DelTeaz t1_j6tajkh wrote
Reply to comment by co_matic in New Yorkers witnessed more homelessness, encampments during Mayor Adams’ first year by Nscience
Lol homeless people don’t like being next to homeless people? How special
co_matic t1_j6tduiz wrote
Treating all homeless like dirty animals will guarantee that the homelessness crisis will never be solved.
DelTeaz t1_j6teq65 wrote
The homeless problem will never be solved ever. Any time a city offers homeless services it just brings on more homeless people. It’s a continuous cycle. This is literally playing out with the migrant crisis too. We’re paying 500 a night for each of them to stay in hotels.
Maybe some day this city will stop throwing money at people that aren’t even from New York like much of the homeless and especially non citizens at the expense of taxpayers. You guys are lunatics.
How about we limit these programs to the community and residents they’re meant to support in the first place.
co_matic t1_j6tfq0q wrote
It's this kind of thinking that will result in either Dickensian workhouses, concentration camps, or mass euthanasia for the homeless.
DelTeaz t1_j6tgjh1 wrote
Imagine thinking that limiting homeless services to New Yorkers, which is the point I’m making, is a bad thing. You’re delusional. Might as well invade Switzerland at this point given your thinking.
Longjumping_Vast_797 t1_j6worim wrote
Right? People can't see the nuance between some rules that create order and a nazi death camp. Pathetic.
WickhamAkimbo t1_j6tln4x wrote
There are any number of counties around the world that generally speaking don't have a problem with this kind of homelessness. The difference is that they force people into treatment that need it and don't tolerate extremely antisocial behavior.
Ok_Yogurtcloset8915 t1_j6uavb7 wrote
I think the actual difference, in a big picture sense, is that those countries attack these problems on a national level, which is really difficult for anything in the US by design. that other person is sort of right in that nyc offering more services/private rooms etc will not improve its situation, because this will absolutely attract more homeless people to go to nyc. the west coast and hawaii are both experiencing this effect right now.
the situation can never be resolved when every major metropolitan area is essentially in a standoff with all the others over who can be the least appealing to homeless populations. only federal intervention can fix it at this point. I don't know what the path to that is, but cities or states acting unilaterally only leads to an endlessly increasing bill for homeless services.
DelTeaz t1_j6tstbh wrote
And they also don’t have unfettered immigration. No migrant crisis. Their resources are used for their own community.
azeet94 t1_j6tztmk wrote
I would like to better understand how the migrant crisis directly relates to the homelessness crisis? Assuming you're referring to illegal migrants, the vast majority of homeless people I see (anecdotal) are white/black, not Hispanic/Asian (majority of immigrants)
DelTeaz t1_j6u8qgz wrote
Because it’s the same principle. People are coming to the city to seek the services that are being offered at the expense of people in the community. Many of the homeless you see in the streets aren’t from New York.
RecommendationOld525 t1_j6tda8l wrote
It should come as no surprise that not all unhoused people are the same. There are many different ways to be unhoused, many different reasons to be unhoused, and many different circumstances in which those folks are living (e.g. with their family, battling a drug addiction, working one or more jobs, multiple things). There are vastly different things that different unhoused people need, and I think what this article may be getting at is that the city isn’t offering enough of those different resources. (And maybe they can’t.)
For example, there’s a nonprofit that specifically helps women in shelters with financial literacy who have escaped abusive homes where they never learned how to manage money. That is a very specific problem that could make a huge difference for some people. We think a lot about the part where unhoused people may be dealing with drug additions and/or mental illness (I can’t imagine being unhoused for a prolonged amount of time and not having some kind of mental illness considering how stressful that must be), but there is also no one solution to how to handle that.
Yes, there are inevitably some unhoused people who do bad, destructive things, who are incredibly difficult to provide care for because they don’t want it. But I think it’s a bad faith argument to abandon anyone and especially to use those folks as an example as to why other unhoused people don’t deserve to be supported. And I think it’s because of that perspective that some unhoused folks don’t want to be lumped in with others.
NetQuarterLatte t1_j6tvtdt wrote
>It should come as no surprise that not all unhoused people are the same.
That's why they shouldn't be treated all the same.
The city is failing to separate a typical unhoused person from the ones who are violent, suffering from substance abuse, suffering mental illness.
And because the city is failing to separate them, that's creating and reinforcing a stigma, while making things worse for all of them.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments