Art Bell

[onan]

Your post did not address the original topic of problems with homelessness and mental illness. I understood the numbers you presented. I didn't understand what you meant by corporate welfare.

I am not a fan of ExIm.

People throw around the term corporate welfare, and I never know where they are coming from or what they mean.

My post was less to a specific point of mental illness. But the statement of fluidity with conditions are similar. In many cases, once a person with a psychotic disorder is properly medicated they can go on to live a life that is quite normal. Does that sound like someone that needs to be placed in what amounts to a prison? The same with homelessness, many that are homeless become caught in a catastrophic spiral. If there is no intervention then there is not likely to be a resolution.

What is funny about housing the mentally ill that do not respond to treatment, is that it would become another prison system. And that costs a shit ton more than those people being in the community. I don't think ethically living in the community for many is right. But republican legislation has been the bastion for breaking down long term facilities.

[Inglorious Bitch]

Please define corporate welfare.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/09/report-shows-oil-industry-benefits-5-3-trillion-subsidies-annually.html

Report Shows The Oil Industry Benefits From $5.3 Trillion in Subsidies Annually

Most Americans should know by now that Republicans despise ‘entitlements’ that they errantly consider is anything Americans receive; even if it is theirs to begin with. They hate the idea of retired Americans receiving their Social Security and Medicare after paying into them their entire working lives, and they hate Americans working at slave-wage jobs receiving nutrition assistance because they earn too little to survive. What they do not hate, and indeed fight ferociously for, are taxpayer-funded entitlements that go to corporations in the form of tax loopholes and particularly entitlements for the oil industry in the form of subsidies.

According to the oil industry, the very idea of ending billions-of-dollars in taxpayer subsidies for the profitable industry is un-American; a position that Republicans embrace with religious passion. However, it is not just Republicans that believe the oil industry deserves to be paid for being a highly-profitable business; the world’s governments are handing outlandish amounts of the population’s money to the industry that is driving the Earth’s climate catastrophe.

In a new and disturbing report from researchers at the International Monetary Fund, the world’s governments are providing subsidies to the highly profitable oil industry to the tune of an astonishing $5.3 trillion in benefits per year.  Another way of looking at just how much the world pays the oil industry that bears responsibility for decimating the Earth’s environment; imagine they receive $10 million per minute. That is $10 million every minute, every day, of every month, of every year. Those mind-boggling entitlements have grown over the past couple of decades and are increasing every year.

What that also means is that every minute the world’s population is paying $10 million to help the fossil fuel industry pump climate-changing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. All the while, in America Republicans are either denying that the Earth’s climate is warming, or debating whether global warming is caused by man’s propensity to pump carbon emissions into the atmosphere. If that is not bad enough, Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to preserve America’s billions in oil industry subsidies while crusading to abolish any and all environmental regulations and eliminate efforts to find new and less costly clean energy alternatives. It is true the world’s population will continue depending on fossil fuels for their energy needs long into the future, but that does not mean seeking and developing existing clean and renewable energy sources needs to be put off; particularly when the intent is to create more wealth for the oil industry.

more at site

[GravitySucks]

My post was less to a specific point of mental illness. But the statement of fluidity with conditions are similar. In many cases, once a person with a psychotic disorder is properly medicated they can go on to live a life that is quite normal. Does that sound like someone that needs to be placed in what amounts to a prison? The same with homelessness, many that are homeless become caught in a catastrophic spiral. If there is no intervention then there is not likely to be a resolution.

What is funny about housing the mentally ill that do not respond to treatment, would become another prison system. And that costs a shit ton more than those people being in the community. I don't think ethically living in the community for many is right. But republican legislation has been the bastion for breaking down long term facilities.

You have much more experience than I working with the mentally ill. It has been my experience working with the homeless (albeit limited) is that it is often alcohol, drug, or mental illness related. It seems like you can't even get them in a shelter unless the weather is absolutely terrible. A couple of days ago, I asked you if you had any ideas, and I don't think I saw an answer.

