The Growing Homeless Problem

The Growing Homeless Problem Ver. 1.0.4

Our Safety-Nets are failing both Socialistic and Capitalistic Systems

Jack E. Johnston

4/6/2019

Edited by KTB

Copyright 2019

Introduction

My financial partner and I are considering renting out real property that we own.  I stopped by a local property management office to inquire about arranging for a property manager for this property.  We seemed to hit it off, and during our communications she became aware that she had a “troubleshooter” in her office.  She was also interested in the growing homeless problem in our community, as well as communities nearby.   I had never considered investigating this homeless problem, but thinking on my feet, I went to the very basics of troubleshooting.  When one wants to find out who is responsible for certain actions, the old saw is “follow the money.”  Who could be making money off the homeless, who are homeless because they do not have any money? Is this a ridiculous question to ask?   

Personal Experience

Having had the experience of using several of our nation’s safety nets in regard to disabilities, resulting from an incident in the workplace, involving in an exposure to high density toxic fumes and a highway speed (50 mph) rear-end hit-and-run collision, I may be the one person who can shed some light on this growing homeless problem in our nation’s communities.

My general consensus is that of the two safety net systems in place – socialistic and capitalistic – both of these systems have similar objectives.  Their objective is to either put a stop to an individual from entering into their safety net system, to remove those from their disability roles as soon as possible, or to buy the claimant off with a payment for the claimant’s losses at a price that is as low as possible.  These objectives being the case, it is those who are providing the safety nets for our nation’s victims who are making money off the homeless in our nation’s communities, and they are causing the growing homeless problem.

The For-Profit Safety Net Providers

Thus it is the for-profit/compensated safety net providers: workman’s compensation, private disability companies, public disability organizations, insurance companies of all types (auto, home, flood, utilities, etc.), and even compensated Social Security Administration disability that are the responsible parties for the homeless problem. The compensated employees are subject to evaluation by their managers; subsequently their salary is dependent on their job performance.  For a government-supported activity with limited resources, this performance evaluation will dominate the decisions of the disability evaluators. 

The Non-Profit Safety Net Providers

In our past history, non-profit disability organizations dominated  social relief programs.  Many churches today have the homeless as one of their priorities, with various services provided from showers and breakfasts to housing, etc.  However, to become a contributing member of some of our churches in these homeless ministries, one must become a member of that church.  Churches, in some cases in the USA, have become more like Christian clubhouses; one must agree to a code of conduct and/or a code of faith particular to that church or religious organization. These extra requirements to participate in the solution to the problem are likely to cause a shortage of participants in these homeless programs.  It would be more productive for these churches and religious organizations to review the basics of their organizations/beliefs and separate the facts from opinions of the basic foundations of their church or religion. It is this writer’s observation that churches are better at spreading gossip than at separating the facts form opinions. It is amazing how opinions can be made into facts.

Past Leadership of the Planet

If one decides they want to influence the world and has the basic physical requirements  of a physical presence and the ability to move a large volume of air over their vocal cords into a large resonate cavity (the mouth) and open that cavity to expel, in great earnestness and personal conviction, (“preach to the choir’), they will probably be successful in reaching their goals.  Some of history’s past great orators were: Cicero of Rome, Hitler of Germany, Billy Graham of the USA.  Billy Graham taught in his seminars what he had learned since Sunday School (“…since he was knee-high to Hector and Hector was still a pup,” as an old college friend said).  Billy spoke with great conviction and earnestness. He told the people what they wanted to hear, and he told them what he believed in is heart was “the truth.”   However, speaking forcefully with conviction does not make opinions equal facts. 

In Search of the “Truth”

These protocols date back to the seventeenth century French philosopher Rene` Descartes, and were modernized during the serial program on radio and television called “Dragnet.”

