More Seniors Are Living in Cars
Published April 08, 2009 @ 08:48PM PT
The Golden Years should be a time for Bingo, Bunco, and water aerobics. But sadly, a growing number of senior citizens are living out their Golden Years in RVs and truck cabs, homeless. Talk about a real loss of dignity.
Gene Sargent is among the increasing homeless senior citizen population. He lives out of his truck cab and tows all of his worldly belongings in a trailer. His story, highlighted today in the Seattle Times, is a heartbreaking snapshot of a growing phenomena. According to the Times:
"The homeless population is graying along with the general population, and we're seeing more elderly people living out their final ... years on the streets," said Michael Stoops, executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless.
A King County/city of Seattle study released in February predicted the number of poor seniors will double by 2025, said Stephen Norman, executive director of the King County Housing Authority. (...)
Federal guidelines say people aren't truly homeless if they can afford vehicles.But, "in our view, someone in an RV who is moving place to place ... is homeless," said Maria Foscarinis, executive director of the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty.
Homelessness, advocates say, often happens in steps.
"People who have never experienced homelessness before first downsize and move to cheaper accommodations," Stoops said. "That only lasts for a while. Then they turn to family and friends and when that runs out, cheap motels. Then they'll stay in cars or RVs. Their worst nightmare is having to knock on a shelter door and be considered homeless. But the reality is the shelters are full and we're not taking reservations."
The thing that saddens me the most about this trend is the toll that being homeless may take on a person's pride. I imagine this multiplies when one becomes homeless much later in life. For these folks, living in a car is bad enough, so reaching out for assistance is often out of the question. This is unfortunate on several fronts: for one, they don't receive potentially life-saving services. But second, they fly under the radar. Nobody knows they exist.
So what do you think: how many homeless seniors are out there? And when do you think this unacceptable trend will reverse?
[Photo from the Seattle Times: Gene Sargent, 65, lives in his pickup - with his belongings in a trailer - and parks in several locations, such as department-store parking lots and side streets, until asked to move by police or store managers. He lives on a monthly Social Security check of less than $700.]
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
EmailRelated Posts
Comments (33)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Shannon has worked in homeless shelters and service organizations in San Francisco, the Triangle region of North Carolina, and currently in the greater Boston area. She is a graduate student studying housing and urban policy at Tufts University.
Wasn't Socialist Stupidity and the "War on Poverty" supposed to end all this years ago? An interesting note:
"in our view, someone in an RV who is moving place to place ... is homeless,"
According to GoRVing.com, thousands and possibly a million people live in RVs full time. Are we supposed to believe that these people are actually homeless?
http://www.gorving.com/pubs/retire_in_style.cfm
And where are the enviros on RVs?
Posted by Rob S on 04/09/2009 @ 02:53AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
You raise an interesting point, and one that's often fraught in defining the homeless. There are clearly some who choose to live in an RV or choose to live doubled up with a friend. But others who clearly would take another option if one was available (like Gene Sargent in the story above).
Do we ignore the people who are forced to live this way simply because others exise who chose this lifestyle? How do you suggest we distinguish between the two?
Posted by Shannon Moriarty on 04/09/2009 @ 08:20AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
As simple means test would separate the RV lifestylers from the RV last resorters quite easily. Oh and the cat food cans in the back might be a clue too.
Posted by CHRIS HOOYMANS on 04/09/2009 @ 11:02AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Is this shallow Hal?
Posted by Joe Bush on 04/11/2009 @ 05:30AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Wow, some of you Americans are pretty odd. There's a big difference between retiring to an RV lifestyle and living in a car because you're too poor to afford shelter. I'm so glad I'm Canadian.
Posted by Kevin S on 04/12/2009 @ 02:10PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"He plans to save up the gas money to get to Oregon, where there's no sales tax. Every penny he can save will help."
How about WA losing the sales tax? Ooops! Can't do that. "It's for the common good".
Posted by Rob S on 04/09/2009 @ 03:06AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
This is not about RVing. It is about a persons life and dignity. It It is about the lack of compassion in government that pays high salaries, spends excessive money on useless projects but turns their backs to the very people who gave them life. Everyone of us could be in this situation some day.
