unless you have money to pay for your participation, they don’t want you or anything to do with you. Despite their slogans, mottos and ads, if you are in need of charity, don’t expect it from scientology.
Many decades ago on Long Island there was a Farmer’s Home Mortgage available to those with low incomes. Way back then a small 3 bedroom 1 bath house was sold for $21, 000 to around 24,000…..or a bit more depending on the house purchased & the DOWN payment of maybe $2, 000.
The “come on” was that those with low incomes would be eligible for 1% mortgage rate when the going rate was 8 1/2 to 9% for people with higher incomes. The 1% mortgage meant that the “new home owner’s” mortgage would be $68 to $72 A MONTH….compared to those with a FULL mortgage for those who made more money.
AAAhhh BUUUTTT….the problem was this….the damned TAXES went through the roof year after year after year. Those who paid 1% mortgage per month had to pay YEARLY county/township/school taxes which were SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS a year & CLIMBING.
Guess what happened to all those nice little homes built on tiny 40 X 100 size lots….they were mostly all FORECLOSED due to Non Payment of TAXES.
These homes were then resold to new buyers for FULL price mortgages. GRAND IDEA to OWN a home with little to NO Income…somewhere under $15,000 a year or less for the 1% mortgage. rate
THAT is what happens….the Property & School Taxes which constantly rise yearly…..all those low income folks LOST THEIR HOMES. FORECLOED, the houses boarded up & then cleaned up & resold to people who COULD afford the full price mortgage & could PAY the required yearly TAXES. Famer’s Home eventually ended the program.
So much for helping the low income buy a house…the cost of utilities to heat a home, have electric service, water, sewer service etc……ADD the BIGGEST COST….the TAXES always win out.
Talk about celebrities. Just a reminder that Monday June 7, 2021 is the day The Rapist gets indicted. Would anyone care to guess the odds that his bail will be continued after he is indicted? After all, the sooner he is behind bars, the better.
The only GOOD news is that it’s been in the NEWS & the rape accusations are now not hidden away, they are OUT THERE. He’s been in Court & being “looked at” I would rather have even THAT done, then nothing done at all.
Imagine having to see him on a daily basis, or even once a week or month, his smirk as he eyes these ladies up & down knowing full well what he’s done. Thinking he’s “had them at his whim & will” & they were helpless to escape him.
I would think that people are beginning to really LOOK at HIM for what he is or “might be” . Where he once strolled amongst all of us, smiling & chattering away & being a good actor at ALL of it, that no one gave a thought that Danny Masterson “might be dangerous or threatening” to women.
Like Bill Cosby Danny thought this day would never come, that it’s all hidden under the rug, buried by himself & the serious threats of expulsion from COS should the women TELL anyone outside COS. “Let US handle it, inside the bubble of religion” under OUR arbitration run by US.
Literally what they declare sanctimoniously is” YOU won’t stand a snowball’s chance in HELL of being recognized as a VICTIM OF RAPE….so just forget it…we find HIM not guilty.”
SMH…..the count down has started….don’t drop the soap in the gang shower Danny
There should be a mandate for all mega religious institutions to have to give back a big portion of their non taxable income to local affordable housing authorities to get people housed. But no one holds them to it! Scientology, LDS, Jehovah Witness, are some of the worst “religions” that don’t give a shit about anybody but themselves and have a shit load of $$$ in their coffers…but again they are not held to any standard of where and how it’s given. It’s crazy!!! This is why all churches should have to pay a tax.
If one takes a look at their site, one will also find a chapter related to what they think about charitable works.
As good scoundrels it is a non-answer on the subject. In fact, being a Q&A (and it is also valid in their terminology in fact they do “Q&A”) they ask the question and give the answer.
And the question is whether scn BELIEVES in charity. Not if they practice it or if it is right to do it, only if they BELIEVE it, on the contrary they underline that an exchange is needed.
So a homeless person should give something back to get some help. So where is the help?
From the very beginning it has always been said that scn “is for the able to make him more able” (note: able equals bank account but in the end the bank account is the only thing that gets as-ised).
So all the others are DB, degraded beings, who are guilty of having lived their previous lives badly and this is their condition.
This is a self-proclaimed church, but which has nothing of a church, and which sees those who do not have a bank account as cursed.
Dang! Sorry. It was Smore that posted about The Kominsky Method and not Balletlady. My mistake. Very sorry.
To Balletlady:
I’m sorry this is O/T in this thread but Balletlady made a post in a thread that was active 4 or 5 days ago recommending that people watch a TV show called, “The Kominsky Method” (starring Michael Douglas and Alan Arkin) because the last season has a great expose on the cult. Specifically, someone else said the end of Season Two and all of Season Three focused on the cult.
