Skip to main content

I mean it makes sense, right? If they had a place to be, you would think they'd be there. Since they're not, there is nothing keeping them from leaving.

Why can't they just go somewhere, anywhere but where polite society would rather them not be? Why the constant reminder of how close one might be to facing life out there, were it not for the grace of God? Street people can keep living as the animals we know we are without civilized folk having to look at them, to smell them, to feign politeness to them as they deny spare change, or ignore as they walk by as though they don't exist, stepping over and around them like the dead bodies that to them may as well be… Right?

Property is expensive, people can't just expect to get along in places they don't have a right to exist in, can they? How unfair is that?

But they do. They do exist. Whether they are pleasant or obnoxious, smelly or keep themselves clean, addicted to drugs or stone cold sober, homeless people exist. You can transfer a homeless person from one state of homelessness to another, from one state in this nation to another, or even to a foreign country, and they will still be homeless.

Scroll to Continue

Recommended Articles

The same rules go for the homeless that would like to move on their own. Sure, many chronically homeless folks may extol the freedoms of life as a vagabond, able to set up abode wherever they find their own two feet and the pack on their back and not have to answer to anyone. The more successfully these folks have convinced themselves that all this somehow outweighs never being free to set up a home of their own, an established security that will always be there so long as God and mother nature allow it, the more ideal it sounds. Almost romantic. Poetic, even.

That is why it's so unfair. The homeless come into their territory, uninvited, camping out and leaving a mess on the side of a once aesthetically pleasing road, living the life without paying to be living in this neighborhood. Of course people care, but between personal lives and a perpetual propaganda culture aimed at manufacturing and marketing outrage there are so many things to care about that seem so much more important than people who they've been convinced don't care about their own lives enough to help themselves, it's hard to want to. The homeless are convenient for usage as part of a political argument, but generally most would rather not even think about them, period. Plus, aren't taxes helping to pay for people to do that instead?

That's where it ends for most: people are paid to care for homeless people, and most of them seem tired and overworked, resentful of their clients themselves, or both. Why should it go any further then that? Can we not just keep paying taxes blindly to be spent by some unnamed authorities on helping the homeless stay homeless and continuing on with our lives, as oblivious to the homeless problem as we can until the next situation that results from letting it go ignored?

Clearly not. It's not financially responsible and is only ethically responsible were it not for the small matter that we are talking about human lives, here; fellow Americans surviving in abject poverty, and there are millions.

Selene Young

The homeless have always been a problem, and so long as they're homeless, they always will be. The faces might change, the stories might vary, and the policies their existence might be blamed on will differ, but until some movement is made in the right direction, progress, if you will, the homelessness crisis will continue to seem like an insurmountable problem. Especially to the homeless themselves.

Selene Young