Home-free-less-people are occupying public areas - without a political agenda or connection to anything more than taking up space where they can find it and claim it regardless of how it affects all others.

Those living and paying for their space - and roofs, amenities, utilities plus whatever - can fit in their small space are asked to "help their brothers" - as most of those who live on streets turn out to be male, and many are older or disabled ones. Fair to all concerned ? no.

Are they willingly or forcibly paying for the non-rent of pubic spaces may be a question if they pay taxes for land, upkeep, and all the increased social services required.

The famous USA government and it’s employees - supposedly paid for by taxed publics and lobbyists and frauds -are unwilling to solve or even see the problem that all the other urbanites live within... while living in paid-for-spaces while surrounded by those too poor or unable to pay or maintain some indoor living spaces.

Take a bus-stop corner that has been Occupied by a dirty persistent man, who has spread out to the edge of sidewalk and store - living in a public space that has become so unsanitary that every bus rider or any person walking that street winces, holds their nose, calls the City councilperson, and worries they have been disease contaminated from breathing in that area. True story. Not made up. Experienced repeatedly.

Any passerby is despaired of trying to find someone in government responsible to change this takeover. Seems like ‘no one can’ change it.

To walk by this disheveled dirty old man, one has to step onto the traffic of the street, or step in urine and in food thrown on sidewalk, and to listen to rants and insults, and to wonder why washed people are living in such fancy neighborhoods together with this [surely mentally ill ] homeless man.

The bus stop bench [a commercial company pays for it] was removed but the same man returned to his favorite spot anyhow - because it is his "home" now. What would any normal person do? the same ? The store is continually calling LAPD when the man disturbs customers or people complain about the store's responsibility in this scene [for the city sidewalk? ].



The fun writing of many other Indy commentators … :

their saying of course, there should be homes for all, paid for by whom and agreed to by whom ? That somehow someones will pay for such living spaces, someone else, of course. That some vague nebulous organization like a govt will take care of housing all it’s citizen and immigrants too. That ‘it should be….” but is not so. How easy *to write* it off so simply.

The pleasure of idealizing that of course 'everyone' should have a home in the USA because we are so rich [and generous too ? ].

The delusion of assuming 'someone else' will take care of these outdoorsy people who are only living on sidewalks, benches, storefront or cubby holes in any buildings because they are poorer or victims of someone else…but this generalization is not logical.

The easy words to say of what "should be" vs. what IS happening, and not only in LA, but worldwide - as we hear it from our visiting tourists and foreigners too.

Of course, India and Asia and even China is known for this way of life … but that is not suitable to our fancy lifestyles…those living near Hollywood and even any ethnic neighborhood in Los Angeles or Orange county…. each ethnic group screams about "get them out of here !" as loudly as any other upper priced ones do. We do not live like "that" ! all shout. We wish.

So many prefer to repeat the same old same msg. of how the homeless are sacred, treasures, helpless, sweet, lovable and will be taken care of….by whom ?

What living out on the streets, beaches, parks is like, is experienced, is known, whether any commentators here have lived it or not – doesn’t answer the question of space and who has or uses or usurps what, when, for how long and does not share.

Those who cant take care of themselves in a more customary way, as in living in any shelter, indoors, in a hut or camp or squat house or a railroad car [as was the romanticized version that was not better then than now either ] are living in other people's yards, sidewalks, on bus benches, in public-parks, and do what they do because they can...and truthfully, they dont care if anyone else doesn’t like it !

Ask the homeless if they are concerned at all about no one else being able to also use those spaces they have taken.

The LAPD has 'more important' business to do and doesn’t like repeat visitors in their overfilled jails. The so-called-social agencies that are suppose to find solutions and living spaces indoors for those in 'need' are stumped by some homeless who do not like the shelters or the spaces that are found for them. And social-workers do not make policy or have power or influence over finances to provide homes, spaces for all those who end up street-wise-street-stuck.

As previously was commented, as anybody can give euphemisms and fancy throw-away lines like : “they should have.... everyone should ...” is just blabbering and passing the chore on elsewhere.

Most assume it is someone else's responsibility, and so on... they do not and would not like some stranger living right alongside them or in their spaces, discarding body fluids and junk food packages and dirty clothes in their living [in or outside] spaces.

Soooo easy to talk, so hard to deal with, in actuality.

