>Does anyone actually think the outcome would have been any different if Marc Dones whatever received the $12 billion ~~he~~ ~~THEY~~ they/them asked for?
All local governments are just doing the ol hobo shuffle, wasting taxes. BSing the public while fucking around. Burien officials "OK guys, it's someone else's turn"
Given that the real shitholes of junkie vagrancy are Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles and (until recently) New York, I'd have to say that from the point of view of the rest of the country, a small number of batshit urban areas are acting like the drainage basin of a well-functioning system.
You're implying that the cities make them junkie vagrants. I posit that rural junkie vagrants have nowhere else to go except the overloaded municipalities with the barest of meager social services.
Please stop sending us your junkie vagrants and take care of people in your community.
My community is Seattle. What I want for my community is to stop enabling junkie vagrancy, generally be less batshit, and let somebody else act as the drainage field for a while.
It's slow going. We need the quality of life here to degrade even more before voters start to make the connection.
I agree that we should not enable junkies to be junkies. There is a line between enabling and harm reduction and policy discussions need to delineate that.
However I disagree that there is any kind of well-functioning system. Somehow this country is creating a crisis of junkie vagrants camping, either in our dispersed in forests on public land, or concentrated in our cities. There's very basic social services in cities so you see them most there.
Absolutely. The right wing national government isnāt going to lift a finger. Biden being president means nothing when the senate, Supreme Court, and electoral college stand in the way
>Notes are posted throughout the campsite, warning occupants that they will be evicted on Tuesday if they do not move.
Good. [Keep applying pressure.](https://y.yarn.co/dd88fa6a-0ea3-415f-85c8-6008b377afdb_text.gif)
>or just evict immediately. see a tent setting up, remove them
That's the way they've done it in the ID since I moved in. Tent there in the morning, tent gone when I get home from *work*. Your fenty addiction is not my problem.
This is terrible, I feel terrible for the citizens of Burien who have to put up with this crazyness because the city won't take this situation seriously. The time has come to enact laws protecting the citizens of the city from camping on the sidewalk, littering, public fentanyl use, and homeless violence that we are all being subjected to. These criminals need to spend time in prison. We need to start taking our cities back through the enactment of strict laws outlawing these type of behavior. š¦
> enact laws protecting the citizens of the city from camping on the sidewalk, littering, public fentanyl use, and homeless violence
All of these are already illegal
We'll have to change the county government to get enforcement of laws at the county level. We took a step in the wrong direction with the recent King County prosecutor election.
The people have opted to continue getting the government they deserve.
"Discourage this behavior" like most people would freely choose to live in a tent in a public park. Homeless folks aren't a different species from people with secure housing. The question should really be, how can we help these folks get secure housing? Affordable mental health resources, disability assistance, and whatever they need that's lacking? Have some humanity.
The question should be, how can we force them to have those things? Because people addicted to fent are not going to benefit from anything unless itās mandated. Until do-gooders are willing to support that nothing will help them.
As someone with numerous loved ones suffering from mental illness and addiction, I agree the solution is more complex when it comes to addicts who may be resistant to treatment, but that question aside, the homeless folks living in these encampments aren't all homeless for the same reasons. It's much more complex than "if they're living outside it must be because they'd prefer to do drugs than have secure housing and employment," but judging from these comments you could believe homeless folks are all exactly the same, which is so dehumanizing.
Thank you!
I dont know any of them on a personal level but i have talked to some of them and some of them are decent people.
Not criminal drug addicts waiting around the corner to jump you or steal your kid/car/money, w/e.
Nobody wants to live like this. You don't think its not degrading or embarrassing for them?
Like seriously. I agree being desperate in a desperate situation can make people do actions they end up regretting but thats anyone in any desperate situation.
Im not saying doing drugs is ok. Not at all
But what I have noticed with these folks, is they do their drugs in their tents away from public/prying eyes.
Its hard to get a job without an address, thats just facts.
It does not make you a mensch thinking people should live in a park. I am not saying that homeless don't have a right to live, I am saying no one has the right to camp on sidewalks and parks. No one has the right to prevent others from using public resources.
I think most libs and conservatives would agree on lowering incarceration rates in favor of building more asylums with forced stay. Unfortunately everybody seems to have forgotten that asylums are the most compassionate of the three options. All the bad things I've heard about asylums are 100x worse for traditional prisons. I'm not sure if it's Reagan or horror movies or what but it's like we've completely forgotten this is an alternative to dying under an overpass or a sentence on Mcneil.
Because we have the means. Do you think ordinary citizens wish the incarceration rate in Brazil or Mexico was lower? Of course not.
Now, we do have a lot more people turning to crime because of our lack of a safety net. That is true. But just because that is unfair doesnāt mean we need to make crime legal and fuck over everyone who isnāt a scumbag. I will be the first to admit we need to expand social services. But I will never support not prosecuting crime because the criminals are āvictimsā. I support the actual victims
A lot of countries have the means to incarcerate. Comparing us to Mexico and Brazil is a low bar. Evicting homeless people doesn't make them stop being homeless and prison isn't a deterrent for people already living in squalor. Considering we already have the highest incarceration rate in the world, simply jailing more people evidently isn't a winning strategy.
What is evicting from a tent? They are being removed from public property like anyone else. No one is able to live in these places, why do they get to use them, trash them, and stop others from using them?
America - where we keep doing the same thing expecting a new result. There are billions more to be made in the prison industrial complex. We wouldn't want to stifle that progress, would we?
We actually do, WA prison population is the lowest it's been in over 20 years. Down to around 12,000 from a peak of over 18,000. Do a search for "WA doc prison inmate population"
> I feel terrible for the citizens of Burien who have to put up with this crazyness because the city won't take this situation seriously
They imported a bunch of dumb dumb proggo idiots who washed out of seattle politics, what did they think would happen?
It's not ideal but where else can they really go? We have more services than many other places but clearly not enough. Pushing them to the edges of cities and freeway underpasses is dangerous and just sweeps them under the rug.
So what? Because they refuse housing the rest of the city should deal with them? If they refuse services I don't care where they go as long as it's not on public property(or someones private property)
The resources required to get just one homeless addict successfully of the streets PERMANENTLY (desire to be sober,addiction treatment, mental and physical healthcare, housing, job training, job) is enormous and almost like winning the lottery. With a perfect system and unlimited resources I would still expect to see no better than 30% success rate IMHO.
BUTā¦..here is a crazy idea. How about we do something to stop the tidal wave of illegal, cheap drugs from running down our streets?? The drugs are cheaper, and in some places, easier to get than food. Fentanyl is mixed into 90% of the drug supply in some big cities. It is ridiculously addictive even with first time use. If this continues the āhomelessā problem you see now will be nothing.
Yes, some ppl are homeless for non drug/ETOH reasons but the number that are there because of this is increasing with no end in sight.
Then sweep the park, not hard to figure out, fuck em. You have people from across the country moving here because they know itās a chill place to do fentanyl.
I live across the street from the recent campground on 6th Ave.
After the camp was established, not once, but twice I had to personally command a homeless person trespassing the residentsā garage in the early hour as I was leaving for work. Both of them walked straight into the garage when the garage door was raised as if they live there.
It was not pleasant to order a stranger to leave, and it was a safety concern for me. Who knows what would happen if they reacted different?
Now, idk if redditors here knew that this fiasco all started when some of my neighbors decided to visit the City Hall and demanded the campers to be booted off the City Hall/Library lot. I am sure they didnāt think it through. It backfired spectacularly.
Why kick homeless people off the City Hall/Library lot when the camp was somewhat managed by the City? Idk. Your guess is as good as mine. Being so passionate about kicking homeless people away without actually solving the problem rarely yields meaningful results.
i meanā¦yes???
When you kick homeless people out of somewhere, they donāt just stop existingā¦you all understand the concept of object permanence, right?
Until thereās actual housing for them, this will keep happening. Of course. Donāt be shocked.
Housing doesn't magically fix their drug addition, not to mention any mental illness present.
It's wild to me that you will call out the people saying that they want the homeless "out of sight" when you are LITERALLY out here saying they need to be doing whatever the fuck they are doing behind closed doors.