This is a serious question... If you were king for a day, how would you fix it for the majority?

I know no single solution will cover 100%, but if you could do any one or two or three things to address the majority, what would be the right thing to do?

Set politics aside... I am genuinely interested in knowing what could or should be done.

[onan]

You have much more experience than I working with the mentally ill. It has been my experience working with the homeless (albeit limited) is that it is often alcohol, drug, or mental illness related. It seems like you can't even get them in a shelter unless the weather is absolutely terrible. A couple of days ago, I asked you if you had any ideas, and I don't think I saw an answer.

This is a serious question... If you were king for a day, how would you fix it for the majority?

I know no single solution will cover 100%, but if you could do any one or two or three things to address the majority, what would be the right thing to do?

Set politics aside... I am genuinely interested in knowing what could or should be done.

For more than three decades, people with more training, education, and insight have been struggling with that very problem. It is quite complicated. At the community level, resources are often no where to be found. Housing is often unavailable. Waiting lists can be more than a two year wait. Shelters, as you mention are in short supply. There are always more in need than shelter available. Those that do offer housing, are often the same thing as slum lords. I have seen homes that have bare wires coming out of sockets. I have seen holes in exterior walls larger than a foot in diameter. I have seen homes that are fire hazards rented to people at 500 dollars for one room and shared facilities. I have also seen them burned to the ground. When someone with a safe and clean home has an opening there are so many applicants that it is almost impossible to figure out who would be the best fit.

People with persistent severe mental illness that do not respond to medication and often make choices that work against themselves. No one can force a person to take medications, unless they are in a safe environment and the doctor has written an order to force medications. That sounds fine, except the risk of injury to staff and the patient often exceeds the benefit of the medication.
Should a person be forced to take medications, mostly I think so. But I am in the minority with that position. I am in the minority because many mental health professionals do not have any experience outside of the classroom. But because they are not usually on "the front lines", they continue to believe civil rights trumps everything.

In a perfect world where I was king, I would fence off half of some southern state that gets little winter. Build shelters and stock food for those living there. However, I am quite sure it would become some version of Lord of the Flies.

Truth is there isn't an answer that will fix the problem. Perhaps that is a conceit that is too expensive to hold onto.

[Lilith]

My post was less to a specific point of mental illness. But the statement of fluidity with conditions are similar. In many cases, once a person with a psychotic disorder is properly medicated they can go on to live a life that is quite normal. Does that sound like someone that needs to be placed in what amounts to a prison? The same with homelessness, many that are homeless become caught in a catastrophic spiral. If there is no intervention then there is not likely to be a resolution.

What is funny about housing the mentally ill that do not respond to treatment, is that it would become another prison system. And that costs a shit ton more than those people being in the community. I don't think ethically living in the community for many is right. But republican legislation has been the bastion for breaking down long term facilities.

I wish for more people like you in the world onan.  Most people don't understand until it happens to them or theirs.  Often the problem is the institution, and/or  the type of "computer like" training those working in them receive.  The medical profession used to be a calling.  I get the impression that for you, it still is.  Most of those in the medical profession these days just see it as "a paycheck" IMO.

[akwilly]

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/09/report-shows-oil-industry-benefits-5-3-trillion-subsidies-annually.html

Report Shows The Oil Industry Benefits From $5.3 Trillion in Subsidies Annually

Most Americans should know by now that Republicans despise ‘entitlements’ that they errantly consider is anything Americans receive; even if it is theirs to begin with. They hate the idea of retired Americans receiving their Social Security and Medicare after paying into them their entire working lives, and they hate Americans working at slave-wage jobs receiving nutrition assistance because they earn too little to survive. What they do not hate, and indeed fight ferociously for, are taxpayer-funded entitlements that go to corporations in the form of tax loopholes and particularly entitlements for the oil industry in the form of subsidies.