Posted by Rick C on 04/09/2009 @ 07:35AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I predict that the nation's minimum security prisons will soon be filled with seniors who have run out of viable options or just can't do it anymore. A roof over your head, three square meals, basic medical care, hot water, clean clothes and some companionship sounds better than living in isolation on the mean streets.
Imagine the looming cost to society for ignoring our seniors. Nobody seems to care about these mostly decent people unless they break some laws, can't pay their bills or can't shuffle along fast enough. Shame on all of us for this travesty,
Posted by CHRIS HOOYMANS on 04/09/2009 @ 10:59AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
This is very strange. He's 65 but gets less than $650 a month in Social Security. Maybe he worked only intermittently. He lives in his truck and drags a travel trailer around with him. Maybe he needs to get rid of some of his stuff. Many large metro areas have senior housing complexes, often run by religious organizations, where a senior can rent a small apartment for 30% of their income (whatever it is). What's wrong with Seattle?
Posted by C W on 04/09/2009 @ 11:05AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I work with the senior homeless population daily and a Social Security check of around $650 to $700 is very common. Most senior housing, where they pay only the 30% of income, have a waiting list of at least 6 month to a year most more then that.
As far as the man needing "to get rid of some of his stuff", he has already lost his home, how many of us at that age would want to get rid of all the memories and things and start over?
Just some food for thought.
Posted by Marion VanWinkle on 05/09/2009 @ 11:46PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Marion, you seem very kind and compassionate. The homeless seniors you work with are lucky that you are there.
I'm older than Mr. Sargent (the man cited in the article). I learned a long time ago that "stuff" can really weigh you down.
Posted by C W on 05/10/2009 @ 04:23AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
As one who lives full-time in an RV--sort of by choice to pursue my advocacy project (www.hearus.us)--I'd say choice and options/resources separate me from the people I see in campgrounds and parking lots who are homeless.
This nomadic lifestyle requires a lot of work, even with resources, and provides some tremendous challenges for survival. Those doing it because they have no other options deserve better...sooner rather than later. You can be sure they lack good nutrition, access to health care, hygiene, and the comfort needed to rest well.
Posted by Diane Nilan on 04/09/2009 @ 11:49AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
In America, we honor our fathers and mothers - we deride them for not getting rich and then we put them out on the street!!!! A car or a tent is better than a shelter, but supposedly well-meaning people want to take away the car or the tent, claiming they want to give the homeless guy a house - isnt gonna happen - at least with the tent or the car the homeless person has some dignity. We need parking lots and infrastructure to handle these new times. Luxury is a only pathetic insult, luxury takes away your pride, the man living in a bus is often much more dignified than the man in the mansion. Americans should understand it could be you, we are all vulnerable.
Posted by Orion Hughes on 04/10/2009 @ 05:17PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Tent City
Posted by Orion Hughes on 04/10/2009 @ 05:22PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Affordable housing for many seniors as well as others is found in manufactured home parks. In recent years, some park owners have taken advantage of the situation when the homes cannot be moved, raising rents far beyond reason and a fair profit, making the homes unaffordable and often unsaleable. It sucks money out of the communities as well as the residents can't afford to patronize local businesses. The result is that more seniors are losing their homes, their biggest investment, and being made homeless and dependent on public aid. It is critical that there be laws in every state that protect the financial interests of those who own such homes and not just those who own the park sites they sit on. In my state, nearly one fifth of the population lives in such housing, over 70% being seniors. This is a huge problem.
Posted by Patricia Williams on 04/10/2009 @ 10:56PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Some older people are impoverished by medical expenses for themselves or their spouses--even with Medicare.
Posted by C W on 04/11/2009 @ 06:58AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Living in the front seat of your truck is not exactly living in the lap of luxury and it is homelessness. What happened to the war on poverty, you ask? Why, that was dismantled, starting with the Reagan administration. Most of us weren't paying attention when the republicans declared war on the poor and middle class in this country.