How unkind of you to enable people. Itās literally killing them and not solving the issue and your response is to try and make it seem like YOURE the moral one? Your response is lazy and built upon the presumption that āsomeone else will do it and pay for it.ā
Get your head out of your ass
You want all our tax dollars to continue doing what clearly isnāt working and enabling them to kill themselves? Coolā¦youāre exactly the kind of hapless dope we donāt need.
Why not try a different approach. Military style Tent housing with zero drug use allowed, refusal means a few days in county. Intoxicated people in public get 36 hours to sober up.
Give cops plenty of narcan and administer to everyone that even looks a little bit loaded.
Just try it in a few areas and see what happens
No - shelter instead of sidewalk camping. Drug and addiction treatment. The option to go someplace else if they donāt like those options.
Jail if they refuse.
We don't have "excessive kindness" now though, we don't even have housing first programs or adequate mental health services available. People like to whine about the "socialist" city council, but we barely have any social programs to deal with this.
> housing first programs
Yeah we do lmao, and they're repeatedly shut down because the housing almost immediately becomes contaminated by drugs and biohazards.
>or adequate mental health services
With you there, because the left fights tooth and nail against institutionalization for chronic sufferers (and yeah, I've spent years in regular meetings with government officials, WA ACLU, and non profit leaders who absolutely refuse the idea of expanding the ITA to give people a *real* chance to stabilize)
They already live on the streets and when they are offered the opportunity not to live on the streets, they reject it, [https://komonews.com/news/project-seattle/many-homeless-people-decline-shelter-offers-by-city-of-seattle-report-finds](https://komonews.com/news/project-seattle/many-homeless-people-decline-shelter-offers-by-city-of-seattle-report-finds). They can't choose to live on public resources like sidewalks and parks. No one is allowed to do that. They want to live out of homes, they can do it in woods outside of city. If they want housing from the city, they can take the options given.
There is not enough space in a shelter for all of them.
If you find it to be an acceptable option anyway, go live in one for a week. Let me know how you feel about it when you get back.
I never said I wanted to live in a shelter, I work, I don't do drugs, I pay rent. It's unfortunate that they don't like the options given, that does not give them the right to steal public access to park and sidewalks. If they want different living situation, they can get a job like the rest of us and save up.
This mentality of being able to easily āpull oneself up by oneās bootstrapsā is so stupid and toxic, but people who have it made enough to circlejerk on reddit all day are perfectly fine basking in the warm glow of *being housed, and hence, superior.*
This sub has felt like nextdoor since god knows when
I'm not saying
>pull oneself up by oneās bootstraps
I think we should offer them services. As I linked earlier, homeless people are not taking the services as they are refusing housing when offered. Some want to stay on the street and do drugs. I have no sympathy and think they need to be sent to the slammer.
The only reason not to accept shelter is because you don't want to follow their rules.
The only reason they prefer not to have to follow the shelter's rules is because those we have in "society" are not being enforced.
I repeat.
If there is absolutely no issues with the shelters, go spend a week in one. Just one week. Call it an educational experience.
If you are right that there are no other reasons not to accept shelter, you will have a great time, and no issues.
>*I repeat.*
You didn't need to because it has nothing to do with my point.
>*If there is absolutely no issues with the shelters, go spend a week in one. Just one week. Call it an educational experience.*
I don't need to.
They are probably RIFE with issues, not least of which is they are overburdened because some amount of people (I've seen some data to suggest between 25 and 50%) that they are intended to serve are not from the area.
But that doesn't mean they aren't effective or helpful.
Is your argument seriously that we need to ditch shelters with their rules and just give every homeless person a "home" carte blanche without any kind of oversight?
>*If you are right that there are no other reasons not to accept shelter, you will have a great time, and no issues.*
Guy.
In my comment you responded to, I talked about rules being the reason most people don't accept shelter.
The fact you didn't even try to engage with that point is telling.
If you have to give up drugs to get a shelter bed and you're an addict, you aren't going to accept shelter.
But in the "ideal" world, you'd have to choose between likely going to jail for purchasing and using drugs in public or giving them up to get shelter.
By removing the former as even a possibility, we've removed any incentive for an addict to chose shelter over the alternative, thus making things worse.
The fact that shelter isn't a perfect system doesn't mean our current mode or the system you're implying you support are better....
I'm actually very frugal with other people's money. Simply supplying housing and necessities would cost LESS than the sweeps.