According to the oil industry, the very idea of ending billions-of-dollars in taxpayer subsidies for the profitable industry is un-American; a position that Republicans embrace with religious passion. However, it is not just Republicans that believe the oil industry deserves to be paid for being a highly-profitable business; the world’s governments are handing outlandish amounts of the population’s money to the industry that is driving the Earth’s climate catastrophe.

In a new and disturbing report from researchers at the International Monetary Fund, the world’s governments are providing subsidies to the highly profitable oil industry to the tune of an astonishing $5.3 trillion in benefits per year.  Another way of looking at just how much the world pays the oil industry that bears responsibility for decimating the Earth’s environment; imagine they receive $10 million per minute. That is $10 million every minute, every day, of every month, of every year. Those mind-boggling entitlements have grown over the past couple of decades and are increasing every year.

What that also means is that every minute the world’s population is paying $10 million to help the fossil fuel industry pump climate-changing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. All the while, in America Republicans are either denying that the Earth’s climate is warming, or debating whether global warming is caused by man’s propensity to pump carbon emissions into the atmosphere. If that is not bad enough, Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to preserve America’s billions in oil industry subsidies while crusading to abolish any and all environmental regulations and eliminate efforts to find new and less costly clean energy alternatives. It is true the world’s population will continue depending on fossil fuels for their energy needs long into the future, but that does not mean seeking and developing existing clean and renewable energy sources needs to be put off; particularly when the intent is to create more wealth for the oil industry.

more at site

i would assume that the amount of subsidies will growvas cars get more fuel efficient.

[Jackstar]

Should a person be forced to take medications, mostly I think so. But I am in the minority with that position.

[GravitySucks]

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/09/report-shows-oil-industry-benefits-5-3-trillion-subsidies-annually.html

Report Shows The Oil Industry Benefits From $5.3 Trillion in Subsidies Annually

Way too many agendas in that article to try and address them all. They didn't provide the link to the report, so I don't know how they came up with a $5.3 Trillion number by all the world's governments. I will just talk about the graphic below that was in the article.

From all the numbers I have seen, oil companies average between 6 & 7% profit margin. If Apple or Google fell to 6% the CEOs would be fired.

The question is, where does that profit go.  It goes to dividends to shareholders. Yes, there are some billionaires and millionaires that are shareholders. But do you know who else is?  Virtually anyone that has a 401(k), IRA or Pension fund that invests in mutual funds. Virtually all retirement funds that are not a federal pension. Even most state and city pensions are invested in mutual funds.

Oil companies don't sell any more oil than there is a demand for. And they pay out all of their profits to their shareholders.

Just think about that for a minute.

My best advice for people that complain about the oil companies, is to pick one,buy 100 shares of that company and then only buy gas from a gas station that belongs to that company. Don't seek out the cheapest pump price, buy from the company you hold a vested interest in. You will be helping yourself earn dividends and you will be hoping that company keeps making a profit.  If you do that, I would suggest that you would view the situation a bit differently.

[PB the Deplorable]

It isn't all negative reports, contrary to your world view. I have explained this to you before. You however refuse to have any more depth to your opinion. It is all just a scam to take your dollars. I never see you bitch about the corporate welfare. I guess in your world we should just shoot them and be done with it.


    SNAP (formerly food stamps) lifted about 4.7 million people above the SPM poverty line (about $25,460 for a typical renter family of four).

    Supplemental Security Income, which assists aged and disabled individuals, lifted about 3.8 million people out of poverty.

    Rent subsidies lifted about 2.8 million people out of poverty.

    Unemployment insurance lifted about 0.8 million people out of poverty.

Those stats are from 2014.

Your perception is that people getting aid are just the same ne'er do wells, over and over again. That isn't reality. You and I have been down this road before, your position never changes. Even when presented with facts to the contrary.

