16 votes

Libertarian Answer to Deal with Homelessness?

I currently live in one of THE worst places for homelessness – Atlanta, GA.

The other day I walked out of my apartment and a homeless man ran up to me shouting “Hey man, give me some money for food!” I’ve been in Atlanta 10 years and every year the problem gets significantly worse. Homeless people/panhandlers are EVERYwhere looking to get something for free. They harass pedestrians and constantly shout at apparently nothing as they’re walking to wherever they go.

I don’t mean to sound curt regarding this issue. I know it’s serious and it would be great if homeless shelters could provide perpetual care for these individuals who need it, but the constant harassment is taking its toll on Atlanta residents.

So what IS the Libertarian solution to this?

I don’t want the police rounding them up and throwing them in jail just for panhandling. This is, after all, a form of free speech. But what should be done? I know the poor will always be with us, but does that mean we have to deal with constant harassment from folks who are (probably) looking for money to go get a fix?

Give me some ideas, DPers!



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

All for that, except

Tax the rich? Why?

Because...


Who else are you gonna Tax? The poor working folks? This is where all the inequity and unfairness comes from.

Now philosophically, I would like to repeal the 13th amendment and have no labor related taxes at all. But given the realities of our historic debt and expenses...this is an impossibility.

So I agree with what comedian George Carlin said: The Rich pay no taxes and get all the breaks (welfare), the middle class do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there just to scare the (bleep) out of the middle class, and keep them showing up at those jobs. All the wealth is this Country is transferred upwards to the top 1%. It's time to reject that model.

So yeah, let's end the bleeping loopholes for the rich, and see the rich pay the load for once --- and not the workers. Let me see a Banking CEO flip the bill for once (instead of stealing from all of us).

Absolutely.

Taxing

the rich does not create a more equal society. It increases government which leads to the very thing you're trying to stop....inequality. Like my post above said...if you want a more equal society you want as little government as possible...the more free a society, the more equality you have. Graph of economic freedom (less government) vs poverty rates for all the countries of the world where data was listed:

"Trickle Down" has failed every time it is used


You can trace the explosion in the gap between the rich and the poor, and the rise of Homelessness (which began in the 1980s) with "Trickle Down" economics. This is a sham (the working class pay the Taxes, and the rich do not) that has failed every time (Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, Obama) it has been used.

Making the rich just pay their fair share also does not by itself expand Government. That just simply avoids a corrupt, biased, and unbalanced approach to the Tax code. The problem with this Country is Wall Street and the big Corporations because they live under a different set of rules. America was supposed to be a Country without a "class system", and not rigged by the rich.

What expands the government is the Global Empire,Pro-Warfare, pro-Police-State, pro-CIA, Pro-Monopoly, Pro-FatCat, Pro-Bankster policies that convert the Country into a totalitarian dictatorship -- in the service of just the top 1%.

And breaking up Monopolies is the most "free market", competitive market thing that you can do. Rigged markets are not free. And a Tax Code rigged on behalf of the Rich is just another form of slavery.

I disagree

"You can trace the explosion in the gap between the rich and the poor, and the rise of Homelessness (which began in the 1980s) with "Trickle Down" economics."

You can trace that same explosion to the expansion of government via the default on the international gold standard 1971) and the subsequent unrestrained growth of the federal government that was limited by the checks provided by the gold standard...and abandoned in 1971. The last real check on government.

Legitimate trickle down economics in a free market absolutely works in my opinion. What we have in this country isn't a free market...and hasn't been for much of our recent history. I agree with you the system is rigged today....it's not because of the rich in my opinion though. The focal point is government...the rich have influence over the government creating a crony capitalist type society...but it's government at the focal point. Get rid of the incentives in government for that environment to flourish...and you correct the problem.

" And breaking up Monopolies is the most "free market", competitive market thing that you can do."

Monopolies don't exist in a free market...there is no need to break them up....which brings us back to the point that we don't live in a free market.

Don't put the cart before the Horse

"I agree with you the system is rigged today....it's not because of the rich in my opinion though. The focal point is government...the rich have influence over the government creating a crony capitalist type society...but it's government at the focal point."

As Alan Greenspan once said: "Whatever the 'relationship' of government is to the Banksters (Rothschilds Bank) is irrelevant --- as long as there is no government agency that can ever tell us what to do". This tells us who is the puppet, and who is the puppet master.

Just walk around the streets of every major city in the Country, and then look at all the tallest buildings. What names are on those building? Who owns them?: J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Chase, CityBank, Rockfeller, etc. This is the ownership class.

The government is just their puppet, their play toy, their b*itch (to put it in gangster terms).

They run the Media. Wall Street devised and created the CIA in the 1940s. The Rockfellers and Warburgs created the CFR, and the Policy Think-Tanks. All the design, planning, and control comes from these private Rich Oligarchs (and their private institutions).....not the government itself.

Politicians are merely lawyers acting in the service of this unelected power club. Some of them go in with good intentions; but all of them end up just mouthing away the 'talking points' from these groups (and then directly work for them as Lobbyists afterward).

If we had an election process that was not based upon money ($$$), many politicians would then have been inclined to prosecute these infiltrators, rather then infallibly suck up to them.

So yes.. the controlling power is this rich superclass, and their corrupt "no money...no access" system that they invented used to kill off public representation.

And the more power that you hand over to Wall Street (example: killing "Glass-Steagall"), the worse and more corrupt it all gets.

You

seem to fit in more w/ the occupy wallstreet crowd (correct me if I'm wrong...not trying to be an a$$). And if so, that's completely fine...everyone is entitled to their beliefs.

I strongly disagree with that opinion however...and so does Ron Paul. What you're talking about is cutting off the tail of the problem....I want to get the head...stop it at its focal point. If you change the environment in washington that allows the bankers and the rich to take it over...they cease to be a problem. If you attack the bankers and rich...guess what...you wind up with the exact same problem a year or two down the road because you didn't change the root cause. You're addressing symptoms of the problem...and not the actual disease.

Not sure if you realized it...but you mentioned something that would "change the environment" of washington..whether you think the idea is right or wrong...this is something that would make more sense than attacking the rich because you're going after the source (government) and not the peripheral (the rich):

"If we had an election process that was not based upon money ($$$), many politicians would then have been inclined to prosecute these infiltrators, rather then infallibly suck up to them."

No: Ron Paul praised the Occupy Wall Street movement.


The point you are missing is that The Banks/Wall-Street run the government, and not the other way around. They are the head, not the tail. They are what has often been referred to as "the shadow" (or unelected) government, or the Invisible Government.

Here's a quote from Teddy Roosevelt that proves the point here:

"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.

These International bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of public office officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government."

--Theodore Roosevelt, 1919
___

""The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus, seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection.

To depart from mere generalizations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes.

These international bankers and Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country, control both parties, write political platforms, make cats paws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organizations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business."

--John Hylan, Mayor of New York, 1922

___________________________________


Now this isn't "my opinion" here. This is the opinion of insiders who witnessed and saw the agenda of this suffocating private power as it was being formed. Those people were telling us the truth about where the controlling power now resides (the Rich cliques, Oligarchs). They are the controlling power. The same power that prevents change from ever happening. The same power that prevents Ron Paul from ever getting elected.

--

And Ron Paul knows this as well. Here are excerpts from Occupy Wall Street article linked below:

While campaigning in Iowa on Wednesday, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul praised the Occupy Wall Street movement, comparing it to the Tea Party movement. "In many ways, I identify with both groups," Paul said.

Although “some people like to paint Occupy left and the Tea Party people right," Paul said, "I think it makes my point. There’s a lot of people unhappy, and they’re not so happy with the two-party system".

"Occupation seems to be more addressing the subject of the very rich....in my talk already I've criticized many people on Wall Street and the people who get rich because they get special benefits, whether they get contracts or whether they benefit from the devaluation of the currencies, or whether they get their bailouts, yes, we should address that. I think the Occupy people are."

-- Ron Paul, 2012 Presidential Candidate
--
Link: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ron-paul-praises-occupy-...


That

quote by Roosevelt. I agree that the government has been taken over by nefarious people/businesses. This is where I differ with you and occupy though - If you slam down on these corrupt businesses/people (the wealthy) that's great....they've used government to create personal gain....wonderful. We get rid of all those bad guys. Now what? We wait for a few years where the EXACT same thing happens again. If you don't change the environment that allows something to grow....it doesn't matter how many times you kill it....it will continue to pop back up and grow.

What if you attacked the environment in washington that allows it to be taken over by the wealthy/businesses? You stop the corruption at its heart. If business didn't have influence over the government, the problem would cease to exist. Business would answer directly to the consumer...instead of buying its way through lobbying and elections via corruptible politicians.

