6 ms·

KOMO TV in Seattle recently (last Sunday) did a big report on this called "Seattle is Dying." Down south in Portland, it's the same thing. Down in San Francisco

by cronix 8y ago

KOMO TV in Seattle recently (last Sunday) did a big report on this called "Seattle is Dying." Down south in Portland, it's the same thing. Down in San Francisco...same thing. Down further, same thing. This is spreading quite quickly, all over in the big cities. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b53uiRFq4Ds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b53uiRFq4Ds

egypturnash 8y ago
FWIW KOMO is now owned by Sinclair, and is increasingly rabidly right-wing. What to do about the homeless situation in Seattle is a big topic of discussion currently; we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets.
- Fellshard 8y ago
  The solutions proposed by the Seattle City Council are to aid and abet addictive habits, and to pursue 'more of the same' for every policy that put things where they are today. No amount of tax money they would receive would fix the problem, because they have shown they cannot spend it competently.
  - grogenaut 8y ago
    Care to elaborate and point to specific policies? Are you referring to safe injection sites or something else?
    - Fellshard 8y ago
      That's the primary example, yes. This in addition to curbing police enforcement of actual drug use and possession, from what I've heard in reporting and from officers themselves. One anecdote I've heard through my brother, who has been in law enforcement and monitors things in our old home region. He told me an officer he knew left the force because those types of restrictions were becoming untenable to deal with. Secondhand, so take this, too, with a grain of salt.
      - chillwaves 8y ago
        What is the advantage in cycling addicts in and out of prison?
        trashcan 8y ago
        Did you watch the video? Removing access to drugs and providing them with I assume subsidized medication that is used to treat addiction.
        m_ke 8y ago
        Do you honestly believe that throwing mentally ill and addicted people in jail is the right solution to this problem?
        trashcan 8y ago
        I do believe that when someone is slowly dying of addiction on the streets, that it might be more compassionate to help them cure that addiction, even if it is against their will (not like you normally get to decide you don't want to go to jail when you've comitted a crime anyway). I know it's not a one size fits all solution by any means, and has the potential for tons of liberty infringing issues, but it sounds better than doing nothing.
        grogenaut 8y ago
        The goal of Safe injection sites are specifically aimed at getting people care while letting them deal with their addictions, under monitoring. Whether they'll work here in the us or if we'll let them is a different question. They worked where the idea came from. That's what gp didn't like. What do you think since you seem to want a better option. Is that better than jail as a default? It's supposed to do what you want without prison.
        Fellshard 8y ago
- throwawaysea 8y ago
  I feel like KOMO being owned by Sinclair is not relevant. This documentary was really well done and on the whole, realistic. Mentioning that KOMO is owned by Sinclair or claiming they are increasingly "rabidly" right-wing (which I've not observed thus far) will only serve to keep people from watching the documentary and making up their own mind, since they will 'pre-judge' it. I don't feel that's what this video deserves given that it is bringing light to a problem Seattle residents have seen right in front of their eyes, building up over the last 10 years. If anything, local publications like The Stranger are skewed towards the far-left and keep playing up a misplaced "compassion" angle that serves to stifle any pragmatic counter-arguments through a vague moral argument. And of course, the city council (literally all its current members) is completely inept and has been gas-lighting residents this entire time, as if we can't see the trash, the drug abuse, the usurping of public spaces by transient campers, the rise of crime, etc. Lastly, claiming that folks in Amazon's pockets shouted down the head tax is not a balanced evaluation. My read of discussions online were that many people were against it, from all walks of life, from all parts of the political spectrum except perhaps the far-left. Construction workers, who don't have the easiest or the most well-compensated job, were the ones shouting down Kshama Sawant's head tax (see their counter-protest at https://youtu.be/ycEa1l01_A0 https://youtu.be/ycEa1l01_A0). And it's not just the Amazon ecosystem - over 100 businesses signed a letter to the council against the head tax (https://www.seattlebusinessmag.com/policy/more-100-seattle-business-leaders-oppose-proposed-head-tax https://www.seattlebusinessmag.com/policy/more-100-seattle-b...).