I don't think anyone but the lobbyists and career politicians favor corporate welfare, so I didn't think there was any need to debate it.  Corporate taxes should be cut, but across the board not special deals by industry for campaign contributions.  Besides, that really wasn't the subject, I was just answering your questions

The mentally ill homeless that could be living normal lives but are living on the streets because they don't take care of themselves, yes if that's the case they need to be institutionalized.  Ifs and maybes aren't helping them.

As far as the rest, the way these programs are set up and administered now we sure aren't getting what we pay for, they are generating more problems than they are curing.  What's wrong with offering a detailed proposal to fix all of this once and for all, and get us on the right path - what we're doing isn't working, whether you think it is or not.

[Value Of Pi]

It isn't all negative reports, contrary to your world view. I have explained this to you before. You however refuse to have any more depth to your opinion. It is all just a scam to take your dollars. I never see you bitch about the corporate welfare. I guess in your world we should just shoot them and be done with it.


    SNAP (formerly food stamps) lifted about 4.7 million people above the SPM poverty line (about $25,460 for a typical renter family of four).

    Supplemental Security Income, which assists aged and disabled individuals, lifted about 3.8 million people out of poverty.

    Rent subsidies lifted about 2.8 million people out of poverty.

    Unemployment insurance lifted about 0.8 million people out of poverty.

Those stats are from 2014.

Your perception is that people getting aid are just the same ne'er do wells, over and over again. That isn't reality. You and I have been down this road before, your position never changes. Even when presented with facts to the contrary.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't mental hospitals mainly defunded and closed on the Reagan administration's initiative. I don't know that the ACLU is mainly responsible for this problem, as PB alleges.

Next step, don't fund outpatient care, either. So, more homelessness in the U.S.

[GravitySucks]

For more than three decades, people with more training, education, and insight have been struggling with that very problem. It is quite complicated. At the community level, resources are often no where to be found. Housing is often unavailable. Waiting lists can be more than a two year wait. Shelters, as you mention are in short supply. There are always more in need than shelter available. Those that do offer housing, are often the same thing as slum lords. I have seen homes that have bare wires coming out of sockets. I have seen holes in exterior walls larger than a foot in diameter. I have seen homes that are fire hazards rented to people at 500 dollars for one room and shared facilities. I have also seen them burned to the ground. When someone with a safe and clean home has an opening there are so many applicants that it is almost impossible to figure out who would be the best fit.

People with persistent severe mental illness that do not respond to medication and often make choices that work against themselves. No one can force a person to take medications, unless they are in a safe environment and the doctor has written an order to force medications. That sounds fine, except the risk of injury to staff and the patient often exceeds the benefit of the medication.
Should a person be forced to take medications, mostly I think so. But I am in the minority with that position. I am in the minority because many mental health professionals do not have any experience outside of the classroom. But because they are not usually on "the front lines", they continue to believe civil rights trumps everything.

In a perfect world where I was king, I would fence off half of some southern state that gets little winter. Build shelters and stock food for those living there. However, I am quite sure it would become some version of Lord of the Flies.

Truth is there isn't an answer that will fix the problem. Perhaps that is a conceit that is too expensive to hold onto.

It is frustrating. It seems like it is going to take some out-of-the-box thinking, probably by someone that doesn't have a vested interest in a predetermined solution to address at least some facets of the problem. When you can't even quarantine someone with Ebola, it is hard to imagine forced encampments.

I wonder if the problem space could be broken up into categories and then have some sort of x-prize like competition for people or organizations to develop solutions which could then be prototyped or funded, along with performance metrics in a manner like paperboy suggested.

I don't think you can just throw money at it. Once you do that, it just gets siphoned off through fraud, waste and abuse.

In my area, we have a lot of Habitat for Humanity homes (and I mean A LOT) and those have seemed to work out well, but that only solves part of the problem. We have a lot of public housing too, but no one wants that in their backyard.

I am not an advocate of large government programs, but maybe some type of locally run "Conservation Corps" type jobs program would help some percentage.

I sense you frustration onan. I wish I had a magic wand.

