4 ms·

> We were making so much money that we covered our eyes at the destitution around us as it got worse and worse I experienced SF leadership protecting them and

by proc0 4y ago

> We were making so much money that we covered our eyes at the destitution around us as it got worse and worse I experienced SF leadership protecting them and giving them more rights to live outside and do anything without consequences. It seems they tried really hard to solve the problem for at least a decade, and it only got worse with every policy and decision they made. The solution to the problem has to factor in incentives that may lead to worse outcomes for the city, and I don't think that has been done properly.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
giraffe_lady 4y ago
> more rights to live outside What would less rights to this look like just curious.
- gruez 4y ago
  Dispersing encampments, for one.
  - Tiktaalik 4y ago
    kicking the can down the road and making it someone else's problem.
    - junofan 4y ago
      These people are not idiots. They know exactly what they can get away with.
    - zamalek 4y ago
      That's a straw man. Nobody is saying that you tear their tents down and leave them to the elements. You provide housing, and you don't give the mentally incapacitated a choice about where they live; at least until they recover. What you're suggesting is to do nothing at all, which achieves exactly what is going on right now.
      - eropple 4y ago
        Anecdotally, most of the folks I hear espousing this viewpoint in the Bay Area are not big on the "provide housing" part of this--more of a "begone from our sight" sort of thing. It's good to see some recognition that providing alternatives is a major step towards a real solution.
        Tiktaalik 4y ago
        same. I very often hear a call to end tent encampments. I very rarely hear any sort of thought out policy on how to end homelessness.
        hotpotamus 4y ago
        Dickens had the solution figured out nearly two centuries ago: > "Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are "in want of common comforts, sir.” > “Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge. > “Plenty of prisons,” said the gentleman, laying down the pen again. > “And the Union workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?” > “They are. Still,” returned the gentleman, “I wish I could say they were not.” > “The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?” said Scrooge. > “Both very busy, sir.” > “Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,” said Scrooge. “I’m very glad to hear it.”
      - TazeTSchnitzel 4y ago
        > Nobody is saying that you tear their tents down and leave them to the elements. This is in fact the most commonly adopted practice for “dealing with” homeless people in places like the United States: violently destroying their homes and property at regular intervals, so that they are out of sight and therefore out of mind of people without empathy.
      - Auracle 4y ago
        I’ll say it. Obviously some people with severe mental illness will need support the rest of their lives, but the people that are homeless because they’re addicted to getting high all day? The only way they’re going to stop is if they hit rock bottom. If you’re enabling their behavior that’s never going to happen. And yeah, it’d be rough for them and some will die, but that will cause some others to never go down that road.
    - rasz 4y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_End_Drive-In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_End_Drive-In Salton Sea Slab City is ripe for development. Cancel/ban all free Methadone clinics from SF, setup one in Slab City with a condition of wearing user tracing bracelets and not moving more than 20-40 miles away and you have something going there.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - britch 4y ago
        Is this a joke or are you seriously advocating for setting up a concentration camp?
        rasz 4y ago
        This problem largely didnt exist 60 years ago because mentally troubled people were institutionalized https://www.kqed.org/news/11209729/did-the-emptying-of-mental-hospitals-contribute-to-homelessness-here https://www.kqed.org/news/11209729/did-the-emptying-of-menta... You can either setup incentives pulling those people away from population centers (free food, drugs, shelter) or bring back Mental Hospitals and forcefully incarcerate. What LA/SF seem to be doing now is ... providing free food/drugs/shelter and protection in downtown and wondering why regular citizens complain. Something has to give, the worse it slowly gets the more drastic snap overreaction when things flip and someone radical gets in power.
      - c22 4y ago
        Why not move the tech bros to Slab City and let the homeless have SF? At least the tech bros can set up air conditioning.
- proc0 4y ago
  There was a mandate to stop moving tent cities. I believe also their property was protected so that anyone that tries to move it can be charged. I'm not saying moving people is necessarily a good idea, but that leaving them alone is basically encouraging the behavior, which of course results in more of it.

by proc0 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

giraffe_lady 4y ago

> more rights to live outside What would less rights to this look like just curious.

gruez 4y ago
Dispersing encampments, for one.
- Tiktaalik 4y ago
  kicking the can down the road and making it someone else's problem.
  - junofan 4y ago
    These people are not idiots. They know exactly what they can get away with.
  - zamalek 4y ago
    That's a straw man. Nobody is saying that you tear their tents down and leave them to the elements. You provide housing, and you don't give the mentally incapacitated a choice about where they live; at least until they recover. What you're suggesting is to do nothing at all, which achieves exactly what is going on right now.
    - eropple 4y ago
      Anecdotally, most of the folks I hear espousing this viewpoint in the Bay Area are not big on the "provide housing" part of this--more of a "begone from our sight" sort of thing. It's good to see some recognition that providing alternatives is a major step towards a real solution.
      - Tiktaalik 4y ago
        same. I very often hear a call to end tent encampments. I very rarely hear any sort of thought out policy on how to end homelessness.
        hotpotamus 4y ago
        Dickens had the solution figured out nearly two centuries ago: > "Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are "in want of common comforts, sir.” > “Are there no prisons?” asked Scrooge. > “Plenty of prisons,” said the gentleman, laying down the pen again. > “And the Union workhouses?” demanded Scrooge. “Are they still in operation?” > “They are. Still,” returned the gentleman, “I wish I could say they were not.” > “The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?” said Scrooge. > “Both very busy, sir.” > “Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,” said Scrooge. “I’m very glad to hear it.”
    - TazeTSchnitzel 4y ago
      > Nobody is saying that you tear their tents down and leave them to the elements. This is in fact the most commonly adopted practice for “dealing with” homeless people in places like the United States: violently destroying their homes and property at regular intervals, so that they are out of sight and therefore out of mind of people without empathy.
    - Auracle 4y ago
      I’ll say it. Obviously some people with severe mental illness will need support the rest of their lives, but the people that are homeless because they’re addicted to getting high all day? The only way they’re going to stop is if they hit rock bottom. If you’re enabling their behavior that’s never going to happen. And yeah, it’d be rough for them and some will die, but that will cause some others to never go down that road.
  - rasz 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_End_Drive-In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_End_Drive-In Salton Sea Slab City is ripe for development. Cancel/ban all free Methadone clinics from SF, setup one in Slab City with a condition of wearing user tracing bracelets and not moving more than 20-40 miles away and you have something going there.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - britch 4y ago
      Is this a joke or are you seriously advocating for setting up a concentration camp?
      - rasz 4y ago
        This problem largely didnt exist 60 years ago because mentally troubled people were institutionalized https://www.kqed.org/news/11209729/did-the-emptying-of-mental-hospitals-contribute-to-homelessness-here https://www.kqed.org/news/11209729/did-the-emptying-of-menta... You can either setup incentives pulling those people away from population centers (free food, drugs, shelter) or bring back Mental Hospitals and forcefully incarcerate. What LA/SF seem to be doing now is ... providing free food/drugs/shelter and protection in downtown and wondering why regular citizens complain. Something has to give, the worse it slowly gets the more drastic snap overreaction when things flip and someone radical gets in power.
    - c22 4y ago
      Why not move the tech bros to Slab City and let the homeless have SF? At least the tech bros can set up air conditioning.
proc0 4y ago
There was a mandate to stop moving tent cities. I believe also their property was protected so that anyone that tries to move it can be charged. I'm not saying moving people is necessarily a good idea, but that leaving them alone is basically encouraging the behavior, which of course results in more of it.