4 ms·

This may be true in San Francisco and certainly is in many other parts of the U.S. It is not true in places with functioning government.

• insanitybit 4y ago
  Yes, obviously. We're talking about San Francisco where this toilet is being built with a very explicit purpose.
  • mcculley 4y ago
    I responded to the blanket assertion. I wouldn't want people in civilized places to think that public toilets should only be "for the people who have nowhere else".
  • gtirloni 4y ago
    What's different between a traditional public toilet that anyone can use and a homeless toilet? You seem to imply there's a difference that affords extra explanation and justification.
    • insanitybit 4y ago
      I'm not implying any difference at all. I'm not saying the public can't use the toilet, I'm saying that the main problem that the government is trying to address is one with the homeless population.
    • s1artibartfast 4y ago
      You are arguing an ideal and they are making a point about practice and fact. The practice on the ground and public policy is that certain "public toilets" are for the homeless. This informs government decisions about how they are designed, who has to maintain them, where they are placed, and who uses them. A public toilet in the tenderloin is a homeless toilet in all but name. A public toilet in Golden Gate Park is actually a public toilet in the sense that you are talking about.