I want to thank you, Balletlady because I’ve just started watching this show and the nature of this expose (my word) is really great. Not only is it the most accurate expose I’ve seen done in this way but it is also extremely funny. I would love to explain what it’s all about but I won’t because I fear that would ruin the show for many of you.
I started with Season 2 Episode 9 and that seems to be the first episode that involves the cult. If anyone knows that it starts any earlier, I’d appreciate if someone would post that because I’m really loving the way they are doing this.
Hi Skyler23!
I’m glad you have been watching it! I read the other day that when it first came out Tony Ortega asked Goeff Levin if he knew if Chuck Lorre had been in the cult since the writing was so spot on. Turns out he was. In explaining this aspect of his past, he said he had done “a lot of stupid things” when he was young.
Enjoy!
Holy Shit! I would never have guessed that Chuck Lorre was in the cult. But the writing was so exact, I can’t claim to be surprised. He sure did make it clear the cult is not good for people or animals or anything on this planet.
Thank you for the lead. It was well worth watching.
I found it quite shocking that so many of Hollywood’s one time biggies are members of COS. One would think they’d have more sense then to allow themselves to be dupe d& suckered in to the realm of COS
TC still believes in this shit show & kisses the ass cheeks & probably butt hole of DM. to see so many……………..mind boggling.
I am hoping that Danny Masterson gets his just due & that these lovely ladies receive full JUSTICE for their sexual assaults.
Sometimes justices takes a long time to prevail, as in the case of Bill Cosby & the Catholic Priest & lay people who assaulted so many.
Ladies STAY STRONG…….as hard as it’s been, the rapist needs to be punished & IMHO it better NOT be “House Arrest”…..or a “celeb prison” where he’s pampered.
So many good shows that give a sometimes “silent side eye” to COS…..even South Park did poke fun at TC etc…..BETTER SOMETHING THAN NOTHING.
This particular piece is so good, I hope you submit it to either or both the LA Times and New York Times as an guest opinion piece.
This, and Aaron’s recent article about how Scientology deals with rape accusations. The best of the best, both of them. They would be so good as guest opinion articles!
“âThe largest humanitarian force on earthâ” is purely an ongoing photo/video cash grab PR campaign by $camology to keep bleeding the sheepbots and has absolutely no meaning or purpose outside the bubble.
I apologise.
(This is the correct link, some people are not on facebook.)
https://exscn2.net/threads/the-opulence-and-decadence-of-scientology-brick-and-mortar-structures-but-on-their-doorstep.243/
OMG!!! Those pictures make me sick. Mabey the homeless should move a little closer to the Celebrity Center.
Excellent presentation Karen – the way you posted one picture showing opulence followed by another showing poverty and then alternating the pictures to match those two conditions all the way.
You have an excellent artistic eye! I doubt that one person in one hundred would have ever thought of presenting those images in that way. I know that I would never have thought of doing that.
Thank you Skyler.
With all their 3 Billion tax free dollars, they have not contributed one thin dime to any Los Angeles issues. The homeless stack up walking distance from their celebrity center *palace*
The homeless problem is a mental health crisis as much as anything. And it’s partly the result of the anti-psychiatry movement that Hubbard and Scientology hung their hats on, though as is typical, they were actually latecomers, not pioneers – like the CofS and its CCHR they criticized and pushed to abolish psychiatric institutions, without having an alternative solution to actually replace them.
And Scientology turns out not to actually have any solutions to critical psychological and psychiatric problems. If anything, in the last few decades, after a slew of episodes of psychotic breakdowns, suicides and murders among those subject to their practices, they have limited themselves even further to treating only cherry picked “worried well” types — who also have the money (or assets, or creditworthiness) to pay for what is now more unaffordable, than the psychiatry that Hubbard criticized for being too expensive.
Plus of course Hubbard’s egoistic, socially Darwinian Scientology, both philosophically and doctrinally, has no interest in helping less fortunate “downstats.”
PeaceMaker said: The homeless problem is a mental health crisis as much as anything.
That certainly would seem to be true. I’m embarrassed to admit I had never even realized that before.
Just like everyone else though, I cannot imagine any kind of solution.
