The World Cup and Homelessness

The popularity of soccer in America wanes in comparison to the sport in nearly every other country on the planet. Right now the World Cup is unfolding in Brazil and the 32 nations involved are battling it out. I grew up playing soccer and it is my favorite sport to both play and watch. It's always been a bit frustrating being a soccer fan in America, but I will enjoy the attention to this beautiful game and keep my fingers crossed for the US team.

The decision to to hold the World Cup in Brazil has been very controversial within the host country. While Brazil is one of the most beautiful countries in the world, it is also one of the poorest. The finances dedicated to this soccer tournament are astronomical and there have been riots and protests by native Brazilians who contend all the money spent on preparing and hosting the World Cup should have been spent in other areas. Poor education and high unemployment plague Brazil. There is a wide chasm between the wealthy and poor and many opponents of the World Cup view the resources spent as a colossal waste of time and a negligent allotment of money.

Those who support the decision for the games in Brazil point to the potential of earned revenue generated in the country as thousands of visitors flock to the various venues hosting games over the next month. Hotels, restaurants, tourism, and shopping will all see an increase due to the World Cup. This perspective views the tournament as a necessary tool to possibly revitalize the and stimulate the Brazilian economy. The argument can go as deep as a person wants to examine and my intention is not to weigh in favor of one position. But the argument does raise some interesting points.

First, what should a community's response to social issues be? If there are pressing, prevalent needs in an area, how much responsibility should be shouldered by members of the community to solve those problems? Or, another fair question could be whether or not social ills need to be addressed at all. A city has obligations toward infrastructure and maintaining the economic viability of it's business sector. Putting local businesses in positions to thrive and succeed is a sign of strong government. Allocating resources is a complex issue and not something to be done lightly.

But what happens when ascetics supplants societal improvement? Is there a limit to the amount of money spent that should be spent on beautification projects and measures that, while providing some positivity, don't really contribute to solving other issues that plague the community negatively? Or are these issues best examined and addressed by individuals and organizations focused specifically on social problems?

I don't think it's an 'either/or' situation and striking a balance between governmental involvement and personal, individual responsibility must be reached. Obviously, reducing and eliminating homelessness in the Flathead Valley is important to us and we do our best to be a bridge between communal involvement between organizations, businesses, government, and individuals. Prioritizing and implementing practical solutions in which everyone assumes some responsibility for providing answers is the best way to make positive changes regarding homelessness in our area.

Now... Back to soccer and go USA!