Has the LGBTI community forgotten its poor people? Micro Rainbow

  • metta

    Posts: 39143

    Oct 20, 2014 6:16 AM GMT
    Has the LGBTI community forgotten its poor people?

    http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/has-lgbti-community-forgotten-its-poor-people171014

    Micro Rainbow
    http://www.micro-rainbow.com/


    Sebastian Rocca
    https://twitter.com/sebastianrocca
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 11:24 AM GMT
    when did they ever care?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 3:06 PM GMT
    It didn't forget; they decided not to care. Poor gays can't drink every weekend or drive an hour and a half to hang at a gay club or bar. In other words, they're failures lol.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 3:30 PM GMT
    Gays will only care if they are good looking and hung.

    Ugly, little dick, and no money = gay piriah.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 3:31 PM GMT
    Steel101 saidIt didn't forget; they decided not to care. Poor gays can't drink every weekend or drive an hour and a half to hang at a gay club or bar. In other words, they're failures lol.


    And how do they expect to become upwardly mobile (aka find a suggah daddy) without an iPhone and Grindr?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 3:38 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan saidGays will only care if they are good looking and hung.

    Ugly, little dick, and no money = gay piriah.


    You win the internet today!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 4:03 PM GMT
    I don't see how we could have, bombarded by constant appeals to give over and above what we already pay in taxes and charitable contributions every day. I give enough every year for me to itemize my deductions and still I get the smarmy guilt card played at every turn, as here. Among competing charities, I give only to those which have a low expense ratio and whose goals of self-sufficiency and personal responsibility are actually met. Being a Vietnam-era Vet, I also give to Veterans' groups. But I never give to beggars, who'd just as soon spend it on some passing pleasure that the rest of us work to obtain.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 4:33 PM GMT

    lol, a lot of people apparently didn't read the gaystar article.

    It was about opening a discussion. It's also not US-centric. Go and look. Although, admittedly you guys have big problems still in the US where in some States you can, (and some are) fired for being gay, threatened with firing for being gay, as well as housing etc.

    ...and I have no idea what MGINSD is going on about in relation to this, lol.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 4:37 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    lol, a lot of people apparently didn't read the gaystar article.

    It was about opening a discussion. It's also not US-centric. Go and look. Although, admittedly you guys have big problems still in the US where in some States you can, (and some are) fired for being gay, threatened with firing for being gay, as well as housing etc.

    ...and I have no idea what MGINSD is going on about in relation to this, lol.


    No surprises there, MIL; your reading comprehension skills have always been on the low side. Hint: try staying on topic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 4:40 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    lol, a lot of people apparently didn't read the gaystar article.

    It was about opening a discussion. It's also not US-centric. Go and look. Although, admittedly you guys have big problems still in the US where in some States you can, (and some are) fired for being gay, threatened with firing for being gay, as well as housing etc.

    ...and I have no idea what MGINSD is going on about in relation to this, lol.






    Just a little info for you: Unless you are a member of one of the protected groups, in most states in the USA you can be terminated for any reason. The new boss may not like you because you remind him of his ex wife, your choice of footwear is odious to him, that hideous mole in the middle of you forehead is distracting. Now, granted they won't tell you that, but they will make your life so miserable that you quit or make up some trumped up charge about your work isn't up to par, etc.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 6:04 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan said
    meninlove said
    lol, a lot of people apparently didn't read the gaystar article.

    It was about opening a discussion. It's also not US-centric. Go and look. Although, admittedly you guys have big problems still in the US where in some States you can, (and some are) fired for being gay, threatened with firing for being gay, as well as housing etc.

    ...and I have no idea what MGINSD is going on about in relation to this, lol.






    Just a little info for you: Unless you are a member of one of the protected groups, in most states in the USA you can be terminated for any reason. The new boss may not like you because you remind him of his ex wife, your choice of footwear is odious to him, that hideous mole in the middle of you forehead is distracting. Now, granted they won't tell you that, but they will make your life so miserable that you quit or make up some trumped up charge about your work isn't up to par, etc.



    There is NO excuse for bad footwear.

    There is a MAJOR distinction between poor and broke

    Broke is a financial condition that, like it or not, will touch EVERYONE at some point

    Poor is a state of mind and way of being that NO ONE wants to be around.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 6:15 PM GMT
    Cash said
    UndercoverMan said
    meninlove said
    lol, a lot of people apparently didn't read the gaystar article.