On Ron Paul. He sympathizes with occupy wall street...he's been predicting this type of thing would happen for years....and he's predicted it would happen because of what has happened with government. Read any book, or watch any lengthy speech he's ever wrote/spoke. Government is at the root of the problem in his eyes. He doesn't want to alienate Occupy...I get that...there are legitimate reasons to be upset.

Here's a segment with him discussing it....fast forward to 40 seconds into the video where he discusses the fact that Occupy isn't addressing the root cause...but the symptoms of what is going on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMFsdG6N540

Fortunately...

..Monopoly cartels are only sustainable with government support.
And "trickle down" doesn't exist. A society that is "rigged by the rich" is not a free market society, it is (nd I join you in opposing it) a fascist society. The "crony-capitalist" super state continues to follow the Hamilton/Lincoln/Mussolini manifesto while paying lip-service to the principles of Smith, Hume, Burke, and Jefferson.

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
======================================
West of 89
a novel of another america
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/161155#longdescr

The homeless problem in the

The homeless problem in the US is one of the worst in the world. Why? Well, I blame corporatism and local, state and federal laws preventing people from making a living.

Take for example Bangkok. I love to compare Bangkok to Baltimore. On the streets of Baltimore you have drug dealers, panhandlers, and junkies, but on Bangkok streets you have entrepreneurs and traders.

At 3AM when you walk down the street in Baltimore you could get shot, stabbed, mugged or arrested... in Bangkok? You could grab an alcoholic beverage from a unlicensed street vendor, buy a DVD, maybe a t-shirt, and something warm to eat.

In the US, people are being devalued and priced out of the market. The US market is so tightly controlled by groups of "elites" that the common man either slaves for them, services them, or ends up on the street.

I hope I could paint this picture for you well enough. While living in the US, it's very hard to see, but escape for a year or two and your eyes see things that you never saw before.

Flipping burgers at a corporate fastfood joint is an option, but why does it have to be the only option in Freedumb-land?

What exactly is your problem with homelessness?

Do you not want to be bothered by them? Move to a gated community.
Do you hate to see their suffering? Volunteer and donate money to the cause.

I was in Atlanta one time and a beautiful girl came up to us in front of a strip club and asked us for money. We all gave her some. I then asked her why she was out on the street asking for money. She replied "I don't want to be a stripper anymore." I wanted to help her more, but I was visiting my friend and he wisely talked me out of inviting her to stay at his place. In her case, she chose to be homeless. It was the best option for her at the time. She could have remained a stripper and slowly transitioned into something else.

There will always be some homeless people. Why? Many of them choose this lifestyle. I have known some people that chose to be homeless on purpose. However, many do not. Some are down on their luck. Some are mentally ill. So we definitely need to provide for some of them through charity. A libertarian society would allow to people to choose exactly to what causes to donate and how much. Since people would get to keep all the money they earn, the amount of money that would go to charity would substantially increase. Also, all that money eaten up by the welfare bureaucracy (up to about 60%!!) would also go directly to help the needy.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

why the down votes?

Maybe it is just the title of your comment... I agree with your response completely. Do away with taxes and and you will see more people giving to others. If everyone helps out their local communities then you can eliminate the welfare programs.

proverbs 20:15
There is gold, and an abundance of jewels;
But the lips of knowledge are a more precious thing.

Free will is an illusion

Free will is an illusion brother!

Not for me

People have mistaken beliefs about what free will means. Free will does not mean people are free of their circumstances. Free will means that choices are made internally based on both internal and external factors. The choices are always constrained. This does not mean that they are not freely made.

“The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.” — Albert Camus

You might like this film: Year of Living Dangerously

One of my favorite lines, referring to the prostitutes in a particular place in Indonesia servicing Western journalists. A veteran journalist is telling a new arrival how cheap they are (a dollar a night) and how good. A native explains: "Starvation's a great aphrodisiac."

http://youtu.be/j2k9d0c4sAM

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

I don't have the answer...

I try and help others when I have the feeling they genuinely are trying to make a better life... But I am very annoyed by the kind of people who just harass you and try and corner you into giving them money; New Orleans has a good share of these.

