(photo from portland's dignity village)it's not that i don't like reading media other than the victoria street newz .... i'm a faithful reader of "focus," and parts of "monday magazine," and "common ground." i'd like focus and monday better if they'd print on recycled .... but the obligatory "newsgroup" bundle of advertising inserts wrapped in a few local news stories just doesn't interest me, mostly because i can't be responsible for that amount of wilderness destruction.
i'm staying at a home that doesn't post a "no newsgroup" notice on their mailbox, and so receives the obligatory bundle of dead trees. this morning i opened it, flipping through, reading the headlines. here is what i learned:
1. in an article titled "they treat the poor good in canada," a quote they managed to extract from one homeless woman who hasn't had it too bad, there's a sidebar that reads: "did you know? a profile of victoria's homeless: more than 40 per cent have a substance use disorder. almost 30 per cent have a mental illness. roughly 30 per cent are thought to have co-occurring disorders."
these "statistics" are sourced from the mayor's task force on breaking the cycle of mental illness, addictions, and homelessness, something an undemocratic organization (mayor and council) disguised as a democracy (while pushing a bridge taxpayers are opposed to) should know all about.
if i were to print these "statistics" in the victoria street newz, here's how i'd spin it:
did you know? a profile of victoria's homeless: almost 60 per cent have no substance use disorder. approximately 70 per cent have no mental illness. and about 70 per cent have no co-occuring disorders.
same book, different chapter.
2. that article's the first of the four part series that's gonna, i guess, showcase some of the approximately 400 people who've been housed since the coalition to end homelessness came into being in 2007. their goal is 1500 homes, and they've housed 400. i have no problem giving credit where it's due, i just wish they'd realize that you can't just take someone who's been on the streets 10 or 20 years and stick them in an apartment and think it's all gonna work out. have we talked about transitional tent cities lately ?
the next topic of discussion .... housing minister rich coleman's suggestion that legislation needs to be established to give police the power to force people into shelters.
the editorial speaks of the need to "keep the public safe." which portion of the public are they referring to, i wonder? to be fair, they explain that dogs and shopping carts aren't allowed in shelters, that they're segregated by gender which splits couples up, and that's why a lot of the street community just doesn't like them. there's also the issue of airborne tuberculosis which is easily spread in a shelter space, and the theft, and the need to be out really early in the morning and then line up again really early in the evening to get back in. and those shelter "beds" referred to are often no more than mats on a floor, side by each. no privacy. no autonomy. no independence.
interestingly, the previous article, about the homeless woman, explained that she lived quite happily in beacon hill park under a tarp for many months. (interesting, too ... the photo shows her cigarette's and ashtray atop a copy of the street newz ...)
the editorial concludes ..... "it's critical for coleman and his staff to consult with service providers - and their clients - to see just how it might work and whether b.c. needs provincewide legislation dictating a solution to what may strictly be a vancouver problem." how many economic collapses do we need, i wonder, before it becomes clear that homelessness isn't the problem .... capitalism is the problem. until we stop creating the wound, it's gonna keep bleeding and all the band-aids in the world ain't gonna stop it.
in cuba they can recall elected officials who don't appropriately represent them ...
