Mormon Church Moves To Build A City In Florida?

[bluebell]

 

Is it better to be homeless and destitute if you are on your own property? Does that provide a measure of relief I'm not aware of?

 

Why don't you come walk around downtown Seattle and ask the folks sleeping on the street if having a consistent and safe place to rest one's head at night would provide some measure of relief.

 

 

I'm not saying that it's not a good thing to give housing to homeless people.  I love Utah's new program of just giving homes to the homeless-i think the programs are well structured and are filling a need. Plus, they actually know what they are doing because they work closely with the homeless and they know what will help and what won't. 

 

What i'm asking is, how much actual help is it to give undeveloped land (which would be taxed by the government to the tune of a few thousand dollars an acre in all probability) to homeless people?

 

Remember that this land isn't subdivided.  There is no sewer system, no roads, no utilities-all of that is paid for by the people who develop the land.  Have you ever looked into building anything on undeveloped land.  Maybe you have and if so, you know that's really expensive.  The city basically makes you repay all the money they spend hooking you into the system.  

 

Besides that, many homeless people are homeless because of mental health and drug abuse issues.  I'm not at all suggesting that those kind of people are not worthy of free homes.  I'm saying that such people need to have good access to healthcare services.  It doesn't make sense to take them miles out into the country and drop them off on their own land when most of them will not be able to get  back to town where such services are generally located.  Many don't drive or have vehicles.  They will be miles from food banks, groceries stores, potential employment, etc. and because the land is undeveloped it will not be a part of any city bus service.  

 

Then, there are the issues of police and fire services, which a lot of the time are not free for people who live out of town.  They have to pay for them in the form of a county tax.  

 

Knowing all of this, how much good can be done with a general idea to just give land to homeless people?

[ERayR]

 

I was told the only way to live with God is in the highest tier of the CK. ETA: Or can someone do her work and marry/seal themselves to her. I guess she'd first have someone do her work and then a man will marry her in the hereafter somehow. That sure is a lot of work, where in her church, it's a no brainer that she would be able to live with God.

 

 

You do have a serious lack of knowledge and a serious lack of understanding of what you do have.

[Guest]

This strikes me as much ado about nothing.

 

The Church has a lot of land and is looking to divest. As any responsible property owner might, it wants a say in how its ranch property is developed so as to mitigate the impacts on the community.

 

Big whoop, say I.

Mormons have been building planned cities for hundred+, of years. Nothing new!

[Calm]

I was told the only way to live with God is in the highest tier of the CK.

Must have been someone who was not LDS or not educated in the doctrine or you misheard them. Though I find it bizarre how long you claim to have been a member and yet you make this type of error.

It might be a good idea for you to read the Gospel Principles manual once a month and then maybe you wouldn't accept what you are told over what is our actual doctrine so often:

GP, ch 46

"All who inherit the celestial kingdom will live with Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ forever (see D&C 76:62) ."

Edited July 13, 2015 by calmoriah

[Tacenda]

Ok, I was misinformed or misunderstood. Back to the topic at hand.

Edited July 13, 2015 by Tacenda

[ERayR]

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Degrees_of_Glory

Not according to this article. The lower tiers are administering angels...and it doesn't appear they'll preside with God.

 

Too many are too quick to assume that which is not necessarily true.  Each will have the chance to embrace that position and affiliation which provides for their ultimate happiness.  If one is relegated to "The lower tiers" it will be of their own choosing.

[Damien the Leper]

I choose OD. There ain't no good beer or good partiers in the other three.

[Calm]

Too many are too quick to assume that which is not necessarily true.

Just for the record for anyone who doesn't check for themselves (not saying ERR didn't, this is a generic posting), the EOM article cited is correct in that it states:

 

All who attain this kingdom "shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever"

 

In case anyone is confused, Tacenda changed her post after ERR responded to it; I assume she reread it and realized it didn't say what she had thought it said.

[sethpayne]

 

 

Knowing all of this, how much good can be done with a general idea to just give land to homeless people?

 

 

Well, if done as you describe I agree ... almost.  There are a few "tent cities" around the area that sit on completely undeveloped land.  There is an understanding between police and the property owners that the homeless should be left alone.  One of these places actually has volunteer social services available.  

