After reading the article posted on the opening page, which tells us about an Anglican Priest who advised poor parishioners it was OK to steal food from large supermarket stores: Protester pours pasta over shoplift sermon priest
I was reminded of an idea I had that poor people might be housed in hostel style accomodation similar to the accomodation that migrants lived in back in the 50’s adn 60’s in Australia.
I remember hundreds of families living out in the Matraville park area, in row after row of large hostels. People lived there until they could find accomodation. It is difficult for people to sort out their lives, and find work, when they are completely homeless.
With so many people homeless in Sydney, for example, why not this way to solve that problem?
It might solve the short term problems of these people? I guess it would require good supervision for it to work.
Hostels and dormitory accommodation for the homeless still happen. As do refuges. Management of homelessness has to be multi-pronged and multi-level. Indeed it is also multi-disciplinary.
In the days that you were citing Ken, there were substantial differences to now. As a result of two Royal Commissions being used to cut costs and reduce economic burden on the state, care for the mentally ill and care for the disabled has been eroded out of sight. The Homelessness sector has been the dumping ground, along with the hospital and prison systems for now homeless disabled and mentally ill people. (to be specific, the Govt used the Commission findings to close the large Govt run assylums, hostels etc and put people out into the community but without the community support dollars required to make good ideas be good).
We have also had substantial changes in the economics and social impact of substance abuse and this has also seriously impacted the nature of homelessness.
We also have good research into the nature of homelessness, how and why people enter into homelessness and how best to manage them. Finally, the suggestion you made harks back to a time when women who tried to escape a violent husband had nowhere to run. Indeed , escape from Domestic violence remains the primary cause for homelessness, especially among women. Given that many women escape violence with their children accompanying them, I’d suggest that dormitory accommodation, or even hostel accommodation would not be the best solution. The danger is high.
The book “On the Outside” by Prof Guy Johnson (also Gronda & Coutts) offers research into the pathways into, through and out of homelessness. Of note is the special effectiveness of interventions that keep people entering into homelessness from also entering into the street community (which consists largely of a mix of homeless, mentally ill and drug using people). Further, his research also demonstrates the absolute need to assist homeless people who are engaged with this sub-community, to extricate themselves from it.
From my personal experience in the sector I’d say his research is bang on the money. The hostel, dormitory and refuge models of managing homelessness solve the socially unacceptable problem of seeing lots of homeless people around, but does nearly nothing about actually managing the problems that a population with increasingly complex issues has.
Dunno if that answers your question. Hope so. Happy to talk some more about the issue, it is one I am passionate about and have been involved at local, regional state and federal levels on.
Just thought I should also add that the present Govt (Rudd and State Govts) are going down the line of en masse accommodation albeit with supports in place using the Common Ground Model. I can’t tell you how appalled I am about this. (actually I can- and will)
Firstly, Common Ground is well marketted in the USA but poorly researched. ie; it makes huge but unsubstantiated claims as to its effectiveness)
second. It’s from the USA. This assumption that Oz Govts of all flavours have of grasping at something from OS over Oz home grown models really gets me annoyed. There has been oodles of money poured into pilot programmes all over the nation. Many of these models have been well researched but never taken up- no matter how effective.
thirdly; It looks like a good idea for exactly the reasons that make it a rotten one. ie; It places a stack of people together who will effectively constitute a community that will prohibit progress for its members. Those of you who have worked in the community sector will be familiar with this phenomenon. It is certainly a part of what Prof Johnson was talking about.
Finally, it will create an easily acceptable means of stigmatising people in the Common Ground facilities. The huge great bread boxes that are used in the USA will become recognisable eyesores that folks will develop an attitude about. (“he’s from that Common Ground thing.”)
Kevin Rudd has failed to improve the lot of the homeless. He promised to fix it, but it is worse.
Unfortunately, spin and rhetoric dont do much. And there is an old political saying - “Bullshit Baffles Brains”, it should be Kevin Rudd’s motto, maybe.
Homelessness is increasing Ken but I’m afraid it is simply following trends that were set in motion years back. We have been noting and commenting for about four years on the increasing numbers of families requesting assistance. Partly attributed to the rental crisis, partly (in the Bush) to the drought, the trend has been exacerbated by the economic downturn. I noted families because when you see families hitting the system then things are critical.
A couple of comments on the article. 1; Rhonda Gregory (whom I have known for years- she is a wonderful woman) is spot on.
2; The homeless person is also correct, the focus should be on causes.
The Road Home white paper on homelessness is focussed on causes as much as on managing the existing problems. The strategies are largely well thought through (I was involved in the process- there was a lot of argy bargy but mostly there was a genuine effort to really tackle the issues) but none are instant fix.
The depletion of mental health infrastructure, the poor relationships between mental health and A & OD services in many areas, the seriously stretched Child protection system, a scant rental market and a very white anted public and social housing sector mean that rapid response isn’t possible.
