5 ms·

Affordable housing will do absolutely nothing for the type of homeless people OP is talking about (drug addicts and the mentally ill). They are homeless becaus

Affordable housing will do absolutely nothing for the type of homeless people OP is talking about (drug addicts and the mentally ill). They are homeless because they have no stability in their life and would not be able to hold a job to pay rent regardless of the cost. The class of homeless you are referring to is people pushed out of their homes due to rising prices and their limited income. These people (in my experience) are not the ones going around screaming at people an not bathing for months. You would most likely not even know they are homeless. You are not talking about the same groups of people so you are talking past each other and nothing productive will come of your exchange.

huac 9y ago
Hence why the commenter you're replying to supports single payer healthcare, to address mental health issues and addiction. And having affordable housing obviously creates some stability in a person's life.
- hueving 9y ago
  Having affordable housing only creates stability if they actually pay the rent. From what I've observed, the problematic homeless people primarily need health care or to be put in a mental institution (for the really unstable ones). Affordable housing would certainly be nice, but having that isn't going to do anything for the ones that piss on the floor or jump off the balcony of a public library because they wouldn't be able to pay (or want to pay) any price for housing.
emodendroket 9y ago
But what's the point of the distinction here? Are we really going to argue that the best thing we can do with mentally unstable people who are unable to hold a job is throw them on the streets?
- Turing_Machine 9y ago
  I don't think anyone is arguing that. "Throwing them on the streets" and "discouraging them from hanging out in the library unless they are actually using it" are two different things entirely.
  - lenkite 9y ago
    No,I don't want homeless kids from being discouraged from hanging out in the library just because they stink and make rich people uncomfortable. Just because some folks don't acknowledge the dark side of the USA, where is little/no support for your fellow citizens who fall off the train, doesn't mean you can grind them down even more.
    - emodendroket 9y ago
      Ultimately trying to devise measures to keep homeless people out of a library is curing a symptom rather than a problem.
    - Turing_Machine 9y ago
      Only "rich people" are bothered by smelly, loud, violent people, and only "kids" are homeless? Uh-huh. Can the histrionic rhetoric, dude. It's not working.
      - mbfg 9y ago
        Perhaps not only, but i'm guessing there's a strong correlation there.
        Turing_Machine 9y ago
        You're totally wrong. And I'm not guessing.
    - Turing_Machine 9y ago
      The more I think about this, the angrier I get. How dare you? How dare you? For one, "rich people" don't usually hang out at the library. They can afford to buy books, videos, and their own computers. The people who bear the brunt of an unusable library are middle and lower class people, especially kids. I know, I was one of them. We were quite poor when I was a kid. I'm talking "didn't have electricity or running water" poor, for extended periods of time. Every couple of weeks, we'd go to "town" (population ~1,500, but it had a library). The adults would drop me off there to read and check out books while they did their errands. I really don't know what would have become of me without that -- we sure couldn't afford to buy books. Would they have left me in the library if it had been full of aggressive, stinky, masturbating drunks? No. Nor should they have. No parent would. What you are saying is that the rights of those who use the library as a sleep-off shelter/shooting gallery/public masturbation facility should take precedence over the rights of those who are there to use the library for its intended purpose. Including younger me. Including every child with the urge to learn, but whose family can't afford books. That is an utterly reprehensible position. Once again: how DARE you?
- EdSharkey 9y ago
  Well ... what is the best thing we can do with mentally unstable people who are unable to hold a job? I want to know what 'best' actually looks like. I know 'best' is not a bunch of talk so that we can feel better ourselves (but not actually do anything.) Time to start passing some laws! We have people who are damaged and hurting and down with no way out. They are not able to care for themselves and they are not going to advocate for or better themselves. There's nothing noble there, only sadness! I snicker at the single payer agenda... Hey, you all know darn well the homeless are going to be LAST in line to get their health care rations after California drives over the single payer cliff. There's only one thing that even approaches 'best'. Take away the homeless' freedom by making homelessness illegal. Work camps for the healthy and mental hospitals for the sick. And before anyone complains about the cost of such a suggestion, please scroll up and see "single payer" was previously recommended. My idea will be cheap by comparison. In fact, the taxpayer should pony up and gladly this time, if purely from a public health standpoint. The homelessness problem is absolutely shameful, inhumane, and abhorrent. That doesn't mean compassion is the answer because feelings allowed us to get so far into this mess. Not fair, not just? Who said life was fair? Where is there any justice? Clearly the homeless are getting a raw deal already. We have to get aggressive and be cold-hearted. Lock them up on a farm, get them clean, force them to work, and then integrate them back into society or the military whenever possible. If people go right back onto the streets after release, they land right back into the camps.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    Work camps? Are you kidding? Why don't you go all the way and advocate a massive eugenics program, because you're most of the way there.
    - EdSharkey 9y ago
      I'm not kidding. I don't want the homeless dead, I want them off the streets and taken care of. Caring doesn't equate with kindness. Signalling outrage here and continuing to ignore the problem simply increases the suffering. You virtue signal your face blue, it doesn't help anyone.