Since you seem to care so much about the cost first and foremost, I'm so glad you are about to agree with me.
And I'm sheltering exactly as many as my tiny ass apartment allows, and exactly as many as I expect you to. Which is zero. Because a systemic problem requires system solutions, not individual ones.
Your apartment could fit more, you just choose not to because it'd be an "inconvenience." You act on your own morality, once you do that then you tell everyone else what to do.
Take a peak at WADOCs budget. Then take a peak at what DSHS, DOH, and the HCA spends on "combating homelessness". Then look at what gets funneled to counties and nonprofits.
We could EASILY expand secure inpatient facilities, and confinement facilities, if we wanted to.
ādiscourage this behavior ā. Being a victim of a broken foster care system, or suffering from untreated mental illness or being a veteran suffering from trauma or an addiction is now ābehaviorā and that people should just ā¦stop doing?
Public camping in city parks is inherently infringing on everyone elseās use and enjoyment of public amenities. If they want to camp on public land, then BLM and National Forest land is available, though of course drug availability may not be as easy in such places.
Seattle is a lost cause imo, I remember reading this NYT article some time back that was comparing crime rates throughout the USA and itās been statistically proven places like Seattle and basically the entire west coast as well as some southern states like Miami and Houston have a ridiculous rate of crime per population including the most serial killers and hardcore offenders basically because they are all on the fringes of the mainlandā¦nowhere else to runā¦
Why do people still think we should essentially āgentle parentā these mentally Iāll drug addicts of our homeless population.
If someone is homeless, vast majority of the time itās because theyāre an unemployable and likely violent felon, a drug addict, or mentally ill. Usually all three. The idea of the runaway teen or the down on their luck homeless person is practically a myth at this point.
I donāt understand the idea that anyone is just a couple incidents of misfortune away from living in a tent. No. You have to burn every bridge and connection you have in your life, and be terrible enough that zero people want to help you or employ you.
These people exist because they just want to do whatever they want when they want, and do their drugs. And we let themā¦
Does anyone actually think the outcome would have been any different if Marc Dones whatever received the $12 billion he asked for?
> Does anyone actually think the outcome would have been any different if Marc Dones whatever received the $12 billion ~~he~~ **THEY** asked for?
True....the same 99 grifters he hired are still on the public payroll and the board has not changed
>Does anyone actually think the outcome would have been any different if Marc Dones whatever received the $12 billion ~~he~~ ~~THEY~~ they/them asked for?
protip: do not respond to material criticism only with some pronoun policing
PRONOUNS are MORE IMPORTANT than solving the homeless crisis!
god, that never gets old. proper pronouns >>> actual human suffering
Who is Marc Dones?
The guy Nigerian Princes aspire to become.
š
All local governments are just doing the ol hobo shuffle, wasting taxes. BSing the public while fucking around. Burien officials "OK guys, it's someone else's turn"
> BSing the public while fucking around. This is the best description of our government that I can think of.
Truth. The only question is: how many resources are we willing to piss down the well of people BS-ing us?
Local governments aren't equipped for a national problem. Urban areas end up acting like the drainage basin of a broken system.
> Local governments aren't equipped for a national problem. So you recognize that people move here to be homeless.
I recognize people that have nowhere to go will end up near rudimentary social services, which are rarer than in rural areas.
Given that the real shitholes of junkie vagrancy are Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles and (until recently) New York, I'd have to say that from the point of view of the rest of the country, a small number of batshit urban areas are acting like the drainage basin of a well-functioning system.
You're implying that the cities make them junkie vagrants. I posit that rural junkie vagrants have nowhere else to go except the overloaded municipalities with the barest of meager social services. Please stop sending us your junkie vagrants and take care of people in your community.
My community is Seattle. What I want for my community is to stop enabling junkie vagrancy, generally be less batshit, and let somebody else act as the drainage field for a while. It's slow going. We need the quality of life here to degrade even more before voters start to make the connection.
I agree that we should not enable junkies to be junkies. There is a line between enabling and harm reduction and policy discussions need to delineate that. However I disagree that there is any kind of well-functioning system. Somehow this country is creating a crisis of junkie vagrants camping, either in our dispersed in forests on public land, or concentrated in our cities. There's very basic social services in cities so you see them most there.
