Gerry Harvey is a fat ****

[skilts]

Iv'e not been homeless.

But then again neither have you or anyone in this thread otherwise they'd have mentioned it by now.

You seem so certain of this. On what do you base this statement?

 

[MushroomRocket]

you don't kick a person when they are down. i wonder what gerry would do if his grandson was homeless.

you dont need to be appreciative of them, but we all know who is going to get bailed out by the government when they go "bankrupt".

we do with types like gerry harvey because they keep the "oil" in the "capitalism" that makes our life tick.

if an economic model better than the current military-industrial complex can be formed, society will kick these types in the bin without qualms.

but of course communism, socialism and all have failed. so we are searching for the holy grail, because capitalism will run its course by 30 odd years.

 

[Monkster]

omg...you can't be serious...

By definition, if you have a home, you're not homeless

You can't be serious thinking that all homeless people are poor unfortunate souls who got some really bad luck.

 

[skilts]

You can't be serious thinking that all homeless people are poor unfortunate souls who got some really bad luck.

Of course not. These ne'er do wells make a conscious decision to sleep under bridges. I look upon it as a lifestyle choice. If they only had the moral fibre and self-discipline of Gerry Harvey. He should be seen as a role model for all derelicts who want to lift themselves up by the bootstraps, put their shoulders to the wheel, their noses to the grindstone and pull their weight.

Try doing that without falling flat on your face. Gerry's a marvel and a lesson for us all. Funnily enough, I reckon his remains will turn to steaming sludge at much the same rate as those he so depises. The only difference is, he's doing it while he's still breathing.

 

[Dogga79]

You can't be serious thinking that all homeless people are poor unfortunate souls who got some really bad luck.

I wonder what the breakdown is for the reason people are homeless. I mean, say what percentage have a mental illness or how many are escaping abuse. Not enough is done for these people and I really do feel sorry for them. I had a step father who didnt mind kicking my ass occasionaly, so I sypathise with others.

But on the flip side if you are a drug addict/ alcoholic or cant be bothered working, you can freeze to death in the parklands. We could get the work for the dole people to chisel them off park benches the next morning.

If you do have a problem with say grog, there are places you can go for help if you really want it.

 

[Monkster]

Of course not. These ne'er do wells make a conscious decision to sleep under bridges. I look upon it as a lifestyle choice. If they only had the moral fibre and self-discipline of Gerry Harvey. He should be seen as a role model for all derelicts who want to lift themselves up by the bootstraps, put their shoulders to the wheel, their noses to the grindstone and pull their weight.

Try doing that without falling flat on your face. Gerry's a marvel and a lesson for us all. Funnily enough, I reckon his remains will turn to steaming sludge at much the same rate as those he so depises. The only difference is, he's doing it while he's still breathing.

So what percentage of the drug addicts living on the streets do you think became drugs addicts AFTER becoming homeless?

 

[JimDocker]

When I read this article this morning, I expected to log in to BF and find a new thread about it from Mantis...



I'm pretty sure that, in this country at least, it is people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds that are disproportionately overweight and obese. But anyway.

As for the criticism of what Harvey has said re: charity, how many people here have genuinely given more than 1% of their total take-home earnings to charity in the last few years, during a 'boom' time?



You seem to be easily irritated by people on this forum. I personally cannot take posters like ASMS seriously; I get the feeling that KC07, linga et al. are straw-man sock-puppets TBH.

Ok - I have and I have every year for a while now and I expect too for the rest of my working life. Actually, I give more than one per cent of my gross salary. Does that give me the right to an opinion ?
Harvey's comments were disgraceful.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

You can't be serious thinking that all homeless people are poor unfortunate souls who got some really bad luck.

where did I say that Monkster?

 

[Monkster]

where did I say that Monkster?

Thats the way you're coming across, or do you believe that even drug addicted morons who've ruined their own lives should get a hand out?

 

[skilts]

So what percentage of the drug addicts living on the streets do you think became drugs addicts AFTER becoming homeless?

You think it's about numbers, percentages, ratiocinacion? The world is not made up of numbers. Drug addicts are no less-human than anybody else. Who gives a toss at what stage of their lives people become homeless? The fact that they're homeless is all that matters. Your depiction of them as the 'other' (those who chose to take drugs)who are lesser than you, because they don't have control over their circumstances, is reprehensible, but in no way a surprise, coming from you.

