San Francisco residents cover sidewalks in rocks to keep away homeless - Well if the city won't help...

Stoneheart

kiwifarms.net
I've heard this same thing about the Roma in Europe who get public welfare housing.
They are not THAT bad... they are very criminal and dont care much.
they turn western european housing blocks into eastern european, but they are not like homeless people or nigger.

Every single European friend I have hates them with a passion. They're like our homeless if you swap the drugs and prostitution (But keep the alcoholism and street shitting) for rampant pickpocketing, muggings, and stealing everything that isn't nailed down
they dont shit on streets, they like to jump into fron gardens and shit there.
 

Maratus volans

Peacock Spider
kiwifarms.net
They are as soundly devoted to denying the impact of mental health and addiction issues on homelessness as they are to denying the viability of nuclear power. And I don't know why. I don't get it. At the absolute best attempt at reasoning, they'll maybe tell you that asylums were terrible inhumane places. But so what then, the "solution" is to do nothing? Toss them onto the street, let them starve and suffer and die? As @Tour of Italy said above, their progressivism is all driven by spite, they want the whole world to believe they're morally superior while they treat the homeless like a NIMBY game of hot potato.

What is it with denying mental health as an issue?
The really oversimplified way to think of it is like this: one of the driving core beliefs of modern progressivism is the need to affirm, without comment or criticism, people's actions and beliefs. The origin of this comes from leftist activist circles, and has noble roots: the idea is that part of the marginalization process for the disadvantaged is to deprive them of places to share their stories and communicate what life is really like for them, so as an activist you need to listen to these people to make sure you're fighting for something that's actually going to help them rather than something that just makes you feel good. Thus, the first step to activism is to get the group you're representing to step forward and to tell their stories to serve as a kind of true north for your efforts. This is what progressives are/were getting at when they talk about "centering marginalized voices."

However, like all things with the modern left, this process was taken to its logical and absurd conclusion, and now the stories and experiences are fetishized and treated as an end in themselves. You can't interrogate or think critically about them because to do so is to silence the "lived truth" of the storyteller. Thus, in order to be a good activist, you must affirm the experiences, stories, life choices, etc. of the marginalized without comment or judgment; to do otherwise is to further their oppression.

How does this affect the homeless? Well, in a few ways. One, you can't talk about the impact of mental health or drug addiction because those are stigmatized and thus carry the whiff of judgment with them. Two, allowing the homeless to continue with the status quo is to affirm their choices and their experiences, which is the correct thing to do as an ally of the homeless because you are not inserting yourself or silencing them. Three, modern progressive thought believes that society is to blame for personal-level issues because society is arranged on a structural level to be oppressive; thus, to solve the problem, society needs to spontaneously and completely rearrange itself to get rid of the offending structures, at which point the problem will naturally vanish. You can't take action on a local level (other than protesting) because that's just treating the symptoms while the disease continues to fester, which makes you an enabler for the very forces you're trying to fight.

Some of it, of course, is driven by the fact that modern activism on both ends of the spectrum is driven more by being anti-"the other side" than it is pro-"our position", so progressives have to be against institutionalization in any form because that smacks of law-and-order conservative positions. It leads to absurdities like abandoning the traditional leftist message of rehabilitation through government programs in favor of protesting any attempt to directly address the negative local consequences of homelessness.
 

Alec Benson Leary

Creator of Asperchu
Christorical Figure
kiwifarms.net
love to see an extremely PTA soccer mom with powerful "can I speak to your manager" energy, dropping boulders like Wile E. Coyote, from her from 34th floor condo smashing homeless people into paste
I love that image but outside of downtown San Francisco's laws say no building can be constructed over like 70 feet or something so you'll never get an apartment that tall. Like all sweeping laws enacted by big lefty cities it's really about preserving the gap between rich and poor, on paper it's to preserve the historic scenery and vistas of the city for the rich assholes who like bragging about the view but ends up being the reason why it costs 4 grand a month to rent a studio apartment built out of corrugated tin.

The ree-ing about hostile architecture really gets on my nerves. The homeless will sleep directly in front of entrances to buildings, for fuck's sake. Is it really worse to put spikes in the way so they can't do that rather than have the first schmoe who shows up for work in the morning be the one who has to ask them to leave? And if the homeless sleeper won't leave, the cops have to get involved, ideally just to arrest the asshole for trespass, not to investigate the homicide of the early morning worker.
I have friends living in Seattle, a husband and wife with a little daughter. Actually they live in Redmond (which is as nice as any average suburb) but the wife works in downtown Seattle. She hates it. Won't set foot in the city limits except for work and that's it. Their daughter was off visiting relatives last week so mom and dad had extra time on their hands, he asked her if she wanted to go have breakfast together in Seattle before he dropped her off for work and she just said hell no. The city police won't even do a sweep through to shoo away homeless until 7am so if you have an earlier work schedule like she does, she can't get into her own work building because there are homeless people squatting right in the front fucking doorway physically blocking access. And like San Fran, Seattle just does not care to do anything.