We got what we deserved when we allowed Reagan and Bush I to do their dirty deeds on America. And we really got what we deserved when we didn't scream bloody murder when Bush Jr stole TWO elections! They ripped this country apart, dismantled our safety nets, drained our Treasury and put us in unnecessary wars, while oil and energy prices skyrocketed out of control. They and their friends profiteered while life for most Americans unraveled. If you voted for these lying, weasel bastards, didn't you think this would happen???
Posted by Maureen Kelley on 04/11/2009 @ 08:30AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Let us not forget that the Clinton Administration also helped to foster the dismantling of the social safety net. "Wefare moms," "three strikes your out" and negating the "Sherman Anti-Trust Laws".
Posted by Jude Montarsi on 04/11/2009 @ 09:27AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I am scared that if I cannot make the mortgage payment, that I, too, may become homeless. And then all of my late wife's posessions will be lost, and I live in my own museum. I compromise my integrity to keep up with expenses, or, so I think. Once a payment is put on the Credit Card, the downhill slope is quick. I work strictly commission with no back-up
Posted by Andy Grabiec on 04/11/2009 @ 07:13PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Andy- It's time to sell most of your museum pieces on E-Bay or at a good auction. A yard sale also might be in order. It's time to cut the bleeders, look for ways to reduce expenses and consider either downsizing or finding somebody to share the space and expenses. Been there, done that. I just passed the ten year anniversary of my Bob's passing. I expected to be out on the street in a couple of years. Instead, I'm thriving and secure because I learned to let go of most of it. The memories, photos and a few special mementos are all we need.
Posted by Patricia Williams on 04/11/2009 @ 08:27PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
For a better idea of "how this happened in Seattle", go back and read the comments section of the original article at the Seattle Times website. They're fully of plenty of condemnation and judgement for the poor.
Also, there's this very important paragraph from the article:
For more permanent housing, "there are huge waiting lists for the public housing that is available," said John Fox of the Displacement Coalition in Seattle. "From 2005 to 2007 we saw, just in Seattle, a loss of over 5,000 [low-cost housing units] to condominiums," he said. "The senior population is one of the first groups to be victimized by this trend" because older people are less likely to have other housing options.
That paragraph helps to explain a lot of Seattle's overall homeless problem. There simply isn't affordable housing, wasn't enough to begin with, and we've been losing what we had - with it replaced by market rate condos for sale. When the City Council and Mayor finally did do "something" they expanded the benefits for building low income housing so that they were available to builders building "median rent" housing to be rented to those making the Puget Sound's "median income". Which means they did NOTHING WHATSOEVER to reverse the trend of lost low income housing.
To put it bluntly, despite the city's reputation of a liberal/progressive utopia, on the ground it's more like a fight among angry rats. There's some grand talk about how things should be, but absolutely no effort to fix things and even the talk stops if fixing things is going to involve a need for money - at which point things turn to fingerpointing and victim blaming.
BTW, speaking of Social Security, even for a lifetime worker, it's a very paltry pittance. According to the Social Security website this year's estimated average is $1153 for retirees and $1068 for disabled workers, but there's a lot of variance involved in the averages... Despite many believing it's a reasonable retirement, it's often subpoverty.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 04/11/2009 @ 09:45PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The difference between living in an RV and a truck cab is the RV was designed to handle our modern creature comforts, like sleeping horizontal, relieving yourself in private, and preparing and storing your food. However living out of a car/tent or grocery basket is inhumane, and you can only hope that when this financial disease attacks you, there are people there who can help you and your family! Homelessness, it's not just for Bumbs and the lazy anymore.
Posted by Mike White on 04/12/2009 @ 12:08PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Despite stereotypes, homelessness has never been just for "bums" and "the lazy". At best, it's just been more likely to happen to them. It's always been something that could - at least in theory - happen to anyone under the right series of occurrences. With the recent state of the economy and personal finances (even before the start of this recession or whatever the pundits and experts want to call it), many were only a paycheck or two away from homelessness should anything happen like an unexpected major medical bill (even WITH insurance) or a sudden layoff or disability of a family member who'd been an income source.
