Th Homeless

  On 4/2/2016 at 12:56 AM, delet... said:

 

  On 4/2/2016 at 12:49 AM, sheathe said:

i might be homeless, but you know what takes away the sting? the fact that i can always count on watching mods shit post at eachother

puts a cigarette in your cup. Are you really homeless dude, you ok etc ?? You always seemed pretty withit, not that i'm saying, life happens, hrmm. is ok ?

 

i love you delet

I read this thread from beginning to end and I can't figure out what point anyone is trying to make :(

  On 4/2/2016 at 11:44 PM, Amen Warrior said:

I read this thread from beginning to end and I can't figure out what point anyone is trying to make :(

basically:

another quality troon joint hits the forum.

I live near an area where there are tons of homeless people and they become wallpaper eventually.

Tyronn Lue status in these streets .

  On 4/3/2016 at 12:26 AM, doublename said:

Tyronn Lue status in these streets .

yeah:

neocons

  On 4/3/2016 at 6:09 AM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

oh reeeealy? don't you think that's sort of how i feel when you dismiss it as a left wing bogey word without going into any detail? so i guess the massive amount of material that has been written on the issue by academics is completely baseless and fictional? have you read their work? what issues do you take with it?

most economic criticisms of neoliberalism define it terms of the theories of the likes of Hayek and Friedman (the Austrian and Chicago schools more broadly speaking), which is fine, economists are free to disagree with one another and try and predict the implications of their various competing theories. not that there's much value to any of this at the end of the day, because economics isn't a science and most economists are charlatans.

  Quote

even if you find it an oversimplification of a range of conflicting discourses, i think the term is appropriate enough to refer to the particular mindset that has dominated our political landscape over the last few decades.

this is where you're wrong, and where I was taking issue you with your use of the term. the neoliberalism as defined by economists hasn't dominated the political landscape over the last few decades, in fact politicians have been implementing policies which are diametrically opposed to neoliberalism (such as promoting unnatural growth in housing markets via government intervention, keeping interest rates low encouraging massive growth in debt, and most obviously bailing out companies rather than allowing them be liquidated). the only policy of recent years that is recognisable from a neoliberal point of view would be cutting spending to reduce debt instead of Keynesian deficit spending (and even then, the US has engaged in the latter, and the UK also engaged in quantitive easing, which is similar and also and non-neoliberal).

  Quote

the reason why those on the right think the term is lefty nonsense is because they are so entrenched in it that they are unable to view it as just their perspective on the world.

no, and I'm not 'on the right' btw, the term - as it most often used by journalists, commentators and the public on the left, is a nebulous term for blanket criticism without the need to get into specifics.

  Quote

to them the practices that construct this discourse are so intrinsic part of their nature it seems to them to be an objective fact that free markets solve all of life's problems etc and that everything can be reduced to a one dimensional way of viewing the world where literally only money is important and everything else is enabled through it. people in opposition to these views are widely aware that life cannot be reduced to such a simplistic viewpoint that ignores the complexities of nature and society. for the last few decades we have been convinced that successive short term decisions equal one comprehensive long term one. clearly this is not working out.

what you're talking about here has nothing to do with neoliberalism either, all mainstream economists believe in the free market (only a proportion of these being neoliberal). you've also got it exactly backwards with respect to neoliberalism - at least with the Austrian school, which was founded with the aim of improving on the overly simplistic prior view of economics which took no account of human action or intention. now it's debateable whether it's in any way sucessfull at doing this, but it certainly bears no resemblance to your rather childish caricature of their motives and beliefs.

