Everybody's Trying To Do The Right Thing, It's Just Coming Out Wrong

The pedophiles in Hollywood are.

How many of the homeless in SF and LA are originally from California?

Have any ideas to help the situation that are economically, socially, and legally feasible?

Listen to cops and other first responders. Lock violent people up. Prioritize public sanitation over whatever ideological reasoning led us to the outcome of ideal conditions for typhus. Do it before those conditions give way to an unthinkable plague outbreak.

Do it while everyone howls at you, because that’s going to happen no matter what. These conditions cannot be allowed in our population centers. We learned this centuries ago, and we are still plague susceptible. There is no vaccine. It is a bacterial disease easily beaten by sanitation.

The other option is to continue policies that have created these increasingly problematic conditions and hope for the best. This will almost certainly involve less criticism from narrow minded “advocates” for the homeless.

1 Like

My BIL works for SFFD mostly using emt skills, my sister as an ER nurse in the area. Both say enforcing low level misdemeanors does nothing as they folks appreciate the warm meal and 3 squares for a few days then go right back out to the street. Many (I dare say most) don’t want the help and want to live the homeless lifestyle.

You break up the camps (which ate typically in shitty areas away from most people), it just spreads the homeless people around and they end up causing problems in neighborhoods that were previously unaffected.

If someone wants to shit or piss on a sidewalk, it’s gonna be tough to catch them everytime. And if you do, the law says it’s a slap on the wrist. Change the law? Well, that law applies to everyone and now a college 21 year caught peeing in an alley goes away to jail for 2 years b/c the laws apply to everyone.

Provide onsite medical to the people to prevent diseases? Well that medical staff gets attacked, or supplies stolen, treatment is refused, and a bunch of money wasted.

1 Like

Probably not many. The lack of law enforcement ability to do anything about it, the insane PC culture that tolerates them, and the silly give-away programs attract the worst-of-the-worst from all over the world.

On the bright side, CA and other stupidly-governed hellholes help clean up the rest of the country by being an attractive nuisance for our low lifes

So we thank you. Keep voting Democrat!

1 Like

From the stats I’ve seen (huge chunks of salt need to be taken with self reported homeless statistics) the large majority of homeless became homeless in the area they currently reside.

What you’re describing strikes me as a combination of ideologically driven policies that are both encouraging people to take up the lifestyle and then congregate where conditions are ideal to be a homeless drug addict.

This is a problem that exists on this scale only in places with policies that allow it and encourage it.

This is what happens when you have well meaning people who have a hard time separating the intent of a government policy from the effect. The hellscape becomes systematically entrenched, and dealing with it in a reasonable manner becomes a political impossibly for any elected official intent on reelection.

If it is ever to be addressed, it will upset a lot of well meaning liberals. The same is true for many other problems that government policy generates.

I realize upset liberals are a great concern on the west coast, but I wonder how bad things need to become before another approach is attempted. What has to happen before someone stands up and says that we were wrong and it is time to abandon failed policies?

Other than upsetting liberals, what do you think should be done that hasn’t already been tried and failed?

I don’t know, one way or the other. I know the CA governor just said most (or a large amount, can’t recall) of the bums in CA are from TX.

Bring back involuntary commitment for severe mental health issues. Lock up anyone violent. Change policies that make it convenient to be a homeless drug addict. Above all, change whatever policies are preventing these camps from being torn down and sanitized in the population centers.

I realize this will be objected to vehemently, but how else CAN it be dealt with?

2 Likes

There’s always the “round vagabonds up and go make them work in a field” approach.

There’s building humane sanatoriums and locking the actual crazies up so they take their medicine and are no longer a danger/nuisance.

You could buy Greenland and ship them there, ala a very cold Australia.

Should probably fact check that.

Not all homeless have severe mental health issues. Building new facilities and treating mental health in institutions is crazy expensive.

Not many homeless are violent. The ones that are, do typically get locked up for the recommended amount of time. Changed laws affect everyone, so there will be serious ripple effects if mandatory minimums are extended.

Policies making it convenient to be a drug addict we’re put in place because criminalizing did nothing to stop it and something else needed to be tried. Safe injection sites bombard users with rehad pamphlets, and medical information, and rehab information in an effort to help them cleanup. Problem is, you have to truly WANT to get clean for rehab to have a chance, and then have a support system once out to not relapse. Not to mention, safe injection sites really don’t get that much use.

Tear down a camp, and the people build another one somewhere else, or move into new neighborhoods creating a new problem. Camps are allowed to exist, but only in areas deemed shitty enough to be acceptable. The problem is “contained” basically.

This has all been tried, and it has failed. It’s not because liberals won’t allow it, it’s because people tried it 10-20 years ago, saw it wasn’t working, and are trying a new angle, which isn’t working either. Kinda like the criminal system focusing on rehab instead of punishment these days.

Ship em over to the eastside of the state and force them to pick all those WA apples haha.

Do you think the Australian outback or Greenland is a more inhospitable environment?

Do you think those policies have been successful? Are typhus cases and plague conditions just an unfortunate part of the balance sheet when considering the net effects of government policy?

I am trying to get my head around the merits of policies that are well-intentioned on the surface, but seem to produce great levels of inequality and require that huge populations live in and around nightmare conditions.

If I am understanding you correctly, this had to happen so other good outcomes could be achieved. Or perhaps you are contending that it would be far worse if policies like those in Houston or Miami were implemented.

Again, I struggle to understand why the policies that work in other large cities are unfeasible in our most liberal population centers.

I must be explaining poorly tgen. That is not at all what I’m saying.

I am saying all the solutions you have offered, were tried and they failed. This happened 10-20 years ago. The current policies were implemented because the old policies didn’t work and the homeless problem was just getting worse. Not to mention it’s gonna be tough to compare Seattle/SF with houston or Miami on a demographic, population or economic basis. Completely different.

These current policies are not working either. Idk what the solution will be.

You’re really stuck on the typhus thing huh? It’s like your homeless boogyman haha

I find it very alarming that medieval diseases are returning, yes. It speaks volumes about the gravity of the conditions. It doesn’t just pop up on its own.

What were the worse outcomes in the past that were averted by the policies of today?

What sets west coast cities apart from other large American cities where year-round street inhabitance is viable?

The “outbreak” is tiny and contained to a small area where sanitation and conditions are exceptionally, lower than anywhere else surrounding.

Previous policies didn’t work. The problem kept growing. New policies were put into place. The problem has kept growing.

Big differences are cost/availability of land, economics of the area, and demographics of the area.

Again, what can be done in these west coast cities that hasn’t been tried and failed? Idk?

Perhaps you’re right. It’s just a little typhus. Gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette.

I’m clearly not cut out for understanding the unique problems of the opposite coast. Please disregard my earlier comments. I’m sure the well meaning liberals have the matter under control as well as anyone could.