.... and into our neighborhood.
I was at the Burnaby Public Library on Saturday. Surprised to see two homeless people sleeping outside. They were not the only ones - I saw a couple of drunks lounging by the steps and three suspicious looking men dealing around the corner.
The library was closed for the day, there were a lot of families with young children on the field.
I'm not used to seeing this. I'm used to the homeless people in the downtown streets of Vancouver or the drug addicts lurking in the corners... away from my neighborhood which I thought was safe. I must admit, I'm nervous about the whole situation and not sure what to make of this.
On one hand, yes, I understand that we have a problem and it probably won't go away just like that and on the other hand, I do not want these people invading my neighborhood. Am I so shallow or small to think like this? I do not want my kids growing up in a place where I have fought hard to be where I am, only to find these people here.
The government has already moved homeless people from downtown Vancouver into quiet neighborhoods like mine which are ill-equipped and unprepared to deal with this matter. They are doing this for one reason and one reason only, to hide the problem away from the eyes of the world when the 2010 Olympics hits here.
Well, just wanted to express my thoughts.
well it happens.
homeless people do not = drug addicts. CTV did a story and research shows that most homeless people in Vancouver are not druggies.
20 per cent of Vancouver's homeless have jobs.
They simply can't afford the city, get evicted, and have no where else to go.
Its our own fault for thinking that this is just a drug problem when its clearly NOT becoming a drug problem for the majority of homeless.
I didn't say they were all drug addicts, SD. Not all fall into that category and I can understand the situation can't be avoided. I'm just a bit distressed to see the homeless appearing where I live.
Perhaps on one hand, it is good for people like me to see them. To know there's a problem where we live and do something about it instead of ignoring them and hoping they would go elsewhere. On the other hand, it isn't something that I care to entertain... the thought of them being catered off by the police and then being dropped off to the nearest mall. It seems like the government is just pushing one problem off so we have to deal with them. We lack the resource and funds but at the same time we have no choice.
I'm starting to think that the Olympics mean nothing but trouble. *sigh*
[h3]Who are the people living in streets and shelters?[/h3]CTV
Yogi Chandra is one of Vancouver's homeless, but he doesn't suffer from drug addiction, mental health problems or even unemployment. He simply can't afford housing in Canada's most expensive city. [/p] [/p]According to one charity worker, up to 20 per cent of Vancouver's homeless have jobs. [/p] [/p]Chandra lives in a Surrey shelter called Hyland House -- a place he heard about from a homeless person he once gave food, before he lost his own home. [/p] [/p]"I felt sorry for that gentleman and I helped him out," Chandra told CTV Vancouver. "I never thought this would happen to me." [/p] [/p]He now works as a landscaper three or four days a week, but lacks the money to afford rent. His free time is spent helping other homeless people at the shelter. [/p] [/p]"The reason I'm here is because I can't afford to have a basement suite at the moment, because I'm not financially rich," said Chandra. "And that's my goal: to save up enough money so I can get out of here very shortly." [/p] [/p]When a new poll asked Vancouver residents why individuals become homeless, only 27 per cent blamed a lack of affordable housing. By contrast, 57 per cent thought drug or alcohol addiction. [/p] [/p]The survey was conducted by the Strategic Counsel for CTV, the [em]Globe and Mail[/em] and CKNW Radio.
[/p]"According to Peter Fidos of Options Hyland House, the high cost of rent in Vancouver is forcing some employed people to live in shelters. [/p]"People are working and they can't afford to live," he said. [/p] [/p]"When you're paying $700 to $1,000 a month and you're working at $8.50, you're not cutting it anymore. People being told that a job leads to independence is starting to sound like a hollow lie." [/p] [/p]The Greater Vancouver area also has the highest average price for homes in Canada at $518,176, according sales recorded by the Canadian Real Estate Association's Multiple Listing Service. [/p] [/p]That's far higher than Toronto, which has the second-highest average price at $365,537."[/p]The minimum wage in British Columbia is set at $8 per hour. Michael Beckley makes $9 per hour, but like Chandra he still found himself living in a homeless shelter. [/p] [/p] [/p] [/p]"It was a little degrading, but I figure the ends justified the means, and it's better to be in a place like this than out on the street," he said.
Thanks to Project Comeback, Beckley was provided with a damage deposit and able to find an affordable basement suite.
