- Messages
- 163
- Reactions
- 314
2 tape measures and 2 razor knives? You are gonna have to go back to the other thread. Four is two and two is none now. Sorry, thieves suck.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah, that is awful and a disgrace, but says absolutely nothing about the success or failure of a program with only 120 homeless young people in it
Not if you smoke the pills instead of eat them...I'm usually a pretty compassionate guy, but it's people like those unnamed thieves that makes me actually a little happy that fentanyl has hit the drug scene so hard in Portland: way easier to misjudge a dose and take oneself out of the picture with fentanyl than it is with straight heroin...
I dunno Vinnie. It's awfully hard to say. It's sort of a "self-reported" success. Heck, if someone was giving me dough, I'd report that program as successful myself. Couple that with the government's penchant for telling us how great they are doing so they can keep their jobs...Yeah, that is awful and a disgrace, but says absolutely nothing about the success or failure of a program with only 120 homeless young people in it
Fair point, and I give that more credence than the other arguments put forth so farI dunno Vinnie. It's awfully hard to say. It's sort of a "self-reported" success. Heck, if someone was giving me dough, I'd report that program as successful myself. Couple that with the government's penchant for telling us how great they are doing so they can keep their jobs...
120 in a program is less than 2% of the identified homeless population in Portland. Hardly a success, but then again what do I know.I dunno Vinnie. It's awfully hard to say. It's sort of a "self-reported" success. Heck, if someone was giving me dough, I'd report that program as successful myself. Couple that with the government's penchant for telling us how great they are doing so they can keep their jobs...
Definitely a small "sample". Unfortunately, when declaring "success", the government all too often doesn't have a "return on investment" mentality. If they spent $120 million on the program and most of the folks eventually became housed, the government would declare victory. Only in America.120 in a program is less than 2% of the identified homeless population in Portland. Hardly a success, but then again what do I know.
Nobody said the program at this time was a solution to all of the homeless in Portland. If you have to go out of your way to show it "failed" by how it didn't help people not participating in it seems like grasping at straws120 in a program is less than 2% of the identified homeless population in Portland. Hardly a success, but then again what do I know.
It is the government's responsibility and duty to monitor the success of their programs and provide supported facts and data to the tax payers. It is not the responsibility of the tax payers who are funding the program.Yes. What (if any) actual evidence do you have to backup your position that the program has failed?
Without having all the numbers it's hard to say if it's a good fiscal return on investment. Homelessness and the associated crime and all cost cities big bucks. It might be that getting them back on their feet has a long term financial benefit for the city. Remember, this is 18 to 24 year olds that are by virtue of their age 'newly homeless' Not the career homeless that are most visible driving in the cityDefinitely a small "sample". Unfortunately, when declaring "success", the government all too often doesn't have a "return on investment" mentality. If they spent $120 million on the program and most of the folks eventually became housed, the government would declare victory. Only in America.
The program is set to run for another year or so. And who said they aren't monitoring the effectiveness of the program?It is the government's responsibility and duty to monitor the success of their programs and provide supported facts and data to the tax payers. It is not the responsibility of the tax payers who are funding the program.
I would like for the program to work, however seeing how our incompetent elected officials have practically destroyed Portland with the their polices, I have little faith in anything they do.
A few talk show people here refer to it as the "Homeless Industrial Complex" just for that reason. NGO's set up shop here to "assist" and what they assist in is making HUGE piles of cash vanish. A lot of this money is of course funneled to the campaigns of the law makers who are pumping money into them. Quite the scam they have but can't blame them. The people here keep supporting it.Those that invest in the homeless, get more of it. It should be called the homeless industry.
It IS an industry. Homeless are now useful idiots. Local governments are cashing in on the new found money stream and won't dare try to actually solve the issue. Would someone like to portray CA as a successful model? They can't account for 24 Billion dollars spent on the homeless. San Fran is such a lost cause the Mayor is proposing a curfew....on businesses! Some areas in CA are building apartments for the homeless at a million dollars per unit, lol. But, hey, the homeless business is good as long as people are happy to fund it.Those that invest in the homeless, get more of it. It should be called the homeless industry.
I agree with this. I just think the government does a poor job of tracking, and they do so without an accounting mindset. Then there's the estimation and spin. "The government estimates gun violence negatively impacts Americans to the tune of $500 BAZILLION dollars." versus "The government estimates government giveaway efforts positively impact Americans to the tune of $500 BAZILLION dollars." *Without having all the numbers it's hard to say if it's a good fiscal return on investment. Homelessness and the associated crime and all cost cities big bucks. It might be that getting them back on their feet has a long term financial benefit for the city. Remember, this is 18 to 24 year olds that are by virtue of their age 'newly homeless' Not the career homeless that are most visible driving in the city
True, Gov is the only work you can fail time and again and still get a promotion.They can't account for 24 Billion dollars spent on the homeless.