4 ms·

So, the thing that always bothers me about how Los Angeles is reported on is the lack of normalization for population. LA is really big with a lot of people. It

So, the thing that always bothers me about how Los Angeles is reported on is the lack of normalization for population. LA is really big with a lot of people. It will naturally have higher population of homelessness. 57k/10.2m is ~0.56% homelessness, which is about par with Seattle (11.6k/2.1m = ~0.55%), but significantly better than SF (7k/870k = ~0.80%) or NY (77k/8.5m = ~0.90%). Given LA's unrelenting rapid gentrification, wealth, and income inequality, I think the situation can easily get much worse. But at least we're trying, trying to make the situation better, or at least slow down its progression. I'd hate to see us give up and invest in anti-loitering securitybots instead. The wealthy here haven't become that out of touch and scornful yet, but keep writing articles like this and maybe they might.

ShabbosGoy 9y ago
> I'd hate to see us give up and invest in anti-loitering securitybots instead. Why would you need securitybots? Orange County police departments already do it for free by dumping homeless people in Long Beach. > The wealthy here haven't become that out of touch and scornful yet I guess you’ve never interacted with people who live in Newport Beach. Or LA for that matter. Are you sure you’re from LA?
cylinder 9y ago
It's an example of major cities taking on what really is a federal problem. NYC and LA run welfare programs using local tax dollars. This is so obviously a federal-level problem that requires a massive federal project to solve. Putting this burden on the local residents of LA, SF, NYC etc is incredibly unfair. It's also inefficient to build homeless shelters in dense LA county when there is so much cheap land throughout the country (with people looking for work, too).