Didn’t the ULEOs murder a Native about a year ago for walking down the street carving wood? He didn’t cost the city much after that. Might have been Seattle.
so instead of costing taxpayers millions, cecil now only costs them tens of thousands (per year).
In Obamaland, that’s considered “success”
I wouldn’t have cared if he died on the street. Sounds harsh, but no one has the right to claim $2 million plus in other people’s money. I’d rather spend the money on feeding those who WANT to live...
WA Ping
Build it and they will come. In the '08 campaign Christine Gregoire announced, with great pride, that the state's investment in homeless and dependency was paying off because the number of people being served had gone up over 20% in just 2 years.
Looks more like the government AIDED and ABETTED him...
No.
Try to help them, certainly, but once they've shown they are bent on self destruction, step back and let Darwin take over.
It's a tough choice, IMHO. But the American people can NOT afford to foot the bill for this type of behavior and keep our own families cared for, too.
Not with Big Government sticking its hand in our pockets to foot the bill, anyway!
Seattle is trying a different alternative that seems to be working. It purchased a cheap hotel, and confirmed alcoholics can stay in it free of charge instead of living on the street. No effort is made at rehabilitation, and they are given free food, and have an on-call nurse available for routine medical care.
And it saves the taxpayers a LOT of money, costing just a fifth of what it would cost otherwise in emergency services, police and other problems.
Though it would save even more money by providing them with grain alcohol and mixer drinks to lessen stomach damage, they have balked at the idea, as they figure both that the public would not stand for it, and that it would attract more alcoholics from other cities.
Surprisingly, there has been another benefit, in that it has been noted that the alcoholics are drinking less on their own, and have improved nutrition so need less regular medical care on top of much less emergency medical care. The police and emergency rooms are also much happier having to deal with them far less often.
The bottom line is two things. The first is that the public do not enjoy seeing drunks dying in the gutters. The second is the recognition that trying to force alcoholics to not be alcoholics doesn’t work, so it’s better to just minimize the expense.
Can we really afford to keep coddling these people?
These are the same people who tell us not to feed the bears in the national parks. Go figure
Today, Leading Horse costs the public the same as most other low-income seniors living in subsidized housing on Social Security, Medicaid and food aid.
.
Alcoholic Indians should be cared for by their own tribes. Indians enjoy the best of both “worlds”. They are treated as separate NATIONS, when it comes to having their own police, laws, casinos, selling cigarettes and booze without state taxes, etc., but when it comes to handouts, they want to dip in our nation’s treasurys. They’re raking in millions with their casinos, and can certainly afford to take care of their own. After all, if you wanna be a nation, then take care of your citizens. The nation next door doesn’t owe it to you.
Soooo...his choice to continue drinking....is supposed to allow us to choose to continue to honor his claim on us?