You must log in or register to comment.

GoHuskies1984 t1_iu012cd wrote

The hotel near me is housing Venezuelan immigrants: Link

Honestly I prefer this over the homeless that used to be put up there. A bunch of immigrant kids running around the sidewalks at 2AM is preferable to being stalked and attacked.


throwaway_samaritan t1_iu16bxu wrote

Yes, this sounds bad, but I rather give housing to families and those looking to improve their lives, than all the homeless who have wasted their lives with drugs and alcohol and bring nothing of use to society.


Grass8989 t1_iu1qbut wrote

That’s a pretty controversial take for this sub.


IvanEd747 t1_iu2108l wrote

I'm surprised he has 38 upvotes, but i never thought of it that way


okfnjesse t1_iu1ke9e wrote

I'm completely with you. Imagine money we pump into the system giving people a shot at a better life. That would be awesome


Effeted t1_iu34eqe wrote

We already spend $50k per homeless annually for I’m not sure what. We have to stop burning cash on them


Tsui_Brooklyn t1_iu2hzoy wrote

Imagine money back to NYer tax payers wallets ?!


Alert-Cookie-233 t1_iu48be1 wrote

I mean if you are that poor and need an extra $40 back these homeless camps are available for you to use.


satan_takethewheel t1_iu2f62i wrote

It’s not about who “deserves” housing- at a certain point homelessness is a public safety/health issue. It helps the whole neighborhood/community if people are off the streets. You don’t need compassion for the homeless to recognize the value in housing them.


phoenixmatrix t1_iu2v5p5 wrote

While there's some folks who are against their money going to help people, its more about who lives next to it. Everyone benefits no matter where you put it, but only a small amount of people directly adjacent pay the non-monetary price. That's where the arguments start.


Either-Discipline258 t1_iu7e5u3 wrote

No value in housing homeless. The tax payers pay the bill. They are a drain on society and their family members or next of kin should be responsible for housing them.


Darrackodrama t1_iu98u4f wrote

Except for the net drain on the police, the violence, and healthcare issues


jaredliveson t1_iu2cml8 wrote

This is a cruel take. Most are forced into that lifestyle. You should be ashamed


harlemtechie t1_iu3am6v wrote

This sub will wake you up to liberal racism. I can't believe you got downvoted.


BiblioPhil t1_iu4aid6 wrote

Honey this is /r/nyc, you're witnessing garden-variety conservative racism.


harlemtechie t1_iu4ijzq wrote

Nah, the gentrification people gotta FN go! I know how they vote too.... you realize we know who they are by now and what they're about.


throwaway_samaritan t1_iu5e4y7 wrote

You're the racist when you assume problems are due to one race. Read what you just wrote - plenty of successful hardworking people of all races in this city and country, as this country is one of opportunity. I think we should just acknowledge that those who throw away their opportunities shouldn't be rewarded - and instead it should go to children and families who actively are trying to better their lives. True racists (libs and conservatives) always make everything about race and do nothing about proposing real solutions.


HAPPYxMEAL t1_iu47e1l wrote

Not really, I knew a few people that chose to live like that. Life is mostly based on personal choices. No one is forcing anyone to be homeless.


jaredliveson t1_iu5appa wrote

That’s such a disappointing thing to hear. I really hope you change


Darrackodrama t1_iu98rfa wrote

This is why we will always suffer from this problem. It ain’t about who deserves it. It’s about the consequences from not giving housing to everyone. They are wildly on display everyday.


anarchyx34 t1_iu27al3 wrote

Funny how SI is treating our migrants better than Manhattan is.


Everyoneeatshere t1_iu3zvdg wrote

Staten is old school nyc. Those yuppies in manhattan are all for policy but not so much in practice when it’s their backyard.


BiblioPhil t1_iu4beji wrote

Yes, this article about one staten Island pizza shop proves that conservatives are actually the compassionate ones.

Just not the conservatives that intentionally stranded busloads of immigrants in New England to score political points. Some other conservatives.


anarchyx34 t1_iu5on6o wrote

It just proves that some people are compassionate and some aren’t often in surprisingly opposite ways than their political leanings would suggest.