    It was about opening a discussion. It's also not US-centric. Go and look. Although, admittedly you guys have big problems still in the US where in some States you can, (and some are) fired for being gay, threatened with firing for being gay, as well as housing etc.

    ...and I have no idea what MGINSD is going on about in relation to this, lol.






    Just a little info for you: Unless you are a member of one of the protected groups, in most states in the USA you can be terminated for any reason. The new boss may not like you because you remind him of his ex wife, your choice of footwear is odious to him, that hideous mole in the middle of you forehead is distracting. Now, granted they won't tell you that, but they will make your life so miserable that you quit or make up some trumped up charge about your work isn't up to par, etc.



    There is NO excuse for bad footwear.

    There is a MAJOR distinction between poor and broke

    Broke is a financial condition that, like it or not, will touch EVERYONE at some point

    Poor is a state of mind and way of being that NO ONE wants to be around.
    Sooooooooooooo fucking true!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 6:25 PM GMT
    I think the problem is more that being "homeless" and "poor" isn't what it was 80 years ago. You should see the "homeless" on the streets here in New Orleans. Its turned into one big con ever since the city essentially legalized vagrancy on public land. They're organized, have cellphones, women have makeup and occasionally pregnant, and if you offer then food/coffee they'll often turn you down and ask for money instead. I'd rather give to a charity that I know is doing good than feel guilty at every other (literally) stoplight in Orleans Parish and fork over a dollar of my hard-earned money when my taxes are ALREADY going to pay for unemployment and food stamps. (abuse of the system is a MASSIVE problem down here)
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Oct 20, 2014 8:12 PM GMT
    MGINSD saidI don't see how we could have, bombarded by constant appeals to give over and above what we already pay in taxes and charitable contributions every day. I give enough every year for me to itemize my deductions and still I get the smarmy guilt card played at every turn, as here. Among competing charities, I give only to those which have a low expense ratio and whose goals of self-sufficiency and personal responsibility are actually met. Being a Vietnam-era Vet, I also give to Veterans' groups. But I never give to beggars, who'd just as soon spend it on some passing pleasure that the rest of us work to obtain.


    I found a solution for beggars.

    Instead of giving them money, offer to take them to an inexpensive restaurant and pay for the meal. Generally they turn down the offer.

    Another thing that happens is that at supermarket parking lots, people will ask for money, saying that they don't have enough money to pay for gasoline to get home. In that case, I direct them to a service station and tell them that I will pay for a dollar's worth of gasoline so they can get home. Generally they follow through on that and obviously the small amount of money cannot be used to buy drugs.

    I will not pay to have my windshield washed; that's become an international racket.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 9:33 PM GMT
    FRE0 said
    MGINSD saidI don't see how we could have, bombarded by constant appeals to give over and above what we already pay in taxes and charitable contributions every day. I give enough every year for me to itemize my deductions and still I get the smarmy guilt card played at every turn, as here. Among competing charities, I give only to those which have a low expense ratio and whose goals of self-sufficiency and personal responsibility are actually met. Being a Vietnam-era Vet, I also give to Veterans' groups. But I never give to beggars, who'd just as soon spend it on some passing pleasure that the rest of us work to obtain.


    I found a solution for beggars.

    Instead of giving them money, offer to take them to an inexpensive restaurant and pay for the meal. Generally they turn down the offer.

    Another thing that happens is that at supermarket parking lots, people will ask for money, saying that they don't have enough money to pay for gasoline to get home. In that case, I direct them to a service station and tell them that I will pay for a dollar's worth of gasoline so they can get home. Generally they follow through on that and obviously the small amount of money cannot be used to buy drugs.

    I will not pay to have my windshield washed; that's become an international racket.


    My solution, pioneered in SFrancisco where "homelessness" got its start, is to admonish them appropriately depending on the time of day. In the morning, while on the way to work, I'd ask the bums barricading the BART station if they were on their way to look for work; in the afternoon, facing even larger contingents who'd finally roused themselves for some serious panhandling, I'd ask them if they'd looked for work today. At other times, I'd offer a cheery, "Day's a wastin'!", in the tradition of a 19th century Horatio Alger story or an industrious old codger.

    Why? Because I know scam artists when I see them, and I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for people who squander what they've been given by others or never worked to gain anything for themselves. You used to never see these people on the streets until the late '70s, when the '60s brought them all home to roost, boost, and play fast and loose with our sympathy and charity. It wasn't just against drugs that Nancy Reagan asked us to "just say no!"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 9:34 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    meninlove said
    lol, a lot of people apparently didn't read the gaystar article.

    It was about opening a discussion. It's also not US-centric. Go and look. Although, admittedly you guys have big problems still in the US where in some States you can, (and some are) fired for being gay, threatened with firing for being gay, as well as housing etc.

    ...and I have no idea what MGINSD is going on about in relation to this, lol.


    No surprises there, MIL; your reading comprehension skills have always been on the low side. Hint: try staying on topic.


    lol, your first reply made it glaringly obvious you didn't scrutinize the article. *grins*

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 9:38 PM GMT

    Now, collectively, quit yer naval gazing. It's not all about the US (in fact in the article the US isn't even mentioned) As an exercise, go and read the gaystar link article and list the countries in the article.

    As well, look in the article and read where it asks for money, rofl.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 11:08 PM GMT
    I just read an article that SF is pushing their gays right out into the streets. Yep...just the gays I guess and no one else. There is a problem with sustainable housing in SF and there's certainly a problem with homelessness but it's not because gays don't care about gays. Are gays in Kansas City having problems, how about Bend, Indiana, Dalton, Georgia? Are the gays forgetting about others in those places? The problem isn't about gays not caring for gays, it's about families not caring for their own and everyone thinking they should be provided for just because. People come to places like SF without a decent job or even a job, where do they think they're going to live? Doesn't matter if they're gay or straight. It's a social problem compounded in many areas by not addressing the mental health issues, and in some cases that have been documented, other communities sending their poor to havens like SF.

    Many of us give generously to many different LGBT charities but when you have abled body people grafting off these charities, there's not as much to go around. People have to be accountable for their own actions, despite how stupid those actions are and how poorly they end. I'm not buying anyone saying these are all people who's families have disowned them either. I'm sure some have but more likely because they would not conform to household rules or had some sort of substance abuse...again, they need to be accountable for THAT decision also.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2014 11:42 PM GMT
    eb925guy saidI just read an article that SF is pushing their gays right out into the streets. Yep...just the gays I guess and no one else. There is a problem with sustainable housing in SF and there's certainly a problem with homelessness but it's not because gays don't care about gays. Are gays in Kansas City having problems, how about Bend, Indiana, Dalton, Georgia? Are the gays forgetting about others in those places? The problem isn't about gays not caring for gays, it's about families not caring for their own and everyone thinking they should be provided for just because. People come to places like SF without a decent job or even a job, where do they think they're going to live? Doesn't matter if they're gay or straight. It's a social problem compounded in many areas by not addressing the mental health issues, and in some cases that have been documented, other communities sending their poor to havens like SF.

    Many of us give generously to many different LGBT charities but when you have abled body people grafting off these charities, there's not as much to go around. People have to be accountable for their own actions, despite how stupid those actions are and how poorly they end. I'm not buying anyone saying these are all people who's families have disowned them either. I'm sure some have but more likely because they would not conform to household rules or had some sort of substance abuse...again, they need to be accountable for THAT decision also.


    How about linking us to that article? From my experience living and practicing law there x 25 years, SF is the absolute last place on earth that would push gays or anyone else onto the streets. The "homeless lobby" is particularly strong there, and the courts are notoriously pro-tenant. The joke, before the fall of the Berlin Wall, used to be that we'd rather practice before an East German Police Ct., than represent a SF landlord in SF's cts.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Oct 20, 2014 11:47 PM GMT
    Unfortunately, the poor are ALWAYS at a systematic disadvantage in society. Doesn't matter the country. Doesn't matter the collection of people (black, white, gay, straight, Jewish, Muslim).

    The inherent problem is that poor people, by definition, have very little power financially. Poor people tend to have, relatively, little power socially (social mobility). Poor people on the face of things have an equal vote in most countries, but this is often not the case, in fact, because while a lawyer can take off an hour to vote during the middle of Tuesday, most McDonald's and Taco Bell workers do not have the knowledge to know it's their right to request that time off (and its the law the business must provide sufficient time) nor would they dare jeopardize their job and what little financial security they have to cast a "worthless" vote you'll often hear them say.