The strain placed on the homelessness, health and policing sectors (with the adjunct Corrective system) requires not just dollars, it requires serious upskilling and well trained people. They aren’t around yet. Attracting folks to the homelessness sector isn’t easy- after the police, ambos and nurses, they are the next most likely to be assaulted at work. They are also poorly paid, yet the level of responsibility is very high. eg; when I ran a Homelessness org. mt pay was the same as the bloke who cared for the Council’s trees and flowers in public places in town. But if any of his charges died he just had to buy another one. If any of mine died- which did happen a fair bit- I was in potential serious strife right through to Coroner’s Court. Why would folks want to do this stuff?
Howard helped improve things by targetting the Mental Health sector, but the rollout of the Community Mental Health programmes has really only begun in earnest in the past 12 months. The same will be true of improvements to the homelessness sector. Indeed, any attempt to improve the homelessness sector without substantial boosts to the Mental Health, Child Protection, A & OD and Disability sectors is highly unlikely to succeed.
So, we need patience for Rudd’s plans to unfold. At least he consulted. Howard’s Govt. came dangerously close to shutting down the SAAP sector without any consultation. it was largely due to the plan being leaked that it was prevented. (SAAP = Supported Accommodation Assistance programme- the bulk of the homelessness response). Incidentally, for reasons of balance, Carr nearly a similar thing with the NSW state response about 8 years ago.
So, I believe that the thrust of the article was a bit too impatient. none of us in the sector expect the issues to be immediately managed, they have been building and building since the closure of Institutions after the Richmond Royal Commission report, exacerbated by other failings in social infrastructure at all Govt levels.
having said that though, I think we need to keep an eye on this. Rudd did appear to have a passion for the issue, so for the first time in living memory a prime Minister recognised the importance of the issue. But will he keep the focus in place? Will they tart up the figures. Rumours have abounded that they plan to ditch the third category of homelessness in the statistics. Tertiary Homelessness may be ditched from the counting. If they do this then achieving their stated goal could be easy but ineffectual.
Plans to force the Common Ground model into inappropriate situations are being considered.
It’s a mixed bag at the moment but mostly it’s promising. The State Govt has also come on board and has finally developed a State Homelessness Action Plan which will require Govt departments into greater cooperation around homelessness. Similar moves in Child protection and Mental Health are underway.
The mental health response by governments is poor. There are many wandering homeless people with mental illnesses who are not treated because they are not a danger to themselves or others. But they need medication to get through life.
These people should be targeted and treated by block injections under a court order.
There should be institutions for people with ongoing mental conditions. Bob Carr closed down Gladesville Hospital in order to get money for the sale of land there.
The rental and house crisis could be solved by limiting the number of properties a person could own without heavy taxation. People speculate on real estate which pushes up prices.
In the old days, people simply saw a house as somewhere to live there whole lives. European speculators and real estate agents pushed up prices mainly. Now with today’s material world it is fashionable to do it.
The drug issue is not being seriously tackled by Governments or Police. If the police wanted to get tought on drug sellers, it could be stopped a bit. Every pub in Sydney has a couple of drug pushers there. A simple undercover investigation could have damage on this market.
Not to mention that Govt advertising and education on the issue is nowhere to be seen.
To solve problems, you need the following:
1 identify the problem,
2. formulate a solution
3. act on this solution in a planned methodical way.
(Poltical party correctness, and allowing media interference is the problem though. the media is more a part of the problem rather than being part of the solution)
True, but it is improving. My new job is in one such programme.
There are many wandering homeless people with mental illnesses who are not treated because they are not a danger to themselves or others. But they need medication to get through life.
These people should be targeted and treated by block injections under a court order.
Sounds like it is caring and a good thing. I have been involved in this process many times, especially where the client has been a danger to self and others. No matter how you dress it up, it deprives a person of dignity and self worth. It also places strong powers in the state’s hands. The court becomes the arbiter of a person’s well being.
It is in precisely the area of dignity and worth that a client will find recovery (not cure necessarily- recovery). If your motive is to make th streets less cluttered with human debris from a failed system, to make them seem safer, then your suggestion would be the one to go for. If, on the other hand, your aim is to assist people to become functioning members of society, to give them self efficacy, to enable someone’s mother, father, son, daughter, sister or brother to return to dignity and worth, then supports, assistance carefully designed and targetted should be developed.
Many such programmes exist. In NSW there is the HASI programme. The Federal Government has also rolled out the PHAMS which is what I work in. There are also the very exciting RCG’s that I believe will fill a huge gap in service provision.
There should be institutions for people with ongoing mental conditions.
There should, and there are. These should be a last resort. The old “they contribute nothing so get them out of the way” policies of Australian Govts. underpinned substantial abuse of human rights. Let us consider the damage that institutions have wrought on the Stolen Generations and the Forgotten Australians. At the heart of the success of failure of these policies are the values that drove them. If our aim is to get folks off the street then systemic abuse is guarranteed. If we intend to return to them dignity and worth, to embrace them into society, then our appproach must reflect this.
