• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

L.A. County Wants Homeless People to Live in Home Owner's Backyards, What's Your Opinion?

How Do You Feel About L.A. County's Plan to Move Homeless People into Backyard Housing?

  • Great idea, I would let a homeless person live in my backyard

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • Great idea, but I wouldn't let a homeless person live in my backyard

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Bad idea, needs to be scrapped

    Votes: 12 66.7%

  • Other- I'll explain

    Votes: 4 22.2%

  • You got any spare change?

    Votes: 1 5.6%
  • Total voters
    18
truthatallcost said:
Who ever thought the Golden State would need to stuff homeless people into backyards? I guess that may get some of them off the street, but with the high rates of mental illness/drug dependency, it's definitely not going to be an option for all 58,000 homeless folks in LA County.
Click to expand...

What is the problem? It is voluntary and has incentives.
 
Moderate Right said:
Actually, I was thinking about the other way around. What happens if the homeless person winds up being a piece of ****? Do the homeowners have to go through an eviction process to get the bums out?
Click to expand...
The eviction process needs to be reformed , 20 years ago ! The evictee should be deported - if possible ..
 
truthatallcost said:
Who ever thought the Golden State would need to stuff homeless people into backyards? I guess that may get some of them off the street, but with the high rates of mental illness/drug dependency, it's definitely not going to be an option for all 58,000 homeless folks in LA County.
Click to expand...

I say bad idea. Because it will start off as voluntary and then through the use of public easement laws it will become mandatory knowing the loons that run those cities and state. It won't matter how many people this becomes a problem for. They will use the handful of bums that are not a problem to make the whole program look good and demonize those who do have a problem with letting the homeless live in their back yard.
 
Masterhawk said:
They should have let the guy keep the tiny houses:

Click to expand...


I almost feel like the city's taking away the tiny houses because this awesome guy who built them is showing them up. How bout demolishing the tiny houses when the city's program becomes a success and the homeless person upgrades instead of demolishing their home, security, and hope by leaving them with nothing.
 
Did everyone catch that this is a "loan" given to the homeowner? Not a grant, but something the owner actually has to pay the government to do. Yes it would be forgiven after 10 years but that's still 10 years of paying principal + interest to do the government a favor. Anyone who would agree to do this is an idiot.
 
The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. - Ronald Reagan
 
X Factor said:
Did everyone catch that this is a "loan" given to the homeowner? Not a grant, but something the owner actually has to pay the government to do. Yes it would be forgiven after 10 years but that's still 10 years of paying principal + interest to do the government a favor. Anyone who would agree to do this is an idiot.
Click to expand...

I couldn't even comment on that silliness, it was so absurd. All that would have came out is a lot of *********'s
 
truthatallcost said:
Who ever thought the Golden State would need to stuff homeless people into backyards? I guess that may get some of them off the street, but with the high rates of mental illness/drug dependency, it's definitely not going to be an option for all 58,000 homeless folks in LA County.
Click to expand...

With the huge backyards surrounding Hollywood mansions, that might be a fine idea.
Sarcasm aside, I find it a huge stain on our country to have so many homeless people. We have to find a way to make this right.
 
Moon said:
I'm curious about the homeowner's liability if their backyard guest engages in any illegal activity.
Click to expand...

Or the states liability if the homeless person kills the homeowners child or something worse.
 
As soon as the Hollywood elite, Nancy Pelosi or Maxine Waters to allow homeless in their back yard......
 
jamesrage said:
I say bad idea. Because it will start off as voluntary and then through the use of public easement laws it will become mandatory knowing the loons that run those cities and state. It won't matter how many people this becomes a problem for. They will use the handful of bums that are not a problem to make the whole program look good and demonize those who do have a problem with letting the homeless live in their back yard.
Click to expand...

You may be right. Similar ideas for housing the homeless exist in Seattle, and they've said that they want every block to have at least one homeless person living there. I wonder if they'll get any of the rich liberals up there to volunteer?
 