I have made friends with a homeless man I see each morning the past couple years... Believe it or not he has explained to me that there is actually a gang of people that control the high traffic stop lights that generate the most money from begging. He routinely gets run off by these people and I have witnessed it once before. He has even been stabbed trying to defend his spot. Has anyone else heard of such things??

I would go on to assume that these groups likely gather a percentage of the money earned (similar to pimps) but that may just be the 'conspiracy' portion of my brain that is ever so active

proverbs 20:15
There is gold, and an abundance of jewels;
But the lips of knowledge are a more precious thing.

Yes indeed I have

Phoenix on a median divider where a guy was begging. Another guy walks up to him with a clip board and asks if this was his usual corner and then hustles the guy down for cash. Apparently the begger I saw was covering someone else's assigned corner that day and yes, there are strong-arms enforcing this predation on the poor.

Be brave, be brave, the Myan pilot needs no aeroplane.

More Taxes -- More Poverty

Those of you who do not understand what kind of message I am trying to send, please take a while and think. Taxes destroyed (very) small business and all kind of inhumane regulations make sure the small business will never come back. Now you have the huge problem of poverty and it is you and me who are paying for these people who otherwise would be able to support themselves (and THEIR FAMILIES!!!!) - say our of $100 we give them $20 maybe goes to them. Once we give people the freedom of free trade back - to trade and to exchange the goods and services without the government interference, we will have no more any problem of poverty. In such circumstances the only problem that could persist would be the problem of stupidity.

The basic problem is that one believes that everything is real, and thus everything is treated as such.
---Kalu Rinpoche

Poverty is not a Disease - a Libertarian Stand

You all the so-called libertarians, how do you feel about sharing the liberties with the poor. I have travelled the world and I have seen a lot.
People who are poor do not need to be miserable and feel persecuted by those who are better off. Please remember we all are getting poorer and poorer
and it is impossible to know what will be our faith in the future. Although there are many who would like those poor to be exterminated, I am sure they are
not here in this forum. If you haven't ever been poor it will be difficult for you to understand the idea of having a chance for a success.
It is possible to put your life together and make it meaningful in any circumstances. What you need is the basics: a shelter, a safety, a possibility to trade your skills,
and fee exchange. All of you hypocrites are very articulate about defending your so-called liberties, but what about those who have no shelter, no income, no family support?>
I am sure that once we allow these people to live and conduct their business, the problem will disappear and we will have another relatively happy group of our society.
The only problem are you guys! You won't allow those poor to live in your neighborhoods! You the so-called defenders of the liberty will be first to call the para-military forces to
remove these poor from your neighborhoods. It will be OK for you to have their homes destroys, their lives damaged, their families scattered - because your fu..ing houses are more important.
Let me show you some pictures. This was America in the beginning of the century:

Little Italy in  New York 1900s

These are the streets in those other countries where poor still have a chance ( I took this picture today):

The basic problem is that one believes that everything is real, and thus everything is treated as such.
---Kalu Rinpoche

Did you read the whole post?

The writer clearly said they did not want to have the homeless taken away.

Do you have any positive suggestions?

In my head the solution is to leave it as it is

Someone asks you for something on the street and you can either say YES or NO. If someone tries to harm you then you have the right to defend yourself. If someone talks trash or rude to you, you can walk away from the situation. If someone tries to follow you, you can walk away from the situation and if they get too close and you feel they are trying to threaten you with physical violence then you can deal with that as needed.

You can also decide to give the person some cash ( for their fix as you put it ), it is their body and are apparently doing with it as they see fit even if it is negatively affecting them. Some people honestly want to eat whereas others want smokes, booze or other crutches.

If you are against giving them cash for their "fix" then you could always ask if they want to go grab a bite with you and sit down and have a great conversation with a fellow american and see how they got to where they are.

I used to pick one homeless person each week or every two weeks ( depending on when I got paid ) to go to lunch with me. It was interesting especially the stories I heard. I never had any issues with any of them BUT I did get turned down many times.

I never gave homeless people money but it wasn't because of what I "thought" they might spend it on. I would rather feed someone and have a conversation with them versus just tossing cash at them.

I have had a few times in my life where sleeping under a set of stairs, in a laundry mat or just outside a 7-11 happened to me. It wasn't my favorite part of my life BUT you either work your way out of it or fall deeper into it.

There really isn't a way to stop the homeless situation. I mean we can as human beings take it upon ourselves to help them get into a better place in life BUT it is up to them to continue the journey.