And it is not a 'fault' or cold-heart, or any Rand mentality that is conveniently used to accuse anyone else of forthrightly saying what all do see, feel, smell, or turn away from themselves.

This is difficult for all, and the homeless who are also difficult to work with because of attitudes, paranoias, severe mental diagnoses, addictions or long outdoorsy experiences where they have survived so far – they are not agreeing to move. It is "our park now" is the usual answer.

It is "my space" now, as no one else can walk, pass, nor tolerate the unhygienic conditions the homeless have created in their own unaware or ‘I cant help it’ ways.

To never blame anyone for what they do or where they have gotten to is the usual liberal wishful thinking - that we are ALL VICTIMS somehow - and no one is ever responsible...not for drug taking, not for continuing addictions, not for their 'oh so sad a childhood' or ' had bad parenting' [the most blamed victims are parents in this USA] - then nothing improves because there is no one Responsible !

And to how easy and wrong it is for others to just assume that this writer knows not how it is - to live as a homeless person - just because of what else is said and thought. How easy it is to accuse and try to be one-up or be superior as a one-down to this writer… how easy it is to write whatever and claim to know it all. ugh

The story stays the same however it is told.

The public city spaces that are spare and sparse and rare are now lived in by homeless people who may have few other choices - but who have assumed they now 'live' there - and so no one else can use those spaces....not the children, not the athletes, not the elderly, not the visitors, not the neighbors.

Not ok.

Are you looking for a justification to call the police? Because if you are, why would you ask here? The law and society already support that kind of action.

If you don't want to call the police, then, don't call the police.

I would start out by telling them to take up only half the sidewalk, because otherwise people can't get around. If they won't cooperate, I don't know what I'd do.

I gave some idealized solutions, and said it could be paid with a tax. There area dozen ideas out there. I just read one which I didn't entirely agree with, but it was simple enough - tax businesses locally and spread the homeless population around rather than concentrating them in skid row.

Nobody comments above: " I would start out by telling them to take up only half the sidewalk, because otherwise people can't get around. If they won't cooperate, I don't know what I'd do. "

ever tried to Tell the homeless to Do anything ?

And have your face smashed in ?

ever tried to ask the ones street-living to share - when they are the ones begging or pan-handling or demanding money?

And be cursed or angrily told that you will be so called 'blessed" by a vengeful god ?

ever ask a homeless [ mentally disturbed and disturbing often male] anything and receive a rational civil answer ?

I've tried and never been decently answered nor even heard at times. The mean dirty grimaces are clear messages that talk and conversation is not what is wanted.

the "I don't know" is the same answer most give to how to solve the Homeless 'problem' and then turn around and ignore the difficulties these scenes also create for 'everyone else'.

Call a City Councilman in LA and see what occurs ?

not much. Write and a form letter will reply but then look and find the same homeless still squatting on open dirty sidewalks extending from edge to edge of sidewalk so pedestrians can barely pass, and cannot pass if they are carrying a package.

Call the LAPD and they repeat that 'we've tried' and nothing can be done to remove the person unless they commit a 'real' crime and even then, they will probably return to same spot and repeat the scene - indubitably.

Call the military and they say there is no war here...

or call a church, or any religious organization that claims to 'help the poor'. But these orgs mostly expand and enhance their properties or outsource their own missionaries.

A few do offer some food services, or have a religious social-ized worker to give out aid referrals - they too found in the phone book or old list as a sincere 'service' that goes with their missionary influence. A very few support a shelter or kitchen or pantry. Very few. Hardly any.

Call any other LA or USA govt office and be referred back to the LAPD, City Council, City Services [call 311 or 211 or 911 or 111 ] and do a full return to the circle, with the homeless still taking over the bus stop benches, the parks, the cubby holes of stores, the back yards or sheds of homes, the beach fronts, the alleys and the sidewalks.

We here are not finding solutions.

We here are not hopefull and NOT IGNORNING nor DENYING the problems everyone else also sees - and walks away from or walks around.

Sometimes we cannot solve or cure or save or help.

Sometimes we can TELL THE TRUTH OF WHAT WE SEE, FEEL, HEAR, FIND, AND DISLIKE or want CHANGED.