  Quote

to bring up corrupt regulation is an own goal, caze. how did it get corrupt in the first place? perhaps politicians with strong financial backing from powerful groups were not doing a very good job of making sure the regulation was fair in the first place? now i can understand that this is partly the fault of members of government, but the idea of using your financial capital to tilt the tables more your way through abuse of the democratic process is entirely part of the neoliberal concept that i am referring to. simply put, nothing is immoral if it means making a profit, and when morality comes into play it is dictated entirely by how your market audience and shareholders will react to the decisions you make.

this isn't an own goal. it got corrupt because people in power are and always will be corrupt, regardless of the system of government, positions of power simply attract people who are likely to be corrupt. it's a constant battle to stop this shit, the only thing we can aim to do is make a system where it's harder for them to get away with it (and centralised socialist systems are the exact opposite of this btw). 'the idea of using your financial capital to tilt the tables more your way through abuse of the democratic process' has absolutely nothing to do with neoliberalism, this is yet another example of changing the definition to suit whatever problem you have at any given moment.

  Quote

if you really don't understand what the concept refers to then how observant have you been in regards to the interaction between business and politicians over time? don't you think we bow to them more than ever? and can you really say it is enriching society when you look at where we are at after years of this bullshit? we are dominated by the will of the wealthy. and instead of being vigilant of their self interest we welcome it and buy into the myths like the trickle down theory, which even its most intense supporters now reject as lofty and ideologically flawed?

well I do understand what the concept refers to, unlike you it seems. and if you really think that society today bows to power and money more than it ever has then you really have a very weak grasp of history, if anything it's the opposite. the vast majority of human history has been the story of a tiny percentage of humanity controlling nearly every aspect of the rest of humanity's lives. there has never been a time in human history where such a large percentage of people have had control of their own destinies to the same extent as we do today. it's amazing how easily we take for granted what has been achieved in the west over the last few hundred years, of which the last 30 years has been the apex.

people would think more clearly about issues if the 'left/right' distinctions were removed

I have met too many people who fit so squarely into 'left/right' stereotypes that I think they uncritically subscribe to the party line

Also, I think some ideas/beliefs are erroneously attributed to the left or the right simply because of who tends to hold them, not because of their actual political/philosophical basis

(For instance, if you were to apply Classical Liberalism values to modern issues, you would not get a Stereotypical Liberal...in fact, Stereotypical Liberals would be have diametrically-opposite ideas/values on a handful of issues)

when you're homeless + not sprangin for change you spend a lot of time trying to find a comfortable//quiet spot to sleep outdoors in the city

also trying to get enough calories, until you get good at dumpster diving

also where to go when it's raining

also how to stay clean once you're dirty enough that places start kicking you out

in the summer you're dirty & you smell bad all the time

fall feels like impending doom

if you can take care of basic survival needs you get to spend most of your day wandering the streets pondering important questions (where will i make trax today? how can i minimize my default level of stink for when i see that girl tomorrow?), but strangers still see you & assume you're thinking nothing but homeless person thoughts

sometimes old men just come up to you in the street & ask you to give them a blow job

At which point you take their money and run right? Cause they're old so they can't catch you.

Cryptowen what made you want to be homeless and was it worth it?

  On 4/1/2016 at 1:37 AM, Bechuga said:

 

  On 3/31/2016 at 4:25 PM, WeAreOceans said:

 

  On 3/31/2016 at 3:06 PM, Bechuga said:

The topic is an excellent and valid one, especially with the terrible prices involved in renting and buying a house. Any hate I have is for the terrible spelling in the OP, which ruins a good topic with a post that seems incredibly insincere. Serious topic, total lack of respect for getting it across sincerely. If I have a serious message I wanted to get across and wanted people to respond in kind, I wouldn't do it using txt spk.

 

After having gone through a whole load of shit to buy my modest flat, I can only imagine the horror a family would be going through to manage either 1) monthly rents 2) saving up to pay for a deposit on top of that, which is the single greatest problem with the current market. If deposits weren't so ridiculous and buy-to-let porfolio owners rewarded so fantastically perhaps the homelessness rate and housing situation wouldn't be the total bag of shit it is. (In England, at least)

 

Have no idea what to say about people who choose to live homeless, especially if they have money. Sort of feels like scraping food onto the floor because you're not hungry, which seems a waste when so many are going hungry. But everyone's life is different so I couldn't see why such a move would make sense.

