8 ms·

exactly. empathy is a wonderful thing to cultivate when designing solutions for obvious problems like homelessness and the community impact it has. But, the fac

• causality0 4y ago
  Exactly. I want the support system to be good enough that there are few to no "unluckies" in these encampments. If we make it possible for virtually everyone who wants to get back on their feet to do so, then we can bring on the regulations to keep the streets clear. I'd gladly pay more in taxes if it meant I could eat lunch in my car in peace or go shopping in the bad part of town without getting accosted by some asshole who "just needs gas money to get home" like it's not the third time this week.
  • kraftman 4y ago
    What kind of person would be there and not unlucky?
    • scottshamus 4y ago
      People with serious mental health and/or addiction issues
      • kraftman 4y ago
        Shouldn't those people be supported by the system and not in encampments?
        • copperx 4y ago
          Certainly. That's what every taxpayer wants, but it's not clear why the government doesn't do anything towards that goal.
          • lupire 4y ago
            Because if the government has the power to imprison homeless people (even if the prisons are "nice" hospitals... today), then they also have the power to imprison "hysterical" women and blacks and gays and anyone else who the government thinks is mentally insufficient. Source: US History.
            • Avicebron 4y ago
              Not sure I follow, can you explain in more detail? You just conflated two different time periods in history and compared them as if the circumstances havent changed?
              • rdubs333 4y ago
                technically he is kinda right its a felony now in tennessee to be homeless.
          • digisign 4y ago
            Not every. There's an odd coalition of rural republicans who don't want to pay, in cahoots with inner-city lefties fighting for the freedom to eat out of garbage cans. Add in a court restriction here and there and local government's hands are tied. There's also the factor that it is a nation-wide problem. Once city can't solve it, if they did everyone would just go there.
            • ZeroGravitas 4y ago
              Laws preventing people eating out of garbage cans seems to indicate that there are people who feel compelled to do so, presumably because the system has failed them terribly. How does an inner city lefty being against such a law (which just seems to be criminalizing extreme poverty), put them in league with the people who don't want a social safety net and so are placing people in that very situation? Isn't it cheaper to give them food than to lock them in prison ... and then give them food?
              • 4y ago
      • vintermann 4y ago
        That sounds pretty unlucky to me.
  • vondur 4y ago
    We pay a ton of taxes in California already to deal with the homeless, yet nothing seems to get done. We need better government. There is no accountability for any of these programs that are enacted.
    • CharlesW 4y ago
      > There is no accountability for any of these programs that are enacted. You can call or email Lourdes Morales in the non-partisan CA LAO if you're truly interested. Note that nearly 1/4 of the entire United States homeless population currently resides in California. The state deals with homelessness at a scale/complexity that makes advice like "we should have better government" and "people should be accountable" not very helpful.
      • rayhomelessbus 4y ago
        That's what happens when you start a homelessness program. The other states decide their homeless have a better chance with you and now you will never be able to fix the issue. State funding can never fix this issue and a state funded program will always fail. Don't even get me started on the idea that charity would solve it, they line their pockets more on nice vacation packages rather than solving the problem itself. Dig deeper and see the coolaid in action.
      • deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  • alsetmusic 4y ago
    The tone of this really is disappointing because it sounds more like a complaint about the unhoused rather than compassion for their situation. Anyway, housing first is a proven method for resolving the cycle of homelessness[0]. Rather than placing restrictions on people (get sober, get a job, etc) to access shelter, putting people in a stable home environment right off the bat has greater success at keeping people housed long-term. I learned about a study on housing first and one of the primary champions of the initiative in a fantastic podcast series called According to Need, by the 99% Invisible crew. It's an eye-opening look at the beuracracy that keeps people unhoused when they seek help[1]. Bonus points that it's reported on in the Bay Area, where the problem is completely out of control. Episode three deals with housing first, but I'd really recommend listening to the entire series if you have the time. "However, for the chronically homeless population, which represents about 10 percent of the homeless population, research has shown, and our experience has been, that when these individuals have a place of their own where they can be safe, the drinking and drug use decreases. Also, with effective case management support, we have found a positive supportive community is created in the single site locations."[2] [0] https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Housing-First-Research.pdf https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Housing-First-Research... [1] https://99percentinvisible.org/need/ https://99percentinvisible.org/need/ [2] https://www.kitsapsun.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/07/14/further-questions-about-housing-first/94326784/ https://www.kitsapsun.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/07/1...
