Communion Posted June 29 Posted June 29 46 minutes ago, on the line said: there's no solving homelessness when so many people refuse services. i'm definitely liberal but living surrounded by this mess is the one thing that makes me conservative. something needs to be done bc what's happening now since covid is not sustainable or livable for anyone. There's people refusing free or affordable dignified private housing? 2
on the line Posted June 29 Posted June 29 11 minutes ago, Communion said: There's people refusing free or affordable dignified private housing? YES, absolutely. 1 1 4
Communion Posted June 29 Posted June 29 (edited) 3 minutes ago, on the line said: YES, absolutely. I mean, there's no evidence for this claim. Can you cite what cities are offering to house homeless people for free in living conditions that are both private and dignified yet are reporting a huge refusal rate? Edited June 29 by Communion 1
on the line Posted June 29 Posted June 29 11 minutes ago, Communion said: I mean, there's no evidence for this claim. Can you cite what cities are offering to house homeless people for free in living conditions that are both private and dignified yet are reporting a huge refusal rate? I live here. My own conversations with people who work in social services as well as my local houseless. I don't really care what your opinion is if you don't live here though. 2 1 1 2
Communion Posted June 29 Posted June 29 (edited) 6 minutes ago, on the line said: I live here. My own conversations with people who work in social services as well as my local houseless. I don't really care what your opinion is if you don't live here though. I'm not sure you understand what you're arguing. The problem is quite literally that the affluent residents of San Francisco are criminalizing homelessness and feigning themselves as victim to some claimed barbarism of homeless people they describe as barely human. "My lived experiences" - your lived experienced as a housed person arguing for the imprisonment of the homeless and poor? Huh? What is your yearly income? What industry do you work in? Surely that information would also be relevant if you're under the impression - and trying to make the claim - that affordable private and dignified housing is available for anyone who wants it in San Francisco. So any homeless person can be given a one bedroom apartment to help them get off the street with no hassle? Edited June 29 by Communion 1 1
beautiful player Posted June 29 Posted June 29 3 hours ago, Communion said: "It's reasonable to make people's choices be institutionalization for struggling with drug addiction or prison" Genuinely curious the motivations of someone to pretend to be some liberal centrist after being permabanned for their far-right views. Continually perplexed by users stripping their profile of demographic information (despite a decade of posts sharing said demographics like race, age, ethnicity, nationality, etc.) to try to appear as something else to those who don't know better. It really has nothing to do with you not being American but this trend of users being like "Oh? Right-wing Dems are criminalizing homelessness? Good, we need to keep our streets clean even if the loony left don't like it " and it's like.. OUR STREETS? Limburg isn't a US city? I was never perma-banned, and I don't hold far-right views either! Surely you're not going to suggest that me advocating for free room & board for the underprivileged is a far-right view? Camping on the streets is already illegal in the Netherlands, and homeless people are treated much more dignified here. So I'm glad to see SF take a step in the right direction. Looking forward to your essay of a response lambasting me for things I didn't say. Don't expect a response though, I've fed the troll enough for today. 2 4
Communion Posted June 29 Posted June 29 2 minutes ago, beautiful player said: So I'm glad to see SF take a step in the right direction. Genuinely disturbing way to describe criminalizing the existence of homeless people.
Legend ReX Posted June 30 Posted June 30 7 hours ago, beautiful player said: Difficult but necessary step. Though, some users in this thread should take a closer look at the content of the OP. Not all homeless people are being sent to jail, instead penalties are imposed for individuals refusing shelter and assistance. Seems fair to me. Yeah . . . I think the people "outraged" by this have never actually visited San Francisco/Seattle/Portland recently. You can't have people pissing/shitting/shooting up in the streets in broad daylight and act like it's normal. The majority of these people aren't homeless due to poverty; it's mostly untreated mental illness compounded by MORE people shipped in by ******* MAGA mayors in shithole states like Florida and Texas. Jailing homelessness is inhumane, but so is the status quo in these cities where these people are just left to their own devices. Bleh . . . it's difficult. 1 7 3
PoisonPill Posted June 30 Posted June 30 Where does she say they'll prosecute homeless people? I only see fines/citations mentioned.
