top | item 21808136

(no title)

farss | 6 years ago

It's not just the free fare - it's the abysmal lack of shelter options and the attempts by cities to criminalize encampments and force people to find somewhere indoors to avoid arrest.

discuss

order

werber|6 years ago

100% this, I’ve been homeless and slept on the bus or subway to stay warm (and safe) and not once did someone try to help me. And now I’m years out of being in that situation and I am part of the same problem, I almost never take public transportation and use Lyft or my car to get around.

awb|6 years ago

> I’ve been homeless and slept on the bus or subway to stay warm (and safe) and not once did someone try to help me.

Curious how someone could have most helped you at that time in your life if you don't mind sharing.

farss|6 years ago

> "(and safe)"

Want to make sure this part of the comment is also highlighted because big homeless shelters can be really difficult, scary, and even dangerous places, even when there are beds available, and so unhoused people have to wrestle with whether it's safer/more desirable to sleep outside rather than deal with all that. And that's not to mention all the cumbersome rules and religious proselytizing they might have to deal with in shelters. Warehousing people is not a good option.

hanniabu|6 years ago

Yup, just earlier this post showed up in my thread with people trying to criminalize sleeping in public areas so homeless can be arrested.

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/16/788435163/supreme-court-wont-...

markdown|6 years ago

Well they should, shouldn't they. Nobody should be able to monopolize and ruin the commons, whether or not they have a home.

The problem isn't the criminalizing of sleeping in public spaces, it's the lack of publicly funded shelters and publicly funded (incl. mental) healthcare for the homeless.

We should pay to give them a place to sleep, and punish them just like anyone else if they choose to set up camps in public spaces.

epicureanideal|6 years ago

What is it that's preventing us from forcing our politicians to offer better options? I would vote for a solution to this, and even donate money to it, if enough other people were doing the same.

Don't most people feel the same about this issue? What systemic problem is preventing a huge mass of people who agree on this from making a meaningful change happen?

nostromo|6 years ago

It's just a much harder problem to solve than you realize it is.

The truth is a lot of the homeless people that aren't in shelters choose not to go to shelters. Why? The biggest reason is because shelters don't allow drugs or alcohol, and if you're an addict that's an immediate pass.

There are other reasons too. Sometimes couples want shelter together, but most are separated by gender (and for good reason: to prevent sexual assaults). Sometimes a person has a pet, and pets are generally not accepted at shelters.

So, what do you do? Allow people to shoot up in a shelter? Or deny heroin addicts shelter? As I said, it's not obvious how to fix this. It's definitely not just a "build more beds" situation in most cities.

tehjoker|6 years ago

If you give everyone houses, it relieves pressure from the housing system which causes rents to go down. Therefore, every landlord opposes actually solving homelessness. Since we have government by the rich and landed, we get their position encoded in policy.

The degree to which reality diverges from this prescription is the degree to which the politicians fear either a) a declining bushiness environment or b) riots

beamatronic|6 years ago

The problem is that as soon as they increase your taxes to pay for something that you want to pay for, they will take that money and use it for something else.

dominotw|6 years ago

> because it's warm,

allowing encampments won't probably solve that unless they somehow provide heat?

hgskncrimcss|6 years ago

In SJ under the 280/87 interchange along the bike path the homeless build wood fires and garbage fires.