ECCOnoob Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Good. I used to do homeless and social welfare work and worked on files for "homeless" people who had actually places of their own to say but refused to go. Its about time funding was cut. Perhaps it could be transferred over to learning disability accommodation. That is a real need. You know, those people who have no choice at all. All this mass hysteria. We are not third world. Some of you lot need to open your eyes and see REAL homelessness. As someone else has rightly pointed out - most of those people camping outside the Cathedral are middle class bods with good jobs and a nice house. They have no idea. Those in GENUINE need will always get a place to stay. Those that dont and have alternatives they refuse to use, quite rightly shouldn't. Oh and for the record, unemployment doesnt mean homelessness. That's just a rediculous suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavegirl Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Good. I used to do homeless and social welfare work and worked on files for "homeless" people who had actually places of their own to say but refused to go. Its about time funding was cut. Perhaps it could be transferred over to learning disability accommodation. That is a real need. You know, those people who have no choice at all. All this mass hysteria. We are not third world. Some of you lot need to open your eyes and see REAL homelessness. As someone else has rightly pointed out - most of those people camping outside the are middle class bods with good jobs and a nice house. They have no idea. Those in GENUINE need will always get a place to stay. Those that dont and have alternatives they refuse to use, quite rightly shouldn't. Oh and for the record, unemployment doesnt mean homelessness. That's just a rediculous suggestion. I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean by disparaging 'non-homeless homeless people who refuse to use their homes'. It seems rather insensitive, coming from an ex-welfare worker, to suggest that offering a home to someone makes them capable of managing the responsibilites involved. Surely if you became aware that someone was struggling to stay in their home and was back on the streets it was your job to help them rather than start accusing them of being non-genuine cases? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Good. I used to do homeless and social welfare work and worked on files for "homeless" people who had actually places of their own to say but refused to go. I know you are right for some but that "some" are a very small minority. There are many genuine cases that are no longer being offered any help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomdido Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I'm considering buying a bit of land and putting a yurt on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shogun Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Yes I could tomorrow no problem I have nice big touring caravan, if it gets any worse this year I would be tempted to sell up and go on the road and live like a pikey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean by disparaging 'non-homeless homeless people who refuse to use their homes'. It seems rather insensitive, coming from an ex-welfare worker, to suggest that offering a home to someone makes them capable of managing the responsibilites involved. Surely if you became aware that someone was struggling to stay in their home and was back on the streets it was your job to help them rather than start accusing them of being non-genuine cases? I refer to the ones who have access to hostel and B&B accommodation but refuse to stay there becuase "its not good enough", the ones who have the option of staying with family, friends or parents but dont want to "inconvenience" them, the underage girls who become pregant and suddenly lose the ability to live at home with parents, the ones who make themselves intentionally homeless through anti-social behaviour or breaches in their tenancy agreement, the ones who make themselves intentionally homeless in order to try and obtain extra priority awards and relocate...... I am not saying that ALL homeless cases are like this. As I said earlier - those in genuine need get the help they require. I have no problem with that. BUT that does not change my opinion that it is very easy for people to use the word "homeless" and try to obtain something out of it. It is already a word overused in the media. When you read between the lines, it is not always what it seems and can distort a situation. The fact is that when a normal sensible person becomes unemployed the first thing you do is make an contingency for it. Deferred or lowered rent /mortgage payments, payment protection or other insurances, financial assistance through housing and council tax benefit etc. If still no replacement job arises further steps of selling or moving house to something more affordable or fully paid for with benefit. If the situation still deteriorates then the council will intervene and provide the appropriate priority or temporary emergency accommodation. All these steps will be travelled through before anyone becomes "street homeless". In that time an average person should have found some form of alternative work - of course not necessarilly the same role or salary but that wouldn't matter by that stage. Earning any wage would be the new priority. I still do not see why there would be such a grave situation between losing your job and becoming street homeless and I still stand that the OP is being rather melodramatic and resorting to be a traveller is a rediculous thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I refer to the ones who have access to hostel and B&B accommodation but refuse to stay there becuase "its not good enough", the ones who have the option of staying with family, friends or parents but dont want to "inconvenience" them, the underage girls who become pregant and suddenly lose the ability to live at home with parents, the ones who make themselves intentionally homeless through anti-social behaviour or breaches in their tenancy agreement, the ones who make themselves intentionally homeless in order to try and obtain extra priority awards and relocate...... I am not saying that ALL homeless cases are like this. As I said earlier - those in genuine need get the help they require. I have no problem with that. BUT that does not change my opinion that it is very easy for people to use the word "homeless" and try to obtain something out of it. It is already a word overused in the media. When you read between the lines, it is not always what it seems and can distort a situation. The fact is that when a normal sensible person becomes unemployed the first thing you do is make an contingency for it. Deferred or lowered rent /mortgage payments, payment protection or other insurances, financial assistance through housing and council tax benefit etc. If still no replacement job arises further steps of selling or moving house to something more affordable or fully paid for with benefit. If the situation still deteriorates then the council will intervene and provide the appropriate priority or temporary emergency accommodation. All these steps will be travelled through before anyone becomes "street homeless". In that time an average person should have found some form of alternative work - of course not necessarilly the same role or salary but that wouldn't matter by that stage. Earning any wage would be the new priority. I still do not see why there would be such a grave situation between losing your job and becoming street homeless and I still stand that the OP is being rather melodramatic and resorting to be a traveller is a rediculous thought. I dont think the careers officer did right to steer you to a job as a housing officer:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 I dont think the careers officer did right to steer you to a job as a housing officer:hihi: Me neither; he sounds like a walking empathy vacuum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 Good job I never was one then. There are plenty of other jobs that cross the same types of work. I have plenty of empathy for those in need. I have worked in social welfare, legal aid and volunteer hours of my time each week being a Managing Director of a Charity. Dont assume anything about me. I tell you what I dont have time for though is people who dont acknowledge their own problems, refuse to help themselves or help offered, are unwilling to work or earn something, refuse to put up wth a little inconvenience, refuse to adapt their lifestyles when necessary, constantly blame others, or always are seeking constant short cuts through life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 5, 2012 Share Posted January 5, 2012 And to answer the OP, I quite fancy it actually. But I reckon it's a game best played while young. I'm too settled and fond of home these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.