Skyler,
Hope this helps. In 2014, Utah did a thorough study , mainly in the Salt Lake area. The breakdown is as follows:
Chronic……… 300
Vets…………….. 300
Mental………… 750
Substance abuse…700
Donestic violence..700
Youth (18-25)……….100
The Mental and substance abuse require full Federal action, and overcome the ACLU and activists objections to forced incarceration. The rest are really manageable at the state level.
https://jobs.utah.gov/housing/scso/documents/homelessness2014.pdf
Those are interesting statistics. If they are representative across the nation it would provide some suggested path of moving forward and dealing with the various categories of the “unhoused”.
I’m getting okay with the terminology unhoused. It somewhat takes the edge off of putting all the different “categories” of the homeless into the same category, many who are unhoused through little or no fault of their own.
Relating to my comment below, different government facilities could be built for dealing with the different categories. While it’s certainly agreed that the internment of Japanese citizens during World War II was an injustice, at least they survived with adequate food clothing and shelter. Shelters or encampments could be built with some being voluntary for people to go to with their children when they are down and out.
This is just a random thought and I’m just thinking outside of the box for dealing with a large national issue.
……………………………………………………………………
“Life in the camps
Conditions at the camps were spare. Internees lived in uninsulated barracks furnished only with cots and coal-burning stoves. Residents used common bathroom and laundry facilities, but hot water was usually limited. The camps were surrounded by barbed-wire fences patrolled by armed guards who had instructions to shoot anyone who tried to leave. Although there were a few isolated incidents of interneesâ being shot and killed, as well as more numerous examples of preventable suffering, the camps generally were run humanely.”
https://www.britannica.com/event/Japanese-American-internment/Life-in-the-camps
A short time ago I saw a TV clip where some city, it might have been LA or a nearby city, was building “tiny houses” for use by the homeless. It turns out that the overall cost for each tiny house was hundreds of thousands of dollars, not a good use of government funding.
Richard, I think we’ll find “unhoused” increasingly fitting as rent moratoriums expire, and a significant number of people who we would not traditionally think of as homeless, end up without housing and, presumably, on the streets. I generally approach new labels with some skepticism, but I think in this case it is appropriate to look at how we classify the problem in a new light, and reconsider out assumptions about it.
p.s. I’d want to know more about just what it was that you saw about “tiny houses.” It occurs to me that maybe there is some more nuanced problem, like the houses themselves being fairly cheap, but the land to put them on being inordinately expensive in a place like LA, where a search turns up a figure of $2.7 million per acre average land price.
PeaceMaker – I’m glad you questioned my comment. The exorbitant cost per tiny home may have come from the total cost of building the infrastructure for a village of homes divided by a small number which were completed.
At any rate my comment above is misinformation. I googled tiny homes in Ca for the homeless and there are videos and articles which I’m now looking at.
From what I observed homelessness became noticable in the 1980s when state mental facilities stopped receiving as much aid from the federal government, or possibly ceased receiving it altogether. It was in the 80s that I began seeing homeless people on the streets in my area.
I’m not defending Scientology nor am I making a political statement. I’m just sharing my observations. Frankly, I think that mentally ill people who are a danger to society ( and/or themselves in that they cannot support or otherwise take care of themselves ) should be in facilities which house and care for them compassionately. I would gladly pay more federal taxes for this purpose. And I also believe that psychiatric drugs for such cases are necessary and useful and a whole lot more compassionate than the chains and straight jackets which were once used to restrain the movements and/or violent impulses of the mentally ill.
In fact Aquamarine The Community Mental Health Act of 1963 was a huge factor in setting the stage for homelessness in the United States. Long term psychiatric patients were released from state hospitals into community health centers for treatment and follow-up. Those were never adequately funded, the community mental health system struggled to meet patient needs and many of those “deinstitutionalized” by the act wound up living on the streets, with no support system. That situation continued from that data forward. Homeless numbersw started rising fast in the late 70’s when the economy was in a sharp decline according to the US government agency N.I.H. This trend continued into the mid 80’s when the economy started recovering.
Real,
I completely do NOT doubt your information.
Its also interesting.
I am not knowledgeable at all on these matters.
I only shared that when I began to notice homeless people on the streets it was circa the early 80s, date coincident with the Reagan administration’s cutting of funds for state mental institutions. Before then I didn’t notice homeless people on the streets.
That doesn’t mean they weren’t THERE by the way.
They very well could have been where I was not.
My opinion is highly subjective and anecdotal.
Only that in the early to mid 80’s homeless people on the streets became noticeable to me, whereas before that time I didn’t see homeless people on the streets.
