There's so much at play here but primarily Bobbitt, the homeless guy, was and continues to be a drug addict, burning through the money others raised for him, stealing from them, and generally being a acrimonious pain in the ass.
Liberals think that homeless people are simply down on their luck and that a financial windfall is all it takes to get them back on their feet. Bobbitt used the money and gifts that this couple raised for him to buy more drugs, at one point spending $25,000 in one week on drugs.
And then there's the whole GoFundMe phenomenon that seems to lack accountability when it comes to raising money for some cause and then spending it how you wish. The couple who started a Bobbitt's GoFundMe account found themselves suddenly inundated with nearly a half million dollars! Suddenly, they were't overly enthusiastic about parting with it either, much less giving it to a drug addict.
Can't say I blame them.
At the very least, there should have been some record showing all three of them making an effort to get Bobbitt ‘clean’.
If Bobbitt failed and back on drugs again, the remaining money (who knows how much there is) held in a trust fund.
Can’t blame Americans growing more and more cynical every day.
So you steal the guy’s money cause he would just blow it on hookers and blow?
The problem is that 200K is missing and another 200K is sitting in D’Amico’s bank account.
The truck and camper that was bought for the homeless vet was still in D’Amico’s name and they sold after three months of “giving” it to him.
The homeless vet claims they gave him a small part of the money to gamble at the casino, but had to pay it back, which he claims he did. So who’s money is this? D’Amico’s or the Vet’s?
D’Amico promised the money would be put into a trust account, but it never happened. D’Amico is driving a brand new BMW, has taken numerous trips around the world, not bad for some guy with a basic government servant salary.
Sorry, even though the Vet is a drug addict, 99% of all homeless are, it was money raised for him, not so D’Amico can have a slush fund at his disposal.
A: All of them.
I thought at the time this was a stupid story. I hate these pop-up viral charitable campaigns because they are, almost always, ineffective at best.
There is a good story, a feel good hook, and people use it to raise money. But even with good intentions, without a plan, there is very little chance that the money raised will have any positive effect.
The money does make the people who donated feel better about themselves, so I guess that's something!
There. Fixed it.
Yep, today’s homeless are not the cast of ‘Grapes of Wrath’ but more often the ‘Wrath of the Grapes or the Poppy’.