 

So no, I don't think just handing a homeless person a deed would do much.  But I think there are a lot of creative ways to use land to help the homeless.  And it wouldn't necessarily cost a lot of money.  But IMO, the Church can and should do whatever makes sense for the property.  It's easy to sit back and be an armchair real estate manager without having all the numbers/facts.

[Scott Lloyd]

Must have been someone who was not LDS or not educated in the doctrine or you misheard them. Though I find it bizarre how long you claim to have been a member and yet you make this type of error.

It might be a good idea for you to read the Gospel Principles manual once a month and then maybe you wouldn't accept what you are told over what is our actual doctrine so often:

GP, ch 46

"All who inherit the celestial kingdom will live with Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ forever (see D&C 76:62) ."

Reading the Gospel Principles manual once a month -- what a concept! So many errors in assumptions could be avoided that way.

[Scott Lloyd]

Well, if done as you describe I agree ... almost.  There are a few "tent cities" around the area that sit on completely undeveloped land.  There is an understanding between police and the property owners that the homeless should be left alone.  One of these places actually has volunteer social services available.  

 

So no, I don't think just handing a homeless person a deed would do much.  But I think there are a lot of creative ways to use land to help the homeless.  And it wouldn't necessarily cost a lot of money.  But IMO, the Church can and should do whatever makes sense for the property.  It's easy to sit back and be an armchair real estate manager without having all the numbers/facts.

In the context of his sermon on helping the poor and needy, King Benjamin includes a caution: let all these things be done with wisdom and order.

 

I think, all things considered, the Church of Jesus Christ does pretty well in helping the poor and needy in the most effective way possible.*

 

*Doling out cash and commodities unconditionally is not the most effective way to do it.

Edited July 13, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[TheSkepticChristian]

 

When I first read this I thought it was a joke.  But then again it may not be and a great idea.  If the claims by global warming prophets are true, a large part of Florida that is currently above sea level will be below sea level.  Many people will have to relocate.  If this land is sufficiently above sea level, an modern middle sized city would make sense.  Perhaps the whole downtown development the LDS Church did in Salt Lake simply was a trial run for something much bigger. 

 

The climate researchers are not prophets, and here is a summary of the actual predictions found in the scientific literature 

 

Edited July 13, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Calm]

Reading the Gospel Principles manual once a month -- what a concept! So many errors in assumptions could be avoided that way.

Would only take an hour or two, it is a very quick read.

[KevinG]

The church needs to build a theme park that outclasses that Protestant monstrosity. I would donate to the church for that.

 

This Protestant Monstrosity?  http://www.holylandexperience.com/  The one that teaches Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs in Eden.

 

I really hesitate to try to compete with that.

[sethpayne]

In the context of his sermon on helping the poor and needy, King Benjamin includes a caution: let all these things be done with wisdom and order.

 

I think, all things considered, the Church of Jesus Christ does pretty well in helping the poor and needy in the most effective way possible.*

 

*Doling out cash and commodities unconditionally is not the most effective way to do it.

 

I agree.  Although doling out housing and commodities to the homeless of Utah (i know it's not quite that simple...) seems to be having a really great impact.  Hats off to to the state of Utah!

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2015/04/17/the-surprisingly-simple-way-utah-solved-chronic-homelessness-and-saved-millions/

How Utah accomplished this didn’t require complex theorems or statistical models. But it did require the suspension of what had been conventional wisdom. For years, the thought of simply giving the homeless homes seemed absurd, constituting the height of government waste. Many chronically homeless, after all, are victims of severe trauma and significant mental health and addiction issues. Many more have spent thousands of nights on the streets and are no longer familiar with home-living. Who, in their right mind, would willingly give such folk brand new houses without any proof of marked improvement?

But that’s exactly what Utah did. “If you want to end homelessness, you put people in housing,” Walker said in an interview. “This is relatively simple.”

 

The nuts and bolts: First the state identified the homeless that experts would consider chronically homeless. That designation means they have a disabling condition and have been homeless for longer than a year, or four different times in the last three years. Among the many subgroups of the homeless community — such as homeless families or homeless children — the chronically homeless are both the most difficult to reabsorb into society and use the most public resources. They wind up in jail more often. They’re hospitalized more often. And they frequent shelters the most. In all, before instituting Housing First, Utah was spending on average $20,000 on each chronically homeless person.

