3 ms·

Why not provide wifi for the homeless as a service, with its own line item, instead of doing it via the Library?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
sangnoir 3y ago
Why segregate an existing service that's already meant for everyone? Would we need another wifi network for Veterans and yet another for retirees?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Why segregate a service that's already meant for everyone? Because one group denies it to others. In New York, the potent image is that of a homeless person obviously going through a mental health issue, who hasn’t bathed in what smells like weeks, sitting in a subway car on their own. (When I was younger and naïve, I went into one such car and tried to talk to them. I had a handful of what I’ll pretend was a smelly sauce tossed my way.)
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    How about shoring up the social safety net like other developed countries? The length at which Americans go to ignore the homeless (until they are in close physical proximity) is astounding. And most "solutions" are to keep the homeless out of sight without doing anything about their circumstances.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > How about shoring up the social safety net like other developed countries? Genuinely curious: how is the mental-health and drug addiction nexus dealt with when one has an unwilling participant?
      - sangnoir 3y ago
        Participate in what exactly? You won't find many takers if the intervention is automatic institutionalization. There are a lot of areas the US has not explored between commiting people to mental asylums and letting them roam the streets.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > Participate in what exactly? I don't know–I'm asking what "other developed countries" do.
    - 0xB31B1B 3y ago
      San Francisco, where this article is about, is spending more than 75k USD per homeless person per year on homeless services. The issues is not a lack of compassion of city residents or the collective residents of the city shouting "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps" to anyone in a precarious position. We have been increasing taxes and spending every year as long as I have been here to help "fix the homeless problem" and it keeps getting worse. At the limit, I would prefer we spend our marginal incoming tax dollar on education and schooling for the children of the city, not on non sober permanent housing for out of town meth heads who just want to get high. Doubling down in this issue, you have a huge portion of the non chronically homeless people who are just on tough times who completely avoid the homeless services in the city because of the legitimate issue that a single insane violent drug addict can have on on an entire homeless shelter or an entire 500 unit permanent supportive housing building. SF housed a few hundred people in the pandemic in an old 300 unit hotel and a few of the residents caused 20 million dollars in damage.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Why segregate an existing service that's already meant for everyone? Would we need another wifi network for Veterans and yet another for retirees?

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Why segregate a service that's already meant for everyone? Because one group denies it to others. In New York, the potent image is that of a homeless person obviously going through a mental health issue, who hasn’t bathed in what smells like weeks, sitting in a subway car on their own. (When I was younger and naïve, I went into one such car and tried to talk to them. I had a handful of what I’ll pretend was a smelly sauce tossed my way.)
- sangnoir 3y ago
  How about shoring up the social safety net like other developed countries? The length at which Americans go to ignore the homeless (until they are in close physical proximity) is astounding. And most "solutions" are to keep the homeless out of sight without doing anything about their circumstances.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > How about shoring up the social safety net like other developed countries? Genuinely curious: how is the mental-health and drug addiction nexus dealt with when one has an unwilling participant?
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      Participate in what exactly? You won't find many takers if the intervention is automatic institutionalization. There are a lot of areas the US has not explored between commiting people to mental asylums and letting them roam the streets.
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > Participate in what exactly? I don't know–I'm asking what "other developed countries" do.
  - 0xB31B1B 3y ago
    San Francisco, where this article is about, is spending more than 75k USD per homeless person per year on homeless services. The issues is not a lack of compassion of city residents or the collective residents of the city shouting "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps" to anyone in a precarious position. We have been increasing taxes and spending every year as long as I have been here to help "fix the homeless problem" and it keeps getting worse. At the limit, I would prefer we spend our marginal incoming tax dollar on education and schooling for the children of the city, not on non sober permanent housing for out of town meth heads who just want to get high. Doubling down in this issue, you have a huge portion of the non chronically homeless people who are just on tough times who completely avoid the homeless services in the city because of the legitimate issue that a single insane violent drug addict can have on on an entire homeless shelter or an entire 500 unit permanent supportive housing building. SF housed a few hundred people in the pandemic in an old 300 unit hotel and a few of the residents caused 20 million dollars in damage.