It is important you understand this; I am not speaking with some sort of Leftie, goodie twoshoes hat on (The Communist Govts were appalling abusers of such people- remember Romania’s Orphanages). This is simple practicality. If you take people’s rights, worth and dignity away you get a response that reflects that damage both in the clients and in those given the task of their care. We need to learn from history here.
The rental and house crisis could be solved by limiting the number of properties a person could own without heavy taxation. People speculate on real estate which pushes up prices.
Good luck with that. Simple variations of stating up a Company or Trust to own the properties will kick in and there will be no substantial difference. Lawyers & Accountants will develop all sorts of schemes at easy costs to enable it to happen. Instead, the depleted social housing sector could be built again. Policies such as the Reshaping Public Housing Policy of Housing NSW are a step in the right direction. Many of my peers dislike(d) it, but I believe the emphasis that it puts on tenant responsibility, cooperation with support agencies was a huge step forward.
The Drug issue is a huge one and no simple solution exists. Should the police do as you say it would change exactly nothing. That is why they don’t do it. Many, most drug users esp those with dependencies) also deal. They do this for the simple purpose of survival.
Re; Govt advertising and education. In fact there is quite a lot around but it is researched, targetted and usually carefully done. The mass advertising campaigns are typically instant failures. Often there is a spike in use of whichever substance is being targetted when they do those things. Hopefully they won’t do that stuff in too much of a hurry in future.
You said
To solve problems, you need the following:
1 identify the problem,
2. formulate a solution
3. act on this solution in a planned methodical way.
Indeed! In fact there is a lot to this going on. The push to get instant results in homelessness in the media is a push to exactly the opposite of this process. I suggest to you the reading of the Green and the White paper’s on homelessness. There were many flaws in the process, but it was overall a wonderful thing to have a Govt fixed on real solutions rather than ones that would just appear to be good ideas but would be failures. But this process takes time and we should encourage this to be the case (within limits)
The research on the areas you raised is extensive and much is available in the public domain. There is research on what models work, where and with whom. We have a Govt that listens (more or less) to the experts. Previous Govts. were not so humble as to admit that the answers wouldn’t come from their populist policy drives.
Don’t get me wrong, Rudd’s Govt tried to block the hands on experts from the process. Folks like us resist simple solutions cos we know that they don’t work- only too well. It is our daily experience. We were making their agenda look complex, we forced them to keep on returning to the table. But, to their credit- they listened. They didn’t always like what they heard, but they listened. Their predecessors were almost incapable of this. (Mind you, it was Howard et al that kicked off the community mental health sector so I shouldn’t be too harsh on him.). He was foolishly deaf on how to handle the A&OD; problems and actually tried to imitate that most failed system of all “The War on Drugs in the US”. In doing so he didn’t do the HIV prevention and Hep C prevention initiatives any good. He tried to can the SAAP sector without even a replacement model and certainly without consultation.
and allowing media interference is the problem though. the media is more a part of the problem rather than being part of the solution
Sometimes that is true, at others it is the media that raises the issues and gives voice to those who should be heard when Govt.‘s don’t listen.
I used to have a little poster on my office door when I was in the A &OD; field. It said “To every human problem there is a solution. It is simple and easy…... AND IT DOESN’T WORK!”
[ Edited: 06 January 2010 05:48 PM by Owen Atkins]
The media usually just agrees with the Govt and publish their spin. They are not pushing enough for Govt to solve problems which have been going on for years.
The Govts rely on information given to them by beaurocrats. I work in this sector and it is a stuff up. Not only do we have half the public sector bludging, they also dont look into things thoroughly or in the logical way. Even half the police are bludging and looking the other way to problems in the community.
Your excuses for not solving the drug problem are typical public service crap. If police were fair dinkum and organised, the problem would be minimised.
The cost of housing is blown out. There is too much regulation and red tape which has doubled the cost of building a home. They should scrap the present system and start again. Building was a fraction of the price say thirty years back. There is no need for such inflated prices, it is mainly due to union/Labor intervention, with too many rules and regs.
This building blow out makes it hard for people to buy their house/appartment, and makes rents higher, and helps people to be homeless.
More people would be housed if they had a job, also. It is up to Govts to make this process work. This is an area which needs the solution/resolution process.
But, in summary, the people responsible for solving the problems, are bludging and brainless. (present company excepted of course) This includes public servants, journalists, pollies, advisors etc)
In short, too many people in Australia are part of the problem, and not part of a solution. Didnt President Robert Kennedy say “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”? Too many people are caught up in their own minds and are sitting on their hands. This includes the victims and the people who are there to solve the problems. Beaucrats more concerned with their status and not sticking their noses out to solve the problems.
It is all part of the corrupted ways of the world. And the answer lies there. Even church leaders and attenders are just as guilty.
That’s a bleak old picture you paint there Ken.
Not one I totally agree with. BTW, I don’t work for any public service. Thank God I work for an NGO.
As for the drug problem. I believe that it is an incredibly complex one and no matter how much policing happens it will not go away. In fact I don’t think of it as being a police issue really.
