Olson 1

Courtney Olson
Professor Serenati
COM 213
26 September 2016
Why Your Homeless Neighbors Are Still Your Neighbors
Horace tells us that your own property is at stake when your neighbors house is on fire
(Horace 424). In this statement, he argues that there are reasons beyond common human decency
to care for your fellow homo sapiens; that even if you have not a speck of compassion or
sympathy for others, it is still in your own best interest to be concerned when others are suffering
in your community. This notion suggests that if the lives of people who are less-fortunate are
improved, everyone would benefit from a cleaner, safer, and happier community. In January of
2015, there were 206,286 individuals who slept on the streets because their families would no
longer house them. There were 358,422 people who had no more than a box to call home
because they had no family member to turn to. And 47,725 men and women who served our
country came back to America to another war where they could not get a job or enough financial
support and would eventually end up living on the streets (By the numbers). This is what the
statistics suggest. In reality, the numbers are probably larger because it is extremely hard to
account for people when they are living off the map. If these numbers are merely statistics on a
screen rather than people who are suffering to you, think about how these numbers are affecting
the standard of living even for those who are living more comfortably. Too often, we have been
taught to ignore the man on the street, begging for change because it is not worth it to take our
hard-earned money to support his drug addiction, as many may think. So then the people who
were never given a chance to earn any money for themselves, who have been failed by the

Olson 2
system, the people who have served our country and came back to nothing, the single mothers
who did not have time to earn a living for themselves are left helpless due to a stereotype a
judgment that everyone who is impoverished is as such as a result of their own wrongdoing
that plagues society with a tremendous lack of sympathy for those in need. It is necessary to
examine why people end up on the streets, how our system is failing them, and what people can
do to help as a community. Regardless of why anyone believes a person may become homeless,
everyone would benefit from having less people living on the streets. Not only would the
individuals who are homeless experience and extraordinary shift in their standard of living, but
streets would be safer, cleaner, and cities would see more profit from industries such as tourism
and the real estate market. To delve into the convoluted issues that may cause a person to be
homeless, the welfare and social security systems must be centerpieces of the discussion in order
to discover how this worldwide poverty epidemic can begin to be solved, starting from
community involvement and education on the issue. We must get rid of the negative stereotypes
surrounding the homeless population and initiate a conversation about what the city and
community can do to better our streets. By personifying individuals who are homeless and telling
their stories, the community may begin to see them as more than a statistic or part of a larger
population, but as people who deserve to live with more dignity than they are currently forced to
live with.
It is easy to argue that welfare and social security are overfunded when statistically, there
exists a lack of motivation to surrender their salary. To add to these beliefs, statistical reports can
easily sway opinions, even when they are presented out of context or skewed to match the
researchers stance on the study. This is why statistics about social security tend to indicate that
the system is too generous when the numerical data is presented. When grand increases in social

Olson 3
security are reported, they seem to support the fact that citizens are paying too high of tax rates
toward social security. As Salamon states, between a ten-year period, social security was raised
245 percent when the cost of living was only raised 171 percent (Salamon 19). These numbers,
presented out of context, plainly say that the United States has become too liberal with
government handouts and pads many peoples views with further support that their hard-earned
money is going to people who do not work as hard as they do and it is not being carefully
distributed. Why then is there still an astronomic number of people living on the streets, if a
social security check is so plentiful? What these percentages do not show is that a social security
check is much under what a person would make if they were working for minimum wage, and
minimum wage is barely considered livable to many. Even raising the rate of social security 245
percent was still not enough to provide for a family to live nearly as comfortably as the people
who publicly complain that their hard-earned money is being too liberally spent.
If people are not willing to pay taxes and essentially give money to people that need it,
then alternative solutions must be addressed. Building shelters and rehabilitation centers that
help get people on their feet is one and into the work-force until they are able to support
themselves is one of the most common solutions that cost tax dollars in the short term, but can
lower the amount of social security needed in the long run. The most common objection to this
alternate solution is the belief that people who live on the streets have made a choice and do not
want to take the initiative to commit themselves to rehabilitation in order to make their lives
better. As a result, cities like Saint Augustine have a single shelter that residents must pay to live
in, which is extremely under-funded and only reaches out to a very small percentage of the
population in need. Because there may be no beds available for a night, people who truly want to
better their lives may be left out on the street with no other choice than to sleep outside under

Olson 4
any shelter they can find, where police and business owners may ask them to leave or even arrest
them for loitering or trespassing. With out basic access to professional apparel and the ability to
upkeep their hygiene, people who do not have a permanent residence are much less likely to be
hired by business owners, yet people often pose the question Why dont they just get a job?
when they see a person out on the street asking for spare change. So what is the homeless
population expected to do? Business owners are not willing to hire them, people are not willing
to pay enough taxes to ensure their comfort, and communities are not willing to give to projects
that will provide them with resources or shelter. Yet no one wants people on the streets. The only
option left to the homeless is to go live in the woods and live a life completely separate from
society, or to simply die and hope for better luck in their next life. As harsh as it may seem, that
is the reality that homeless people are living in; being unwanted everywhere they go. They lead
their lives in search of where they may possibly be lucky enough to sleep, shower, or eat next
while the rest of society defines these activities as basic needs. The answer to the question why
dont they just get a job? has a simple answer. They can not. They did not choose to live an
uncomfortable life, but as a society, we have chosen to fault them for their stroke of bad luck as
they fall victim to an unsustainable job market.
American society has created a vision that hard work will inevitably lead to success, and
no matter how many times the American Dream theory is disproved, people continue to believe
that their success had nothing to do with the privilege or luck that was granted to them along the
way. Because of this, poverty has been conceptualized as an individual failing rather than a
fault of society (Rank 49). Because many of the people who end up with out a home are in a
similar demographic sphere, it is easy to perpetuate stereotypes about these demographics being
innately lazy or stupid in comparison to the predominately white middle-class. Studies done by