I used to believe the idea too or at least that it wasn't allowed to happen to those who tried to be responsible by doing things like working as much as possible when they could, staying clean (i.e. not drinking or doing drugs), staying out of crime, etc. Next thing I knew, through a long and twisted series of circumstances, I spent a full year couch surfing. Only mistakes I made were being disabled (not that I could have picked my genes) and staying too long with an abusive spouse.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 04/12/2009 @ 01:00PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I believe part of the solution to this problem would be to build a housing complex in every state for homeless veterans. We spend billions of dollars to build monuments to honor our veterans, but can anyone live in a monument? No. I have no problem honoring our veterans with permanent sites to visit, but I believe giving them a place to lay their head at night does more to honor them than building a monument to remember them by. And that doesn't have to be the end of it: Help them get back on their feet with ANY needed care they may need, such as job training, medical, mental, etc.
Posted by Kenneth Davis, Sr. on 04/14/2009 @ 12:40PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
What a great idea, to bad we can't get the VA and the government to do that. Although to their credit they have a fairly good program that helps a lucky few pay their rent.
Posted by Marion VanWinkle on 05/09/2009 @ 11:59PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
You have a point there about medical care. What it takes for veterans to get care through the VA is, in many cases, absurd and particularly so when you start figuring in red tape, wait times and cost - yes, that's right, COST as in copays for care and prescriptions and they're often stricter than Medicare or Medicaid about income. That this happens to veterans who were PROMISED this care in return for their service is wrong on so many counts.
Thing is, medical care is in many cases tied closely to homelessness and risk of homelessness for quite a lot - not just veterans. Public health has for so long been so neglected that in many areas it either no longer exists or you've got to pay for it (and they often won't bend the rules on your copay) or you MUST have at least Medicaid - how is HAVING to pay a $20+ copay or HAVING to have insurance PUBLIC health? In particular, this requirement tends to apply if you need any sort of specialist care - doesn't matter that for YOU it's basic care for a condition you've long had - they're going to require that insurance or if they'll take copays at all they're often higher copays. This is where they start FORCING people into homelessness by FORCING them onto disability via that near-forever wait for a social security disability determination if they're not of the full SSA retirement age or close enough to it to retire early...all just to get medicaid. This is a true failure of our nation's safety net on many counts - health, safety, housing - at least these three.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 04/14/2009 @ 11:04PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Danetta has it right. Millions of us have live through the failures of our non-system. I did, barely, though my husband died of it. What a waste. Universal health insurance is a critical piece of the puzzle to stabilizing so much else in this nation, families, businesses. When we have that in place it will save so many from homelessness and bankruptcies. Though I would like to see single payer (government) as this would be the most practical way to go, the Obama plan should get us there in stages. Support the funding for our vets and for universal health insurance by communicating with your reps and senators in Congress.
Posted by Patricia Williams on 04/15/2009 @ 07:08AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I agree that veterans should receive comprehensive care (medical, residential, etc.) when they need it. All should receive coverage from universal health insurance. Many elderly are driven to bankruptcy by the costs of a spouse's "final illness" .Even with Medicare, the co-pays are very high, and even with Medicare-D some people have to limit or skip their medication. These expenses are also formidable for younger people.
I agree with Patricia that single payer would be the most effective way to go, and that Obama is trying to get us there in stages. (If we phase in an effective single payer system, businesses will hop on the bandwagon because it will reduce one of the biggest expenses that U.S. businesses have.)
Posted by C W on 04/15/2009 @ 07:48AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Speaking of Medicare, getting assistance with copays - or qualifying for Medicaid if you're not bad off enough in your health to be put into some sort of institutional type setting (even if it's just something akin to a nursing home) - is darned near impossible. MNP Medicaid has impossibly low income and asset limits, particularly if you're not looking at institutionalization, on top of this states have the right to play mental gymnastics like declaring legally married couples to be "two families of one for the purpose of determining medical benefits" which can result in things like one spouse gets full help and the other gets none or both spouses get useless help like QI-1 (just help with Medicare premiums) and MNP Medicaid that comes with $1500 PER PERSON spend downs that EACH must make every six months (that's an amount often around half their income), plus merely having Medicare and/or Medicaid typically renders you ineligible for most charity care programs no matter how far below the poverty line you are or how unable to make those coinsurance payments.