How often have you been homeless? Have you any idea what it's like to not have a place to sleep? What gives you the right to make judgements about those who are homeless? You are a waste of bandwidth - yep, that's a judgement, based on your self-professed shallowness and insensitivity. Are you availed of a similar level of information about the situations of the homeless which allows you to make such crass judgements as those you've exposed on here?

 

[Monkster]

You think it's about numbers, percentages, ratiocinacion? The world is not made up of numbers. Drug addicts are no less-human than anybody else. Who gives a toss at what stage of their lives people become homeless? The fact that they're homeless is all that matters. Your depiction of them as the 'other' (those who chose to take drugs)who are lesser than you, because they don't have control over their circumstances, is reprehensible, but in no way a surprise, coming from you.

They have complete control over their circumstances, they are the ones who chose to do drugs in the first place.

How often have you been homeless?

Never, what does that matter? How often have you been a millionaire/billionaire deciding who to give money to?

What gives you the right to make judgements about those who are homeless?

The same thing that gives you the right to make judgements on people in other situations.

You are a waste of bandwidth - yep, that's a judgement, based on your self-professed shallowness and insensitivity.

I actually didn't profess to be shallow or insensitive, no idea where you're getting that from.

Are you availed of a similar level of information about the situations of the homeless which allows you to make such crass judgements as those you've exposed on here?

Crass judgementS? I made one judgement, that some homeless people are such because of choices they've made.

 

[Schism]

****ing hell there are some real units on this forum.

 

[volcboy]

Thats the way you're coming across, or do you believe that even drug addicted morons who've ruined their own lives should get a hand out?

So, based on your logic, if I see you face down in a gutter after being beaten up at a pub, I should leave you there because you were a drug addicted moron (i.e. alcohol) who shouldn't get a hand out?

People make mistakes - should you write someone off totally just because they have made some bad choices? Do you think that everyone is beyond rehabilitation? You probably support capital punishment and locking people up and throwing away the key as well, I'd guess.....

 

[Monkster]

So, based on your logic, if I see you face down in a gutter after being beaten up at a pub, I should leave you there because you were a drug addicted moron (i.e. alcohol) who shouldn't get a hand out?

Well I don't drink so it wouldn't happen anyway.

People make mistakes

People fix their own mistakes as well.

You probably support capital punishment and locking people up and throwing away the key as well, I'd guess.....

Thats why you shouldn't make assumptions because I don't support capital punishment except in very rare cases where there is 100% proof of guilt and it would be protecting society to permantly remove the person from society.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Thats the way you're coming across, or do you believe that even drug addicted morons who've ruined their own lives should get a hand out?

do you wanna stop putting words in my mouth champ?

Is that your usual discussion technique. Maybe I should try it.

So... you obviously think that because some people **** their lives up with drugs, that no-one who's homeless deserves any help. In fact, I can extrapolate from what your saying, that there should in fact be extermination squads in operation to rid the streets of these scum.

That's a pretty hardline Monkster, I didn't know you were such a dick-head

 

[Lance Uppercut]

They have complete control over their circumstances, they are the ones who chose to do drugs in the first place.

even the ones who were violently or sexually abused as children. In fact, even more so them, huh Monkster? They should get over their shit and get a job hey.

I mean, you don't drink, and you're a saint. So anyone who does must be of morally weak stock. I mean, just cos drugs are addictive; they STILL shouldn't have made that decision when they were 14, technically still children, and having a hard time of it, to start using drugs, and should be castigated and despised for the rest of their pathetic lives as a result.

The poor maligned old billionaire was just telling it like it is hey mate!!

 

[footyfreak]

I'm not going to way into this too deeply as it seems to be a fiery issue and i cant be assed right now but suffice to say I believe in welfare to a certain extent but i also believe people have to take the ultimate responsibility for themselves and life wasn't meant to be easy or fair, it would be nice if it was but it isn't.

I also believe there are large numbers of both genuine cases of homeless people who think they have no options and those that are lazy, no hoper's or choose to live that way by lack of action or effort. I think that is why there is this big difference in opinions.

Both sides are right to a degree with a large number of people who are homeless. But there is a flip side.

Hows that for fence sitting, sort of

 

[rdhopkins2]

Should HN should ban store cards, interest free promotions etc because some can't resist the temptation to buy on credit?
Why not ban alcohol and fast food too if we are at it?

No doubt serious problems exist with homeless issues. But what is the answer- basic shelter/food for a work for the dole scheme, mixture of this and better education?

 

[skilts]

That's a pretty hardline Monkster, I didn't know you were such a dick-head

He's been that way for quite a while. Barely human really.

 

[pazza]

Another view from upon high in an ivory tower that loses the concept of reality.