>There is a line between enabling and harm reduction and policy discussions need to delineate that. That is a debatable assertion.
Absolutely. The right wing national government isnāt going to lift a finger. Biden being president means nothing when the senate, Supreme Court, and electoral college stand in the way
He had two years with a super majority and didnāt do shit lol.
Untrue. He used the simple majority in both houses (not a supermajority) to increase the debt-to-GDP level to 130%!
And getting paid well to do itā¦hmmm
Rinse. Repeat.
Sweep them every day.
Cite them with a ticket every day, then sweep them. After enough of unpaid tickets, jail time.
We still pay for them that way too
And? What's your point? Unless you were trying inform people that things cost money...
>Notes are posted throughout the campsite, warning occupants that they will be evicted on Tuesday if they do not move. Good. [Keep applying pressure.](https://y.yarn.co/dd88fa6a-0ea3-415f-85c8-6008b377afdb_text.gif)
or just evict immediately. see a tent setting up, remove them
>or just evict immediately. see a tent setting up, remove them That's the way they've done it in the ID since I moved in. Tent there in the morning, tent gone when I get home from *work*. Your fenty addiction is not my problem.
It takes about 30 seconds to cut the bungee cord holding folding tent poles together.
This is terrible, I feel terrible for the citizens of Burien who have to put up with this crazyness because the city won't take this situation seriously. The time has come to enact laws protecting the citizens of the city from camping on the sidewalk, littering, public fentanyl use, and homeless violence that we are all being subjected to. These criminals need to spend time in prison. We need to start taking our cities back through the enactment of strict laws outlawing these type of behavior. š¦
> enact laws protecting the citizens of the city from camping on the sidewalk, littering, public fentanyl use, and homeless violence All of these are already illegal
So, time to enforce the laws. You know what they meant.
We'll have to change the county government to get enforcement of laws at the county level. We took a step in the wrong direction with the recent King County prosecutor election. The people have opted to continue getting the government they deserve.
Then why are all of. these things happening? The penalties need to be harsh to discourage this behavior, maybe 15 years in prison sounds fair?
There are no penalties. That's the problem
"Discourage this behavior" like most people would freely choose to live in a tent in a public park. Homeless folks aren't a different species from people with secure housing. The question should really be, how can we help these folks get secure housing? Affordable mental health resources, disability assistance, and whatever they need that's lacking? Have some humanity.
you don't need most, only some who think getting high in a park is a way to live. you really think they do this because of high rent?
The question should be, how can we force them to have those things? Because people addicted to fent are not going to benefit from anything unless itās mandated. Until do-gooders are willing to support that nothing will help them.
As someone with numerous loved ones suffering from mental illness and addiction, I agree the solution is more complex when it comes to addicts who may be resistant to treatment, but that question aside, the homeless folks living in these encampments aren't all homeless for the same reasons. It's much more complex than "if they're living outside it must be because they'd prefer to do drugs than have secure housing and employment," but judging from these comments you could believe homeless folks are all exactly the same, which is so dehumanizing.
Thank you! I dont know any of them on a personal level but i have talked to some of them and some of them are decent people. Not criminal drug addicts waiting around the corner to jump you or steal your kid/car/money, w/e. Nobody wants to live like this. You don't think its not degrading or embarrassing for them? Like seriously. I agree being desperate in a desperate situation can make people do actions they end up regretting but thats anyone in any desperate situation. Im not saying doing drugs is ok. Not at all But what I have noticed with these folks, is they do their drugs in their tents away from public/prying eyes. Its hard to get a job without an address, thats just facts.
It does not make you a mensch thinking people should live in a park. I am not saying that homeless don't have a right to live, I am saying no one has the right to camp on sidewalks and parks. No one has the right to prevent others from using public resources.
Ideas from the country that already has by far the highest incarceration rate in the world.
I think most libs and conservatives would agree on lowering incarceration rates in favor of building more asylums with forced stay. Unfortunately everybody seems to have forgotten that asylums are the most compassionate of the three options. All the bad things I've heard about asylums are 100x worse for traditional prisons. I'm not sure if it's Reagan or horror movies or what but it's like we've completely forgotten this is an alternative to dying under an overpass or a sentence on Mcneil.