Olson 5
multiple individuals including Charles Booth, W.E.B. Dubois, and Hull House researchers all
show that the labor market as it is can simply not support all of the people who live in the United
States (Rank 53). This means that no matter how hard-working an individual may be, if they are
to start on lower ground than another, their hard work may very possibly lead them on a direct
path to unemployment because the work-forces capacity is simply not large enough for everyone
that needs to support themselves and their families. Because of this, a strong social safety net is
needed to catch those who are unable to make a living in the workforce. This social safety net,
however is ineffective because it is part of a system that is based on the notion that the
employable are being provided sufficient income by the labor market (Rank 60). A safety net is
built only to catch the few that the system has failed, but when the system is failing so many, the
safety net begins to rip, letting the people that need it fall through. Welfare policies have been
reformed so many times that it seems impossible to find a solution. Instead of thinking outside of
the circle that welfare policy has gone in and looking for more major systematic reform, people
choose to blame those who are in poverty for their misfortune. Salamon questions whether or not
we can find a viable solution to alter welfare policy within the sphere we have been thinking in
(Salamon 98). It is clear that if the reform policies will continue to go through the same rotation
that they have been going through since the 1930s -- varying in measures of extremity, but not
providing sufficient support to those in poverty if major reform that entertains new ideas is not
instituted.
Because so many studies have been performed in attempt to explain what causes poverty
and homelessness, certain demographics are identified time and time again as having
characteristics that are now associated with poverty. The stereotypes previously discussed can
turn into stigmas that reinforce racist, sexist, and elitist views, creating a glass ceiling for

Olson 6
minority groups. The people who simply match the description of poverty are likely to be
perceived to have a lower work ethic, skillset, and experience level than others, regardless of
their resume. Because many homeless people struggle with drug and alcohol abuse, all homeless
people are expected to have these same addictions, whether the individual in question actually
struggles with this or not. These stigmas keep people who may be hard working at the bottom
because, as a society, we have decided that they deserve less. Because these people who are
employed or employable are discriminated against, they are likely to make lower wages than
their counterparts who may have equal credentials. Social security is then given to these
individuals to supplement their income or act as their income, even though they are fit and
capable to be a successful, functioning part of the workforce. There is then less social security
available for those who are unemployable or unable to work such as people with disabilities that
prevent them from working, people who are too sick to work, single mothers who need to be
home with their children, or people who are too old to enter a job (Salamon 105). Instead of
blaming the businesses who are paying their employees too low of wages or blaming the policymakers for failing to provide a secure safety net that is able to support everyone in need of
support, many blame the extraordinarily small percentage of people who abuse the system and
use others money to take a free ride. While these people unfortunately do exist, they are simply
scapegoats for the systematic faults of our social security system. If this become the reason that
policies are changed to cut welfare benefits even further, the homeless population will not
suddenly put down their tin cans and pick up their briefcases. It is pertinent that our nation
realizes that regardless of political affiliation, homelessness and poverty is a problem that
everyone would benefit from if it were alleviated. And in order to make that happen, systematic
changes must be made with out party politics being involved.

Olson 7
If luck really is what got those of us more fortunate parties into livable homes, and hard
work is keeping us in the positions we currently hold, then why is it our place to take care of
those who did not end up with the same luxuries? Is it too big of a problem to fix? Why should
we care? Perhaps poverty will not be cured worldwide in this century even if every person
decided to start giving a little more their neighbors with out homes. But as a generation, it is our
responsibility to leave our communities in better condition than they were left for us. Saint
Augustine, specifically, is a town that consistently sees the streets and parks being used as beds
for people who do not have a memory foam mattress to go home to. A beautiful, historic city
would benefit from these people getting the help they need just as much as these people would
benefit, and that does not mean sending the entire homeless population to Jacksonville so that the
problem is no longer ours. It means starting a conversation within the community. This is why
blogging about homelessness is important. It can initiate the type of dialogue that turns into a
global conversation. It allows people to see what solutions work within what type of
communities and which ones have failed so that ideas can be shared, and the world can
ultimately become a better living space for all of its inhabitants. Through doing short interviews
with homeless people in St. Augustine, it is possible to learn more about their lives and to
humanize them by sharing these stories with the rest of the community.

Olson 8
Works Cited
By the Numbers. Snapshot of Homelessness. National Alliance to End Homelessness. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 25 Sept. 2016.
Horace, Edward Moore, and Charles Beck. The Works of Horace; with English Notes, and a Life
of Horace. Cambridge: J. Bartlett, 1854. Print.
Rank, Mark R. One Nation, Underprivileged: Why American Poverty Affects Us All. Oxford:
Oxford UP, 2004. Print.
Salamon, Lester M. Welfare, the Elusive Consensus: Where We Are, How We Got There, and
What's Ahead: Welfare Policy Project of the Ford Foundation and the Institute of Policy
Sciences and Public Affairs of Duke University. New York: Praeger, 1978. Print.