  • The first responsibility of an investigator is to separate the facts from opinions.  Sergeant Joe Friday of the Investigative Division of the Los Angeles Police Department, this fictional character in the serial “Dragnet,” often stated when interviewing witnesses, “Just the facts ma’am, just the facts.”
  • The second responsibility of an investigator is to not form any opinion on the outcome of the investigation.  If an investigator attempts to prove what they know is the correct outcome, they will undoubtedly prove themselves right.  The Innocence Project, to this day, is finding innocent people who have spent years in prison due to these faulty investigations. 
  • The third responsibility of the investigator is to be skeptical of all information, assuming the information to be false until proven to be true.

The Bottom Line

If a disability evaluator is motivated to keep or remove a disabled person, particularly one who is  mentally disabled and would have difficulty even dealing with the disability evaluator, they would likely find the person they are evaluating not qualified for long-term disability coverage from the safety net organization they represent. Alternatively “the probability for being withheld from long-term disability is greater than the probability that one will be granted long-term disability if this is mental disability.”     

The Changing Dichotomy of the USA

In the early 1970’s, the dichotomy of the USA began changing when we decided that women should enter the workforce as professionals. This progression has now been in progress for almost five decades.  Some interesting changes have occurred in our society – some positive and some that are giving us great difficulty in overcoming.  Increasing homelessness is somewhat a result of this changing dichotomy of our society. 

Two Income Families: With two incomes from college-educated parents, the gap between the haves and the have-nots has increased.  This has resulted in those single-income families having difficulty with the economics of “supply and demand.”  The more demand for products, the higher the price for those products, and this includes housing.  Single parent families often see the need to supplement their income with more income-producing activities. Some of these activities, such as solicitations by those single parents who interface with those of greater wealth for information about vacations, etc.,  earn extra income on the black market from the “home burglary societies.”  Other single parents find that they need to work two or even three jobs to meet their financial needs of their family. Our society often ends up educating and teaching their children, and one could say that the children grow up parentless, which snowballs the uncertainty of the economic future of their children. 

Two Working Professionals Find They Only Have Time to Raise One Child.  Only children have some very distinct personality characteristics.  These special skill packages have, in the past history of the USA, made them leaders of the country or leaders in some organization – even leaders in the church.  These special characteristics were somewhat manageable when these only children were few in our society. We gave them leadership positions and even gave them their own office or work space.  But what do we do with a nation of leaders? A nation of the following:

  • I win, you lose
  • It’s my way or the highway
  • I’m right, even though I’m not”
  • I want this, I want that, I want it my way”
  • Look, see what I have accomplished
  • Didn’t I do a god job
  • I’m in control here” 
  • See how important I am
  • Negotiate? What’s that?
  • See what a good job I have done for you
  • Look at the long-term plan that I have documented for your organization
  • “Follow my instincts? What are instincts?”

These are some of the distinctly only child’s special personalities actions or vocalizations.

There are various levels of these only child characteristics.  These characteristics are also noticeable in situations where the child received more of the parents’ attention than their siblings such as: “The little prince or princess” (a boy or girl arriving after several children of the opposite sex); a “firstborn or even a later-born” with more than five years between siblings (they received minimal influence from their siblings and more attention from their parents). Basically these only children performed for their parents and, as grown adults, are performing for some organization.

The Bully: The classes in our primary school system are being saturated with these only child personalities that, when looked at from the viewpoint of those not so embellished, sees them as “bullies”. In the reports of school shootings the past decade, the word “bullies” has surfaced as the cause of the mass shooting in the school.

 “Before a problem can be solved, the problem must first be correctly identified. Failure to correctly identify the problem before a solution is enacted will result in the problem becoming worse and harder to solve.”  

Q.E.D.

Personal Notes

When I was exposed to high-density toxic fumes in the workplace and went through the various safety net programs, both socialistic and capitalistic, and ended up with my income being reduced to 40% of my pre-disability income, I was lucky because my financial partner was employed at a salary that could sustain us financially.  However, due to being employed by a contractor of the US government, I was allowed to be Social Security exempt.  That resulted in me being three quarter credits short for qualifying for Social Security benefits, including SS Disability.  

I had been a leader in a church’s singles ministry for several years before moving on to being a Sunday school teacher.  I now thought I could get a position in my new church and earn enough Social Security credits to qualify for Social Security benefits.  I therefore applied at this church for a paid position within the church structure.  I received a visit from their lay preacher leader and was interviewed for a position in this church. 