- diogenescynic 8y ago
  Just watched the documentary and it is entirely fact based. I hate Sinclair, but this was quality work.
- cronix 8y ago
  I didn't detect any rabid right-wing bias in this documentary, despite whoever owns it. It seemed pretty neutral, if not from a humanitarian perspective. I don't think I've ever seen a rabid right-wing org point out that drug addiction is actually the biggest component of this homeless problem, and showing a solution working elsewhere that was primarily based on getting people off of drugs. > we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets. It sounds like people need to vote for politicians with spines then if shouting them down is all it takes, assuming the majority of people actually wanted it because they believed it would solve the problem.
  - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
    > we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets. > assuming the majority of people actually wanted it because they believed it would solve the problem. The poster is omitting that most people in Seattle were opposed to the tax, because it would have significantly harmed labor unions and regional businesses, like grocery stores. The Seattle city council crafted a tax without consulting businesses about how economics works, doubled down and told people to stuff it when they pointed out that it was going to damage the local economy by crippling mid-tier businesses that had high-gross, low-margin revenues, and were then forced into an embarrassing retreat when labor unions started campaigning against it and neighborhood organizations circled the wagons to protect their historic businesses. It was also a pocket change, feel good tax: Seattle spends over a billion dollars a year on poverty, between low-income subsidies and homelessness, and has nothing but a degrading situation to show for it. People in Seattle just have a simple question: both Amazon and the SCC have spent about $25B over the past decade -- Amazon to rebuild SLU, and the SCC on anti-poverty; why does Amazon have a campus and tens to hundreds of thousands of lives changed, while the SCC has literal poop on the streets to show for it?
    - remarkEon 8y ago
      I live in Seattle, and work for Big Tech. Your description is basically spot on. It's frustrating to me because the Seattle City Council seems so disconnected from the strife that a lot of these people face - as correctly depicted in the KOMO documentary. If the SCC wanted to extract some value from Amazon then fine, just do it explicitly. This was a half-handed way to go about it, and so disconnected from how local economies work. I will live here for a few more years for sure. But if the SCC keeps on this same path, and Seattle turns into SF I'm leaving. It's sad, because I've been living here off and on since 2011 and I genuinely love the PNW, since it's got everything I want - access to nature and the water, smart people that I'd consider starting a company with, and a beautiful aesthetic. I'm not the only one that feels this way. Coworkers, especially those who just had kids or are about to, plan on leaving for the suburbs or ditching the city altogether. Edit: was googling city council videos and, well, here's an example of what I mean: https://youtu.be/gMrBFNoHBkg https://youtu.be/gMrBFNoHBkg
ng12 8y ago
Yeah, of course. We sold out the last vestiges of small-town America but are not socially prepared for a world where the entire economy is focused around a select few cities.
- Retric 8y ago
  In 1930 5.9% of all Americans where living in NYC. The importance of cities has seen minimal changes, the issue is we stopped building enough housing and transportation infrastructure. Many US issues come from where we place the borders of our local governments. Local was more meaningful before the car, but with increased mobility that’s no longer the case.
  - erik_seaberg 8y ago
    This. My commute crosses five incorporated cities in three counties, all barely distinguishable, but I can only vote in the one where I sleep.
    - jdavis703 8y ago