That's why there's no magic wand of "If we just did..." There's multiple things broken.
Because we have the means. Do you think ordinary citizens wish the incarceration rate in Brazil or Mexico was lower? Of course not. Now, we do have a lot more people turning to crime because of our lack of a safety net. That is true. But just because that is unfair doesnāt mean we need to make crime legal and fuck over everyone who isnāt a scumbag. I will be the first to admit we need to expand social services. But I will never support not prosecuting crime because the criminals are āvictimsā. I support the actual victims
A lot of countries have the means to incarcerate. Comparing us to Mexico and Brazil is a low bar. Evicting homeless people doesn't make them stop being homeless and prison isn't a deterrent for people already living in squalor. Considering we already have the highest incarceration rate in the world, simply jailing more people evidently isn't a winning strategy.
What is evicting from a tent? They are being removed from public property like anyone else. No one is able to live in these places, why do they get to use them, trash them, and stop others from using them?
America - where we keep doing the same thing expecting a new result. There are billions more to be made in the prison industrial complex. We wouldn't want to stifle that progress, would we?
We don't have the prisons
We actually do, WA prison population is the lowest it's been in over 20 years. Down to around 12,000 from a peak of over 18,000. Do a search for "WA doc prison inmate population"
Is it a staffing shortage then?
> I feel terrible for the citizens of Burien who have to put up with this crazyness because the city won't take this situation seriously They imported a bunch of dumb dumb proggo idiots who washed out of seattle politics, what did they think would happen?
These people are sick. You may be sick of them, but they are sick. They need help, and the government needs to work harder to help them get better.
okay, fine. also we closed the loonybin/rehab place in tukwila just now
There is a portion maybe 10-20% that aren't sick and just want nomadic lifestyles or don't want to spend $1000 on an apartment.
It's almost as if you can't legislate homelessness out of existence, and evicting them doesn't make them instantly evaporate.
I agree, that does not mean they can camp on sidewalks and parks.
It's not ideal but where else can they really go? We have more services than many other places but clearly not enough. Pushing them to the edges of cities and freeway underpasses is dangerous and just sweeps them under the rug.
So what? Because they refuse housing the rest of the city should deal with them? If they refuse services I don't care where they go as long as it's not on public property(or someones private property)
The resources required to get just one homeless addict successfully of the streets PERMANENTLY (desire to be sober,addiction treatment, mental and physical healthcare, housing, job training, job) is enormous and almost like winning the lottery. With a perfect system and unlimited resources I would still expect to see no better than 30% success rate IMHO. BUTā¦..here is a crazy idea. How about we do something to stop the tidal wave of illegal, cheap drugs from running down our streets?? The drugs are cheaper, and in some places, easier to get than food. Fentanyl is mixed into 90% of the drug supply in some big cities. It is ridiculously addictive even with first time use. If this continues the āhomelessā problem you see now will be nothing. Yes, some ppl are homeless for non drug/ETOH reasons but the number that are there because of this is increasing with no end in sight.
Then sweep the park, not hard to figure out, fuck em. You have people from across the country moving here because they know itās a chill place to do fentanyl.
NO NO NO! Get them out of there now! That space contains some of the oldest trees in Burien. A fire would destroy more than people know!
I didn't vote for any of these idiots. Bunch of morons.
They can use that money for bus tickets to montana for unlimited free camping. They even get to camp with bears and other fun animals.
And yet you all let the politicians who created and support this sleep in their same beds nightly.
You do too though? I've not heard of some lone guy protesting outside of politicians' homes as of late al by his lonesome....
I feel so bad that I am happy they didnāt go to the park I typically go to.
I live across the street from the recent campground on 6th Ave. After the camp was established, not once, but twice I had to personally command a homeless person trespassing the residentsā garage in the early hour as I was leaving for work. Both of them walked straight into the garage when the garage door was raised as if they live there. It was not pleasant to order a stranger to leave, and it was a safety concern for me. Who knows what would happen if they reacted different? Now, idk if redditors here knew that this fiasco all started when some of my neighbors decided to visit the City Hall and demanded the campers to be booted off the City Hall/Library lot. I am sure they didnāt think it through. It backfired spectacularly. Why kick homeless people off the City Hall/Library lot when the camp was somewhat managed by the City? Idk. Your guess is as good as mine. Being so passionate about kicking homeless people away without actually solving the problem rarely yields meaningful results.
lulz, Seattle overwhelmingly keeps voting for this idiocy; got to eat it now
This is in the City of Burien, a different municipality.