The effects of drug use can be policing issues. ie; violence, theft etc. But drug use itself is hardly really a police issue. The rules we have made up about what drugs are acceptable and which aren’t for our culture are hardly rational and certainly don’t reflect any real attempt to better public health or stability. The USA Prohibition should have taught us all the failure of prohibition policies on any intoxicating substance, but no, we decided to ban a raft of drugs (heroin was banned in about 1954- until then we were the world’s largest consumer of it- without any huge problem. After that we got a real ripper of a problem.
If we want to really tackle the problem then we should be dealing with it at the source. For heroin it is in Burma & Thailand mostly (The Golden Triangle) and Afghanistan. Impoverished farmers easily choose a crop grown there for centuries that has a lucrative market.
For your police action to be effective we would have to guarrantee that the courts are going to convict the people that come before them, but the courts have long since recognised that drug use is very largely a health issue and I agree with them. I don’t believe there is any excuse for any behaviour while intoxicated (nor do the courst largely) but I hardly think that drug use itself is a crime. Alcohol lies at the heart of most drug related crime but I note it is still readily available. Thankfully too, cos I do love a beer.
As for the housing crisis, simply build more social housing and relieve the pressure on the market that way. We once had a substantial public housing sector and now it has been depleted. It will represent a real competitor to the private market and reduce rents all around. Rudd has committed to do this (in part- I’m not sure how effective its numbers will be).
I have, in my work, the task of dealing with a vast number of bureaucrats. Some are fools, some are dead lazy, but many more than your picture indicates are committed and great to work with. They listen and they work their way through a cumbersome system to instigate change.
Re; the red tape for building a house. This is very true and needs to be addressed. Red tape is always an issue. It is also one of the reasons that the Govt has more recently become willing to listen to NGO’s and to work with them. Under Howard NGO’s were largely silenced. His rule in funding agreements and in taxation status made it nearly impossible foir an NGO to speak out against Govt policy.
ie; You signed an agreement not to speak out against his policies and also, if you did, not only were you in danger of losing funding- you were identified as an “Advocacy Group” and not eligible for taxation relief. Somehow his crowd considered advocacy separate from any other work being done. For my part I can hardly see how that is the case and most of the sector agrees. Advocacy is essential, whether it is to get a department to listen to what a client needs and provide it as they should or to get Govt to change damaging policies.
If you really want to do something about these issues Ken then some of those links I gave you are useful.
The Green & White papers on homelessness were part of an extensive consultation process with the sector. That was the Govt listening not only to bureaucrats but to client lobby groups, to NGO’s and significant other players such as researchers.
I’d suggest that at least in this issue the Govt listened.
Under Howard there was (unusually) a significant consultation with the sector and so the now unrolling mental health community programmes are just now coming inot being. Please note that these programmes were developed under Howard and are only now being unrolled. It does take time if you want to get it right.
As for the Drug & Alcohol problems. The Bi party agreements to promote harm minimisation were significantly eroded under Howard and it will take a long time to get things right again. Any attempt to continue the “war on drugs” will not succeed. The USA has no qualms about throwing heavy handed policing at this issue, including military operations in source countries and have done nothing like succeed. Nor can it. They failed with the Prohibition, they failed with the War on Drugs, they have had nearly a century of failure- why on earth would we want to enjoin that massive failure of law enforcement, public policy, health policy, child protection etc etc etc?
Harm minimisation works, but all it takes is the media (often the Telegraph) to write an article on ... shock, horror… a needle exchange or the Injection Rooms and suddenly we have knee jerk Jerks screaming about how it’s a moral nightmare and calling for these things to end. Well Howard was a populist of the first order and responded to those outcries rapidly and without consultation. If things are worse now, I suggest you lay a significant part of the blame at his feet. He depleted housing stock (as did the Labor Govt before him), he rarely consulted, he ignored bi partisan agreements and the research, he got another war on drugs going, he reduced the public sector’s (NGO & Govt) ability to advocate on issues. If the media have seemed to be asleep for a while it is because many of the players they would normally have spoken to were silenced.
One good way to stop drugs is to cut off the head of the snake in order to kill it. The head of the drug snake is the cash being made from it.
The attraction with drugs is the money to be made from it. If drugs were made available to registered users the money would dry up, and drugs would end up being unattractive to sellers and buyers. It is a market which flourishes on money. Drug users would then be controlled and pushers put out of business.
Of course some would still go for it. But it would no longer be pushed illegally but distributed by agencies which could control and monitor it and also educate people in the end to give it up. People who know nothing about the drug market can never understand this way of eradication of prolific drug use. Drug selling is a community pyramid selling operation.
I know you will argue against that method, quoting failed overseas attempts at this, but it is really the only way to attack the problem. (And better policing would also help.)
Actually I won’t argue that at all. I think that legalising currently illicit substances and making them available under controlled means is an option that needs to be better explored. The Merseyside experiment was a success but it was expensive.
The injection rooms are a step in that direction.