Chandra is also hoping the program will help him move out of his Surrey shelter room.
"Everything costs so much these days," he said. "And ten bucks doesn't get you around."[/p]
[/p][a href="vny!://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070104/homeless_wednesday_070104/20061206/"]vny!://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070104/homeless_wednesday_070104/20061206/[/a]
[/p]
[/p]
Seriously, its not druggies anymore. The Vancouver public is starting to act much like the US public did in the 80's with the HIV/Aids crisis thinking that only gay people get aids.
That poll is troubling.
Homeless issue is not just a drug problem anymore.
If you need any proof just go to a shelter and talk to the people, I do whenever I get a chance, you'll realize that the stereotype of all homeless people are druggies is just not true.
Much like the stereotype of only gay males get HIV.
Thanks for the link.
I sure wish the majority of homeless people were like that but I do not think they are all like that. I'm glad that there are programs out there that can help people like him but I feel there should be more funding and more work done on this other than just catering the homeless off to suburbs without consulting the residents.
who said they are just pushed to the suburbs?
People move around.
As I've said before Drug problems can be fixed, people working and still not able to keep an apartment, now that's a bit tougher to fix because low income housing doesn't bring in the money to the city coeffers quite like a shiny condo.
I've heard from a friend who reads up on these things and he said that the police have orders to move the homeless to places like Metrotown or Brentwood Mall area. The idea is to keep them out of sight hence no problems. In time for the Olympics.
As for the low income housing... I think it's a great idea. I see many more buildings being built or renovated to accomodate those who cannot afford the housing prices in Vancouver. I for one, would like to see more of them being built. [/DIV]
exactly.
low income housing fixes the growing problem of people getting thrown under the rug because they get priced out.
then you can focus on the drug and prostitution problem.
Problem is, the politicians at city hall and in Victoria say the things to get elected and then don't come through on promises. Or if they do, its not enough.
Yeah Sullivan and co, are worried about reporters looking for a story during the olympics, like they always do. During the Olympics in Atlanta they shipped all the homeless out.
Problem is, you can't ship out a small city.
And what's to stop organizers from having a huge rally somewhere during the olympics. BBC, NBC I bet would gladly listen.
Lise wrote:
As for the low income housing... I think it's a great idea. I see many more buildings being built or renovated to accomodate those who cannot afford the housing prices in Vancouver. I for one, would like to see more of them being built. [/DIV][/DIV]
you raise another problem.............how many of us will not object to having low income housing in our neighborhoods?
That is a very good point you've raised, 49er. I'm not sure I'm comfortable having a low income housing resident in our area but it's better than seeing the homeless on the streets and not having a place of their own.
Gee. I wonder how those residents living around Main Street station feel when the government built those low income apartments next to them. It's weird to see a really expensive property and a low-income property side by side.
I really don't get why people hate low income housing. Seems hypocritical. Much like people caring about global warming but when polled don't want to give up there Suburban or take transit.
Not in my backyard syndrome.
Sportsdude wrote:
I really don't get why people hate low income housing. Seems hypocritical. Much like people caring about global warming but when polled don't want to give up there Suburban or take transit.
property values are based on how much your neighbor sells his house for.........people don't want to see their property values dive
true but then what would you rather have? Homeless people roaming around or not?
And its shown that eventually the 'low income' housing becomes just as expensive as the regular homes.
Playing the not in my backyard is weak in my opinion and somebody has to lay down the iron fist and say enough is enough or nothing is going to get done.
But then again, political parties are not about issues anymore but just power.
Harper is playing to Quebec vote because he craves his 'precious' majority.
Democrats won't force an end to the war because they want the issue around in '08 so they can virtually wipe the republicans off the map.
This isn't a political issue. Yet like everything, its treated like one.
We had the gubbernment come into our neighborhood, buy up half a block and put in a whack of low income housing. After that Ive had my truck broken into and vandalized numerous times and have caught kids from the complex trying to steal stuff through our back fence. But things DO have to progress.
We now have them putting in a halfway house for 'recovered' drug addicts across from the local high school. Despite all the protests and obvious issues with this.. its being built.
These things have to go somewhere, I do agree with this. But my problem is why do all these places have to go everywhere but the west side.. where the people who make the decisions live.
