Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

EndoftheWeek t1_j0vhp6b wrote

“Some of the most at risk people in our society don’t deserve to be provided with an opportunity to get the help they need to get back on their feet because children (which I don’t have) might see an ugly building.”

Are you fucking insane?

11

bdeeney098 t1_j0vj1br wrote

That's not even close to what I said, cut it out. I did say however that I totally believe in housing first to get people back on their feet and a path to better lives. I simply just think that this is not a good location for them to set up this program. Keep twisting my words and making shit up though, it will probably work out for ya.

−1

EndoftheWeek t1_j0vmp0m wrote

It doesn’t matter what words you use. The actual, material result of this endless ‘oh, of course, but not here’ nonsense is exactly what I said. There is an actual proposal with an actual location that has actual potential to help people in real need. That’s rare enough as is. Finding a special, secluded zone for it is a both an unnecessary luxury and one that keeps these projects in limbo and the people in need of them on the streets.

8

bdeeney098 t1_j0vpweb wrote

It absolutely matters what words I use and to think otherwise is ridiculous. Also, I think it's important to do some homework and figure out where this transitional housing should be set up to best service those in need so they can be successful. If the location is nowhere near the services people need and there isn't transportation close by to get them where those services are then it's not gonna work. We aren't helping people by putting them in a hotel room to turn into a shooting gallery without any plans on how they'll transition to more permanent housing. Next thing you know the hotel is trashed, time and resources have been wasted, and we're back where we started except the community is worse off for it.

Edit: spelling

5