Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Algae-Ok t1_itgdhlc wrote

What do you expect from Lakewood? If you are a outsider you aren’t welcome if you are a insider you still aren’t welcomed. The community always been trash

43

thesuprememacaroni t1_ith1tso wrote

What do you expect from religious people? Generosity? Compassion? Empathy?

What are religious people? Hypocritical. Selfish. Cruel.

28

playdohplaydate t1_iti4uy5 wrote

More people being mad about the tree issue than doing anything about the homelessness issue

7

12kdaysinthefire t1_iti73xj wrote

That was my takeaway too. Like no one even suggested hey, let’s build a homeless shelter or start a program to help them get back on their feet.

2

playdohplaydate t1_itiekd3 wrote

Lakewood has always had a tent city but everyone seems to hate the town more than they want to do anything about helping homeless people

3

Hooktales t1_itkuwl7 wrote

Ocean County has 1 Code Blue shelter, Toms River, Just Believe Inc. They work with the surrounding to communities to get folks to a safe, warm place often with a meal.

If you want to help an organization that is truly committed to helping the community this is the place. Around this time last year they were collecting coats for men (the greatest need) and other items. They take donations of $ and time (volunteer) also.

1

fidelesetaudax t1_itgd909 wrote

I’m rarely one to sympathize with politicians. But Mayor’s like this are damned if they “allow” visible homelessness and damned if they don’t. They often are simply reacting to the populations demands.

−6

structuremonkey t1_itgr1ah wrote

Sure. But cutting down trees is not an answer. This is simply an assenine reaction generated by the intellectual giants otherwise know as police ...

12

SyndicalistCPA t1_itgvix2 wrote

You telling me a degree in Criminal Justice (if that) doesn't produce the most intelligent police force that know how to decrease poverty, a problem only solved through social spending instead of increasing the police budget?

5

betcher73 t1_ith18r4 wrote

Can’t be homeless if you’re dead.

Increase the police budget now. /s

4

Sirlancemehlot t1_itj7w78 wrote

If you think it's the police, you don't know anything about Lakewood.

1

structuremonkey t1_itjmrhq wrote

I know plenty about lakewood. The idea of cutting the trees was from the police. " quality of life taskforce" or something so ironically titled.

Cutting trees will do nothing positive related to homelessness or the problems in lakewood...

1

Kab9260 t1_itgi7dy wrote

That and there are few (if any) real solutions that can be implemented at the local level. Shelters only help those who are willing to dry out and commit to mental health/addiction treatment. The majority of homeless have given up on treatment or need longer term treatment than the current system allows.

The solution would be to restore institutionalization but with more controls/oversight. We’d get better outcomes with longer-term care away from the streets. That’s beyond the ability of local municipalities to offer.

6

SyndicalistCPA t1_itgvbz4 wrote

This is not true. It can be done on a local level. The problem is that is has to be done by every locality. Newark, for instance, has a good homeless program. It is so good that they get homeless people traveling from Detroit to take advantage of the program. Other towns also send their homeless to Newark (including NYC), because they don't want to fund a program themselves. This overburdens Newark's program and causes the homeless problem to exacerbate in the city.

3

Kab9260 t1_itgzjqk wrote

Exactly why it needs to be funded on the state level or national level to distribute the financial burden.

Right now, it makes more sense financially for municipalities to make homeless unwelcome than finance their long-term care. Newark shouldn’t have to bear the cost on its own.

It also leads to disparities in terms of access to care. Many local charities and shelters only have the funds to help designated populations. State-run facilities would expand access to more people and provide opportunities to get addicts away from the environmental factors that are feeding their addiction.

2

SyndicalistCPA t1_itgztfd wrote

And where would these state-run facilities be? It will always be the cities because the suburbs don't want to face reality from their white picket fences.

1

Kab9260 t1_ith7r7t wrote

It would require political compromise with NJ’s rural counties. Give them what they need to sell it to their constituents as a win.

It’s unlikely that the Republican Party can ever gain a majority in the NJ legislature (governor is a different story). This leaves room for compromise as long as they can still sell it as a win.

1