With so many reasons as to why they are in their specific situation, it might take a person some time to WAKE UP and snap out of it. We could be that WAKE UP that snaps them out and they go out and try and elevate themselves.

Now there are also many who like the lifestyle. Like riding trains around the country and staying in homeless shelters and just being nomads. Many young people do it ( especially within the punk rock scene, something that I enjoyed in my late teens/early 20's ) just for the adventure and because in their head they are NOT mainstream and really grunge rock lol.

We also have a ton of vets out there who are really messed up in the head and have trouble with simple functions. PTSD is very real, my neighbor was an army ranger and it was hard for him just to have a conversation with anyone. He stayed inside as much as possible and had many days where he blacked out or was suicidal. Now I believe many of these issues to be the meds they kept trying to shove down his throat BUT I am sure the missions he went on and what he did during those missions didn't help with his mental stability one bit.

http://shelfsufficient.com - My site on getting my little family prepped for whatever might come our way.

http://growing-elite-marijuana.com - My site on growing marijuana

The "Person to Person" Income Tax Deduction

Just as you are "allowed" to make a child income tax deduction, so should you be "allowed" to make a "person to person" income tax deduction.

But seriously, giving "help" is very very VERY hard. If you ever get money and find that it is your job to give it away and "help", if you have good feedback controls in place, you will soon learn how incredibly hard it is to help just about anyone. Next, giving to the hungry. Once upon a time it was my job (age 19) to try to "help feed the hungry". Those were eye opening times. 9 times out of 10, you were feeding the problem. Many are alcoholics, hence they want your change, your cash but they do not want a job. My time doing that "work" taught me the tremendous power of two things: women and Jesus.
Women could break a heart and so many men never recover from it and Jesus does miracles for those who hit bottom. But you've got to let them hit bottom. (Oh and yes, I am an atheist).

Now if you are an owner of a business, and you give a person a job, 9 times out of 10 you've "REALLY" helped someone. Making America a job creating mass producing free market powerhouse? Yeah, that creates lots of jobs and helps lots of homeless people. THAT ECONOMIC BOOM can happen again, so quickly that even believers in the free market will be caught off guard.

Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Libertarian Answer to Deal with Homelessness?

I have seen quite a few of these loaded questions asking what the Libertarian solution is to problems created by the GOP and DEM's.
This point needs to be made because these problems will not exist if Libertarians had equal access to the ballot and were elected more often. 94% of all winning candidates spent more. Is that democracy?

The solution to homelessness is to elect less GOP and DEM's Elect more Libertarians! This solution will take some time, however.

A short-term solution is to offer a homeless person a job, then see how they respond. If a person is legitimately destitute and not lazy/ drug addicted, you can tell by their response to a job offer. I have offered many people jobs only to find them looking for a handout.

Label Jars, Not People!

Well said

I don't have anything to add...I must be slipping.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty" TJ

I believe the whole point to Libertarianism is understanding

that there is no single right answer to something like homelessness.

Hear me out...

Rather than a broad sweeping federal solution as some suggest, in my perfect world, each local community handles it in a way that works best for them. Then over time, the best solutions will rise to the top.

If it's terrible in Atlanta, gather support to outlaw it. Those who resist will be forced to offer alternative solutions. What works for Atlanta may not work for Marietta, each should find their own solution.

But in the end, there should be no solution sponsored and paid for by the federal government. Ideally those who want to help should spend their money with churches and charities to help instead of the government.

Many Years Ago...

...my boss, a Cuban, who jumped off a bannana boat to live here, related how he handled panhandlers on the subway;

"When they asked me for money I'd say: Hey Man! You still owe me 5 bucks from the other day"!

Problem solved.
Credit to John Lopez; a great guy to work for, I miss him.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

Simple, end poverty

And you do that by ending the war on poverty, and ending fascism in general, ie the war on capitalism.

Why is he homeless?

Is he addicted to some drug that only exists because of the war on drugs?

Is he a vet with PTSD (ie inevitable psychological trauma of a person with a conscience involved in killing innocent people)?

Was he simply raised in a broken family and received no useful (real) education because the war on poverty destroyed his family and public education destroyed his childhood?

Is he the victim of damage from being sold legal psychotropics by the government protected and subsidized pharmaceutical cartels? Or given unsafe child vaccines?

Is he an escapee from the prison industrial complex and broken because he spent his teen years being raped in a cage, again because of the drug war?

