Current Events > LA passed measure that bans homeless camps within 500 ft of schools and daycares

(+) Yeah! (+)

doesn't address the underlying problem/10

Question: where are they going to go?

Question: where are they going to go?

The way the city is zoned, there's not enough housing for the paying people who want it. There's enough people in Los Angeles already who struggle to find and maintain apartment living as is

The idea of housing the homeless before everyone else is and always has been absurd

Why should California continue to pay the price of being "accommodating" when there's 49 other states in the union, many with lower costs of living

Good.

Should be more than just 500 ft, but this is certainly a step in a better direction.

A "step in the right direction" would be evicting those applauding this and housing the homeless there. It's a potential win-win, the homeless have homes and maybe, just maybe, the ones evicted will gain a tiny shred of empathy.

Welp, looks like I'm moving back in after being suddenly homeless.

Maybe we should take care of the people with the most need first? You seem to have a problem with them existing in certain areas, but also don't want their urgent needs taken care of urgently. So what exactly do you wan them to do?

Maybe your anger should be directed at whatever is increasing the cost of living for everyone, or causing fellow citizens to become homeless, or restricting the supply of affordable housing? I think you'd find some common answers to those questions. Where as blaming people on the ass end of society and shuffling them around solves nothing.

The way the city is zoned, there's not enough housing for the paying people who want it. There's enough people in Los Angeles already who struggle to find and maintain apartment living as is

The idea of housing the homeless before everyone else is and always has been absurd

Why should California continue to pay the price of being "accommodating" when there's 49 other states in the union, many with lower costs of living

The people with the most need in this case are the kids walking to school in the mornings who have to sometimes walk on an active street during rush hour because the sidewalks are occupied by makeshift tents

I can't find the story but I'm pretty sure a kid was hit by a car because of this exact thing last year. So this story about an elderly woman will have to suffice
https://ktla.com/news/local-news/woman-struck-by-car-on-street-where-tents-were-blocking-sidewalk-is-suing-l-a/

I'm sure there's a latrine available somewhere

A "step in the right direction" would be evicting those applauding this and housing the homeless there. It's a potential win-win, the homeless have homes and maybe, just maybe, the ones evicted will gain a tiny shred of empathy.

Why should California continue to pay the price of being "accommodating" when there's 49 other states in the union, many with lower costs of living

What a surprise that homelessness skyrockets as housing prices reach historic heights. What a strange connection of circumstances.

I really have to imagine most are mental health/drug related, which means the idea of even getting them to stay in some kind of housing would be difficult.

The graphics above demonstrate that variation in rates of homelessness cannot be explained by variation in rates of individual factors such as poverty and mental illness. In fact, where poverty is higher, homelessness is lower, which is perhaps a counterintuitive result. Similarly, there are not higher rates of people with serious mental illness in locations with high rates of homelessness. Therefore, high rates of homelessness are not the result of more people with certain individual vulnerabilities residing in those locations. Poverty rates in Detroit, for instance, are far higher than in San Francisco, but rates of homelessness in Detroit are but a fraction of those observed in the Bay Area.
...
These are the conditionsthe structural factorsthat explain the observed variation. In our data set, housing market conditions explain the most variation in rates of homelessness observed around the country. Cities with higher rents and lower rental-vacancy rates (i.e., tighter housing markets) see higher per capita rates of homelessness. This is where a fuller picture comes into view. Individual risk factors help account for who in a given city might lose their housing at any given point in time, but housing marketsrents and vacancy ratesset the context in which those risk factors are expressed. Without looking at housing markets, you cant explain why Seattle has a much higher rate of homelessness than Chicago, Minneapolis, or Dallas. The fundamental conclusion is that the consequences of individual vulnerabilities are far more severe in locations with less accommodating housing markets.

A "step in the right direction" would be evicting those applauding this and housing the homeless there. It's a potential win-win, the homeless have homes and maybe, just maybe, the ones evicted will gain a tiny shred of empathy.

The places with the most homelessness aren't the places with the biggest drug or mental illness problems; they're the places with the highest housing prices.
https://www.sightline.org/2022/03/16/homelessness-is-a-housing-problem/

maybe you should take a few in. That would be a step in the right direction

The way the city is zoned, there's not enough housing for the paying people who want it. There's enough people in Los Angeles already who struggle to find and maintain apartment living as is

The idea of housing the homeless before everyone else is and always has been absurd

Why should California continue to pay the price of being "accommodating" when there's 49 other states in the union, many with lower costs of living

The way the city is zoned, there's not enough housing for the paying people who want it. There's enough people in Los Angeles already who struggle to find and maintain apartment living as is

The idea of housing the homeless before everyone else is and always has been absurd

Why should California continue to pay the price of being "accommodating" when there's 49 other states in the union, many with lower costs of living

People like TC nor the Nimbys give a fuck. They don't think of them as people.

Also, funny how he did a ninja vanish

maybe you should take a few in. That would be a step in the right direction

I don't care for back and forths when they're about the drug addicts sleeping on the streets who contribute nothing to society

Any homeless people caught within 500 ft of schools or daycares will be round up and put in a house, given a shower, have a doctor look at them and diagnose them with any necessary medication, and then they will be put into a program to help them get a job and get back on their feet

no exceptions

There are also lots of shelters that most homeless refuse to use due to being given curfews and unable to bring drugs in. Also some of them being MH patients dont care or understand. So a lot of them just prefer to live like that. What do we do about that?

I dont want kids or even myself to be subjected to watch people inject needles on themselves til they die of overdose.

A "step in the right direction" would be evicting those applauding this and housing the homeless there. It's a potential win-win, the homeless have homes and maybe, just maybe, the ones evicted will gain a tiny shred of empathy.