huac 9y ago

Hence why the commenter you're replying to supports single payer healthcare, to address mental health issues and addiction. And having affordable housing obviously creates some stability in a person's life.

hueving 9y ago
Having affordable housing only creates stability if they actually pay the rent. From what I've observed, the problematic homeless people primarily need health care or to be put in a mental institution (for the really unstable ones). Affordable housing would certainly be nice, but having that isn't going to do anything for the ones that piss on the floor or jump off the balcony of a public library because they wouldn't be able to pay (or want to pay) any price for housing.

emodendroket 9y ago

But what's the point of the distinction here? Are we really going to argue that the best thing we can do with mentally unstable people who are unable to hold a job is throw them on the streets?

Turing_Machine 9y ago
I don't think anyone is arguing that. "Throwing them on the streets" and "discouraging them from hanging out in the library unless they are actually using it" are two different things entirely.
- lenkite 9y ago
  No,I don't want homeless kids from being discouraged from hanging out in the library just because they stink and make rich people uncomfortable. Just because some folks don't acknowledge the dark side of the USA, where is little/no support for your fellow citizens who fall off the train, doesn't mean you can grind them down even more.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    Ultimately trying to devise measures to keep homeless people out of a library is curing a symptom rather than a problem.
  - Turing_Machine 9y ago
    Only "rich people" are bothered by smelly, loud, violent people, and only "kids" are homeless? Uh-huh. Can the histrionic rhetoric, dude. It's not working.
    - mbfg 9y ago
      Perhaps not only, but i'm guessing there's a strong correlation there.
      - Turing_Machine 9y ago
        You're totally wrong. And I'm not guessing.
  - Turing_Machine 9y ago
    The more I think about this, the angrier I get. How dare you? How dare you? For one, "rich people" don't usually hang out at the library. They can afford to buy books, videos, and their own computers. The people who bear the brunt of an unusable library are middle and lower class people, especially kids. I know, I was one of them. We were quite poor when I was a kid. I'm talking "didn't have electricity or running water" poor, for extended periods of time. Every couple of weeks, we'd go to "town" (population ~1,500, but it had a library). The adults would drop me off there to read and check out books while they did their errands. I really don't know what would have become of me without that -- we sure couldn't afford to buy books. Would they have left me in the library if it had been full of aggressive, stinky, masturbating drunks? No. Nor should they have. No parent would. What you are saying is that the rights of those who use the library as a sleep-off shelter/shooting gallery/public masturbation facility should take precedence over the rights of those who are there to use the library for its intended purpose. Including younger me. Including every child with the urge to learn, but whose family can't afford books. That is an utterly reprehensible position. Once again: how DARE you?
EdSharkey 9y ago
Well ... what is the best thing we can do with mentally unstable people who are unable to hold a job? I want to know what 'best' actually looks like. I know 'best' is not a bunch of talk so that we can feel better ourselves (but not actually do anything.) Time to start passing some laws! We have people who are damaged and hurting and down with no way out. They are not able to care for themselves and they are not going to advocate for or better themselves. There's nothing noble there, only sadness! I snicker at the single payer agenda... Hey, you all know darn well the homeless are going to be LAST in line to get their health care rations after California drives over the single payer cliff. There's only one thing that even approaches 'best'. Take away the homeless' freedom by making homelessness illegal. Work camps for the healthy and mental hospitals for the sick. And before anyone complains about the cost of such a suggestion, please scroll up and see "single payer" was previously recommended. My idea will be cheap by comparison. In fact, the taxpayer should pony up and gladly this time, if purely from a public health standpoint. The homelessness problem is absolutely shameful, inhumane, and abhorrent. That doesn't mean compassion is the answer because feelings allowed us to get so far into this mess. Not fair, not just? Who said life was fair? Where is there any justice? Clearly the homeless are getting a raw deal already. We have to get aggressive and be cold-hearted. Lock them up on a farm, get them clean, force them to work, and then integrate them back into society or the military whenever possible. If people go right back onto the streets after release, they land right back into the camps.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- emodendroket 9y ago
  Work camps? Are you kidding? Why don't you go all the way and advocate a massive eugenics program, because you're most of the way there.
  - EdSharkey 9y ago
    I'm not kidding. I don't want the homeless dead, I want them off the streets and taken care of. Caring doesn't equate with kindness. Signalling outrage here and continuing to ignore the problem simply increases the suffering. You virtue signal your face blue, it doesn't help anyone.