Harm minimisation is the only option if you want results. Your idea is one that is politically unpalatable, especially since we would cop enormous pressure from the USA to not go there. For my money it’s a good option although there are huge hurdles to overcome. At the moment (again cos of Howard’s direct actions) even Methadone is considered to be a poor option. I think Methadone and “Bupe” are incredibly effective but hugely under resourced programmes.
Well, Owen, look at it this way. People will still use drugs but they will get them for a fraction of the market cost.
They will pay enough to cover the cost of the scheme. Say instead of $50 for marijuana, it could be $20.
When they get the drugs, the fact that they are drug users will go on their medicare card or better still an identity card.
The person’s employer, or the Govt will also get to know that they are drug users. (This becomes a disincentive to continue taking drugs?)
People will not have to commit crime to get the money for drugs, and drug pushers will be put out of business.
Meanwhile, the drug user will be subjected to a complete education programme to inform them of the risks and side effects. I think drug use would become a minor problem in the community, over a few years of this policy.
But really, the pollies, beaucrats and media seem to be ignoring the drug problem in our society, going on the lack of reports coming out. They continue to tackle the problem with the old failed methods. (if you find yourself in a hole, you don’t keep digging deeper, if you have any sense)
Just another case of the people who should be coming up with solutions actually being part of the problem.
In respect of charity to the down-and out, showing kindness to those in need is very important, but without leading them to faith in God through Jesus, good deeds, in the end, only offer partial relief. People could then probably continue living their lives in the wrong misled way as before, and ultimately end up at relief centres over and over again.
It is like the adage, “Give a man a fish, and you fill his belly for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you save his life for a longer period”. (or words to that effect)
People end up thinking well of organisations which offer food and shelter. But if they trusted and knew Jesus, they could then become independant of such organisations, for the rest of their working life. People need more than just food and shelter - they need to have new lives built on the ‘rock of faith’ - Jesus.
In sections
]In respect of charity to the down-and out, showing kindness to those in need is very important, but without leading them to faith in God through Jesus, good deeds, in the end, only offer partial relief.
Yes, but I have seen that turned into abuse at the hands of some ... er… many, who preached at their clients instead of listening to them. I have seen plenty of conversions at the hands of such people. The “converted” lasted for long enough to get what they needed and probably wound up embittered about jesus cos His reps were crap. Don’t downplay this Ken, it’s a big issue.
“Give a man a fish, and you fill his belly for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you save his life for a longer period”
Pretty much the driving philosophy for the sector nowadays. At the mo I work for a Christian org that simply does the work. We don’t preach. We accept folks as they come to us. I have had a gutfull of preaching in this sector and it’ll take a long time tom convince me it’s OK.
Live it and give it but preach somewhere else.
The cost of housing is blown out. There is too much regulation and red tape which has doubled the cost of building a home. They should scrap the present system and start again. Building was a fraction of the price say thirty years back. There is no need for such inflated prices, it is mainly due to union/Labor intervention, with too many rules and regs.
This building blow out makes it hard for people to buy their house/appartment, and makes rents higher, and helps people to be homeless.
As for the housing crisis, simply build more social housing and relieve the pressure on the market that way. We once had a substantial public housing sector and now it has been depleted. It will represent a real competitor to the private market and reduce rents all around. Rudd has committed to do this (in part- I’m not sure how effective its numbers will be).
A few months ago I did the ring-walk around the old brick-pit at Homebush. I didn’t know anything about it previously, but it’s the site of the old NSW Govt. brickworks. The walk is one of those public space projects, with the history of the brickworks displayed as you walk around.
The brickworks was started in about 1911 because of poor housing affordablity and operational (with ups and downs) until the 80s. During the time of its operation, housing affordablity became substantially better. Now, - guess what? - it’s back at least as bad as 1911 levels. This is a very broad generalisation and overall impression, I know. It is the analysis I made at the time of more detailed information, which I read at the time.
This I see as an example of how strategic and practical Government involvement can really make a difference. I understand a lot of generic brick houses in Sydney were built from NSW Govt brickworks bricks. I’m not claiming it’s the only reason for better housing affordability in that period. I’m saying I believe it was a significant factor, and even possibly a critical one. I’m not saying ‘bring back the brickworks’, either. The right strategic Government involvement for the time is of utmost importance. I am suggesting that the public sector has an important place.
[ Edited: 12 January 2010 03:46 PM by Ros Burgess]
This I see as an example of how strategic and practical Government involvement can really make a difference.
Indeed, the planned mass building of Govt stock is hoped to input into the Aust economy. If managed well the influx of Social Housing stock will impact positively on the building economy and on housing prices and the rental market. It will also benefit the NGO sector where social housing is managed by that sector.
Ros Burgess said, in relation to brickworks and cheaper house building prices in the past:
I understand a lot of generic brick houses in Sydney were built from NSW Govt brickworks bricks. I’m not claiming it’s the only reason for better housing affordability in that period. I’m saying I believe it was a significant factor, and even possibly a critical one. I’m not saying ‘bring back the brickworks’, either. The right strategic Government involvement for the time is of utmost importance. I am suggesting that the public sector has an important place.