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted July 5 ATRL Moderator Posted July 5 On 6/29/2024 at 1:52 PM, on the line said: YES, absolutely. I'd love a reference to validate this claim. — Reminder, the vast majority of us have more in common with homeless people than those living pretty in their SF penthouses. SF is a city where the poverty line is more than $100,000 in household income. It is so easy for functioning people with jobs to be homeless in that city and that should be the problem they address. 3 1 1
VOSS Posted July 5 Posted July 5 "Progressive" NIMBYs in San Francisco deserve all the blame for this.
Horizon Flame Posted July 5 Posted July 5 California has a poor reputation right now with San Francisco having the worst. It's costing them tourism dollars. They have to do something. 3
on the line Posted July 7 Posted July 7 On 7/5/2024 at 9:15 AM, Bloo said: I'd love a reference to validate this claim. — Reminder, the vast majority of us have more in common with homeless people than those living pretty in their SF penthouses. SF is a city where the poverty line is more than $100,000 in household income. It is so easy for functioning people with jobs to be homeless in that city and that should be the problem they address. You have to be drug free to use the services and stay in stable housing. So many are so far into their addiction they're literally unable to do it. This not made up or hard to understand, but it also took me a long time to accept that's what's happening. I have a partner as well as in other social services who have validated this through copious stories. 1 2
Communion Posted July 7 Posted July 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, on the line said: You have to be drug free to use the services and stay in stable housing. So many are so far into their addiction they're literally unable to do it. This not made up or hard to understand, but it also took me a long time to accept that's what's happening. I have a partner as well as in other social services who have validated this through copious stories. So people suffering from drug addiction deserve to be homeless and thus this is how you come to the conclusion that anyone can have housing? Should we just round up all people with addiction and mass slaughter them? Get them out of your hair? That's essentially what you're proposing. Edited July 7 by Communion 1
on the line Posted July 7 Posted July 7 9 minutes ago, Communion said: So people suffering from drug addiction deserve to be homeless and thus this is how you come to the conclusion that anyone can have housing? Should we just round up all people with addiction and mass slaughter them? Get them out of your hair? That's essentially what you're proposing. You're riling yourself up creating false narratives again. 3 2
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted July 7 ATRL Moderator Posted July 7 2 hours ago, on the line said: You have to be drug free to use the services and stay in stable housing. So many are so far into their addiction they're literally unable to do it. This not made up or hard to understand, but it also took me a long time to accept that's what's happening. I have a partner as well as in other social services who have validated this through copious stories. Saying people should be drug free to not be homeless is sociopathic and unhelpful. But, more importantly, I'd still greatly appreciate a reference to support your earlier claim. Thank you. 1
on the line Posted July 8 Posted July 8 (edited) 14 hours ago, Bloo said: Saying people should be drug free to not be homeless is sociopathic and unhelpful. But, more importantly, I'd still greatly appreciate a reference to support your earlier claim. Thank you. Those are the literal rules of shelters....yikes. Anyway, conversation with you is done since you clearly don't know what you're talking about. ETA - I think I'm confusing laws from Oregon and California (I work in both and travel bt both - and sometimes Seattle too - often for long periods of time), but SF recently started legislation to require this so that's why it's on my mind. Source: https://sfstandard.com/2024/06/18/san-francisco-homeless-sober-housing-overdoses/ This is actually supported by many homeless too. One source for homeless refusing services (and feel free to google, there are many articles about this and other counts in CA, OR, WA, and even on the east coast): https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/60-of-homeless-people-offered-shelter-last-month-refused-according-to-sf-mayor/ This is no secret for those who live in these cities/states. I'm actually surprised how many posters have pushed back on it here. Edited July 8 by on the line fact checked myself lol 2