Grass8989 t1_iu0oj99 wrote

The majority of homeless are just “down on their luck” according to this sub, I can’t imagine they would do something like that. /s


Hrekires t1_iu13zvi wrote

I mean... the average homeless person in NYC is homeless for about a year. That feels like "down on their luck" to me?


Double-Ad4986 t1_iu0oqf1 wrote

ur missing the /s even though yeah some are down on their luck but most definitely arent


SuperTeamRyan t1_iu0w5fd wrote

Having long term substance abuse problems isn’t mutually exclusive to being down on your luck. In fact having mental health issues will increase your chances of having shit luck.


hellobeau t1_iu12awd wrote

yeah lol like do people think that drug addicts think about long term consequences and possible severity of these consequences when trying drugs for the first time


Soraflair t1_iu1z7he wrote

You're definitely supposed too.

Do you know anyone who smokes weed who endorses trying fucking meth?

You are 100% responsible for what you put in your body willfully as an adult.

If I catch myself drinking too much, I literally take a breather week so I don't become addicted and are always in control of my facilities. That's why all the commercials say "drink responsibly." Not drink, and then go drive your car during rush hour #YOLO"

The only reasonable exception is heroin based products that were prescribed by a doctor. (Lorizapan for anxiety, Oxy for Pain, etc.) Then the patient becomes addicted.

Pain pills are a reasonable exemption, but in circumstances where the user is doing too much drugs on the weekend that they develope a problem.

Yeah that's entirely the users fault, fix your shit, and face the childhood demons your avoiding like the rest of us

Stop running away from your problems with substance abuse because it "numbs the pain." That's a ridiculous excuse, deal with your problems. The hard truth is life does not care about your trauma, deal with your shit, or end up homeless and drugs, that's simply the reality.

You don't need a psychiatrist for 99% of these issues. Here is a freebie, experience sexual trauma as a child, and now you're carrying the weight of that around without telling anyone, because it's to painful to deal with, and you've given up because "it's already been to long, I missed my chance."

Pull your head out of your ass and tell someone. No wonder you can't hold down a job, who the hell can do that while carrying around childhood sexual trauma while literally pretending everything is totally fine, and literally becoming exhausted all day hiding your emotions and blending in? What are you an idiot? Fix your shit, tell someone, and then if you still can, as an adult, set that person straight.

"I forgave you a long time ago, but you listen here, if you ever come near me or my family ever again so help me God I'll put you in the fucking hospital, and you'll be eating through a feeding tube."

See, you even got to forgive them, and move on without violence, but set them straight and asserted yourself that you'll never willfully become a victim again. (You have no control, I mean someone could push you Infront of a train, but the point is it's not willful.)

That's closure. Now you don't have to down a fifth of Jack Daniels every weekend to stop your demons from harassing you.

TL;DR people need to fix their shit, instead of turning to drugs and alcohol to numb their pain. Life doesn't care about you, and that's just the way it is.

EDIT: u/maveric29 has pointed out that I have improperly categorized the medication I was commenting on; the proper classification is Opiates, and Lorazepan is a Benzodizapine. Regardless, the comment is more directed towards providing an exemption of my remarks towards those people. I believe they should be exempt as they are simply following established medical doctrine in order to treat an underlining condition; and should not be viewed with the same scrutiny as I described for those outside of that category.


FuckinPeacemaker t1_iu220hz wrote

Hey man it sounds like you have everything figured out. Have you thought about writing a book with such wisdom as “pull your head out of your ass” and “fix your shit”. You could really help heal a lot of people with such sage advice!


Soraflair t1_iu29iex wrote

Honestly i've thought about it, it's really not hard, I had to fix my own issues as well, you'd be surprised at the amount of people who have childhood sexual trauma who literally just avoid the issue all day, carrying weight around. (Yes I am aware you we're being sarcastic)

Anxiety does not care, and will continue to bother you all day until you fix it.