The cuts made by the Democratic House & Senate when Reagan was President (Presidents don’t control what an opposition congress passes) were small compared to what was cut in ’63 (When JFK & LBJ were President and they controlled congress)
Understood! In my comments I should have stressed that I am nor have I EVER been knowledgeable about this issue. I did say that I was not making any sort of political statement, merely offering my observations, my anecdotal observations at the time. Thank you for this new information. I will add now that I strongly disagreed with the cuts that were made during the Reagan administration to mental health facilities and/or any prior, larger cuts enacted in ’63 when JFK and LBJ were Presidents, no matter what branch of government and its political party at any given time was responsible for them. OK?
Again, interesting information, and surprising as well. Just so you know, I think these cuts were wrong and I don’t care what political party or branch of government was at any given time responsible for them. Its wrong to turn people who cannot care for themselves and are a danger to themselves and possibly to society out into the street. Its just wrong, that’s all. Whether over a course of time this happened gradiently or all at once or because of Democrats or because of Republicans or because of bi-partisan legislation doesn’t matter to me. It is and was wrong, in my view. Horribly wrong, and inhumane. And irresponsible and selfish. That’s my opinion.
The sociopath Hubbard was adamant and vociferous in his hatred of humans that were not wealthy enough to pay his exorbitant rates for the snake oil he sold.
There is no ‘charity’ in $cientology. The precepts in the Way to Crappiness are a PR joke. People who see the dichotomy in the $cienoverse leave quickly. Some don’t have the introspection and nerve to tell the Regs and sea borg to phuck off. We can only wish that those who support this excrement will wake up one day.
Seattle is also being overwhelmed by the homeless problem. In addition to the tents, streets are also lined with extremely derelict campers and RVs. These are parked in front of homes and businesses and they can not be ticketed or towed as they are officially labeled “homes”. So much for the tax paying businesses and home owners. Forget the “church” of Scientology. It doesn’t have much interest in caring for its own staff and has zero concern for the “wogs”.
Portland is exactly the same. It is so sad and such a massive mess.
Mat, I can’t think of anything I could say to improve your message.
As I read yours, I thought that it DOES seem that scn staff are considered just a small step above the DB wogs who can’t PAY for being serviced in the scientological way.
Peridot,
Wow, that’s a hell of a story!
It’s not surprising,though.We are talking about a “religion” conceived by
a pill-popping,narcissistic criminal to enrich himself whilst enslaving and defrauding others.
The Sea Ogres merely enforce El Con’s grift and phuckery,glorying in
the elitist cosplay and universe-saving delusion…
Sad shit.
I disagree. Not only do I think that CC and the CoS should NOT start taking in homeless people, I think doing that AND the current policies of California in allowing the tents to be on the streets will do nothing positive and HAS done nothing but encourage MORE homeless to settle in across the city. Before anyone asks me, “so what are YOUR solutions ?” , I ‘ll say that I do have some proposals, but this forum is not a place to have a full discussion on specific solutions to this problem. I’m just responding to what I think Mike is suggesting.
I might add that I’ve lived in CA since the 80’s and the homeless problem has gotten worse. If only one tent pops up, within days there will be three and then six and a lot more. They multiply like rabbits. I’ve seen them take up on sidewalks in front of banks and businesses and take over not only the sidewalk but the road to the point where orange cones are put up and cars have to have one lane less than before cuz that lane is closed due to homeless. The crime rates are up because of homeless too. Some homeowners who pay top dollar to live in the best of neighborhoods are now being broken into by the homeless who have moved in with their need for money to buy drugs and food with. I would say the homeless are bringing home values down, but in CA the only thing the state has going for it is the fact that real estate is overpriced and still going up. Between CA de-funding the police and homelessness growing out of control, I’d say move to CA at your own peril. And no, unfortunately I don’t have a solution to the problem.
Cindy,
My son lives in San Francisco and walks pretty much everywhere. Occasionally has to go through the Mission District where the homeless population has been increasing exponentially through the years. He tells me he tries to avoid that district as the stench of urine and feces is overwhelming. Even wearing his N-95 respirator.
He tells me the politicians have made the city into an actual mecca for homeless folks. The population is increasing as they are actually relocating to the once great city. He has shared the scene via Facetime with me on occasion.
Hey! Here’s an idea. Alcatraz Island is almost completely uninhabited. Transfer all the homeless there? It has a history of housing folks who threatened humanity. Then housing values, public health and safety, crime rates and tourism might begin to come back to “normal”. Right now, all of that is in peril. I think the Island’s tourist income loss would be a very small price to pay for the resulting benefit to the people and businesses of the once greater city.
Glenn,
I’d rather see them take up residence on El Con Hubbard Way. The cherch can help with the mental health issues and maybe give some A-Are-Cee Break sessions to improve the general tone. Perhaps a few TWTH booklets which can double as TP if reading is a problem.