ATRL Moderator Bloo Posted July 8 ATRL Moderator Posted July 8 6 hours ago, on the line said: Those are the literal rules of shelters....yikes. Anyway, conversation with you is done since you clearly don't know what you're talking about. I never said those aren't the rules. I challenged the moral legitimacy of that rule by stating that homeless people that aren't clean should also be allowed shelter because they're human. You returned that comment by defending the status quo. Quote ETA - I think I'm confusing laws from Oregon and California (I work in both and travel bt both - and sometimes Seattle too - often for long periods of time), but SF recently started legislation to require this so that's why it's on my mind. Source: https://sfstandard.com/2024/06/18/san-francisco-homeless-sober-housing-overdoses/ This is actually supported by many homeless too. One source for homeless refusing services (and feel free to google, there are many articles about this and other counts in CA, OR, WA, and even on the east coast): https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/60-of-homeless-people-offered-shelter-last-month-refused-according-to-sf-mayor/ This is no secret for those who live in these cities/states. I'm actually surprised how many posters have pushed back on it here. Your source is a quote from the same mayor who is highlighted in the OP as being excited to prosecute homeless people? 2
on the line Posted July 8 Posted July 8 28 minutes ago, Bloo said: I never said those aren't the rules. I challenged the moral legitimacy of that rule by stating that homeless people that aren't clean should also be allowed shelter because they're human. You returned that comment by defending the status quo. Your source is a quote from the same mayor who is highlighted in the OP as being excited to prosecute homeless people? I, too, was a bright-eyed progressive when I moved to the west coast 12 years ago. Then I watched it get worse year by year but held to my convctions. But then covid happened, and I've watched the complete failure of progressive policies make life worse for taxpayers and homeless alike. This isn't good for anyone. It isn't safe. It isn't moral. Letting people take over every inch of public space leaving human waste on every surface and drug paraphernalia on every sidewalk, bench, and public transit seat is not the way to run a society. Unfortunately, we've seen how people cannot be left to their own devices to make good choices. Maybe a little tough love is what we really need. Also, feel free to Google if that source isn't good enough for you. I'm not your seach engine. There's plenty of info to corroborate what I've said. 2 2
jakeisphat Posted July 20 Author Posted July 20 Update from this week's debate - Breed announces city will sweep homeless encampments and pursue criminal charges: Quote "We are going to be very aggressive and assertive in moving encampments, which may even include criminal penalties," Breed said Thursday, speaking at a mayoral debate hosted by Local 798, a labor union that represents San Francisco firefighters. . . . Homelessness was the first issue brought up. After other candidates responded with varying plans to increase shelter beds, Breed emphasized increasing penalties on campers: "We have to start cutting off the opportunities that exist in San Francisco," she said regarding homeless encampments. "We have had to move from a compassionate city to a city of accountability," the mayor added. . . . Breed doubled down on her stance: "Citations, penalties … and criminal penalties … we now have the ability to enforce the law." https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/sf-mayor-takes-tough-stance-on-homelessness-19582490.php
Enrique523 Posted July 21 Posted July 21 On 6/29/2024 at 8:52 PM, on the line said: YES, absolutely. In what world?? You're just lying 1 1
Enrique523 Posted July 21 Posted July 21 On 7/8/2024 at 10:00 PM, on the line said: I, too, was a bright-eyed progressive when I moved to the west coast 12 years ago. Then I watched it get worse year by year but held to my convctions. But then covid happened, and I've watched the complete failure of progressive policies make life worse for taxpayers and homeless alike. This isn't good for anyone. It isn't safe. It isn't moral. Letting people take over every inch of public space leaving human waste on every surface and drug paraphernalia on every sidewalk, bench, and public transit seat is not the way to run a society. Unfortunately, we've seen how people cannot be left to their own devices to make good choices. Maybe a little tough love is what we really need. Also, feel free to Google if that source isn't good enough for you. I'm not your seach engine. There's plenty of info to corroborate what I've said. Tough love has NEVER worked, ever. Being "tough on crime" has never worked and it's well documented, it made everything worse. You're just hate a specific group of people and wish them harm just because they make you feel icky, just like LGBT people make the GOP feel icky. At leats be honest about it instead of pretending otherwise. How exactly do you intend to help people struggling with addiction? If they are refused services because of that, what's the solution to help them? 2
hawx23 Posted July 22 Posted July 22 9 hours ago, Enrique523 said: Tough love has NEVER worked, ever. Being "tough on crime" has never worked and it's well documented, it made everything worse. You're just hate a specific group of people and wish them harm just because they make you feel icky, just like LGBT people make the GOP feel icky. At leats be honest about it instead of pretending otherwise. How exactly do you intend to help people struggling with addiction? If they are refused services because of that, what's the solution to help them? Do you live in SF? 1
Recommended Posts