Ros I have worked in a few fields. I started as a graphic artist and went on in other adverting jobs. I then quit Sydney for a while and with training became a bricklayer for a spell. I have worked in the public service for a number of years to this time.
In those days, there were fewer regulations. I built a two storey holiday house through a builder, and finished it off with a lot of additional brickwork done by myself. The cost in 1980 was $28,000. today the same house would be well over $200,000. I think this is much greater than average inflation.
There are so many silly regulations that government bodies have brought in which lead to inflated prices. My friend, a current architect agrees with me. He says that beaucrats dream up some clever scheme to make things better, which really don’t do that much, and push up building costs. There are so many extra fees, and taxes also these days.
What is needed is a complete re-think. Go back to basics and rule out much of the unneccessary red tape. The extra safety issues add so much to costs, and most of them are over the top. Councils demand too much from the builder in terms of paperwork, which slows up the process too much as well.
Also there are fewer apprentices in trades these days. Employers will not train young people. The trend these days is to import labour from overseas, with many asian tradesmen, who have less training than the old days.
Well, I was saying Government bodies should actually do more - hence I said ‘strategic practical Government involvement’ - I wasn’t taking regulation into account. There is a general notion at the moment that Government just doesn’t do things properly and everything should be privatised. I think the profit motive, which private enterprise is built around, will only do so much. (And one thing it does is tempts people to be shonky, hence the need for regulations (but they should be sensible, and you say they are not)). Helping the poor needs a sense of community or public accountability, largely left to the government.
We see many failed cultures today - basketcases in fact.
In Africa, South America, especially. Now we see Haiti - a country that has let itself go down the sink, and is now devastated by an earthquake. Are they simply victims for living a backward culture?
I have wondered whether some countries do not progress because of the culture that they have locked themselves into. I would call it a cultural handicap. A culture that holds them back. A culture that keeps them poor.
I see this cultural handicap in Western countries, including Australia. Poor ‘anglos’ in housing commission estates who, generation after generation, continue to not rise above a low state of existence. We see muslim Australians not progressing, is that also a cultural handicap we see.
I think becoming a Christian may be the answer to this problem in individuals. Would it help people financially to bring them to Jesus?
In the USA, some cultures there fail to progress, especially the black population. Why? Is the fact that they lock themselves into their negative culture the reason? Or, not to be rascist, failed poor white people, the same reason?
This link looks at why blacks, for example are holding themselves back. Black Culture This link may sound rascist, but does it truthfully point out problems in that culture?
Here is part of that link
Ask yourself, what do you think when you hear on the news about a violent attack that has taken place? When you hear about a gang murder or drive-by shooting, what do you think? What do you think when you hear of a cop being shot by a drug dealer? You immediately think the culprits were black! Why do you think this? Because you are racist? That is what the race extortionists and mainstream media charge. But that is not the reason. You immediately think of blacks because the vast majority of the time…it is blacks! This is not to say white people don’t commit crimes..they do. But whites make up such a large percentage of our population while blacks make up approximately 13%. Does it make one racist to form opinions on experience? No, it does not. Black males, about 6% of the US population, account for a tremendous amount of our violent crime. Government intervention is not the answer…it’s been tried. Crying victimization of slavery is not the answer…it’s not. Here is the answer: Blacks must immediately change their behavior and values. Blacks must leave behind the beliefs that have made them a extraordinary burden on America. Simply put, it is time for blacks to do better…..
Education, sensible behavior and good decision making is the only way for black youth to rise above their current position on the economic food chain. Dropping out of school, dropping illegitimate children at age 14, drugs, Ebonics, and dressing like a clown will not get you any further than the ghetto in this life.
Does any black parent truly want that kind of life for their child?
What I have seen in the past 20 years is a rebellion by blacks against American moral and social values. Nothing is sacred or pure to them.
There is a hatred of all things white and American. They have been pampered by political correctness and corrupt politicians who take our tax dollars to create generous welfare and social programs for blacks.
I see this cultural handicap in Western countries, including Australia. Poor ‘anglos’ in housing commission estates who, generation after generation, continue to not rise above a low state of existence. We see muslim Australians not progressing, is that also a cultural handicap we see.
The ‘ghettos’ are “alive” ( is that the right word ? ) in Australia. We live in south west Sydney - a region that is pockmarked by various ghettos - mostly they stem from being financial ghettos - and then, within theses areas, they are broken up into various ‘ethnic’ ghettos ( be they either racial or cultural ones ).
The overbearing trait for a lot of folk ( those who feel ‘trapped’ and destined to live forever in these ghettos ) are that they see themselves as VICTIMS - and nothing short of winning the lottery will rescue them. There seems to be no way for them ( or their children ) to break out of their whirlpool existence. Negativity rules their lives. It is really sad - and we have observed multitudes of these casebook examples through our church’s attempts to reach out into these ‘ghetto’ areas and try to help folk break out of their cycle of despair, victimhood and hopelessness. This can only be achieved by a one-on-one decision by an individual to want to change - and then to seek and accept help from others - and to ‘move on’ with their lives.
