Send Us Hatemail ! mailbag@conservativecave.com
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
sad_one (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 12:02 AMOriginal message WOW! Google gives all SF homeless voicemail http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23377190 SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. - Google has made an announcement that could help hundreds of homeless people in San Francisco get back on their feet.Every single homeless person in the city will be given a life-long phone number and voicemail, NBC11's Lisa Bernard said. “Providing phone and messaging capabilities and access to vital healthcare is an extraordinary step forward in the city’s commitment to a comprehensive approach to addressing the needs of this vulnerable community,†Newsom said.“We're firm believers in the power of technology to improve the daily lives of individuals and communities as a whole, and we recognize that access to phone and voicemail services is one way that Google can help San Francisco's homeless stay connected with family, friends, social workers, health care providers, and potential employers," Walker said. This is really great. It is empowering.
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 12:52 PMResponse to Reply #9 23. No, I don't see the "empowering" either. Just an ad for the company, with no practical value. What will come out of this is "helping" people pointing it out, then when the homeless person says "I don't have the money to keep making phone calls", they'll just be attacked as "You're not willing to help yourself."
BigDaddy44 (99 posts) Thu Feb-28-08 12:57 PMResponse to Reply #23 25. I agree Clearly this is malicious, and google should pull the plug. They're just trying to gain favor with the high income homeless demographic. (how do i add a sarcasm tag?)
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:07 PMResponse to Reply #25 27. You can be sarcastic with me all you want. Maybe you should read what I actually WROTE?? When YOU become homeless, I'm SURE you will thoroughly enjoy snarks like yours.
BigDaddy44 (99 posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:15 PMResponse to Reply #27 36. I did read it Google, a liberal company, is doing something nice, and you immediately pointed out how it really wasn't solving anything. So, in that spirit, I was suggesting they just pull the plug altogether.And WHEN I become homeless (i'm not sure why you think that's imminent), at least I'll have a voice mailbox now.
mondo joe (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:16 PMResponse to Reply #36 37. You might want to consider that you are arguing with a poster who previously demonized Habitat For Humanity.
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:20 PMResponse to Reply #36 40. "Nice" doesn't solve problems. Since you don't like my response to it, since I'm just a dumb homeless person who clearly doesn't know nearly as much as you do, why don't you bother to read the other posters who also think it makes little sense?
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:28 PMResponse to Reply #42 48. It's an image win for Google. .... that's all it amounts to. Clearly, you're satisfied with that, and just want to mock homeless people.Empathy, much?
mondo joe (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:10 PMResponse to Reply #25 29. Heh. My only hesitation in praising this move is that there are already existing, and very good, orgs that provide this service - Community Voice Mail being one.I think the target population might have been better served by Google supporting CVM rather than setting up a parallel system.
tishaLA (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:32 PMResponse to Reply #29 52. That is correct. These services have been available to homeless people for quite a while and, pace the opinions of some others, the services really are helpful for homeless people because it gives them a voice mailbox number at which whey can receive calls regarding job interviews etc. that allow them to start getting on their feet without using a shelter's, or a friends, number. Having this kind of privacy is one step in the process of reasserting one's humanity.Another, BTW, is having a mailing address, which homeless people by definition do not have. Fortunately, many shelters and other homeless service agencies also provide these to the homeless.
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:23 PMResponse to Reply #31 44. Maybe you might want to read what I wrote about how useless it is??? A HOME would be of much more help, but I suppose that wouldn't make the company have such a wonderful "liberal" image.
BigDaddy44 (99 posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:26 PMResponse to Reply #44 46. Are you implying... That Google should be providing homes for people instead?
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 01:27 PMResponse to Reply #46 47. I'm not implying anything... I'm CLEARLY SAYING that if you want people to get jobs, then you need to make sure they have a home!How simple is that to understand?
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 02:25 PMResponse to Reply #54 73. Dear caring person: As most homeless people do, I have only the computers at the library to use. I must access the internet in 15 minutes blocks. So, while I'm very sorry to keep such a patient and kind person waiting, this is the best that I'm able to do. With every disdainful post, you are showing yourself to be not only ignorant, but quite judgemental of those you consider beneath yourself.I think that is speaking volumes to those who are lurking.
