>"John W. Bienko" <as...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
>news:fvhrd1$5ks$1@theodyn.ncf.ca...
>> Hawaiians may be interested..
>> Here in Calgary Canada a Homeless Connect Program was
>> sponsored at a large shopping mall to do something
>> worthwhile for the homeless, now estimated at 3600
>> men and women.
>> Volunteers provided medical services, haircutting and
>> grooming, free clothing, toiletry supplies, food
>> baskets, as well as employment opportunities.
>> The objective is to give these unfortunate persons an
>> opportunity todo something constructive to better
>> their role in life.
>> It was amazing to see the transformation. Once the
>> look of poverty was removed, these persons turned out
>> to be handsome and beautiful people.
>> The interest of the volunteers showed these persons
>> a better way of living.
>> And they were thankful.

>Let me suggest that there is a difference between "showing" them a better
>way of living, and acomplishing the goal, i.e. that they do something to
>live better, are two different things.  I am not saying that is not a good
>thing to do, but if in the end, if they are still homeless, you did not
>solve the problem.  In the end, what is important is that the number of
>homeless people decreases and that we are able to reduce the number of
>people who are homeless.  To begin with, it seem to me the "solution" or
>partial "solution" requires that we understand fully why they are homeless
>in the first place.  "If" a person is homeless because they have a substance
>abuse problem, making them feel better, does not solve the reason they are
>homeless.  We have to figure out if we can successfully get them to not be
>dependent on that substance.  "If" a person is homeless because they don't
>have a job, or they lost the job they did have, or they cannot get a job
>that pays them enough money to keep a roof over their head, the "solution"
>to the problem is different than someone who has a substance abuse problem.
>And if you do not address and solve how to get them a good paying job, you
>have not solved the basic reason they became homeless.  And the chances are
>that even if you succeed to get them to afford to put a roof over their
>head, they could become homeless again, because you did not solve the basic
>reason they were and will become homeless.  "If" a woman with children are
>homeless, you shuld ask yourself, why did she become homeless?  If she had
>children, that means some man contributed to that child being born.  If the
>wonan is homeless, is that man who fathered that child, or fathers who
>fathered those children, also homeless.  And if the father of the children
>are not homeless, and the woman and child are homeless, why is that?   I
>would think you also have to know what level of education these homeless
>adults have achieved.  I am willing to bet you will find a direct
>correlation between the level of education they have achieved and the number
>of people who are homeless.  And then the quesiton becomes, how do you
>convince them to get more of an education.