Glenn, I agree with you. Some years back I was going to be near San Francisco and told my relative, hey let’s take a detour to see San Francisco and the Ghirardelli Chocolate factory and eat fish on the pier etc. He said no way will I go to San Francisco and described how bad the drugs, feces, urine and “enmest” of the are are due to homeless. The tourist trade there has really dropped because of it.
And about a year or so ago there was a reporter in San Francisco doing a story on how trashed the city now is from homeless living there. She was dressed to the nines in a skirt and suit jacket and high heels, hosiery, etc. While she was on camera a homeless person peed on her. Looked like he aimed it at her.
Cindy
PS I Love yhour Alcatraz idea.
Cyndi, remember that Alcatraz was shut down as a prison, because it was too expensive to run. If you actually wanted to put people out on Alcatraz again, you’d have to first completely rehabilitate the facility, and then staff and run it according to at least basic humane standards, providing at least minimal health and psychological services. If you worked out the full cost of that, renting rooms at the St. Francis on Union Square would start to look like an affordable alternative. Even if Alcatraz were ready to go as a federal prison, keeping people like that would still cost over $100 per day.
I point all that out just to demonstrate the quandary that any even basically humane solution is expensive – and ultimately, not entirely satisfactory to everyone. That’s much of the reason we’ve ended up with the mess we have. To bring it back to a relevant topic, the problem is exacerbated by people who, like Hubbard, claim to have easy or virtually magical solutions – but turn out not, on closer examination, to really be offering anything useful, workable or affordable.
Peacemaker, thanks for educating me and everyone else on the costs and actions needed to make Alcatraz a solution. I didn’t know all this. It sounded good in theory anyway. I guess we could do what LRH said to do to people who are 1.1 Covertly Hostile and below on the tone scale: put them in boats and get them out in the middle of the water and then blow up the boats or sink them.
Before you jump on me, that was a joke, albeit gallows humor. I think Hubbard might have been serious about that being a solution to the 1.1 and lower tone level people.
PeaceMaker – What an excellent no-nonsense and fact based post. Thank you.
Cindy – I almost missed reading PeaceMaker’s post. It was your post that made me come to my senses and read it. Thank you.
If the federal government can divert billions of dollars to “accommodate” a flood of poor migrants coming across the southern border it could likewise divert billions of dollars to deal with the homeless situation but there is no political will to do so.
It might eventually end up as a National Emergency with the necessity to build encampments outside of the city limits which would at least be better than the shanty towns in impoverished countries.
One might consider the “rights” of a homeless person to camp out in your front yard or place of business versus your rights as a citizen to have them not do so. A harsh reality.
Richard, In CA when they try to move homeless to shelters or even hotels (a hotel not far from me was converted to house homeless, and building tiny homes for them, many homeless refuse to go to the shelter, hotel, and tiny home. Why? Because they would have to follow the rules if they did and they don’t want to have to give up drugs and other things. Also some are afraid to go to shelters for fear their belongings will be stolen by other homeless and/or they’d suffer a violent attack from another homeless. It’s a real problem. But in my humble opinion, when you buy a house, you then own the house as well as the land it sits on. So if we allow homeless to camp on your front lawn, then why even bother owning property? Someone else gets for free what you saved up for and spent 30 or more years paying for with your own hard earned money.
And I agree with you that we should not be spending tons of taxpayer money to pay for people thronging the border, coming over our borders illegally and then ignore our own homeless problem, some of whom are veterans who fought for our country. Let’s take care of our own before we take on illegal aliens rushing our borders.
Since the idea of “unhoused” has come up here’s a thought on that. Providing “homes” for all the “homeless” is an impossibility but providing temporary “housing” for the unhoused might gain some acceptance across the party lines of politicians and voters. It’s just terminology but it might make a difference.
In CA the are building tiny houses in certain areas for the homeless. Indoor plumbing, a kitchen , everything. But t will be a dent in the much bigger problem.
I meant to include the idea of forcibly removing the homeless or unhoused to government run encampments which obviously brings up the discussion of civil liberties but big problems require big solutions and I’ll leave it at that.
That solution may just be:”Stay the heck away from California, especially Los Angeles.” My experience in LA 45 years ago was pretty awful. I was living out of my car after commuting across the US to do the SHSBC at ASHO. Even though I’d paid for the course and did it to the best of my ability, I got NO sympathy or help getting a stable place to couch-surf for a few weeks as I found my feet. Then the S.O. recruiter twigged on my situation. Plied me with the dream of being one of the “next 100 Class 12s”, I was ‘encouraged’ to divest myself of all my worldly possessions and get flown over to Flag to start on that quest. The New Yorkers I’d dealt with a couple of years earlier were friendlier, as strange as that sounds.
