When
comparing the homeless with the houseless I'd definitely say Reno has a little
of both. Homelessness are people who are not immersed in their community, but
they may have a fine place to live and houseless who have no place to live and
are not aware of their environmental factors. I need to change some of these
conditions that Jim Burklo described. He says that homeless people may have a
place to live and chose not to live there. I think this is a load of crap. They
most likely don't have a house, and if they had a house they would most
certainly live there in the winter. It gets cold in Reno in the winter. Burklo
might of written this from some warmer urban areas.
What I
noticed about the people without homes in the casino district is that some of
them wore things that looked like they might of been nice at one point. Perhaps
they once had a good job and lost it. While they had their good job they made
poor investments so when the economy crashed they were forced onto the streets.
These people are qualified as houseless because they certainly understand the
factors that surround them since they held some position that was considered
higher in society at a certain point.
Then I
noticed the older homeless people. I start to wonder what their stories are. I
feel bad that old people are homeless, but perhaps it is something they are
used to and have always dealt with. A lifetime of homelessness is hard to think
about. If someone's been on the streets for that long are they really homeless.
Do they understand the culture and community that they are immersed in? At a
certain point being on the streets has to get to a person. Surviving day to day
becomes the overall focus and the community around them is lost.