 

So, to in part cut those costs — but also to “save lives,” Walker said — the state started setting up each chronically homeless person with his or her own house. Then it got them counseling to help with their demons. Such services, the thinking went, would afford them with safety and security that experts say is necessary to re-acclimate to modern life. Homelessness is stressful. It’s nearly impossible, most experts agree, to get off drugs or battle mental illness while undergoing such travails.

 

Edited July 13, 2015 by sethpayne

[omni]

This Protestant Monstrosity? http://www.holylandexperience.com/ The one that teaches Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs in Eden.

I really hesitate to try to compete with that.

CFR Adam and Eve did not ride dinosaurs!

[KevinG]

CFR Adam and Eve did not ride dinosaurs!

 

I withdraw my hasty assertion...

 

Edited July 13, 2015 by KevinG

[Calm]

I am curious if those in SLC see much of a change.

I am seeing larger numbers of people, especially what looks like families, on the street corners begging. If i can read the chart correctly it appears that homelessness over all is going down, but not that dramatically...about .15 drop from .6 percent to a little less than .5 percent of the total population. The much larger group of temporary homelessness has not changed much so I am wondering if what I am seeing is an increase in beggars that end up going home at night in our area.

[sethpayne]

I am curious if those in SLC see much of a change.

I am seeing larger numbers of people, especially what looks like families, on the street corners begging. If i can read the chart correctly it appears that homelessness over all is going down, but not that dramatically...about .15 drop from .6 percent to a little less than .5 percent of the total population. The much larger group of temporary homelessness has not changed much so I am wondering if what I am seeing is an increase in beggars that end up going home at night in our area.

 

I think the biggest change is with the "chronically" homeless. Down to ~540 from ~2000 in 2005.  

 

I suppose that's a good place to start -- with those who have had long-term struggles with homelessness due to health issues or abuse problems.  Curious to see how Utah continues to tackle the overall problem.

[bluebell]

I am curious if those in SLC see much of a change.

I am seeing larger numbers of people, especially what looks like families, on the street corners begging. If i can read the chart correctly it appears that homelessness over all is going down, but not that dramatically...about .15 drop from .6 percent to a little less than .5 percent of the total population. The much larger group of temporary homelessness has not changed much so I am wondering if what I am seeing is an increase in beggars that end up going home at night in our area.

I have noticed an increase of parents with children on street corners begging as well in our area (Layton and Ogden).  It would be interesting to know if something has changed, or if people have discovered that they get more donations when they have children with them.

[Duncan]

Maybe the Church will have a NHL team? another Florida team.........maybe they'l call them the "Mormon Beehives" or some such thing............!

[KevinG]

Maybe the Church will have a NHL team? another Florida team.........maybe they'l call them the "Mormon Beehives" or some such thing............!

 

Deseret Danites?

[Calm]

I have noticed an increase of parents with children on street corners begging as well in our area (Layton and Ogden).  It would be interesting to know if something has changed, or if people have discovered that they get more donations when they have children with them.

Begging in Russia in our experience was primarily done by children, even to the point of putting a crying toddler in a cardboard box large enough he couldn't climb out of it and sticking that on a corner in winter.  I couldn't see any parent nearby.  It was so very, very wrong.

 

Another time a little Gypsy girl (Gypsies were the most common beggars at the time we were there, they were pretty much despised as criminals by the rest of the Russians so them choosing to use children made social sense as horrific as that is) came up to my husband on the train where he was sitting and tried to take his hands and stroke them and lay her head in his lap.  It freaked him out.  She apparently went up and down the train cars for a number of hours on many days as I believe he saw her again in another car on a different day.

 

Perhaps it is simply that parents can't get someone to watch their kids, but I am cynical enough (perhaps from my time in Russia where begging was a profession for many) that when I see two adults with children with them or even a man and a woman together, that I think it is most likely they are going for the increased donations since one of the adults could be off in the park watching the kids or some place else safer and less attention getting for the kids' sake or if just two adults, one of the adults could be off trying to get a job or doing something else useful.  It has been rare before to see a woman out begging in my area, I think I've seen it maybe twice before this past year, now not so uncommon, especially with kids attached.  

 

I don't see it as healthy for kids to be part of begging even if it might be the only way for a parent to get money for them (I doubt this is true given the extensive welfare setup not only available in the state, but through the Church if the parents are willing to make the effort and accept the rules that are given along with the assistance).

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

How could they!? Damn the church.

[omni]

I withdraw my hasty assertion...

Don't show that to Rob Osborne, he may seriously use that photo in the next evolution thread.