    Sure, a very few poor people are poor by choice. Either altruism in giving all their money away, or for philosophical reasons. But the vast majority of poor people are poor because they're "unfit" (I do not mean to cast a moral judgement) to "succeed" in our society. They're strapped with taking care of kids. They're addicted to drugs. They have undiagnosed or diagnosed but untreated psychological problems. They have schizophrenia. They have no political connections. They don't know anyone on the City Council. They don't know lawyers. They don't know doctors. They don't know the new "hot" stock option. They're even further debt because after their check bounced, the bank charged them a fee for it bouncing.

    The cycle is clear and sad. And it's usually not their "fault" in any kind of a moral or judgmental sense. It's usually just unfortunate circumstances (e.g., being born with an IQ of 80, being born with a genetic propensity to become addicted, being born without parents who instilled the importance of completing-at the very least-high school, etc.). No institution has ever had a "preferrential option for the poor." Christ's teachings did and do, he preferred the poor in an affirmative sense, but the Catholic Church, despite its extensive social justice teachings, has overall failed to deliver on its preferrential option for the poor (I say this as a Catholic who admits the Catholic Church is one of the most considerate and compassionate institutions towards the poor).

    So have gays? Yes. As have every other group. Sad but true.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2014 3:55 AM GMT
    One of my favorite lines in any movie comes from Mel Brooke's History of the World Part I in which King Louis XVI is told the peasants are revolting to which he replied, "You're not kidding; they stink on ice!"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2014 5:29 AM GMT
    Obama has been helping the LGBT communities in other countries by financing their executions through his good friends like the sultan of brunei.

    Here's video of liberal democrat obama praising his "good friend", the Sultan Of Brunei who passed a law to execute gays by stoning:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxX0Ni3L3bc

    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/brunei-sharia-penal-code-gay-stoning

    Obama must approve of stoning gays to death because the video of him praising the sultan is still on the White House website.

    Obama is also negotiating a free trade agreement with his "good friend" the sultan:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbrinkley/2014/09/15/u-s-in-trade-talks-with-country-that-practices-sharia-law/
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Oct 21, 2014 5:28 PM GMT
    mx5guynj saidObama has been helping the LGBT communities in other countries by financing their executions through his good friends like the sultan of brunei.

    Here's video of liberal democrat obama praising his "good friend", the Sultan Of Brunei who passed a law to execute gays by stoning:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxX0Ni3L3bc

    http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/brunei-sharia-penal-code-gay-stoning

    Obama must approve of stoning gays to death because the video of him praising the sultan is still on the White House website.

    Obama is also negotiating a free trade agreement with his "good friend" the sultan:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbrinkley/2014/09/15/u-s-in-trade-talks-with-country-that-practices-sharia-law/


    This particular "guilt by association" argument has to be one of the most strained, tenuous, and illogical "arguments" I've seen on RJ. It's clear you don't like Obama, which is fine. I happen to like him, but we can disagree. However, you can't torture logic like this. We have to play by the same rules of logic, and the same set of facts.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14360

    Oct 21, 2014 5:48 PM GMT

    If I see any street person regardless of their race, ethnicity, sex, or sexual orientation I usually tell them that since they appear very able bodied that they should go get themselves a full time job. I detest these lowlife panhandlers. The mass majority just want to live off everyone else and they flatly refuse to make the needed changes to get off the street corners and out of crushing poverty. They are lazy and they don't give a shit about anyone or anything.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2014 6:40 PM GMT
    This is not just a LGBT issue. It affects everyone. The reality is that the gap between the rich and poor has grown. Not everyone can find a job as easily as you might think for those people who are insulated and complacent. The jobs that the employers offer the people are increasingly precarious... part time, temporary, casual, on call,seasonal, 3-5 hour shifts, or contract type of employment arrangements. More frequently the employment opportunities are coming from employment agencies who do the contract hiring or provide the services for the companies.

    Unfortunately with this type of employment the majority of people will not be able to continue supporting the system and pay their debts, living expenses,taxes which will lead to more disparity and austerity. A huge concern for the future safety and security needs of people.

    The cost for "the talent" the 10% of the population-(millionaires club) is becoming too much of a strain for the public and private enterprise to afford. More people in the future are going to have to learn to live simpler lives and expect to work for less money. The system will not be able to continue to function or will 10% of the population continue to support the whole economy.