You will come home everyday, and not do the dishes because you are so exhausted, you will look at the laundry, but not fold it because you "can't even," you will stay up every night until 1:30AM even though you said you would go to bed early because you have work the next day. Then you will wake up at the literally last possible moment, you will even do mathematical equations, factoring in imaginary traffic patterns based on your previous travel times to work, factoring in the difference with things such as the weather, or to account for accidents to LITERALLY LEAVE FOR WORK AT THE LAST POSSIBLE SECOND. "Well if I leave at exactly 7:57, ill be there before 8:45.

I mean come on, how much louder does it have to be? Then you think, I'm a slob, but then you'll suddenly get a burst of energy, and clean THE ENTIRE HOUSE, from top to bottom, and then once you're done, it'll just start back up.

You can only go to the gym for 3 weeks at max, before you give up.


Everyone has their issues, the problem is you assume I think it's just the drug users, no it's literally everyone, everyone has these issues, and they're all not equipped to handle any of this, and it absolutely drives me crazy, that I almost refuse to help anyone, except on rare occasions; I didn't birth all these people, there is literally too much work for one person to do, on top of all this, it's like talking to brick walls half the time, everywhere I go, I have to argue with people who don't understand how any of this works; drives me up a wall; & don't even get me started on r/Christianity, JESUS CHRIST those people are more lost than the /r/athiests. At least the athiests aren't totally full of shit.


machined_learning t1_iu24zvj wrote

TL;DR I've made sweeping generalizations that drug users are just weak people who don't know as much as me.


maveric29 t1_iu2l1zh wrote

You have it all figured out! Lorizapan is not related to heroin not would anyone who knows what their talking about as a heroin derived. Heroin oxy and fentanyl are derived from opium hence opiates. Lorizapan is a benzodiazapine. Very different.


Soraflair t1_iu2mncq wrote

Ah you have me there, yes, my fault, the proper categorization is opiates.

I was unaware that Lorazepan was not an opiate but a benzo; very good information to know.

Unfortunately they are typically prescribed together with disastrous results. (Source: )

Regardless, I will update my comment with the clarification that I am allowing a reasonable excuse for addiction derived from pharmaceuticals. The point being is that a person who was prescribed addictive medication, cannot really be blamed entirely for becoming addicted to it, because they were prescribed in a medical, and controlled manner, with the intention of treating an underlining condition. Thus it would be unreasonable to blame them entirely for becoming addicted, because they are simply trusting the established medical community. (Plenty of people became addicted around 2010s completely unaware of the dangers of these medications, and it would be unfair to place entire blame on a lot of these people.)


maveric29 t1_iu2ns3c wrote

They are generally only prescribed together as a low grade anesthesia while ministered and administered my a physician. They are not safe when used together and will not likely be prescribed.


Soraflair t1_iu2ogg4 wrote

Is this a more recent thing? Do you happen to know why the VA prescribes both then? (I'm not making any accusations; just curious) Looks like the FDA hasn't outright banned the practice, just maybe advises against it?

(More scholarly source: )

Although this is a bit off topic, I was only making a simple argument, my main point is drug addiction derived from prescribed pharmaceuticals should not be held to the same standard as self medicating copping based addiction.

(FDA Advisory link: )


maveric29 t1_iu2rmqh wrote

They persibed them both because I'm certain situations they are useful. My main point was you clearly can't grasp drug use or abuse. And your misunderstanding of simple things proves as much.


Soraflair t1_iu2udrq wrote

Sounds like an appeal to authority, or established order.

What exactly is incorrect with what I am saying? My argument is that drug users, typically utilize drugs to cope with trauma, and use it as an escapism method in order to avoid dealing with their actual problems.

However, the drug cycle does not typically end by simply attempting to stop utilizing the drugs unless you deal with the underlining driver of the drug use, which is typically unresolved trauma.

Which is commonly resolved via therapy sessions; which is nothing more than a licensed therapist helping you sort through your issues.

How is anything I am saying irrational? Sure i'm a bit brash, because we'll frankly i'm sick of seeing it excused everywhere in this society, and having to deal with it 24/7.

The point being is that we have an epidemic of "psychological issues," issues that people used to literally just associate with the human condition. I would argue it's literally trendy now to claim to have MPS; which is nothing more than, you guessed it, more trauma avoidance.

We are entirely enabling this behavior, by not calling it for what it is, these people are full of shit, who would rather do drugs, and self medicate than deal with their demons.

My point is, that no amount of medication will solve these specific issues, anxiety will never go away, and can only be dealt with by dealing with the issues head on. (Which is why I stated that in 99% of circumstances, people are simply avoiding dealing with their issues, there is a rare exemption of 1%; which by in large is not a small population, who legitimately have physical medical issues that absolutely impair their mental cognitive processes, however the majority of people in our society do not fall into this category.)

You likely missed my other comment, but I also addressed the same issues present in people who are not dealing with addiction:

It's not simply a one off occurrence, it's an entire epidemic of people who simply refuse to deal with any of their issues what so ever, on an unprecedented scale.


maveric29 t1_iu7dzt7 wrote

I give up you are insane and incapable of coherent thoughts. Have a pleasant evening


Plays_On_TrainTracks t1_iu3tpzt wrote

This should have been one of those post you made it about halfway through, and said fuck it, and just deleted.


co_matic t1_itzubt7 wrote

>The shelter complex’s opening on Oct. 19 coincided with a drop in the number of Venezuelan nationals entering the U.S. illegally after the Biden administration announced an agreement to expel many of them to Mexico, according to border aid groups. Most migrants who have traveled north on buses in recent months came originally from Venezuela, in part because the government-sponsored rides brought them to cities with large Venezuelan populations.

Biden started using Title 42 - a Trump-era policy used to turn back asylum-seekers on pretext of stopping COVID transmission - to turn back Venezuelan asylum-seekers, after failing to repeal the policy earlier this year. Seems like Dems saw the Abbott bus stunt as being bad for their midterm chances, and so basically adopted the GOP policy on immigration for the time being.


TudeExtrude t1_iu0sd26 wrote

Not often discussed is, why should we provide asylum to them? They came through Mexico and didn't apply there, thats a statute in the requirements for applying to asylum in the US.

Asylum is about getting to safety and getting away from a repressive government, since when has it been "go to the best possible country for your personal economic reasons"?


JRsshirt t1_iu2bow9 wrote

Because asylum has long been misused as a lever for immigration. The whole system needs to be overhauled imo. It shouldn’t be so hard to move here legally that you have to claim you’re doing it for your own safety to get in.


tonka737 t1_iu4gug3 wrote

Well it makes sense to manage who enters your borders. Limited state funds and filters who can enter the country.


givemegreencard t1_iu5elal wrote

> They came through Mexico and didn't apply there, thats a statute in the requirements for applying to asylum in the US.

No it is not.

The US only has a safe third country agreement with Canada.

Whatever your opinion on asylum law and whether or not it is abused, no applicant for asylum in the U.S. has a legal requirement to seek asylum in any intermediary country they passed through.

Whether these asylum applicants actually qualify based on a well-founded fear of persecution based on the protected classes is a different question.


PyramidClub t1_iu45u2w wrote

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"


dread_beard t1_iu5qjhb wrote

What you say is fully accurate. I mean, read my comments and posts. I am very, very liberal. But there is zero reason for these migrants to not apply for asylum in Mexico. Period. This is not how the process is legally supposed to go.


ketzal7 t1_iu0395d wrote

As Dems always do. Talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. Btw I’m not advocating for Republicans, just saying Dems are not immigrant friendly either.


TarumK t1_iu0rj59 wrote

I don't know what immigrant friendly means. Most of the people coming from Venezuela are clearly economic migrants not political refugees. The liberal position on this is very hypocritical. Is the idea that America should take in unlimited immigrants? If so why are we making them go through all the trouble of an incredibly dangerous route through gangland and the desert? Why not just sell them plane tickets from their home countries? There's no coherent position there at all. No matter how restrictive or open immigration policy is, most people who would like to come to America are never gonna be able to come to America.


djphan2525 t1_iu19psq wrote


ketzal7 t1_iu1whcp wrote

No DACA recipient wants to stay in status limbo forever. They want a path towards citizenship.


princessnegrita t1_iu2hrx8 wrote

It’s a half measure that is still so much better than literally nothing.

We can acknowledge wins and still expect better. This country has had amnesties before, at the very least they could do it again to clear backlogs.


djphan2525 t1_iu1xt9p wrote

oh wait... 800,000 people enrolled in the program is nobody?

>I strongly believe that children who were illegally brought into this country through no fault of their own should not be forced to return to a country they do not know. The 800,000 innocent young people granted deferred action under DACA over the last several years are pursuing degrees, starting careers, and contributing to our communities in important ways. While I disagreed with President Obama's unilateral action on this issue, I believe that rescinding DACA at this time is an unacceptable reversal of the promises and opportunities that have been conferred to these individuals.

-Senator John McCain, Republican


ketzal7 t1_iu1zx7l wrote

I said they don’t want to stay in permanent DACA status. I never said they refuse DACA outright.


djphan2525 t1_iu2ub7c wrote

and what's your point.. these 800,000 people are better off when DACA was in place or else why were they trying to use it...

was that nothing? or it doesn't count for you?

yea i thought so...


Draymond_Purple t1_iu09arb wrote

In what world are Dems not immigrant friendly... It's like one of their pillars.

Everyone can always be better, do better, but that doesn't mean Dems aren't immigrant friendly


movingtobay2019 t1_iu0i0dd wrote

You are conflating rhetoric with action.

It's easy to be "friendly" and say the right things when it doesn't cost anything. When it starts costing votes? Think you get the point.

So I guess if by "immigrant friendly" you mean bunch of feel good statements without substance, you would be on point. Democrats have certainly mastered it (see the free housing lawyers they promised without giving as much a second of thought as to how they are going to retain a supply of highly trained lawyers).


HayPlaceAPlaceforHay t1_iu0rcs0 wrote

DACA was massive action. It’s not the policy of dems to let everyone who wants to be a citizen be a citizen.


kent2441 t1_iu2mx2a wrote

So it costs them votes, they lose power, and they can’t do anything at all. Then what?


Toilethyme t1_iu0k751 wrote

We can be friendly to immigrants and still send them home, humanely. There’s a difference between enforcing the law and abject brutality.


ketzal7 t1_iu0l33v wrote

Policy wise it seems like it but they’ve consistently turned a blind eye to border patrol abuses and have had no problem pushing Republican immigration policies when it suits them.


Hrekires t1_iu0crbt wrote

Trump was the worst, most corrupt President to serve in my lifetime.

But not literally everything he did was wrong.


vy2005 t1_iu1d7om wrote

The migrants are getting treated much worse in Mexico. Just doesn’t make it to American media. Your view of that as right or wrong is subjective


Cyril_Clunge t1_iu0jswk wrote

How young are you?


Hrekires t1_iu0kp16 wrote


I'm open to the debate that GWB was worse, but I think trying to overthrow an election trumps the Iraq War.


AggrievedEntitlement t1_iu1ku5a wrote

How many people died because of the Iraq war?


actualhumanwaste t1_iu1ojfb wrote

Imo it's fair to say that Bush was worse on a humanitarian and international level while Trump was worse on a domestic level. As for total human suffering, Bush probably takes the cake.


Cyril_Clunge t1_iu50fs6 wrote

Bush also had 9/11 (not saying he did it but the ball was dropped somewhere), Hurricane Katrina and the Financial Crash of 2008. Plus the whole Florida 2000 shenanigans. At this point, it's probably easier to focus on which POTUS was the least shitty.

Something I always find funny is people talking about post-truth era with Trump, as if he's the first President to ever lie. After having the Vietnam War, Watergate, Iran-Contra, Monica Lewinsky, Iraq WMDs, etc....


chargeorge t1_iu0se1u wrote

Beyond that change, border migration always slows into the fall and winter.


Hrekires t1_iu0cnks wrote

Temporary housing was temporary and maybe not worth getting 10/10 outraged over? Shocking.


CookieSheaButter t1_iu0hxd3 wrote

I think it was more that it was reactionary rather than based on sound logic.