 

I'll be glad when I can finally afford a deposit, but I have the privilege of a beefy payslip and no overhead from kids to do so, not a luxury everyone has. Being free of Buy to Let ghouls will make a nice change. My current landlord is selling the place to another investor - one person came round to look at the place when I was in. Didn't even preface some small talk or pleasantries before asking me if I was employed. Been paying the rent for six months on time, but gotta check those fat cashcow titties, huh?

 

Anyway yeah, jokes aside, Manchester has a huge homeless issue. Rough sleepers everywhere in the city centre and I don't know what the council is doing about it - I don't even know what the most effective solution is. Were council houses any good at helping people find their feet? Either way, no solution means the vacuum of hope is filled with dangerous cretins like Wesley Hall.

 

 

Me too: I had no major outgoings which allowed me to put a decent amount away each month. I can only sympathise for those stuck in high rent situations with no chance of putting a penny away.

 

As for squatting, many councils are starting to open up abandoned buildings as a way for the homeless to have somewhere to have a roof over their heads. The highest profile case of it recently was Gary Neville allowing squatters to remain in place until his company began renovating it. Not permanent, but it's a start and a help: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/18/former-manchester-united-star-occupiers-of-hotel-winter-ryan-giggs-gary-neville

 

It was a nice gesture. Problem with the place was it was headed by the aforementioned Wesley Hall. He started becoming very paranoid, accusing new people arriving of being media or government plants, and having violent outbursts. Last I heard he was escorted from the property by private security and told not to come back. A lot of volunteers and activists have called him out as a real detriment to the homeless cause in the North West of England. There have been a few other squats in the city, including one next door to me, but they usually get evicted with a month or two. Now we have a homeless camp near Piccadilly station... it's an ugly situation, and not one more apartment buildings for buy-to-let investors is going to solve.

too loo loo, troon loo loo tooo loo loo loo loo loo loo loo loo loo troon loo loo, too loo loo troo loo loo loo loo loo loo loo loo loo palsimon

capitalism creates that terrible envy that plagues many people. a source of major unhappiness in society

  On 4/5/2016 at 4:55 AM, marf said:

capitalism creates that terrible envy that plagues many people. a source of major unhappiness in society

The studies on money and happiness are pretty interesting

The TL;DR is that money makes people happy only insofar as it alleviates financial stress (e.g. bills, debt)

But beyond that? Nope

Money does not make you happy

  On 4/4/2016 at 5:23 AM, Candiru said:

Cryptowen what made you want to be homeless and was it worth it?

i felt unhappy & totally unfulfilled by comfort//security, and the future looked like an endless cycle of maintaining comfort//security until death

i felt like i learned more//experienced more//felt more in 2015 than in the previous 10 years combined. Also time slowed down, it essentially felt like living a whole decade (not having money was only a small part of this, though). Only real regret was the loss of control my lifestyle resulted in - I definitely felt like there were people who took advantage of the extreme trust I decided to put in everyone

Respect, few things will give u a better insight into your own psyche & the human condition. There are predators aplenty among the human race, u must've pushed your luck a few times?

The local council where my Ma lives have tried implementing a ban on homeless folks sleeping rough.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/25/homeless-people-newport-angry-council-ban-rough-sleeping

Given how many people this covers and the spectrum of mental health issues involved words just fail sometimes....so many places around London have adjusted to those soft spikes in recent years too. Makes u wonder.

  On 4/5/2016 at 10:43 PM, cwmbrancity said:

There are predators aplenty among the human race, u must've pushed your luck a few times?

interest in my genitals went way up, which was more of a mixed blessing than i initially would have assumed

the way i got judged by some people started to weigh on me after a while. like one time in july i'm digging cans out of the trash & this guy starts giving me shit. "oh it's great that you can play with cans all day, some of us have to work real jobs". at that point i was midway through my third 14 hour day collecting cans, arms were covered in weird black goo, and i'd make about $4 in a good hour.

i generally avoided "real" homeless people. the fact that there were so many of them, trapped in this lifestyle because it was all they'd known for years, had drug addiction or mental illness etc etc - that was too much for me. if i thought about the reality of it for very long my entire worldview started to implode

negative comments really stick. i still cant shake this guy saying to me "what would you know what a semicolon means, you work at kinkos." ten + years ago

  On 4/6/2016 at 9:00 PM, marf said:

negative comments really stick. i still cant shake this guy saying to me "what would you know what a semicolon means, you work at kinkos." ten + years ago

did you tell him you thought it meant he was only half an asshole?

  On 4/1/2016 at 7:20 PM, caze said:

 

  On 4/1/2016 at 6:24 PM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

? i never said that nor meant to imply it. i'm not anti capitalist.

 

neoliberal economic ideologies on the other hand...

 

actually the major problems that have occurred within capitalism in the last decade or so have had nothing to do with neoliberal policies (e.g. bailing out of banks is not even slightly neo - or any other kind of - liberal), and nor were the market crises that preceded those decisions (corrupt regulation and cack handed government intervention was mostly to blame). of course, 'neoliberal' has become little more than a left-wing bogey word, so maybe you don't actually know about the specifics and precise definitions of what you're complaining about.

 

neoliberal expands the financial framework and modus operandi where is least needed, for no other logical reason than putting price on just about evey possible thing you can imagine. You don't have to be a genius to see what comes next if you already have a system that supports corrupt regulation by design.

  On 4/7/2016 at 1:45 AM, Godwin Austen said:

neoliberal expands the financial framework and modus operandi where is least needed, for no other logical reason than putting price on just about evey possible thing you can imagine. You don't have to be a genius to see what comes next if you already have a system that supports corrupt regulation by design.

if you don't have to be a genius to see it then it's pretty weird that pretty much nobody predicted it (though maybe you need to be more precise about what 'it' is here). in fact the number of people who predicted it happening was so small that it's far more likely they were right by accident, rather than because of any deep understanding of they have of the world. the predictions of an economist, no matter whether they're austrians, keynesians, or marxists - or any other tribe, are about as much use as a chocolate teapot. it's precisely this failing, and the failure of most everyone to understand it, that leads to these kinds of problems in the first place. neoliberalism doesn't entail corrupt regulation by design at all either, and I'm not saying that current political structures are uncorrupt, just that they're not neoliberal by any proper definition of the term.

  On 4/8/2016 at 6:01 PM, caze said:

 

  On 4/7/2016 at 1:45 AM, Godwin Austen said:

neoliberal expands the financial framework and modus operandi where is least needed, for no other logical reason than putting price on just about evey possible thing you can imagine. You don't have to be a genius to see what comes next if you already have a system that supports corrupt regulation by design.

 

if you don't have to be a genius to see it then it's pretty weird that pretty much nobody predicted it (though maybe you need to be more precise about what 'it' is here). in fact the number of people who predicted it happening was so small that it's far more likely they were right by accident, rather than because of any deep understanding of they have of the world. the predictions of an economist, no matter whether they're austrians, keynesians, or marxists - or any other tribe, are about as much use as a chocolate teapot. it's precisely this failing, and the failure of most everyone to understand it, that leads to these kinds of problems in the first place. neoliberalism doesn't entail corrupt regulation by design at all either, and I'm not saying that current political structures are uncorrupt, just that they're not neoliberal by any proper definition of the term.

 

What do you mean nobody predicted it? I'm no finance/economy professional, but I still know of many analysts and whatnots expressing their opinions on this matter through articles, interviews, memos... There's been media ping-pong among all of the proponents and opponents for the last ten years. And I'm not even particularly interested on the subject. Your argument that neoliberalism doesn't entail corrupt regulation by design is the same as 'guns don't kill people'. Of course it doesn't, but if you fail to see that in order to push any interest towards realisation, this interest will not be measured on its qualities, say being a well-integrated solution, but solely on the potency of the only 'qualitative' trait in neoliberalism which is, ironically, quantitative. Which means 'the one with more money and own people in key positions blocking all other options (those people were of-course already meticulously placed there in order to keep your scheme going by the very same measures). This is where, among many others, I see how capitalism already corrupts its own regulating mechanisms in order to survive.