3 ms·

I am not implying the strawman hypothetical you proposed. I think the confusion might be that the strawman doesn't even follow logic, TBH. Were did the Sacram

by RC_ITR 3y ago

I am not implying the strawman hypothetical you proposed. I think the confusion might be that the strawman doesn't even follow logic, TBH. Were did the Sacramento Democrats comment come in? I simply stated that the article highlighted federal decisions and blamed other governments for the consequences of those decisions. In that set of circumstances, Sacramento Democrats are equal to SF progressives, as they are both bound by a higher power (The Federal Government). And to answer the question I think that you're asking, yes, I do believe the Federal government has a lot more power to solve homelessness than SF or California does. Do you think otherwise? EDIT: I also think this fascination with Democrats vs. Republicans really misses the point here. This shouldn't be a competition to lay blame. That's the top symptom of broken government. It should be a creative endeavor to solve the problems and it saddens me that so many people don't feel that way on this supposed "hacker" forum. EDIT 2: >Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. I disagree that a city of 800k residents has the resources to solve a problem that's plagued every society ever. I think the largest and wealthiest government in history is much better suited for the task. I also think that SF being in the United States 100% makes it the Federal Government's issue, not some isolated thing that most people who live in other places can ignore. Like it or not, most homeless people are American citizens who happen to choose to live in SF right now. They can leave SF, but can't leave America.

AlbertCory 3y ago
You're "simply" trying to spread blame around. That's all you're simply doing. SF has all the resources they need. They just need to use them. "plagued every society ever" -- no, it hasn't, not to anywhere near the scale of SF. Even large cities within the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit, like San Diego, Fresno, Spokane. San Jose.
- RC_ITR 3y ago
  The injunction applies specifically to SF as it relates to a specific court case. Is that not clear to you? >SF has all the resources they need. They just need to use them. I guarantee to you the Federal government has more/better. But hey, let's play the game. What exactly does SF need to do? Step by step.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    Oh, I see, you want me to put some specifics out there, so you can nitpick them? I guarantee to you that SF has possibly the worst problem of any city, except for some other West Coast cities. So why don't you explain why cities with equivalently good weather don't suffer nearly as much? Just luck?

by RC_ITR 3y ago

AlbertCory 3y ago

You're "simply" trying to spread blame around. That's all you're simply doing. SF has all the resources they need. They just need to use them. "plagued every society ever" -- no, it hasn't, not to anywhere near the scale of SF. Even large cities within the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit, like San Diego, Fresno, Spokane. San Jose.

RC_ITR 3y ago
The injunction applies specifically to SF as it relates to a specific court case. Is that not clear to you? >SF has all the resources they need. They just need to use them. I guarantee to you the Federal government has more/better. But hey, let's play the game. What exactly does SF need to do? Step by step.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  Oh, I see, you want me to put some specifics out there, so you can nitpick them? I guarantee to you that SF has possibly the worst problem of any city, except for some other West Coast cities. So why don't you explain why cities with equivalently good weather don't suffer nearly as much? Just luck?