Midlodemocrat (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 03:56 PMResponse to Reply #73 115. Then why are some of your posts castigating liberals from the middle of the night? The library is open all night? Whoever heard of such a thing?You do yourself, nor your cause any good by insulting the people on this site.
JackBeck (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 04:02 PMResponse to Reply #115 119. Not only from the middle of the night But after the computer labs at both Ft. Collins's libraries have closed.
Two Americas (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 05:18 PMResponse to Reply #115 144. unbelievable Why can't the damned homeless people act the way we want them to? Google cannot be criticized, but we are all over each other to find any little weakness, any little excuse to attack and rip the person to shreds.Does it occur to you that people are - justifiably - afraid of you and reluctant to post details about their lives? Does it occur to you the tremendous courage it takes to reveal anything about yourself here?The incredible self-sacrifice - for the good of others - required to make oneself a living, breathing witness to the horror that millions of people are experiencing, in the face of that being used to harm or threaten the person, is stunning and awe-inspiring for the moral courage and compassion for others that it indicates.
Midlodemocrat (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 05:20 PMResponse to Reply #144 146. What?
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 02:18 PMResponse to Reply #58 70. I HAVE NO ADDRESS, if you'd bother to read what I wrote. Edited on Thu Feb-28-08 02:37 PM by bobbolinkBy definition, being homeless means you have NO ADDRESS for yourself, or anyone else.NOW... would you like to come down off your highhorse, and try HEARING the experience of a homeless person before shouting HORSECRAP?edited to add... since you delight in equating me with a pig, we obviously have nothing further to discuss.THAT kind of shit I can get from Limpballs!
Dorian Gray (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 05:14 PMResponse to Reply #51 143. Bobbo Your negativity on even small moves by people to aid the homeless seems like an angry resentment, which is understandable, but not worth anything. While trying to figure out if this measure can actually help people, it doesn't really serve any population to be so negative about it, particularly when it's met with some enthusiasm by those aided by this type of move in the past, and it's supported as a good move by social workers, those who are intimitely familiar with homelessness.
Dorian Gray (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 05:12 PMResponse to Reply #44 142. Providing homes to numerous homeless people would cost a lot more than a telephone. And though it would be a fantastic thing for GOOGLE to do, it would be virtually impossible to provide that assistance to so many homeless in our country. And though that would be a much better step, I don't see how that negates the usefulness of this move, either.
bobbolink (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 12:43 PMResponse to Original message 21. What does "voicemail" help... so you keep playing phone tag, with each call you make costing 50 cents.Do you realize how fast that adds up?Fifty cents to access your messages.Fifty cents each to return those calls, and speak once again to THEIR voicemail.Lots of fifty cents, with what being accomplished????HOMES.We need HOMES.What a concept!
Two Americas (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 02:04 PMResponse to Reply #57 68. status It is all about status. Bobolink cannot win on this thread, and that is very revealing. Google and its defenders have status. If a critic IS homeless, they have no status and can be dismissed. If a critic is NOT homeless, they have no credibility and can be dismissed.What is being thrown at critics on this thread is status - "helpers" have status - or they would not be in a position to help. The "helped" have no status and need to shut up so we can get on with the business of "helping" them.The exquisite irony here is that people - who are in fact themselves homeless - are being told that they don't know what it is like to be homeless, or they wouldn't be criticizing Google and its supporters. What they mean is that the person does not know the proper way to look at this from the viewpoint of a person who is NOT homeless but who "cares." There is also a phenomenon of people who were once poor and homeless, and rather than learning from that or becoming more compassionate, have violently rejected their former selves and former lives, and have much invested in what they did to escape poverty. In their personal mythology they may have "gotten motivated" or got a cell phone, or "changed heir attitude" or whatever. They now project that onto other people who are in unfortunate circumstances and aggressively insist that their own personal story has universal application. This can become quite angry and hateful, since in their own fear and desperation hating themselves and their former circumstances seems to them to be an essential component in keeping their head above water. Now that they are out of poverty, they are willing to see that it was their own fault that they were in poverty, so they blame others who are in poverty rather than the social conditions or political and economic realities. That is politically reactionary, not to mention spiritually and morally bankrupt.