      My commute on BART and Caltrain in the Bay Area touched 4 counties and dozens of cities. The Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan area now officially spans five state-level entities: Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Yet our political structures don’t recognize this new regionalism.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    Suburban political boundaries were drawn this way intentionally. The “solution” for integrated school districts was to pack up and leave for places that minorities couldn’t afford to move to, so you could keep your kids going to all-white schools. Even today undoing those boundaries is fraught by the specter of history. https://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/fears-about-marta-suburbs-familiar-but-changing/kfrTElU7l1c0w9TJRgGsPJ/amp.html https://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/fears-about-ma...
sakopov 8y ago
Watched this last night. I live in Midwest and used to visit Seattle 2 or 3 times a year. Haven't been there in 6 years. I do remember seeing a lot of homeless people in the city, but I don't remember running into homeless camps, especially the middle of the city. So when I saw this in the documentary I was totally surprised it's become this bad. What in the world is happening there...
- dabockster 8y ago
  Made me dust off my HN account for this. I’m a fourth generation resident of Tacoma, WA just south of Seattle, so I might be able to shed some light on what’s been happening. Please pardon spelling errors, I’m typing this on my phone. Washignton state is very passive aggressive as a whole. You see it in the politics as well as the people themselves. In this case, Seattle does want to help the homeless but doesn’t want to make the effort to build a proper facility. We’re quick to jump in social issues like gay marriage, but will absolutely balk at anything that requires more money, time, or effort. So Seattle, in the most passive way possible, stops enforcing public camping laws. There are other significant components to it as well. In the case of the Seattle Police, they just got shaken down by the Dept of Justice for corruption and racial profiling as well as by the WA State Supreme Court (the death penalty ban cites a Seattle prosecutor being openly racist on the record in King County Court). My guess is that the police is being super careful right now to avoid another legal confrontation, so a lot of grey area stuff (like homelessness - illegal to camp but they gotta sleep soemwhere) doesn’t get enforced. The freeway camps get even trickier since they’re on Department of Transportation land, which only the State Patrol has legal jurisdiction on under current law (city laws don’t affect highway land).
davidw 8y ago
For a different point of view: https://www.realchangenews.org/2019/03/20/komo-asserts-seattle-dying-misery-porn https://www.realchangenews.org/2019/03/20/komo-asserts-seatt...
- Zamicol 8y ago
  I read that and I don't see an alternative presented, just criticism.
  - Fellshard 8y ago
    That's the gist of how it is in Seattle. You're not allowed to address or discuss it. You're not allowed to observe there may be a problem. You can only help in the permitted ways - serving or donating to some shelters. Everyone else, be on your way. The city will tend to all, you need not worry yourselves.
diogenescynic 8y ago
Just watched this. As someone from SF, this is EXACTLY how the situation is here, just worse. I completely understand how Seattle residents feel. I really don't understand how this is allowed to continue year after year with so much money thrown at it clearly not doing anything.
dade_ 8y ago
A symptom of drug use, that is a symptom of a sickness spreading through our society. It isn't a US problem. Across the border, Vancouver is famous for it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6-1oo-b3Ds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6-1oo-b3Ds It is spreading to colder climates as well. Tiny in comparison, but it has recently turned into a problem in Toronto. The encampments are already growing again: https://globalnews.ca/tag/gardiner-expressway-homeless-encampments/ https://globalnews.ca/tag/gardiner-expressway-homeless-encam...
mathgenius 8y ago
I was totally interested in watching this, but this youtube is complete garbage, and does not belong on HN.
spicymaki 8y ago
I am center-left (recovering socialist) and I thought the documentary was fair (harsh and judgmental but fair). It seems like the residents are not happy with what is going on, and the city government is not providing satisfactory results. Clearly arresting and returning drug addicts and the mentally ill back to streets next day is a bad idea. I wish they spent a little more time digging into why they are just returning offenders back to the street. Suppose the cost of incarceration is a factor for the city's budget, would they be able to institute and sustain a comprehensive rehab program? The documentary seems to have presented guaranteed solution (comprehensive rehab) at the end, but they might be masking complexity.

