Squatters say foreclosed homes beat homeless shelters (New York)

LA Times ^ | 12-21-11 | Tina Susman

[basil]

Sounds good, doesn’t it? The problem is, no one is going to let people, including children, starve. And, if they have to live on the streets, especially if children are involved, some agency somewhere is going to provide for them.

We don’t have masses of people dying in the streets from hunger in this country.

I’ve been involved with people in this situation during the years.

[gimme1ibertee]

Sounds good, doesn’t it? The problem is, no one is going to let people, including children, starve. And, if they have to live on the streets, especially if children are involved, some agency somewhere is going to provide for them.

That's true,and,no,children should not be allowed to starve. The parents can go to a charity,a church or a shelter.After they've exercised every option,and refuse to take care of their children,then there can be no other choice but to take the children away from them and place them with foster parents.It's still going to be cheaper than welfare for years and years on end. Besides, it may be doing the kids a favor by placing them with a family that is stable,with two parents that can instill some type of family framework values in them,keeping them from being moved around from pillar to post,with people that obviously don't care enough about them to do anything about their situation.