[akwilly]

I share your values

[GravitySucks]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't mental hospitals mainly defunded and closed on the Reagan administration's initiative. I don't know that the ACLU is mainly responsible for this problem, as PB alleges.

Next step, don't fund outpatient care, either. So, more homelessness in the U.S.

Reagan did away with the Federal program, but at the same time, he passed on all off the funding to the states. That was right when he took office. He was trying to reduce the size of the federal government and give the states more control. I don't know how long that funding continued. I am sure Congress had to decide each year whether or not to keep returning the funds to the states.

My guess would be that some states were better stewards than others. I seem to remember horror stories about institutions in Texas being closed and people being taken to greyhound stations.

I don't think that was in 1980 though, it seems like it was more around 83-85. I am working from fuzzy memories, but I do know Reagan's intent was to reduce the size of Federal government, not eliminate the services for the mentally ill.

[onan]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't mental hospitals mainly defunded and closed on the Reagan administration's initiative. I don't know that the ACLU is mainly responsible for this problem, as PB alleges.

Actually PB isn't wrong. The closing of mental hospitals goes back to JFK. Reagan did step up the game. Civil rights became part of the package in the 70's when it was decided patients had the right to refuse medications under the first and eighth amendments. That by and large is a good thing. So many of the issues regarding stability are really a matter of individual values and the ability to make valid assessments regarding safety. The problem is compounded by the fact that many that are responsible for assessment and administration of medications are not legally trained. I have seen a multitude of unfounded law suits because of these gray areas.

[Catops]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't mental hospitals mainly defunded and closed on the Reagan administration's initiative. I don't know that the ACLU is mainly responsible for this problem, as PB alleges.

Next step, don't fund outpatient care, either. So, more homelessness in the U.S.

Yeah, no, I agree. It wasn't the ACLU; it was a Republican thing in the works for many years which became fully realized under Reagan. One of Bateman's guests, Dr. John Liebert (also a co-author with Bill Birnes) talks a lot about the deinstitutionalization movement in one of his books. Liebert is a psychiatrist who works with mentally ill criminal offenders. I remember hearing about deinstitutionalization in the news when it was unfolding, learning about it in college when people were warning  that without developing a structure of community mental health resources to take up the slack it would lead to disaster. Liebert is pretty much reporting on the disaster and we're all living in it today.

[Catops]

Hell. I defer to Onan.

[Uncle Duke]

Yeah, no, I agree. It wasn't the ACLU; it was a Republican thing in the works for many years which became fully realized under Reagan. One of Bateman's guests, Dr. John Liebert (also a co-author with Bill Birnes) talks a lot about the deinstitutionalization movement in one of his books. Liebert is a psychiatrist who works with mentally ill criminal offenders. I remember hearing about deinstitutionalization in the news when it was unfolding, learning about it in college when people were warning  that without developing a structure of community mental health resources to take up the slack it would lead to disaster. Liebert is pretty much reporting on the disaster and we're all living in it today.

Birnes, the same guy who coauthored books with George Noory and Phil Corso.  *ducks*

[Richard Groyper]

I share your values

That child shouldn't have been such a faggot.

[WhiteCrow]

Hell. I defer to Onan.

Lack of basic understanding of how businesses operate. In simplest terms  All cost including, taxes are passed on.. Raise taxes, raw material or wages no big deal. Just an adjustment in costs of goods sold. Consumers ultimately pay. Feeds inflation and erodes buying power. Back to square one.

[Donald Noory]

Birnes, the same guy who coauthored books with George Noory and Phil Corso.  *ducks*

You've never had the dubious pleasure of reading Worker in the Light by George Noory and William Birnes? If not, sit a chimp in front of a typewriter, and you'll end up with something far more compelling, and intellectually rigorous.

