New York pays for 1-way getaways to the homeless

[Phoenix Wright]

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=14822002&ch=4226713&src=news

It seems that New York is buying tickets for homeless people to get out of their town. Thoughts?

[Fei Mao]

hmm I want to say the mayor wants to increase the value of New York city by moving the homeless away from New York though there's two ways to think this either the mayor wants to save money so he dosen't build have to build homeless shelters or increase the value of New York city.

Edited July 30, 2009 by Jason W.

[-Cynthia-]

I don't find anything morally objectionable to this, since people aren't forced to leave and are probably receiving better benefits in their new locations than they would in underfunded, overcrowded shelters(social programs in the US are being underfunded atm). If relatives/friends are willing to support them instead, this could work out for both the homeless and NYC.

[Agro]

Sounds like a great idea - I don't see any noticeable losses.

[NinjaMonkey]

So it costs NYC $500,000/year to ship these homeless people to various destinations across the globe, but it costs them $36,000/year on support for the homeless.

Now, my maths might be a bit rusty, but isn't $500,000 a lot more than $36,000? And given that we are still in the middle of an economic downturn, shouldn't they be saving money?

[California Mountain Snake]

So it costs NYC $500,000/year to ship these homeless people to various destinations across the globe, but it costs them $36,000/year on support for the homeless.

Now, my maths might be a bit rusty, but isn't $500,000 a lot more than $36,000? And given that we are still in the middle of an economic downturn, shouldn't they be saving money?

-$500,000 for all homeless people's transportation.

-$36,000 per family

Support for the homeless is much more expensive.

I see nothing wrong with this as long as there's no coercion involved. At least unlike in Japan, they're allowed to come back if they please.

Edited August 8, 2009 by California Mountain Snake

[Jyosua]

I agree with this. It seems like a great idea, they're checking to make sure the people have a place to go to, they're not forcing them, and it's cleaning up the streets at a much less amount of money than what it would normally take to use homeless shelters.

[Phoenix Wright]

So it costs NYC $500,000/year to ship these homeless people to various destinations across the globe, but it costs them $36,000/year on support for the homeless.

Now, my maths might be a bit rusty, but isn't $500,000 a lot more than $36,000? And given that we are still in the middle of an economic downturn, shouldn't they be saving money?

-$500,000 for all homeless people's transportation.

-$36,000 per family

Support for the homeless is much more expensive.

I see nothing wrong with this as long as there's no coercion involved. At least unlike in Japan, they're allowed to come back if they please.

But you don't think it's a problem for other countries? Pouring our homeless into theirs?

[Agro]

So it costs NYC $500,000/year to ship these homeless people to various destinations across the globe, but it costs them $36,000/year on support for the homeless.

Now, my maths might be a bit rusty, but isn't $500,000 a lot more than $36,000? And given that we are still in the middle of an economic downturn, shouldn't they be saving money?

-$500,000 for all homeless people's transportation.

-$36,000 per family

Support for the homeless is much more expensive.

I see nothing wrong with this as long as there's no coercion involved. At least unlike in Japan, they're allowed to come back if they please.

But you don't think it's a problem for other countries? Pouring our homeless into theirs?

They're going to stay with their families (assumedly), so technically it shouldn't be a problem.

[Jyosua]

So it costs NYC $500,000/year to ship these homeless people to various destinations across the globe, but it costs them $36,000/year on support for the homeless.

Now, my maths might be a bit rusty, but isn't $500,000 a lot more than $36,000? And given that we are still in the middle of an economic downturn, shouldn't they be saving money?

-$500,000 for all homeless people's transportation.

-$36,000 per family

Support for the homeless is much more expensive.

I see nothing wrong with this as long as there's no coercion involved. At least unlike in Japan, they're allowed to come back if they please.

But you don't think it's a problem for other countries? Pouring our homeless into theirs?

As Angelix said, if you had watched the clip, you'd know that they are making sure they have a place to stay at the other end. Usually it's with family. So They're no longer homeless, and therefore no longer a burden on anybody (Well arguably they may be a burden on their families. :P).

[Phoenix Wright]

So it costs NYC $500,000/year to ship these homeless people to various destinations across the globe, but it costs them $36,000/year on support for the homeless.

Now, my maths might be a bit rusty, but isn't $500,000 a lot more than $36,000? And given that we are still in the middle of an economic downturn, shouldn't they be saving money?

-$500,000 for all homeless people's transportation.

-$36,000 per family

Support for the homeless is much more expensive.

I see nothing wrong with this as long as there's no coercion involved. At least unlike in Japan, they're allowed to come back if they please.

But you don't think it's a problem for other countries? Pouring our homeless into theirs?

As Angelix said, if you had watched the clip, you'd know that they are making sure they have a place to stay at the other end. Usually it's with family. So They're no longer homeless, and therefore no longer a burden on anybody (Well arguably they may be a burden on their families. :P ).

I don't have volume on my computer (none at all, and I don't have the Windows Disk to reinstall what was deleted), so I chose not to watch it since I wouldn't be able to hear anything.