What do you think the odds that his being isn't because of what the government has done to him?

Not very.

Worse than that: Let's say he decides to try to turn his life around. He saves up some of his begged money and if tries to sell umbrellas or peanuts on the street, the cops will shut him down, and the real reason is because they are paid by 'licensed', 'zoned', and 'regulated' retailers to keep away competition.

Let's say he evades detection and makes enough money to maybe get a flop. His social worker finds out and cuts off whatever aid he might be getting.

Knowing all this however, he simply doesn't try.

Maybe you have a lawn to mow, maybe you have something you could use his help with. You might hire him, but you know it's a liability. What if he's undocumented?

Maybe you think to try to teach him to code computers?

But then you think what if you're breaking some law by hiring unlicensed help or giving unlicensed lessons or being an unlicensed employer.

Knowing these risks, you won't bother.

But sometimes people do fall between the cracks for other reasons.

If you had double your income how likely would you be to help him? If everyone had double their income how likely would it be for people to be wandering around in need?

I think about helping people all the time and do when I can figure out how and who. But I know there are risks, and I know there are risks to them as well, and I also know they may be so broken by the entitlement system that any help is pointless.

Government is the problem. First do no harm. Start there.

Look at the Catholic Worker

Look at the Catholic Worker House communities for an example. Fully self-funded. They do not receive money from the government or from the Catholic church. And they are anti-war also.. Check it out.

First of all ...

... it is not a choice between (a) what libertarians would do versus (b) what would a utopian society look like. There is no such thing as utopia. There is no perfect world -- not now, not in the future. So, the question is: What is the best solution to solve social problem X (in this case, homelessness)?

Second of all, the current solution is not working, especially in Atlanta. So, it is not a choice of (a) what would libertarians do versus (b) why don't we just stick with the great big government solution we have now. The current big government solution does not work, especially in Atlanta. So, it is reasonable to consider some alternative.

Third, libertarians offer an alternative solution to what is going on right now, to improve things over what is happening right now, because what is happening right now does not work, especially in Atlanta.

What is a libertarian solution? The short answer is the free market solves most social problems. The former USSR had bread lines and food shortages because the government was in charge of food distribution. Today, North Korea and Cuba need financial aid from other countries (Russa, Venezuela, China) in order for their people to eat because their governments run the food distribution system.

In the West, private businesses run food distribution and there are no bread lines, there are no food subsidies from other countries. It is not a true libertarian system, but the point is that the market has a way of solving social problems.

You should ask yourself a question: Where does homelessness occur? Do they come into your home and sleep on the couch? Do they break into the Four Season hotel and sleep in the bed? No, homelessness happens on the streets, and the streets are public (government) property.

So, the problem happens on government property, and on the government's watch. So, it is the government that lacks the ability or the willingness to solve the problem.

In a libertarian society, there would be very little (or no) public property. Most (or all) property would be privately owned. So, the owners would have an incentive -- just as they do right now -- to stop homeless people from trespassing on their private property.

Furthermore, in a libertarian society there would be very low or no taxes. Taxes would be so low that the average person would have thousands of dollars more to spend on whatever they want. Some of that money would go to homeless shelters. In cities like Atlanta, where it is more of a problem, more private money would go into homeless shelter charities than somewhere else where that is not a problem. Since property would be privately owned, homeless people would not have their current option of sleeping on government streets and harassing people on government property. Instead, they would be the ones who would be harassed until they wound up in homeless shelters.

This is the basic idea of how the homeless would cease being a problem for the non-homeless, as well as how the homeless themselves would be able to get real help and a chance to get back on their feet. For the small percentage of homeless who literally cannot care for themselves, there would be charities for the mentally ill and the physically unable.

In other words, the free market solves social problems ... and the government DOES NOT.

That is one of the primary reasons that libertarians believe in smaller government. We want to see SOLUTIONS, not cheap talk. Politicians for big government are long on cheap talk, but they don't give a damn about actual solutions.

We want RESULTS, while they want to pat themselves on the back for "doing something" which results in getting nothing done at all.

So, the question is this: Do YOU want results, too? Judge a person's political views by whether or not they REALLY give a damn about RESULTS. If they keep proposing the same, tired solution (more money via more government) even though it does not achieve results, then they really don't give a damn about helping people.

Libertarians want to SOLVE PROBLEMS, not play make believe.