I’m thinking that scn can “kill” two birds by inviting (selected) homeless to join their crew. Problem is that their existing homeless shelter & food *might* be superior to CC’s.
Interesting topic today because recently I’ve been seeing a kind of movement where it seems embarrassing for some to use the name “homeless”. Much like the name for African Americans used to be “Colored People” but no longer.
I’ve been seeing a trend lately the name should be changed – can you believe this? They are now being called, “unhoused” or “people without houses” or “people without homes”. Has anyone else seen this?
What is up with this? Why does it make some people so embarrassed to call them “homeless”? I’m being quite serious in that I’d really like to know why this movement has started to find another name that makes some people feel less guilty.
Just like the cult cannot be counted on to give any charity – although they can certainly be counted on to collect for charity, why is this change occurring and who is it that feels so guilty? They must not be very clever because they think they will feel better by changing the name without changing the condition? I’d wager that members of this cult may be included in the people who want this change. Following is a link to some story that discusses this change.
The Language Around Homelessness Is Finally Changing
https://archive.curbed.com/2020/6/11/21273455/homeless-people-definition-copy-editing
For anyone who may be wondering why I seem to be upset about this change in name, it’s because the idea that people think it will help to change the name without changing the condition is some kind of solution. I believe it’s just some kind of stupid.
Skyler23,
I agree with you.
There are other names too…..”street people, bums, park bench people, subway sleepers, from areas in NYC.
There are no answers sadly. “Welfare” sometimes pays for SRO (single room occupancies) in really low grade hotels, but at least people have a roof over their head, some heat & a bed to sleep in. Bathrooms are a premium….maybe one shared bathroom down a hallway, some in the small rundown SRO room.
These places are filled with alcohols, drug addicts, some with mental health issues & are hard to find. The “not in my backyard” scenario is in force. Many of these places have been taken over by wealthy investors who either knock the building down…or gut it & then upscale it for the wealthy.
Locally here the churches offer the homeless MEN a week’s stay & dinner & hand out donated clothing…St Vincent De Paul offers hot dinners nightly…with the pandemic it’s now a “bagged lunch”….for Women there are some shelters & “domestic violence shelters”….or if children are with the mother, help from DSS including temporary housing vouchers until “eligibility is established”.
The DIAGNOSED & “certified mentally ill” go to group homes….some walk away when they get their “day pass” & simply do not return, walking the streets & neighborhoods without their medications.
I could tell you stories about this when I worked in NYC near The Empire State Building…when Horn & Hardart were in business along with the “Automat”…….cheap food & what was wonderfully delicious coffee. A brief respite from the cold in winter or heat in summer to get shelter temporarily.
It has been said that to supply “these people” with permission to live in tents, give them food, blankets, sock, gloves, warm coats etc KEEPS them in the area” where they are NOT welcome or wanted…………………
BIG question is……what to do what to do what to do………COS sure as HELL isn’t going to offer them anything………….I don’t think the next generation will figure this one out either.
Well put Balletlady
Hello Kate & JP….Many years back we were in NYC to spend the day at museum & general nice day of shopping.
We stopped at a fast food restaurant for lunch. A woman in her 40’s wandered around asking for $$$. I told her we’d be MORE than happy to buy her a meal…she REFUSED saying “I WANT MONEY”.
Well, good luck I told her….we’re not giving anyone $$$. if you’re hungry we’ll get you a meal. After being refused by several other tables of seated people she angrily stormed off & went outside.
When we left the restaurant, there she was, surrounded by three different men “swigging a bottle of booze” out of a brown paper bag. SMH. When we’d have lunch at a fast food place or hotdog stand, I’d sometimes buy an extra small meal & hand if off to someone. They were always grateful.
Once while in NYC it was around 7 p.m & some of the stores were closing.
Across from where a few friends & I were talking…we SAW a young man remove his backpack & nice warm jacket man & proceed to sit in the doorway of a closed store.
We watched with interest while doing window shopping & to see what was going on with him…….as he removed his sneakers & socks, Put out a cup for the collection of $$$$ supposedly for his “poor little self” ….& sit there & wait. WOW…what a SCAM. After 30 to 40 minutes with NO DONATIONS…he put his socks & sneakers back on, put his jacket & backpack back on….& LEFT penniless.