    • alienbeast 4y ago
      Pardon my ignorance, but does "housing-first" come with an expiration date, or is it indefinite? Obviously, if you pay for someone's home, you cure their homelessness, but the goal is to have them pay for their own home eventually, right? I'd expect something like: You get 1 year of "housing-first"-style free housing with no requirements, then you get 1 year of "tough love" free housing with sobriety and job-search requirements, then you get kicked out.
      • mofosyne 4y ago
        I imagine it depends on the cost differential between the externalities of them being homeless like crime, health and surrounding business impact vs just providing basic housing indefinitely with some resources to get out when ready. People with complex issues have variable amount of time to resolve it. Can't put a time on it. But you can figure what cost you more and how much you value human dignity within that cost framework. So an arbitrary time limit in this case does not make sense as a government public welfare policy.
• guerrilla 4y ago
  • filoleg 4y ago
    > all you're worried about his how it's an aesthetic inconvenience Stolen property, burglary/robbery, biohazard in the form of feces on sidewalks, and potential unprovoked violence are hardly just "an aesthetic inconvenience" in minds of most people.
    • guerrilla 4y ago
      • BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
        >” Weird, starving people stole” I have never seen an emaciated homeless person. I do not excuse “stealing to eat” when soup kitchens, food banks, and food stamps are available as alternatives to crime.
        • guerrilla 4y ago
          • jvanderbot 4y ago
      • jvanderbot 4y ago
        You cannot talk me or GP out of disgust. Once you see an obviously insane person sitting in a puddle of their own pee, on the front step of a recently closed shop you used to go to, you see the problem as a problem. There are only so many times you can step over a potentially dead person on a running trail. Only to have them get up and run away when you look closely even from a distance. There's only so many times you can watch a huge person crawl out from the canals and start following people around the neighborhood before you consider moving your wife and kids away forever. Don't get me started on the actual assaults and threats that he's made. Or how about the guy who was standing beside my car with a can of gas, just looking at it swaying back and forth when we were leaving the beach. Where do my kids go when I go confront him and try to retrieve our ride? How many times can you shrug off a break in to the mail room where all the mail is just ransacked. That's only a couple years. You can have empathy in abstract. But when you're in the middle of it, the 99% sob stories don't matter, the lack of public safety does. And what's most infuriating is that it's not a 'place'. these problems drift like garbage on waves, collecting in random locations, esp 'safe' neighborhoods, until they are scattered away again, usually not by police because God forbid they risk actual protests from people who don't live in the affected area. (see echo Park protests).
• supernovae 4y ago
  Have you ever thought that maybe it’s what you do that causes homelessness? That your protected safe exclusionary and prestigious places cause the problems you don’t want to face? if there was affordable living then there wouldn’t be encampments and if there were affordable places for them to camp in more humane conditions that would work too but we don’t want that - we want our prestigious places..
  • ceeplusplus 4y ago
    Expensive housing did not cause the person in the article to decide to move to California with no job and no money. Some people just can't be helped and they think their disruptive behavior should be tolerated by society.
    • mcbishop 4y ago
      My uncle recently talked with a homeless person... learned that his dad killed his mom when he was a child. I don't know how challenging it'd be to be a healthy contributing member of society with this sort of background. It's not always just laziness.
      • copperx 4y ago
        Is it ever laziness? I think that the myth of the lazy bum is just that, a myth.
        • Avicebron 4y ago
          rip, am lazy bum
        • supernovae 4y ago
          i volunteer with homeless weekly and my wife runs a homeless support facility where they try and help people get benefits such as social security, recover IDs and get food stamps and such. most “work” a lot flying signs out in the heat to make a few bucks, some drink it all away.. some use it to try and get the hell out of town. some are just so into survival mode they don’t know any better but what i find the most interesting is how most are just nice people. you wouldn’t know that by reading this thread. most homeless people just want to talk, share their stories and have a friend. They’re tired of being arrested for sleeping. They’re tired of their stuff being stolen - a lot of their mental issues stem from lack of sleep and filling that void with drugs and booze.. it’s unfortunate how people get treated and this thread is no exception to people perpetuating their high and mighty views of a world they know nothing about - merely to protect their world view that dehumanizes these people. if being without a home is decriminalized and we work to build systems that support these people they wouldn’t be under bridges and in parks.. they sometimes get pushed into camps but those camps rarely give glimpses of hope and service but rather make them feel like outcasts. and everyone is a NIMBY when it comes to this - the OP being no exception to it. They don’t care about people, they care about appearances and property values and thus nothing will ever change or happen.