Friday, May 27, 2011
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Monday, May 16, 2011
Friday, May 13, 2011
Last month I read a story about a wet-house
and I have been tossing the idea around in my head for a couple of weeks now and I think its an interesting option...
A wet-house is sort of the other side of the coin from a dry-house. A wet house is a community house that allows alcoholics to drink. At first the thought goes against everything we have been raised to think, but lets break it down.
A wet-house provides a place for alcoholics, many of them homeless. to go and stay. The person is given a stipend of 89$ per month to do with what they will, including buying alcohol. The issue that some people have is this is partly financed by the taxpayers, with the rest being financed by Catholic Charities. It seems very odd that someone would be able to spend taxpayer money on alcohol, but lets think think it through for a second.
The amount of money paid to the residents of St Anthony's residence in St. Paul Minnesota is 89 dollars per month. There are approximately 60 people taking advantage of this service.
$89*60 people=$5,340 per month
$5,340*12 months=$64,080 per year
Yes 64,00 dollars a year is a lot to you and me. However in the United States a hospital cannot refuse care to any patient, regardless of their health care situation (which is the way it should be) How much money do you think is spend every year in illness and injury due to homelessness? lets take a look (the below information was found at CNN.com and belongs to them)
"A University of Washington research team studied a group of 95 chronically homeless alcoholics and found that in one year, they cost taxpayers more that $8 million in hospitalizations, detox centers and incarcerations.
When the same group spent one year in Seattle's Housing first program-- residences where they are allowed to drink--the same group cost $4 million in taxpayer money." (This study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association)
This is a simple math equation here guys. If it is cheaper to have houses where they can drink, then thats the way to go. They cannot get better until they decide to, which is the truth no matter where they live. Why wouldn't we at least give them a place to live??