As a “regular” at Horn & Hardart…..I pick up several cups of coffee to bring up to work for a few friends. We never had any spoons in the office, on occasion, since they KNEW me….they’d place a Horn & Hardart branded teaspoon along with the order to be shared amongst the three or four of us.
To THIS DAY….I have in my possession THREE Horn & Hardart BRANDED teaspoons that were overlooked & never returned.
I believe the “Statute of Limitations” on theft has run out……but I’m still looking over my shoulder.
Exactly. In England they used to call them ârough sleepersâ very recently. Sounds almost like gentrification
Skyler,
Probably as long as there has been language people have chosen a ‘word’ that best defines a ‘thing’ — in their viewpoint. Then you can add in the adjectives and adverbs to further modify the ‘word’ being used to define the ‘thing’. As you see it.
Then you move into people with an agenda and their skewing of the ‘word’ to suit their agenda, or companies selling their product, and on to the social media (public media) with their attempts to snag your attention for whatever cause.
I bought my wife a complete dvd set of the Three Stooges. She was startled to watch episodes from the late 1030s through the 1940s where Germans and Japanese were belittled. Mel Brooks made ‘fun’ of many subjects; Is probably now banned from many venues. The shifting perception of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ goes on.
Paul Hogan (Crocodile Dundee) made news recently when he posted a sign on his Venice Beach home that stated ‘THIS IS MY HOME NOT YOURS’. Santa Monica bluff got covered with homeless after Tom Haden invited then during the 1984 Olympics, and they have been there since. I’m glad CA is behind me.
As Joe wrote there are ‘solutions’ but this is not the place for discussions.
Massachusetts and New York State are also very homeless friendly. New York in particular LOVES anyone who is broke, out of work, on public assistance, mentally ill, or in any way disabled. New York is besotted with such people, can’t do enough for them, and from what I hear Massachusetts is also. Problem is it gets COLD in the Northeast. So my solution would be bi-coastal homelessness. California, Phoenix, you take’m from October thru May and then come Memorial Day Weekend they can summer in the Northeast.
I know I sound horrible. I’m sorry. I always give to the homeless.
I give something every time I pass one of them. And if they have a dog – OMG. Funny thing is these dogs of homeless people always look VERY well fed and they’re usually warmly wrapped in blankets and sleeping very peacefully. But still – I can’t stand it, especially when its cold…yes, I’m a Northeasterner.
Here’s something that Pope Francis advised with regard to giving to the homeless and I’ve been doing it ever since I read it some years ago.
Francis says, and I’m paraphrasing:
“Don’t worry that the money you give will go for drink or drugs. Give what you can and don’t think about that. But don’t just drop the money and walk on. Instead, when you give, LOOK at the person/ That’s a human there. LOOK at him or her, speak, say something. Make the person you’re giving to know that you SEE him or her. Sometimes doing that will be FAR more beneficial to the person than the money you’re giving.”
That’s what Pope Francis said. And that’s what I do now. I make sure I make eye contact with the person and make myself see the person as a person. I say, “Good luck to you.” Its hard to describe but Francis – I’m not Catholic but I love Pope Francis – Francis is right. Connecting, however momentarily this way is…nice. Heaven knows its little enough to do. These people…they’ve become invisible. Its wrong. Its just so wrong.
God knows I have no solution for the homeless problem. I honestly don’t want to live near them and step over them. I really don’t. But they ARE people, underneath there. SOMEthing has to be done for them, God knows.
And thank you for reading this conflicted rant from NIMBY yet guilt ridden Northeastern liberal Aqua đ
Nice article. Sorta highlights the problem journalists have reporting on current events; having to walk a very careful line to avoid insulting ANYone, in these days where everyone seems entitled to get upset about anything or nothing, intended or not.
If a person is believed to not have money Scientology apparently wants nothing to do with them.
BUT if they can’t contribute MONEY, they’re okay if they “donate” their lives and liberty.
Myself and a lot of other scientologists rented rooms at the Celebrity Center in the 1970’s when it was still called The Manor Hotel and undergoing renovations. Some of the old wallpaper was falling off the walls, the furniture in the rooms was old and rickety and many of the shared bathrooms were out of service but nobody cares because we were ” On Purpose”. The rent was pretty cheap.
That scn could afford to buy and renovate a hotel was an indication that scn was expanding. DM wants marble floors but Elron would probably have been satisfied with “modest” accommodations for the guests.
Not at Celebrity Centre Richard. Ronald McScientology called for OPULENT accommodations.