by cronix 8y ago

egypturnash 8y ago

FWIW KOMO is now owned by Sinclair, and is increasingly rabidly right-wing. What to do about the homeless situation in Seattle is a big topic of discussion currently; we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets.

Fellshard 8y ago
The solutions proposed by the Seattle City Council are to aid and abet addictive habits, and to pursue 'more of the same' for every policy that put things where they are today. No amount of tax money they would receive would fix the problem, because they have shown they cannot spend it competently.
- grogenaut 8y ago
  Care to elaborate and point to specific policies? Are you referring to safe injection sites or something else?
  - Fellshard 8y ago
    That's the primary example, yes. This in addition to curbing police enforcement of actual drug use and possession, from what I've heard in reporting and from officers themselves. One anecdote I've heard through my brother, who has been in law enforcement and monitors things in our old home region. He told me an officer he knew left the force because those types of restrictions were becoming untenable to deal with. Secondhand, so take this, too, with a grain of salt.
    - chillwaves 8y ago
      What is the advantage in cycling addicts in and out of prison?
      - trashcan 8y ago
        Did you watch the video? Removing access to drugs and providing them with I assume subsidized medication that is used to treat addiction.
        m_ke 8y ago
        Do you honestly believe that throwing mentally ill and addicted people in jail is the right solution to this problem?
        trashcan 8y ago
        I do believe that when someone is slowly dying of addiction on the streets, that it might be more compassionate to help them cure that addiction, even if it is against their will (not like you normally get to decide you don't want to go to jail when you've comitted a crime anyway). I know it's not a one size fits all solution by any means, and has the potential for tons of liberty infringing issues, but it sounds better than doing nothing.
        grogenaut 8y ago
        The goal of Safe injection sites are specifically aimed at getting people care while letting them deal with their addictions, under monitoring. Whether they'll work here in the us or if we'll let them is a different question. They worked where the idea came from. That's what gp didn't like. What do you think since you seem to want a better option. Is that better than jail as a default? It's supposed to do what you want without prison.
        Fellshard 8y ago
throwawaysea 8y ago
I feel like KOMO being owned by Sinclair is not relevant. This documentary was really well done and on the whole, realistic. Mentioning that KOMO is owned by Sinclair or claiming they are increasingly "rabidly" right-wing (which I've not observed thus far) will only serve to keep people from watching the documentary and making up their own mind, since they will 'pre-judge' it. I don't feel that's what this video deserves given that it is bringing light to a problem Seattle residents have seen right in front of their eyes, building up over the last 10 years. If anything, local publications like The Stranger are skewed towards the far-left and keep playing up a misplaced "compassion" angle that serves to stifle any pragmatic counter-arguments through a vague moral argument. And of course, the city council (literally all its current members) is completely inept and has been gas-lighting residents this entire time, as if we can't see the trash, the drug abuse, the usurping of public spaces by transient campers, the rise of crime, etc. Lastly, claiming that folks in Amazon's pockets shouted down the head tax is not a balanced evaluation. My read of discussions online were that many people were against it, from all walks of life, from all parts of the political spectrum except perhaps the far-left. Construction workers, who don't have the easiest or the most well-compensated job, were the ones shouting down Kshama Sawant's head tax (see their counter-protest at https://youtu.be/ycEa1l01_A0 https://youtu.be/ycEa1l01_A0). And it's not just the Amazon ecosystem - over 100 businesses signed a letter to the council against the head tax (https://www.seattlebusinessmag.com/policy/more-100-seattle-business-leaders-oppose-proposed-head-tax https://www.seattlebusinessmag.com/policy/more-100-seattle-b...).
diogenescynic 8y ago
Just watched the documentary and it is entirely fact based. I hate Sinclair, but this was quality work.
cronix 8y ago
I didn't detect any rabid right-wing bias in this documentary, despite whoever owns it. It seemed pretty neutral, if not from a humanitarian perspective. I don't think I've ever seen a rabid right-wing org point out that drug addiction is actually the biggest component of this homeless problem, and showing a solution working elsewhere that was primarily based on getting people off of drugs. > we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets. It sounds like people need to vote for politicians with spines then if shouting them down is all it takes, assuming the majority of people actually wanted it because they believed it would solve the problem.
- NotAnEconomist 8y ago
  > we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets. > assuming the majority of people actually wanted it because they believed it would solve the problem. The poster is omitting that most people in Seattle were opposed to the tax, because it would have significantly harmed labor unions and regional businesses, like grocery stores. The Seattle city council crafted a tax without consulting businesses about how economics works, doubled down and told people to stuff it when they pointed out that it was going to damage the local economy by crippling mid-tier businesses that had high-gross, low-margin revenues, and were then forced into an embarrassing retreat when labor unions started campaigning against it and neighborhood organizations circled the wagons to protect their historic businesses. It was also a pocket change, feel good tax: Seattle spends over a billion dollars a year on poverty, between low-income subsidies and homelessness, and has nothing but a degrading situation to show for it. People in Seattle just have a simple question: both Amazon and the SCC have spent about $25B over the past decade -- Amazon to rebuild SLU, and the SCC on anti-poverty; why does Amazon have a campus and tens to hundreds of thousands of lives changed, while the SCC has literal poop on the streets to show for it?
  - remarkEon 8y ago
    I live in Seattle, and work for Big Tech. Your description is basically spot on. It's frustrating to me because the Seattle City Council seems so disconnected from the strife that a lot of these people face - as correctly depicted in the KOMO documentary. If the SCC wanted to extract some value from Amazon then fine, just do it explicitly. This was a half-handed way to go about it, and so disconnected from how local economies work. I will live here for a few more years for sure. But if the SCC keeps on this same path, and Seattle turns into SF I'm leaving. It's sad, because I've been living here off and on since 2011 and I genuinely love the PNW, since it's got everything I want - access to nature and the water, smart people that I'd consider starting a company with, and a beautiful aesthetic. I'm not the only one that feels this way. Coworkers, especially those who just had kids or are about to, plan on leaving for the suburbs or ditching the city altogether. Edit: was googling city council videos and, well, here's an example of what I mean: https://youtu.be/gMrBFNoHBkg https://youtu.be/gMrBFNoHBkg

ng12 8y ago

Yeah, of course. We sold out the last vestiges of small-town America but are not socially prepared for a world where the entire economy is focused around a select few cities.