[PB the Deplorable]

From the ACLU webpage:

https://www.aclu.org/aclu-history-mental-institutions

This was going on long before Reagan was President, or even governor:

http://www.nytimes.com/1984/10/30/science/how-release-of-mental-patients-began.html?pagewanted=all

Even Hollywood got into the act:

http://www.amazon.com/One-Flew-Over-Cuckoos-Nest/dp/B000LY94N4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1456891361&sr=8-2&keywords=cuckoos+nest

[PB the Deplorable]

Birnes, the same guy who coauthored books with George Noory and Phil Corso.  *ducks*

And Noory's Late Night Snack Book

[Uncle Duke]

You've never had the dubious pleasure of reading Worker in the Light by George Noory and William Birnes? If not, sit a chimp in front of a typewriter, and you'll end up with something far more compelling, and intellectually rigorous.

No, but I have "coauthored" articles with/for men who had a story to tell but not the ability to do so in a clear, concise manner.  Any man who can get a book out of someone as simple minded as Noory or batshit crazy as Corso is someone to be respected.

[Donald Noory]

No, but I have "coauthored" articles with/for men who had a story to tell but not the ability to do so in a clear, concise manner.  Any man who can get a book out of someone as simple minded as Noory or batshit crazy as Corso is someone to be respected.

I think anyone who co-authors a book with Noory is due zero respect, for most likely doing 99% of the writing work on the book, then allowing a chimp like Noory to receive a "co-author" credit. And also for using Noory's name as "co-author" as a cynical cash-grab to sucker in the low-watt bulbs in the Coast audience.

[WhiteCrow]

I wish for more people like you in the world onan.  Most people don't understand until it happens to them or theirs.  Often the problem is the institution, and/or  the type of "computer like" training those working in them receive.  The medical profession used to be a calling.  I get the impression that for you, it still is.  Most of those in the medical profession these days just see it as "a paycheck" IMO.

Dear brig, not trying to start anything. My experience with the medical profession is completely opposite. Dedicated professionals on every level.

[nbirnes]

And Noory's Late Night Snack Book

To be fair, I have to take (uncredited) responsibility for that one.

[GravitySucks]

To be fair, I have to take (uncredited) responsibility for that one.

LOL

[nbirnes]

I think anyone who co-authors a book with Noory is due zero respect, for most likely doing 99% of the writing work on the book, then allowing a chimp like Noory to receive a "co-author" credit. And also for using Noory's name as "co-author" as a cynical cash-grab to sucker in the low-watt bulbs in the Coast audience.

Actually, back when our company got into a multi-book deal with Noory, he was in the honeymoon period with many fans, us included. We signed contracts for approximately five books stretching into the future, and it started out as a solid, exciting endeavor.

[WhiteCrow]

Yeah, no, I agree. It wasn't the ACLU; it was a Republican thing in the works for many years which became fully realized under Reagan. One of Bateman's guests, Dr. John Liebert (also a co-author with Bill Birnes) talks a lot about the deinstitutionalization movement in one of his books. Liebert is a psychiatrist who works with mentally ill criminal offenders. I remember hearing about deinstitutionalization in the news when it was unfolding, learning about it in college when people were warning  that without developing a structure of community mental health resources to take up the slack it would lead to disaster. Liebert is pretty much reporting on the disaster and we're all living in it today.

Your memory is certainly different than mine.. Horror stories of institutions and mistreatment and abuse of the institutionalize. Disabled 'rights' and reintegration in society movements.


https://youtu.be/R51JTZNYfoU

[Donald Noory]

Actually, back when our company got into a multi-book deal with Noory, he was in the honeymoon period with many fans, us included. We signed contracts for approximately five books stretching into the future, and it started out as a solid, exciting endeavor.

Worker in the Light was foisted on the world in 2007. Pretty sure everyone knew Norry sucked by then, including any of his "co-authors". Most people must think it's trash. 44% of the reviews received on Amazon are one star, each of the other "star" rating categories has less. (3% two star, 9% three star, 11% four star, 33% five star...that's pretty pathetic)