I knew I was in trouble when I offered to make him a cup of coffee.  He responded, “Have you ever made a cup of coffee?”  I had to admit that this was going to be my first cup of coffee.  He refused my offer for a cup of coffee.  As the interview progressed, I dutifully answered his questions.  When he asked what books I read, I thought I would cut to the chase with an offer of free information. The background for this action is as follows: At the end of my seventeen years as a Sunday School teacher, in preparation for an Easter Sunday lesson plan, I had performed as a professional troubleshooter on an organization scale for several decades. I now thought that I could no longer teach these fourth-graders the church doctrine about Easter. My first and only self-created lesson plan was focused on the meaning of  Easter. This lesson plan did not go well with the newly-arrived preacher to this church, as his youngest son was in my class.  My cut-to-the-chase free information was: “The main issue you need to be concerned about is that I think this visitor to Earth was crucified on Easter for different reasons than what we have been taught” (or words to that effect).  That ended this interview. I have since found out that this interviewer is an “Only-Child” with a “Rescue Complex”.

The aftermath of this interview is a prime example of the lack of respect for the First Amendment to the Constitution of the USA – “Freedom of Speech” and “Freedom of the Press”  – in the church.  I not only did not receive a paid position in the church so that I could earn Social Security credits, but now was restricted to any contact with church children, visitors to the church, attending any church social functions and was restricted to use of only one classroom in this church.  When this church got a new lead pastor right out of seminary, after I had a few interactions with him and visits from three of the church elders who showed me the contract that I had signed to obey their codes of conduct to be a church member, I received my signed invitation to “find another church.”  I now have this document framed and hanging on my home office wall. This confirmed my view that the churches have become Christian clubhouses. 

After several years of being restricted to this one classroom in the church where my opinions were quickly squelched by the leaders of this group, I am now able to speak, usually, without being shouted down but still receive some uproar when I challenge church activities. I created a couple of blogs: “A New Paradigm in Christian Thinking” and Gadflyblog.com.  I am not allowed to give any information about these blogs inside of the church.

However, one of the leaders in this class and I have formed a successful music group, “Jack and Mark” et.al., a bluegrass style pickup band, and we are now performing quite successfully in downtown businesses, coffee houses and restaurants.  This is after about a decade of performing as street musicians and on an open-air bandstand in the downtown city park on Sunday afternoons.   We perform as “National Crises Troubleshooters masquerading as musicians.”  We have a two-hour repertoire of national interest tunes, bluegrass standards, old-time gospel, original tunes, folk tunes and message tunes.

Our Mission

 It is our mission to teach our audience thegood news of the kingdom  that the “Messenger from the Creator of the Universe” brought to planet Earth and to inform the planet not to promulgate laws like the lawmakers have done or they will come to dominate us.”  This representative of the creator of the universe taught us about science and the processes the creator created and how we can plug into these processes.  His listeners did not have the capability to understand the science he was teaching and made a religion from His teachings.  Therefore, it is our objective to rid planet Earth of religion and teach the science that this representative of the creator of the universe taught.

The USA has promoted the Democratic form of government throughout the planet Earth. History has shown that democratically lead nations have a way of self-destructing.  These nations self-destruct because they did not understand the guiding economic principles of what has become known as “The Ten Commandments.”  These guidelines would be better understood if known as “Ten Hypothetical Imperatives” a situation where one obeys the imperatives because there is a reward for doing so.  These Ten Imperatives are directly tied to the “Economic Operating Efficiency” of that nation.  The Economic Operating Efficiency of a nation is demonstrated in that nation’s “National Debt”.   Our second president John Adams stated “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.”  The growing homeless situation in the USA is an indication that we are not following these “Ten Hypothetical Imperatives”.  We promote this theme with a medley of “This Land is Your Land” by Woody Guthrie and “Hypothetical Imperatives” arranged by Jack E Johnston and based on Exodus Chapter 20 and an original “The Promise” by Jack E Johnston based on John 14:3.  Q.E.D.