Lovebug said:
With the huge backyards surrounding Hollywood mansions, that might be a fine idea.
Sarcasm aside, I find it a huge stain on our country to have so many homeless people. We have to find a way to make this right.
Click to expand...

I agree, but we're creating this problem, here in California at least. We've allowed wages for blue collar jobs to erode through the use of illegal immigrants, putting many Californians out of work. The population boom from being a Sanctuary State has created a housing shortage, while available housing has shot up in price due to demand.

Now the state wants to build 2 million new housing units, apparently ditching concerns about the environment and climate change, in favor of a short term solution. Not to mention the loss of farmlands that will occur from building 2 million more units.

California should serve as a glowing lesson to the rest of the country, for how to ruin a beautiful state.
 
It's as if they don't want to address homelessness.

1) Doesn't give the homeless their own plots

2) Relies on home owners not being made awkward or endangered by the prospect of having a homeless person on their land.

3) Penalizes those who aren't made awkward or worried about their safety by making this a loan for which the gracious home owner is responsible for fulfilling.
 
This is a disaster just waiting to happen......
 
truthatallcost said:
You may be right. Similar ideas for housing the homeless exist in Seattle, and they've said that they want every block to have at least one homeless person living there. I wonder if they'll get any of the rich liberals up there to volunteer?
Click to expand...

Probably not. People tend to easily support things if they know it won't have a negative impact on them. I think if they proposed allowing homeless to live rich peoples backyards then this would immediately shut down and sue the hell out of the city.
 
Last edited:
HowardBThiname said:
I remember hearing about that -- complete farce. The guy was providing them with a secure place to sleep and the City hauled the little houses away.
Click to expand...

I guess the city considered the tents and cardboard boxes safer.
 
Mason66 said:
Or the states liability if the homeless person kills the homeowners child or something worse.
Click to expand...

Which reminds me....if you recall the Elizabeth Smart kidnapping a while back, the kidnapper was one of those vagrant panhandlers(alleged homeless) carrying a "will work for food" sign. Her father hired him to do some handy work around the house in full view of his young daughters.
 
truthatallcost said:
Who ever thought the Golden State would need to stuff homeless people into backyards? I guess that may get some of them off the street, but with the high rates of mental illness/drug dependency, it's definitely not going to be an option for all 58,000 homeless folks in LA County.
Click to expand...

There are half a dozen islands right off the coast... just move the homeless there.
 
Peter King said:
Who knows, could be a good idea for people who have a large plot of land and want to legalize a small building at the end of their grounds. It would help a bit with the homelessness issue for a bit and may give a homeless person a chance to get back on their feet again. But it should come with some provisions, the homeowner has to make it a green building, meaning that it has to have solar panels to warm and power up the building so that the homeless person has light, heat and it must have running water (for which the state has to reimburse the homeowner).

The government then has to approve the homeless person for food stamps and help with finding employment. Because if a homeless person has a home, food, security, the government can comply him if he wants to remain to live there to either work (and pay a sum to the landowner for him living there) or work as a volunteer for a certain number of hours a week (after he has been physically cleared to do so) and for that the government will keep giving him food stamps but purely as a way to get that person to find his way back to real employment and get off all government assistance.

Then, but only maybe then this will be a way for a homeless person to find his way out of his seemingly endless hell of homelessness.

But the State should also have a provision that a homeless person can be kicked out if he abuses the place or uses/sells drugs from the premises, after which a new candidate can live there (for the minimum 10 years that the house needs to stay as a homelessness shelter for 1).

Preference for housing there should be given to families/homeless veterans/vulnerable individuals due to handicaps.
Click to expand...

Just wait til some homeless guy rapes or murders some little kid in the backyard...
 
ObamacareFail said:
I guess the city considered the tents and cardboard boxes safer.
Click to expand...

True but I think the homeless are running out of tents and cardboard boxes.

th
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom