(12-22-2024, 09:35 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote:

(12-22-2024, 08:52 PM)mikesez Wrote: I know that many progressives have a bad attitude towards vets and that's a damn shame.  I've also been at bars just shooting the breeze, guys complaining about work, and a vet who's maybe had one too many comes out of nowhere with "that's not hard and I'll kick your [BLEEP] right now if you think that's hard compared to what I did." So some of what you see may be just hostility to the military, and some of it may be they had a bad experience with a vet in the past.  Doesn't make it right of course.

Anyhow.  Thank you for that link, it's a good article. 

Federal money was given to states on an emergency basis with few strings attached.  This was not normal and is not going on now.  Some blue states gave some of that money to illegals, as you might expect.

So, in an emergency, in a blue state, you found an exception to the general principle that illegal immigrants don't receive federal dollars.  The general principle stands.  And New York City was providing housing to all, both illegals and vets.

As told the bolded part, that's a no. Liberals in general do not care for the military overall, anyone who serves or has served. For some it's a pacifist thing and I personally know two of these types, and I understand and respect that, and there may be the occasional person who has had a fallout with a service member or vet, but for the most part liberals have absolutely no care for it. At all.

As for the homeless vets issue. Have you ever had to qualify for government housing? I have. It was a long time ago now but the average low income person has to jump through more hoops you can imagine just to qualify and that doesn't mean you're put in a house or apartment, AKA, 'the projects'. It simply means you qualify and can be put on a waiting list. 

NYC has some veteran specific funds for housing that is not federal or state funded, it comes from donations. Federal or state funds would be Section 8 which is not vet specific, it's low income specific. Some of this funding comes with some strings attached. Have they been evicted through court order? No? They don't qualify. Are they addicts and in a program? No? They don't qualify. Are they disabled through the VA? No? They don't qualify. 

This is just to qualify for one type of funding but they're all very similar, and again, it does not guarantee a place to live.

I've never had to qualify for government housing, I always had other choices, but a couple of times in my younger, "just getting started" life there were apartments I applied to that turned me away because I hadn't already gotten admitted to government assistance.  "That's OK, I'll pay you the whole thing." "No, sorry, the complex only accepts people with government assistance." Just scraping the surface of the system was very difficult for me, and I'm sure it only gets more complicated.

NYC also has a city funded program for homeless shelters that will buy hotel rooms when there is overflow.  That's the part that people found outrageous out in right wing media.  

I've volunteered at homeless shelters, I used to do it once a year before I had kids.  If there is space, they take you in, and they don't care if you're illegal or whatever, and they'll initially provide for you with privately donated money. But they demand to see your ID and with that they will start calling to see what you qualify for and what you don't qualify for.  If you qualify for something, they will collect it in your name while you're staying there.  The whole point is they want you off of their dole and onto the government's dole if at all possible.  It's kind of ugly, and a turn off for many, but the private homeless shelters have become the place that sorts out who qualifies for what convoluted government program.

---