Oak2004 (918 posts) Thu Feb-28-08 06:46 PMResponse to Reply #69 191. It's probably not "unfortunate" It's thatA) the rest of the infrastructure that it would take for it to be useful to her is not available to her where she lives. Without free phones, free voicemail is useless.B) When you're living on the street, half-measures designed to "help" the "helped" to "help themselves" look like what they are -- useless crap that just makes a mockery of a person's real needs. The answer to homelessness *is* homes. Anything less, posing as real help and allowing those better off to feel good about themselves, is downright maddening.Given free use of a telephone, voicemail is better than nothing. Without access to a phone, voicemail is indeed as likely as not to be yet another excuse for "helpers" to blame those they help. The "helpers" of the homeless are, as often as not, clueless at best, condescending certainly, and actively hostile and on a power trip at worst. I remember when 50 cents meant I had enough money to buy "dinner" -- usually a candy bar, as that's the most number of calories you can buy for less than a dollar-- and having anything at all to eat that day was a special event. Fortunately I didn't have voicemail else, yes, my "helpers" would have expected me to pass up the only food I might have had for several days in order to "return their phone calls". You want voicemail to be genuinely useful? Add in access to a telephone and transportation to and from that phone. And then make it possible for people to actually use that voicemail to get a real live home. When and where those conditions are in place, at least in part, it's useful. Elsewhere, it's a mockery -- like offering a band aid to someone with a gaping chest wound.Half measures aren't answers. Half-measures are often feel-good diversions, especially where money poured into diversions could instead be used for housing.
mondo joe (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 06:51 PMResponse to Reply #191 194. You never gave to a canned food drive? Never did anything to help the homeless or others in poverty?If you did, that was a half measure. You would be well served to learn what these half measures really mean to people who can't afford your righteousness.
Dorian Gray (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 05:20 PMResponse to Reply #68 147. He can be a critic all he likes but other than saying "They should provide homes! This is for PR," and not responding to statistics that have been posted on this thread, he hasn't provided criticism that truly gets at the issue. Being homeless sucks. Bobbo doesn't like this measure. But, is it really ineffective? I haven't seen him address in any way HOW this wouldn't work. Shelters allow people to make calls for free to the voicemail accounts, so it's not the 50 cents per call.
Two Americas (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 05:35 PMResponse to Reply #147 155. red herring The statistics and metrics are a red herring. The debate is between those favoring privatized help model, and those favoring political solutions.
Two Americas (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 06:39 PMResponse to Reply #159 190. yes Edited on Thu Feb-28-08 06:41 PM by Two AmericasIt has become invisible to us. I think it is important to see this dynamic. Some may disagree. I don't expect to win everyone over. I do ask that the point I am bringing to the discussion be respectfully considered.When someone posts "wow! Google did a wonderful thing!" the issue is not whether or not the (very small and arguably self-serving) thing they did is good or bad, helpful or not. The issue is - or should be for all who care and are interested in politics and consider themselves to be liberals or politically to the left - the political ramifications of profusely lauding and praising privatized charity solutions, particularly in a context of a life and death battle with an extreme right wing political movement that has "privatization" as a centerpiece of their propaganda.I work, and have worked for 40 years, with many dedicated people in poor areas who accomplish much more than Google is here with no fanfare and with far fewer resources at their disposal. It is the rare person I meet who is actually on the front lines who would dismiss and ridicule what I am saying here, or deny that we need a political solution, or deny that charity often comes with strings, or deny the importance of attitudes people have about poverty. These are all legitimate areas for discussion, and the ferocious and negative response to any attempt at discussing those issues is disturbing at best.
mondo joe (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-28-08 06:49 PMResponse to Reply #190 192. It's the rare person on the front lines who would dismiss a service that will provide a great benefit to the people they work with just because that service was tied to private dollars.Most people on the front lines of homelessness and poverty can't afford your righteousness.