[img style="width: 469px; height: 369px;" src="vny!://www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek06/0310/0310housing_7metro_b.jpg"]
[span class="a_textBold"]Metro Hollywood Mixed-Use, Los Angeles, by Kanner Architects[/span]
This project, a refreshingly attractive low-income housing development, contains 60 units, most of which are two- and three-bedroom apartments situated above 10,000 square feet of retail space and a child-care center and built over a subway station. The project also exceeds state energy codes by 20 percent and lines up its large courtyard with the existing courtyard of its neighbor, thus creating a greater open space for both buildings. Overall, the project is colorful, uplifting, and compatible with the design of the subway station below. To help protect residents from the sounds from the street and the trains below, the architects placed the windows strategically in vertical and horizontal patterns. Jury members admired the benefits of this project saying it is "lively, sustainable, and a great example of being active and playful!"
[a href="vny!://www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek06/0310/0310housing.cfm"] vny!://www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek06/0310/0310housing.cfm[/a]
The NIMBY syndrome is only relevent when it IS in fact in YOUR back yard.
I hear Lise's concern though. The compassion is there, but when you've worked hard to put yourself in a place that it isn't an issue (although we all know that it still IS), It's disturbing to know that now you are raising your children in an environment that you worked hard to avoid.
Russ wrote:
These things have to go somewhere, I do agree with this. But my problem is why do all these places have to go everywhere but the west side.. where the people who make the decisions live.
Sullivan sees the Westside as $$$$ that has yet to be exploited. Instead of fixing the problem they just tear down everything and build nice big shiny condos pushing the people further out.
All low income housing should be built where the problems are going on. But the problem is city hall wants tax money. So they tear down blight and make something shinny just for a quick fix. Its like getting high. Feels good for a little while but then you get the side effects.
P.C. wrote:
The NIMBY syndrome is only relevent when it IS in fact in YOUR back yard.
I hear Lise's concern though. The compassion is there, but when you've worked hard to put yourself in a place that it isn't an issue (although we all know that it still IS), It's disturbing to know that now you are raising your children in an environment that you worked hard to avoid.
then get involved and pay attention in politics and local movements to actually stop the problem instead of electing people that just continue to pass the buck to the next generation....
as a society we are re-active instead of pro-active.
just as its not a problem until it affects me, me, me, me, ugh.
The fact is Sam Sullivan and city hall of Vancouver could turn downtown eastside into a thriving community with a low income model but yet they will continue to push the problem onto other cities i.e. Surrey because the all mighty tax dollar is god.
People turn to drugs when they become helpless in life, because it makes them feel good. Give the people a roof over there head, a path to a job and you'd be shocked at the results.
NIMBY is even more bizarre when it actually is in your backyard and you continue to deny that it actually is a problem, denial.
as a society we are re-active instead of pro-active.
just as its not a problem until it affects me, me, me, me, ugh.
My reaction to this is, why do you think it's all political. Why do you think you need 'society' to back you. If you're moved to do something about it......fly at it. If every person who believes it's an issue didn't bother doing anything because they think it's the responsibility of the government they are as much a part of the problem as the government.
We CAN act independantly and do something.
I think that Lise's reaction is normal. I heard in Lise that the compassion is there....but she is now faced with looking at it from another angle.
P.C. wrote:
My reaction to this is, why do you think it's all political. Why do you think you need 'society' to back you. If you're moved to do something about it......fly at it. If every person who believes it's an issue didn't bother doing anything because they think it's the responsibility of the government they are as much a part of the problem as the government.
We CAN act independantly and do something.
I think that Lise's reaction is normal. I heard in Lise that the compassion is there....but she is now faced with looking at it from another angle.
I've lived in America too long. Without political support of society you can't get anything done here. Activism is pretty much dead.
I guess that's why I see this issue as ultimately a political issue, because everything is a political issue, at least where I live.
Public transit, political-racial issue.
Crime- political issue.
Cleaning the enivronment- big time politics.
I guess I live in a different world.
Because any 'activist' issue is inherently political and you get labeled so.
Im not in the area where there is a problem SD, Um thanks.
while I agree in principal. I dont at all when you consider most of the homeless in the downtown eastside are from there.
Sam Sullivan is a statue builder.. his if he could swing it.