Only the best for celebrities!đ
This lines up with a report I received summer 2019 (pre-pandemic) from a friend concerning his Midwestern United States “ideal org” with its large âpiazzaâ type space in the front of the building. He told me of a beautiful summer night where he was at the org to attend an event (inside). With the nice weather, the catered dinner of fried chicken and other picnic-style foods was served outdoorsâessentially in the (signage) âAll Are Welcomeâ open air front space of the building. This, he explained, sits in a well-trafficked part of their downtown, including foot traffic. One would imagine, in normal circumstances, this space and the convivial atmosphere of cheerful churchgoers dining on a simple delicious summer buffet would signal an inviting atmosphere.
As my pal reports, at one point, a polite though evidently down-on-her-luck woman approached. She could see what appeared to be a relaxed setting of church folks dining, an abundance of food, and asked my friend could she have a meal with them? He stressed she was very polite. She did not smell, was not unraveled physically or emotionally. Apparently, there is a well-run homeless shelter nearby, so possibly this was a resident out for a stroll on a pleasant summer evening. In Scientology terms, we would say, âShe was out âgetting some spaceâ.â
My friend being a kind soul, and viewing the abundance of food, told her, âSure.â He went to get a plate of food for her as she calmly waited. My friend was then swiftly stopped by a uniformed Sea Org member on mission at the org, asked what he was doing (the S.O. member knew), and told my friend he could not do this. Then the S.O. member went over to the woman and gave her the type of dismissal Mike is describing, firmly advising, âThis is a private eventâ and directing her to get out and go elsewhere, that she was not welcome.
The reason my somewhat naĂŻve (still in the bubble) friend recounted this story is because he was upset and confused by this occurrence. Wouldnât any church welcome the stranger, a person demonstrating kindness and humility, courteously asking can they share in the available meal, seeing how much good food there was, which was not going to be consumed by the small group present? My friend was trying to compute the âhumanitarianâ and âSomething Can Be Done Aboutâ and âThe Way to Happinessâ precepts so often extolled. Where is the evidence the actions of group match these sentiments?
I think, too, my friend was personally insulted. At his âlevelâ of the âthe Bridge to Total Freedomâ and training, with what he has personally donated, can he not be trusted to make an ethical decision and operate on his own determinism? All he was going to do was give her a disposal plate, disposal eating utensils, a napkin, and some food. That is it. Hardly a crime, but apparently for his org leadership, these actions were off-script and had to be stopped.
Truly sad. Here, you have a simple opportunity to collide with decency, but a decision is made to forego this option and select a course instead that is dis-inclusive and rather cruel.
… but a decision is made to forego this option and select a course instead that is dis-inclusive and rather cruel.
… and incredibly stupid as well. But that fits right in with the overall policies of this cruel and greedy and stupid cult.
By acting this way to this woman, the result is they create another “Skyler” – someone who spends a huge amount of time bringing their wrongdoings to light. So often this cult shoots themselves in the foot this way.
This is a very sad story and im guessing that they didn’t even try to make a excuse to the lady. Theirs so much that could be said about that story. Its alarming why he would be told not to help her. I can think of two reasons, 1. the more senior Scientoliegist was trying to flex his muschle and show your friend who is boss, putting him in his place – putting the idea in his head that he should ask permission before deciding things / not to think for himself and 2. a fear of repeat and growing business from the lady.
If they feared that the lady would come back they could have dropped a big enough hint to deter her, they could have said something like “heres your food, fortunately we have some to spare,l. We hate wastage therefore we normally dont get more that allows us to hand out to others but today you are lucky as we have excess which is rare”. A response like that would deter her from asking again (not saying they should deter her but if they didn’t give her food because they were scared she would come back repeatedly then they could tell her indirectly this is a one off).
The story smells of greed, coldness, lack of compassion and inhumane behavior – the exact opposite of what a religion is meant to be.
scn has ALWAYS been exclusionary — only for the “able”. Why should DwarfenfĂźhrerÂŽ change that key element of the enterprise?
To @Skyler23, @Xenos, @Mark, @JereLullâVery interesting remarks and speculations around my friendâs story about the light fare served outdoors to a group of parishioners at his C of S, while an S.O. member on mission quickly shoos away a woman who asked to share the meal, appearing a bit down on her luck.
A great investigative tactic for either a journalist or a 501(c)(3) non-profit watchdog from the U.S. Internal Revenue Service would be to pose as that sort of person. Someone who is not scary, comes in daylight, is not entirely unkempt, is polite, and only making the most rudimentary DO YOU OPERATE AS A PUBLIC BENEFIT request.
To be instead swiftly discarded, that certainly conveys no public benefit here.