Sometimes, that seems futile but is the only thing to do for the moment. Repeat. and Repeat. and Not deny nor cover up what is apparent.... even if no govt or agency 'can' solve or wants to actually invest $$ or staff in solutions.

Many say it all happened because they closed the mental asylums, the state rules changed, all levels of the govts assumed someone else would house/help/save those who could not live 'normal' in-home lives,

Or assumed that families would willingly take on the old burden of trying to hide their mentally-disabled ones.

In the Reagan govt years and forever after that, the govt claims it had no funds and no responsibilities. The VA still claims their released military are on their own and are no longer dependents. The bigger wars were over, so the men should get over it too. And many men who were not combat injured used that refrain of "I am - combat-injured Vet !" as a status ploy they had not actually earned - as a reason to expect to extort money from passer-bys.

Yep, call it for what it was and still is.

A mess that is no where being solved, cleaned up, paid or taxed or wanted to make better.

So the streets are the most visible place to get pity or a pittance or hope for a savior to appear, there. While pedestrians squirm by and cars try to not run over the jay-walkers with their hugely filled stolen shopping carts.

And again, we as individuals do Not have 'the great solutions' - nor do the police, the doctors, the low level social workers in any govt or agency either.

but the EXPERIENCES of most citizens of being denied public-access-spaces is not to be ignored or make okay either.

For those who live indoors to have no where else to go, to sit, to enjoy other than one's paid-for-by-ownself-living-spaces is not the American lifestyle. Nor other cities elsewhere either.

Simply stated, we need to not pretend we are pleased, content and accepting that the ones who live on OUR [ yes, All of us] streets, sidewalks, beaches, alleys, et al are to remain there as is.

Usually, there's no conflict, so there's no communication or negotiating. I have asked homeless people if they could make room so I could sit, and they've moved.

I've also been yelled at by some homeless person for just walking next to their tent. I have yet to deal with someone's tent taking over the whole sidewalk.

I tried talking to a guy who was drunk and passed out on the sidewalk. He was alive, but totally passed out, probably from alcohol or drugs. Another street person said that, and said leave him alone to sleep it off. I checked in later, and he was gone.

great replies here and to other article about same topic but with > 33 comments there ---- some sincere, some accusatory, some questioning and some just blasting images hoping to get attention. Topic: can the homeless fairly take all available public spaces to live in with their ‘stuff’ and leave none for ‘everyone else’????

why are extremes the easy way to depict anyone who is not playing by a few people’s policially-only-Our-defined-“correct”-rules ? Why are extremes discussed at all ? billionaires ? don’t know any nor plan on finding them in ordinary worlds we exist in – yep, each of these commentators are included in this “we”. The drunks passed out on sidewalks, other than in special areas, these are not the normal findings of ‘homeless’ living on LA most city streets. Some do, most find their usual cubby hole or friends. The experience of ‘nobody’ is a fair-share here but may not be my or someone else’s experiences, which means what 1 person finds in 1 district or area is not nessarily related or same to another’s. but interesting, and shared. Ok.

On streets found near here, every corner has one or more heavily laden man with shopping carts overfilled and heavy with their ‘ownings’ alongside their bodies seemingly stuck in one favored spot. In front of a regularly used store, alongside an alley or safe corner.

Bus stops are frequently Occupied…with 1 man and his things, so most other bus riders cannot dare not sit alongside [having cleaner clothes and being affected by certain smells may be why, fear of being touched, grabbed, insulted or fainting may be other whys]. riding a bus and just observing, it is many, not a few, bus benches that are not used by most busriders because they are already filled with those who awoke on our streets and found a ‘spot’ to call their own for the day. And watching these scenes, why are so many poor working people not acting or looking sympathetically on these streetlivers and act irritated that they cannot also sit or wait for bus on a bench ? Obviously, something to do with the differences in cleanliness, courtesy, dangers perceived and even ‘social class differences’ to the POOR people, not the billionaires who don’t use bus benches, or do they too ?

The topic remains vital and needs repetition [obviously I think so and so do the continual deniers here do too]. There are inadequate space for us all, to share, or there is a hijacking of what is open air available and not locked, gated, or security-safed. Or, the homeless have taken what they could and refuse to share or cannot [unaware? unconscious? self-centered?] give up any spaces they have found in case someone else takes it and they have to move over or away.