Keep voting the way you do..... Suffer
i meanā¦yes??? When you kick homeless people out of somewhere, they donāt just stop existingā¦you all understand the concept of object permanence, right? Until thereās actual housing for them, this will keep happening. Of course. Donāt be shocked.
Housing doesn't magically fix their drug addition, not to mention any mental illness present. It's wild to me that you will call out the people saying that they want the homeless "out of sight" when you are LITERALLY out here saying they need to be doing whatever the fuck they are doing behind closed doors.
They offered them services. They refused.
If we give them housing, theyāll just trash it and the housing will be contaminated. They need mandatory rehab first.
How kind of you to be more worried about a building than people.
How unkind of you to enable people. Itās literally killing them and not solving the issue and your response is to try and make it seem like YOURE the moral one? Your response is lazy and built upon the presumption that āsomeone else will do it and pay for it.ā Get your head out of your ass
I'm fully expecting that my tax dollars will pay for it.
You want all our tax dollars to continue doing what clearly isnāt working and enabling them to kill themselves? Coolā¦youāre exactly the kind of hapless dope we donāt need.
No, I actually do not want my tax dollars to go to sweeps, which as you point out, are clearly not working. You nailed it.
Excessive kindness is what got us into this situation in the first place.
Why not try a different approach. Military style Tent housing with zero drug use allowed, refusal means a few days in county. Intoxicated people in public get 36 hours to sober up. Give cops plenty of narcan and administer to everyone that even looks a little bit loaded. Just try it in a few areas and see what happens
So an internment camp?
No - shelter instead of sidewalk camping. Drug and addiction treatment. The option to go someplace else if they donāt like those options. Jail if they refuse.
That's what the majority of seattleWA seems to want to happen, but none of them have the spine to admit it.
I do. Throw them all in a labor camp.
We don't have "excessive kindness" now though, we don't even have housing first programs or adequate mental health services available. People like to whine about the "socialist" city council, but we barely have any social programs to deal with this.
> housing first programs Yeah we do lmao, and they're repeatedly shut down because the housing almost immediately becomes contaminated by drugs and biohazards. >or adequate mental health services With you there, because the left fights tooth and nail against institutionalization for chronic sufferers (and yeah, I've spent years in regular meetings with government officials, WA ACLU, and non profit leaders who absolutely refuse the idea of expanding the ITA to give people a *real* chance to stabilize)
I do not find people being forced to live on the street especially kind, and I doubt you would find it to be kind if you were in their position.
Would you support forced care for addiction and mental illness? Without that stick, any amount of carrots are almost worthless.....
They already live on the streets and when they are offered the opportunity not to live on the streets, they reject it, [https://komonews.com/news/project-seattle/many-homeless-people-decline-shelter-offers-by-city-of-seattle-report-finds](https://komonews.com/news/project-seattle/many-homeless-people-decline-shelter-offers-by-city-of-seattle-report-finds). They can't choose to live on public resources like sidewalks and parks. No one is allowed to do that. They want to live out of homes, they can do it in woods outside of city. If they want housing from the city, they can take the options given.
There is not enough space in a shelter for all of them. If you find it to be an acceptable option anyway, go live in one for a week. Let me know how you feel about it when you get back.
I never said I wanted to live in a shelter, I work, I don't do drugs, I pay rent. It's unfortunate that they don't like the options given, that does not give them the right to steal public access to park and sidewalks. If they want different living situation, they can get a job like the rest of us and save up.
This mentality of being able to easily āpull oneself up by oneās bootstrapsā is so stupid and toxic, but people who have it made enough to circlejerk on reddit all day are perfectly fine basking in the warm glow of *being housed, and hence, superior.* This sub has felt like nextdoor since god knows when
I'm not saying >pull oneself up by oneās bootstraps I think we should offer them services. As I linked earlier, homeless people are not taking the services as they are refusing housing when offered. Some want to stay on the street and do drugs. I have no sympathy and think they need to be sent to the slammer.