Here's the way to make sure no-one is homeless and living in abject poverty.

1. All those inner-city high-rise developments we are all seeing..that have apartments going for the princely sum of $400000 on average - tax developers higher if those properties, should they become undersold (as most are these days), becomethe property of the various state Housing Commissions. Any check of waiting times for just simple basic public housing would show that the average waiting time is anything up to 5 years (certainly in Sydney and Melbourne). This will also help to relieve the rental property crisis being faced across metropolitan Sydney and Melbourne in particular.

2. An increase to the public service in terms of employing more people and business to coming to the party and offering the low-skilled and homeless employment opportunities. Give these people some confidence as a starting point and let them develop saving regimes, so that the situation in #1 isn't so pronounced.

3. Restructure the income tax system so that those earning under $50000 pay no tax on their incomes at all. Given that the proportion of tax paid to income earned really makes a difference at the low end of the income market (i.e. 20c per ever dollar under $50000 is equal to $10000 in tax), that extra $10000 in a low-paid employees pocket can only be good for the economy, be it in terms of saving/investing or spending as the case may be.

 

[KevinCat07]

It depends on the homeless person, but mostly they get themselves into that situation.

However those comments are quite cold and it's almost as if he is implying they have no right to live when he says they drag the community down, add nothing. He is kind of right if you apply it to some of them but it just didn't sound good.

 

[volcboy]

Well I don't drink so it wouldn't happen anyway.

You never go to places where other people are drinking? So you couldn't get hit by someone who has been so others may assume you're just a drunken yobbo? Never say never.

People fix their own mistakes as well.

Obviously without any compassion or assistance from other human beings. Especially ones with the alias Monkster apparently.

Thats why you shouldn't make assumptions because I don't support capital punishment except in very rare cases where there is 100% proof of guilt and it would be protecting society to permantly remove the person from society.

But you do support life sentences without parole?

I'd also like an example where there is 100% proof of guilt in a case. Confessions don't count - they can be coerced. It is impossible for DNA evidence to be 100% accurate. Eyewitnesses? Forget it. Video footage? Photoshop and MovieMaker anyone?

That is without going into the philosophical argument that killing anyone condemns the killers (e.g. society, the courts) to be murderers themselves.

 

[Monkster]

do you wanna stop putting words in my mouth champ?

Is that your usual discussion technique. Maybe I should try it.

So... you obviously think that because some people **** their lives up with drugs, that no-one who's homeless deserves any help. In fact, I can extrapolate from what your saying, that there should in fact be extermination squads in operation to rid the streets of these scum.

That's a pretty hardline Monkster, I didn't know you were such a dick-head

You just contradicted your own arguement by stating I said some and than turning it into all, try again.

 

[Monkster]

even the ones who were violently or sexually abused as children. In fact, even more so them, huh Monkster? They should get over their shit and get a job hey.

Oh FFS childhood abuse is not an excuse to become a drug addict, there are plenty of people (most likely the majority) who were abused as children and don't turn to drugs.

I mean, you don't drink, and you're a saint. So anyone who does must be of morally weak stock. I mean, just cos drugs are addictive; they STILL shouldn't have made that decision when they were 14, technically still children, and having a hard time of it, to start using drugs, and should be castigated and despised for the rest of their pathetic lives as a result.

More excuses, mate I had a mate who was a chronic alchoholic and still managed to have a job (as a wharfie so it's not like he was a multi-millionaire or anything), have a place to live and look after his daughter, so don't tell me it can't be done.

The poor maligned old billionaire was just telling it like it is hey mate!!

The only reply that deserves is whatever.

 

[Monkster]

You never go to places where other people are drinking? So you couldn't get hit by someone who has been so others may assume you're just a drunken yobbo? Never say never.

I very rarely go out to clubs/pubs, and so far I haven't been bashed, probably because when drunken idiots start mouthing off I keep my mouth shut and ignore them.

But you do support life sentences without parole?

Depends on the crime.

I'd also like an example where there is 100% proof of guilt in a case. Confessions don't count - they can be coerced. It is impossible for DNA evidence to be 100% accurate. Eyewitnesses? Forget it. Video footage? Photoshop and MovieMaker anyone?

That'd be why I said very rare.

That is without going into the philosophical argument that killing anyone condemns the killers (e.g. society, the courts) to be murderers themselves.

There is no argument there, by definition murder is illegal killing, if it's state sanctioned it's not illegal, therefore it's not murder.

Now the argument that it makes you just as bad as the other person I can see.