I'm married (hopefully not much longer), disabled and living in Seattle. Our income is $1188/mo, which puts us solidly below the poverty line for a family of 2 and will put me just above the poverty line for a family of 1 when the divorce is finalized. We've - thanks to a combination of Federal laws and Washington's particularly draconian laws (plus DSHS' inept ways of applying them) struggled for 5 years to survive in WA like this - while paying half our income to rent, another $100 (no matter what games we played) for utilities and receiving around $100 in food stamps - to pay (or at least pretend to pay toward) my coinsurance amounts, buy a reasonable amount of food, do a bit of laundry, and have something left over for whatever might pop up that's also necessary (like replacing car windows or buying gas). So I can really understand why/how Senior Citizens and the disabled might end up homeless.
What neither I - nor any of my health care providers or their billing departments understand - is why more help isn't available or how "loopholes" like the one that allows declaring married families to be "two families of one for the purpose of determining ONLY their medical assistance" would even GET on their books, much less why it would ever be used since it's so overtly inhumane because it effectively denies health care by making it inaccessible unless and until you can find the rare someone who will actually make an exception and give charity care DESPITE your having at least Medicare. This part of the system most certainly needs reform NOW, not in some distant tomorrow in "stages" to make it politically palatable... No, it won't be easy, but it shouldn't be easier to accept the human costs than the political costs either.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 04/15/2009 @ 04:46PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
As Danetta says, we need reform NOW. My late husband and I went through a similar nightmare, falling between the safety nets much more often than snagging them. I declared bankruptcy and hung on. My mother's similar crisis after my father's death galvanized the family to pull together to get homes repaired, sold and put us in a double wide in a senior park where I'm looking after her. After 20 years with no insurance and serious chronic medical issues, I'm finally covered. We've even got some home aid through Medicaid for Mom now. Obama isn't talking about a distant tomorrow. He's going for choices this year IF enough Americans are insistent. We can always try pressing our legislators for HR 676 and S 703 as well. That would give us single payer universal. The stages I was referring to in Obama's plan were the numbers of Americans opting to take government insurance. He seems to be trying to work around people's resistance to change from private insurance which would assuredly doom passage of universal health insurance. I understand that about half of all bankruptcies, or it may be higher now, are caused by the costs of illnesses and accidents. Too many people are too easily convinced that they must lose everything, pay their medical bills no matter if it leaves them with no home. When its survival time, we shouldn't be bullied into abject poverty.
Posted by Patricia Williams on 04/16/2009 @ 01:22AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Single payer would not necessarily be just an "expansion" of Medicare to the entire U.S. population. (Medicare has its flaws.) One advantage COULD be the use of electronic data systems. Another advantage would be the inclusion of "young healthies" in the patient pool to stabilize reimbursement rates and spread costs.
As far as the states' involvement. Talk about patchwork--what a mess!!! One country, more than 50 programs.
Posted by C W on 04/16/2009 @ 04:32AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
SO -do something about it -SUPPORT MY SUGGESTED CHANGES TO HR1408 BEFORE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE NOW.i have lots, lots, lots of solutions but need some help to get them voice....
build it and they will come.
http://homelessness.change.org/actions/view/accessible_housing_for_all
Posted by DARLENE MATTHEWS on 05/02/2009 @ 02:26PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I did a pre-emptive strike on homelessness when I was 59 - similar to my quitting smoking, at 52, before I had to.
I've been living in a van for the previous 10 years. During that time I was successful in earninng and saving $100,000. I've spent some of that $ recently on equipment and tools that will aid me in continuing a nomadic life..in sustainable comfort..responding to the vagaries/caprices/hazards of the economy and climate change.
The assumption that we could go on living an oppulent life style (hogging 25% of the world's resources) seemed unrealistic to me. I chose ten years ago to live WELL BELOW my means. I learned how before I had to.
This is directed at readers who also don't have to..yet.
Posted by Alfred Allen on 08/09/2009 @ 03:50PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.