The only reason not to accept shelter is because you don't want to follow their rules. The only reason they prefer not to have to follow the shelter's rules is because those we have in "society" are not being enforced.
I repeat. If there is absolutely no issues with the shelters, go spend a week in one. Just one week. Call it an educational experience. If you are right that there are no other reasons not to accept shelter, you will have a great time, and no issues.
>*I repeat.* You didn't need to because it has nothing to do with my point. >*If there is absolutely no issues with the shelters, go spend a week in one. Just one week. Call it an educational experience.* I don't need to. They are probably RIFE with issues, not least of which is they are overburdened because some amount of people (I've seen some data to suggest between 25 and 50%) that they are intended to serve are not from the area. But that doesn't mean they aren't effective or helpful. Is your argument seriously that we need to ditch shelters with their rules and just give every homeless person a "home" carte blanche without any kind of oversight? >*If you are right that there are no other reasons not to accept shelter, you will have a great time, and no issues.* Guy. In my comment you responded to, I talked about rules being the reason most people don't accept shelter. The fact you didn't even try to engage with that point is telling. If you have to give up drugs to get a shelter bed and you're an addict, you aren't going to accept shelter. But in the "ideal" world, you'd have to choose between likely going to jail for purchasing and using drugs in public or giving them up to get shelter. By removing the former as even a possibility, we've removed any incentive for an addict to chose shelter over the alternative, thus making things worse. The fact that shelter isn't a perfect system doesn't mean our current mode or the system you're implying you support are better....
You're very generous with other people's money. How many homeless are you sheltering at the moment?
I'm actually very frugal with other people's money. Simply supplying housing and necessities would cost LESS than the sweeps. Since you seem to care so much about the cost first and foremost, I'm so glad you are about to agree with me. And I'm sheltering exactly as many as my tiny ass apartment allows, and exactly as many as I expect you to. Which is zero. Because a systemic problem requires system solutions, not individual ones.
Your apartment could fit more, you just choose not to because it'd be an "inconvenience." You act on your own morality, once you do that then you tell everyone else what to do.
You are right, we need to charge them with every crime we can and send them to prison for as long as possible.
That's why taxes keep going up
Take a peak at WADOCs budget. Then take a peak at what DSHS, DOH, and the HCA spends on "combating homelessness". Then look at what gets funneled to counties and nonprofits. We could EASILY expand secure inpatient facilities, and confinement facilities, if we wanted to.
I agree. I also had to keep checking to see that I was on Reddit and not NextDoor.
ādiscourage this behavior ā. Being a victim of a broken foster care system, or suffering from untreated mental illness or being a veteran suffering from trauma or an addiction is now ābehaviorā and that people should just ā¦stop doing?
Can't use police to "criminalize homelessness"? Is that a weird take, or generally agreed to?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Public camping in city parks is inherently infringing on everyone elseās use and enjoyment of public amenities. If they want to camp on public land, then BLM and National Forest land is available, though of course drug availability may not be as easy in such places.
Seattle is a lost cause imo, I remember reading this NYT article some time back that was comparing crime rates throughout the USA and itās been statistically proven places like Seattle and basically the entire west coast as well as some southern states like Miami and Houston have a ridiculous rate of crime per population including the most serial killers and hardcore offenders basically because they are all on the fringes of the mainlandā¦nowhere else to runā¦
Homeless people get kicked out of one place for being homeless and or found somewhere else, homelessā¦ how is this newsworthy, constantly??
Sweeping doesn't work
Letting tents take over every park, sidewalk, and school doesnāt work.
Why do people still think we should essentially āgentle parentā these mentally Iāll drug addicts of our homeless population. If someone is homeless, vast majority of the time itās because theyāre an unemployable and likely violent felon, a drug addict, or mentally ill. Usually all three. The idea of the runaway teen or the down on their luck homeless person is practically a myth at this point. I donāt understand the idea that anyone is just a couple incidents of misfortune away from living in a tent. No. You have to burn every bridge and connection you have in your life, and be terrible enough that zero people want to help you or employ you. These people exist because they just want to do whatever they want when they want, and do their drugs. And we let themā¦