The shelter population was going to explode this summer even without a manufactured migrant crisis. The eviction moratorium expired while inflation and rent soared. Besides that, the shelter population is always highest in summer.

The mayor, who was warned about this when he took office decided to take zero preventive or reactionary steps. He proposed a laundry list of ideas to help people move out of shelters and into permanent housing. Yet as of today, he has implemented zero with no plans to ever do so. So what do we have? A growing shelter population while average time in shelter is at over two years for families.

The city would rather spend $5300 a month per person (the cost of the awful homeless shelter on Randall’s island right next to the HERC) than take any steps toward meaningful reform.


gothamtommy t1_iu1iko3 wrote

Technically, he didn't do "nothing." He had DSNY and NYPD destroy homeless encampments.


Grass8989 t1_iu0osjz wrote

If Biden didn’t change course, we would have continued to receive Venezuelan migrants and it wouldn’t have been temporary.


Toilethyme t1_iu0kpfy wrote

Open them up to anyone as budget housing?


virtual_adam t1_iu0mbp4 wrote

Keep ‘‘em up for the music festivals next summer


nexert233 OP t1_iu18zzm wrote

Haha. I like this idea. Convert it into a hostel to recoup the money that was spent.

On a serious note- the pictures do not make the place look at all comfortable.


Sea_Sand_3622 t1_iu1l57h wrote

Par for the course … do you know how many temporary facilities were built for Covid patients or non-Covid patients and they were completely underutilized? And do you know who got the contracts to build them?

Hello big time Ny state Democratic Party contributors who own construction companies.


dboggny t1_iu24ewd wrote

I don’t mean to nitpick your comments but I am going to anyway. The Covid tents weren’t underutilized. They weren’t utilized because they weren’t needed. That is all. Thanks.


MonthApprehensive392 t1_iu0vgte wrote

Knew this was going to happen. There’s been a telling trend in Blue metro areas to create these tremendous efforts of humanitarianism only to find they don’t work as planned. Either out of lack of need or lack of oversight.


LunacyNow t1_iu1b8uo wrote

Well there's always the thought - let's do this - and then when comes down to it everyone always assumes that someone else will be doing the helping and the paying for it.


MonthApprehensive392 t1_iu1cjts wrote

At some point it becomes ineffective leadership to not be aware enough to know that something will fall flat on its face.


werdnak84 t1_iu1mqcm wrote

It's the WSJ. You can't read it unless you have a subscription.


john-bkk t1_iu31qn5 wrote

It always seemed like this is one stop-gap interim solution to the homeless issue, as long as there was reason for people to utilize designated areas to live in. Those places probably wouldn't be very safe, so there would need to be other drivers for why to live there, like open access to food or medical care. Even with that the goal would be to get people who are often mentally ill or doing badly related to drug addictions to make clear and rational decisions, which wouldn't be easy for them.


True_Comment_4144 t1_iu495yi wrote

So how many millions of dollars did NYC blow on this stunt?

Why are people so okay with their tax dollars being essentially wasted when they claim they can't afford groceries and gas?


Top_Unit_1736 t1_iu4pv6x wrote

Send em back, were the obly country in the world who dont practice border control. Ask the europeans if they have open borders? Or the israelis? Why shluld we.


soyeahiknow t1_iu7g3h1 wrote

So i drive by the 69st station on the 7 line every morning. There was always a lot of hispanic day laborers there since its a major entrence to the highways and there is a huge hispanic church. Anyways, ive notice a lot of female day laborers and what looks to be families. Before it was mainly men. Wonder if those are the new migrants?


Keyboard-King t1_iuc8qgy wrote

NYC has unlimited recourses and infinite space. Please send more.


jumbod666 t1_iu2kttk wrote

Wouldn’t one think that housing would be cheaper and more affordable without the government intervention in the housing market?


MrRabbit t1_iu11zjq wrote

Damn this sub has really turned into a MAGA echo chamber of stupid shit holes.


ketzal7 t1_iu20zkf wrote

It always was my friend, there are just some threads that attract more of them.