( Off to church now - will opine more at a later time. )
This can only be achieved by a one-on-one decision by an individual to want to change - and then to seek and accept help from others - and to ‘move on’ with their lives.
I think the answers are far more complicated than that. Ultimately it is down to each individual to make their own decisions. But decisions are based on the life context and the perception that arise from this.
Typically, in any place in the world, if you want to find the “failed cultures”, failed groups and those who are ruled by negativity- look for where there has been colonisation, enslavement and the new arrivals into the lowest socio-economic groups.
Where problems continue, look for low rates of education, poor sanitation, poor health, water and housing.
Another great indicator is the repression of women- in fact, it is one of the best indicators for maintenance of poor standards of living.
If you want to keep a failed state or group failed, keep the women repressed, kybosh universal education and ensure poor health and housing is maintained. I don’t think conversion is the cure, but it should be Christians who are in there, getting their hands dirty and leading people out of poverty. It means copping abuse, working for no thanks, being non-judgemental and treat people as equals, even when you find them repulsive, obnoxious or threatening.
It means giving women power in the family, educating them and allowing them status in society, prosecuting those who are violent towards them, even if they are religeous leaders. It means protecting the kids from abuse such as that disgusting anti-child witch stuff in Nigeria (lead by evangelical churches.)
It usually means respecting their beliefs, no matter how theologically unsound you think they are and it means putting your own certainties aside.That’s what Christians should be doing if they genuinely want to make a difference. It is what they often do in all sorts of places in all sorts of circumstances.
When people think the aer is conversion, there tends to be amnesia once the conversions have happened. The aim should be the betterment of the people no matter what. We should love as God loves. He provides for the believer and the pagan, for the good and for the wicked. His love is extended to all. So should ours.
I think culturally handicapped people don’t actually realise the state that they are living in. That is the big problem. When I say a culture is handicapped, I mean people live in a community living a culure which disadvantages them. I hope people are more introspective about the state their culture leaves them in.
Although it is politically incorrect (for people of liberal politics), these people should be informed, with love, that they need to change.
But because of political correctness, they are not, and they don’t change. They are either ignored, or some government department gets a lot of money to do little to help them, despite the best efforts sometimes. (eg Australian native people) .
In the case of black gang bangers, say, their fallen state is glamourised in video clips, movies, etc. Meanwhile most of them remain in the ghetto, acting out a role that doesnt help them. In Australia, I think the muslim male gang culture is very similar to the US black cgang ulture in many respects. These cultures don’t help the participants to succeed in life. Black culture and Muslim culture both seem to produce negative results for their participants.
Yes, it is up to the individual to make a decision to improve their lives, but it is also up to various cultures to determine whether it is valuable to continue in their particular lifestyle, or reject aspects of that culture. That takes education on an official level, I think.
Owen said:
Typically, in any place in the world, if you want to find the “failed cultures”, failed groups and those who are ruled by negativity- look for where there has been colonisation, enslavement and the new arrivals into the lowest socio-economic groups.
Where problems continue, look for low rates of education, poor sanitation, poor health, water and housing.
Another great indicator is the repression of women- in fact, it is one of the best indicators for maintenance of poor standards of living.
It is easy to find an excuse for failures, but it is up to cultures and individuals to change things for themselves, and not blame everyone else.
Ken
facts tend to speak for themselves. Colonisation leaves serious legacies and it helps not one wit to tell people to get over it and get on with it. Colonisation, enslavement and the tendency across cultures to alienate, ostracise and persecute their indigenous peoples do leave legacies.
For example; in Oz, it is possible to map out where the hot spots for Aboriginal disadvantageare going to be. Just get a map of where the missions were. In those places you usually have terrible disadvantage and cultural breakdown. This is important. The function of many missions was the deliberate destruction of indigenous culture. The remnant group is usually divorced from their culture (most anglo-whites have very little understanding of the impact of a loss of culture- we have forgotten the legacy of Norman domination on our own ancestors. Hundreds of years of abuse and persecution, relegation to the lowest strata, denigration of their language- nearly all our swear words are just the Saxon word for whatever it was- body part or function- but they were “vulgar”- ie; not Norman”). You can claim we got over it- but that process took a lot of blood and quite a few hundred years. We need to afford those we have done the same to at least the understanding that we have caused hurt, taken their culture, language and land. These losses are incredibly painful.
I hardly think that a new process of pure missionary work is going to be successful. The generational memories include substantial distrust and resentment- with good reason.
And it’s no use claiming it was all ages ago. I live right next to the town where the Aboriginal Deaths in Custody began with Eddie Murray’s hanging in a cell in Wee Waa. In that town I experienced first hand the terror that I could invoke in indigenous households just by announcing I worked for the Dept. of Health (not to mention when I worked for DoCS).
The victimisation stuff is still real.
If you were a Jew living in post Nazi Germany, ten years after the war, you’d still have profound terror of anything representing that oppression- or profound anger.
All that aside- telling anyone to just “get over it” or to reduce an issue down to blame and failure is naive and hardly takes account of real human experience. Nor is it useful (or even helpful) to just give them stuff, money, houses etc as some sort of moral sop or even a genuine attempt to help.
Dignity can be nurtured then earned. but dignity is the key. Disadvantage is always accompanied by denied dignity. Look at the causal list I made- denied dignity is at the heart of this. If Christs message (a huge carrier of personal and cultural dignity in itself) is to be heard by these groups, then the bearers should be from within the community not remnant “good guys” from the oppressive cultures. Meanwhile, others should be helping to develop communities and dignity and set up infrastructure. As much as possible it should be through members of those communities.
But, no dignity is carried to a group by telling them that they have failed, that they are failures, that their culture is a failure. None. To assist any group, you build on their strengths. You do so humbly and reducing your own personal and cultural impact.
Mind you, you should also be honest, but assuming that a culture is a failure is not honesty- it is an imposition of your own judgement. If it is true- they need to find this truth without someone preaching at them.
The careful communicator can do this.
If I tell a client that the thing they do is useless, they will simply resent my judgement, get angry with me and probably do that thing even more. If I ask them to consider what they do, ask them to consider the results and have the patience to wait for them to move through layers of experience and learning and problems until they can see what I already see, then they will grow and change.
I can be blunt and quite brutal and am often accurate. But mostly I find it better to let them learn. In two difficult local hamlets, many folks (myself included) tried to get things happening and real social improvement. We all failed - spectacularly. But when a local did that same work, results happened on a huge scale.
Anything else is really a sort of cultural imperialsim, or colonisation or whatever.
Y’know Davo, I prefer lots of little petty and crap bureaucracies than one big, cumbersome and beyond redemption type mess that a single world parliament could ever offer. Biblical prophecies aside, I think the whole idea is a nightmare.
I despise bureaucracies at the best of times, imagine a huge, world wide one.
Yuck
Hi Owen,
first of all I posted too soon and did not want to sound flippant about the fairly weighty and careful sociological insights above. I thought this thread would be about the plight of the poor, but that was my Haiti News overload acting on my brain.
A world parliament could definitely be yucko in some ways, but I despite wars even worse than big bureaucracies. ;)
What do you make of the EU? I’m imagining something like that, but better. The vision of some of the EU reformers see for the EU is a bold, robust, accountable, open democratic system, rather than the ‘dirty diplomatic deals done behind closed doors’ we have at the World Bank and UN.
Anyway, imagine Haiti having an emergency co-ordinator already in charge, with law and order and provisions on the ground already! That 1.3 trillion dollars we spend on the military to nuke each other back to the stone age each year could be drastically reduced and turned into more of an “International Rescue”.
This is starting to sound a little like “Thunderbirds are Go!” so I’ll refer further discussion on this theme across to Who fears a World Government?.
Labor will dredge up dozens of comments by Mr Abbott on issues such as industrial relations, abortion, teenage sex, marriage and climate change. ... Sydney Morning Herald
A PREGNANT woman is among 15 new hepatitis C-infected patients treated at a Croydon abortion clinic who have joined a class action against Victoria's ...
Swansea council agreed earlier this year to bestow the freedom of the city to Dr Williams, who has been leader of the Anglican Communion since 2003. ...
Swansea council agreed earlier this year to bestow the freedom of the city to Dr Williams, who has been leader of the Anglican Communion since 2003. ...
From there, his return to Christianity is gradual, beginning with a rediscovery of the joys of Christmas, followed soon, on the occasion of his wedding, ...
More seriously, our lack of faith has led us to erect false gods in Christianity's place (New Age superstitions, modern art), while the secular consensus, ...
From there, his return to Christianity is gradual, beginning with a rediscovery of the joys of Christmas, followed soon, on the occasion of his wedding, ...
Some experts have worried that this particularly therapy has not been adequately proven in animals and could spur a backlash against the embryonic stem cell ...
PERTH Anglican Archbishop Roger Herft has clashed with his Catholic counterpart over Julia Gillard's atheism. He warned it was "unhelpful and untrue" to ...
Kinglake residents Jean Howard, St Peters Anglican vicar Stephen Holmes and Peter Crook near the site of the Anglican church. Picture: Aaron Francis Source: ...
He didn't miss a beat during an hour-long appearance at Cannon Hill Anglican College's open day yesterday, where he cheerfully posed for photographs with ... Worm may turn on PM Sydney Morning Herald
“I was not even aware of her religious belief and of her conversion to the Anglican church. I therefore strongly refute any claims of the Centre or any ... Telegraph.co.uk
Tony Abbott has no plans to make abortion more difficult to procure if he becomes prime minister. The opposition leader, a practising Catholic, ... Sydney Morning Herald
The archbishop's comments follow attacks by two other church leaders in recent months - Sydney Anglican Archbishop Peter Jensen and Sydney's Catholic ...
But not Jewish hostility to Christianity. You can understand why Jews might dislike the Christian religion: not only does it deify a man, the ultimate ...
RSS Feed