Yes, many have been yelled at, cursed, run from a bared fist waving with loud shouting if speaking to a homeless, or being totally ignored as if not present there at all. The LA City and adjacent areas, other cities, local counties, etc. are not, do not, will not change the scene with excuses while they who have influence over how taxes are spent chose other happier projects instead.

Joseph Murphy (pictured above) is not an undercover journalist. He’s an oil rig worker based in Dundee.

But when he found out his Council was paying workers called City Centre Ambassadors to bully and intimidate homeless people out of the town centre, he decided to go undercover to expose the truth.

Joe hit the streets and took a camera with to live stream life as a homeless person in Dundee. The film makes interesting viewing. Homeless people give him tips – such as keeping his coin jar further away from him as passersby won’t want to come too close. There is also the sense of separation – of no longer being part of ordinary life.

Just 27 minutes into filming, as Joe is shown sitting quietly, interacting with the public only when spoken to – a City Centre Ambassador arrives on the scene and immediately orders him to move on. The manner in which the Ambassador speaks to him is curt and intimidating.

His greeting is “You’re new”, followed by “Stand up”.

When Joe refuses to stand, move or give his name – the Ambassador moves a little away and calls the police – just as Joe had been told would happen, by homeless people in the town.

The behaviour of the Ambassador is in stark contrast with the Job Advert, which asks for candidates who “have a willingness to help and a pleasant friendly manner. Good communication and interpersonal skills are also essential”.

He is told by the Council worker that the Ambassadors are required to move homeless people on – referring to them as an “eyesore”and a “hindrance to business”.

..

The ultimate act of revolution in a society that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.. ..Giving is also one of the most personally rewarding things you can ever do. It is not a sacrifice.

There is real joy in being part of your community and a feeling of elation and peace comes with the knowledge that your actions make a profound difference in the lives of others.

We expressed confusion that more people hadn’t figured this out. I say to Joe: “It’s like everyone wants a revolution, but no one wants to change”. He laughed and said:

“That’s it. The revolution isn’t out there. The revolution is here with us. All we need to do to make it happen, is change the way we behave.”

> can the homeless fairly take all available public spaces to live in with their ‘stuff’ and leave none for ‘everyone else’????

Well, as far as I can see, they aren't taking all the public spaces to live in.

The relentless war against the poor people of the United States continues as the Republicans passed massive cuts in food stamps through Congress. Over billion in cuts to food stamps, recently was shoved through the Republican-controlled US House of Representatives in that party’s latest attempt to balance the country’s budget on the backs of the poorest people in this country.

Are you living in skid row?

It sounds like you are. I just can't think of any other place in Los Angeles like how you describe.

The growing masses of America's poor have been largely ignored—until now. Occupy Wall Street is changing that.

We've been at war for decades now—not just in Afghanistan or Iraq, but right here at home. Domestically, it's been a war against the poor, but if you hadn't noticed, that's not surprising.

You wouldn't often have found the casualty figures from this particular conflict in your local newspaper or on the nightly TV news. Devastating as it's been, the war against the poor has gone largely unnoticed—until now.

The Occupy Wall Street movement has already made the concentration of wealth at the top of this society a central issue in American politics. Now, it promises to do something similar when it comes to the realities of poverty in this country.

By making Wall Street its symbolic target, and branding itself as a movement of the 99 percent, OWS has redirected public attention to the issue of extreme inequality, which it has recast as, essentially, a moral problem.

Only a short time ago, the "morals" issue in politics meant the propriety of sexual preferences, reproductive behavior, or the personal behavior of presidents. Economic policy, including tax cuts for the rich, subsidies and government protection for insurance and pharmaceutical companies, and financial deregulation, was shrouded in clouds of propaganda or simply considered too complex for ordinary Americans to grasp.



Now, in what seems like no time at all, the fog has lifted and the topic on the table everywhere seems to be the morality of contemporary financial capitalism.

The protestors have accomplished this mainly through the symbolic power of their actions: by naming Wall Street, the heartland of financial capitalism, as the enemy, and by welcoming the homeless and the down-and-out to their occupation sites.

And of course, the slogan "We are the 99 percent" reiterated the message that almost all of us are suffering from the reckless profiteering of a tiny handful. (In fact, they aren't far off: the increase in income of the top 1 percent over the past three decades about equals the losses of the bottom 80 percent.)