Retric 8y ago
In 1930 5.9% of all Americans where living in NYC. The importance of cities has seen minimal changes, the issue is we stopped building enough housing and transportation infrastructure. Many US issues come from where we place the borders of our local governments. Local was more meaningful before the car, but with increased mobility that’s no longer the case.
- erik_seaberg 8y ago
  This. My commute crosses five incorporated cities in three counties, all barely distinguishable, but I can only vote in the one where I sleep.
  - jdavis703 8y ago
    My commute on BART and Caltrain in the Bay Area touched 4 counties and dozens of cities. The Baltimore-Washington Metropolitan area now officially spans five state-level entities: Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. Yet our political structures don’t recognize this new regionalism.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  Suburban political boundaries were drawn this way intentionally. The “solution” for integrated school districts was to pack up and leave for places that minorities couldn’t afford to move to, so you could keep your kids going to all-white schools. Even today undoing those boundaries is fraught by the specter of history. https://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/fears-about-marta-suburbs-familiar-but-changing/kfrTElU7l1c0w9TJRgGsPJ/amp.html https://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/fears-about-ma...

sakopov 8y ago

Watched this last night. I live in Midwest and used to visit Seattle 2 or 3 times a year. Haven't been there in 6 years. I do remember seeing a lot of homeless people in the city, but I don't remember running into homeless camps, especially the middle of the city. So when I saw this in the documentary I was totally surprised it's become this bad. What in the world is happening there...

dabockster 8y ago
Made me dust off my HN account for this. I’m a fourth generation resident of Tacoma, WA just south of Seattle, so I might be able to shed some light on what’s been happening. Please pardon spelling errors, I’m typing this on my phone. Washignton state is very passive aggressive as a whole. You see it in the politics as well as the people themselves. In this case, Seattle does want to help the homeless but doesn’t want to make the effort to build a proper facility. We’re quick to jump in social issues like gay marriage, but will absolutely balk at anything that requires more money, time, or effort. So Seattle, in the most passive way possible, stops enforcing public camping laws. There are other significant components to it as well. In the case of the Seattle Police, they just got shaken down by the Dept of Justice for corruption and racial profiling as well as by the WA State Supreme Court (the death penalty ban cites a Seattle prosecutor being openly racist on the record in King County Court). My guess is that the police is being super careful right now to avoid another legal confrontation, so a lot of grey area stuff (like homelessness - illegal to camp but they gotta sleep soemwhere) doesn’t get enforced. The freeway camps get even trickier since they’re on Department of Transportation land, which only the State Patrol has legal jurisdiction on under current law (city laws don’t affect highway land).

davidw 8y ago

For a different point of view: https://www.realchangenews.org/2019/03/20/komo-asserts-seattle-dying-misery-porn https://www.realchangenews.org/2019/03/20/komo-asserts-seatt...

Zamicol 8y ago
I read that and I don't see an alternative presented, just criticism.
- Fellshard 8y ago
  That's the gist of how it is in Seattle. You're not allowed to address or discuss it. You're not allowed to observe there may be a problem. You can only help in the permitted ways - serving or donating to some shelters. Everyone else, be on your way. The city will tend to all, you need not worry yourselves.

diogenescynic 8y ago

Just watched this. As someone from SF, this is EXACTLY how the situation is here, just worse. I completely understand how Seattle residents feel. I really don't understand how this is allowed to continue year after year with so much money thrown at it clearly not doing anything.

dade_ 8y ago

A symptom of drug use, that is a symptom of a sickness spreading through our society. It isn't a US problem. Across the border, Vancouver is famous for it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6-1oo-b3Ds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6-1oo-b3Ds It is spreading to colder climates as well. Tiny in comparison, but it has recently turned into a problem in Toronto. The encampments are already growing again: https://globalnews.ca/tag/gardiner-expressway-homeless-encampments/ https://globalnews.ca/tag/gardiner-expressway-homeless-encam...

mathgenius 8y ago

I was totally interested in watching this, but this youtube is complete garbage, and does not belong on HN.

spicymaki 8y ago

I am center-left (recovering socialist) and I thought the documentary was fair (harsh and judgmental but fair). It seems like the residents are not happy with what is going on, and the city government is not providing satisfactory results. Clearly arresting and returning drug addicts and the mentally ill back to streets next day is a bad idea. I wish they spent a little more time digging into why they are just returning offenders back to the street. Suppose the cost of incarceration is a factor for the city's budget, would they be able to institute and sustain a comprehensive rehab program? The documentary seems to have presented guaranteed solution (comprehensive rehab) at the end, but they might be masking complexity.