Where does she work? Amazon. They want to save the world from hearing mean words on the internet but I guess it's bad PR to be seen taking too many steps to protect their own employees' physical safety.
 

Ruin

#respectskeltins
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
They are as soundly devoted to denying the impact of mental health and addiction issues on homelessness as they are to denying the viability of nuclear power. And I don't know why. I don't get it. At the absolute best attempt at reasoning, they'll maybe tell you that asylums were terrible inhumane places. But so what then, the "solution" is to do nothing? Toss them onto the street, let them starve and suffer and die? As @Tour of Italy said above, their progressivism is all driven by spite, they want the whole world to believe they're morally superior while they treat the homeless like a NIMBY game of hot potato.

What is it with denying mental health as an issue? Any sane homeless person who actually wants and would benefit from being given a leg up with housing support will tell you that for every one of them, there are ten more homeless people who are just despicable, violent drug addicts who actively resist attempts to offer them help. They want to shit up the streets and live like animals because even the bare minimum of responsibility that comes with being a non-violent member of society is too much for them. But they treat politics like hot potato just the same as they do their physical neighborhoods - if it's mental health then the Democrats have to admit there's more complexity to the issue, but if we just say it's all about being priced out then I guess the Republicans are all at fault. Even though this shit only happens in gentrified, hipster leftarded cities that praise themselves for being bluer than an eskimo's balls.
They furiously deny it because if they admit it's a drug problem then they have to admit Ronald Reagan was essentially correct when he warned what soft on drug policies would lead to and that's the last thing boomer politicians want to do.
 

Alec Benson Leary

Creator of Asperchu
Christorical Figure
kiwifarms.net
They furiously deny it because if they admit it's a drug problem then they have to admit Ronald Reagan was essentially correct when he warned what soft on drug policies would lead to and that's the last thing boomer politicians want to do.
Basically the same reason they won't try any method of curbing homelessness if Giuliani tried it in NYC first. Never mind that his methods actually worked, he's a Republican, and if a Republican says don't put your hand on the stove then by god you better burn your hand to a cinder or else you're not pure enough for the inquisitors.
 

sperginity

everything is terrible
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
These bleeding-heart brainlets keep bleating about "housing crisis", but it's a mental health and drug crisis for fuck's sake. All the housing in the world won't mean jack shit when you're too dysfunctional to stay indoors and not get strung out.
This is supposing that a person with a drug problem will be equally likely to stay sober if they have a steady job and adequate housing vs being homeless. That just isn't true. The person who realizes that they can't afford rent, and also cannot find anywhere cheaper, has just freed up several hundred dollars at the exact same time that they have been devastated by losing their housing. It isn't a mystery why people get high in that situation when they wouldn't otherwise. Keeping a job without owning a place to shower or wash clothes is difficult, too. There are people who would be wrecks no matter what, I have a hard time believing that it is the (rising) % of homeless people that is currently being discussed.

Housing could easily be more affordable, but rich people don't want to have their preferred neighborhoods taken by people who grew up in them, so they offer more money for the house/condo they want, which property owners would be foolish to refuse. Prices inflate for everyone. Rich people try to put homeless crisis centers in other people's neighborhoods, and start a giant regulatory battle with whoever lives there. There is no where that welcomes a crisis center that is close enough to where the homeless actually hang out, they tend to shake down people who have money. So here we are.

lol and you Yanks claim to be a 1st world country...
the constitution makes it very difficult to institutionalize unwilling people for being insane. The way I see it, it is not realistic to expect to commit the exact right number of people, you're either going to commit too many people or too few. America errs on the side of too few. Other countries err on the side of too many. Our problems are out in the open where you can see them, yours are in an institution somewhere that you'll never hear about. I don't know what is better for crazy people, but I prefer the constitutional protections functioning this way for the rest of society.
 

Matthew216

kiwifarms.net
Stories like this really make me wonder why anyone who can afford to live in San Francisco does.
Romance. San Francisco is the heart of the “Great Liberation Movement” that’s been plaguing us since the sixties. SF was there bass, and now it strives to live up to that reputation.
 

Wazzupnerds

kiwifarms.net
Basically the same reason they won't try any method of curbing homelessness if Giuliani tried it in NYC first. Never mind that his methods actually worked, he's a Republican, and if a Republican says don't put your hand on the stove then by god you better burn your hand to a cinder or else you're not pure enough for the inquisitors.
Nail on the fucking head.
 

neverendingmidi

it just goes on and on and on and on...
kiwifarms.net
Also some have been there forever. I forget which thread, but somebody was explaining a law about housing that was passed (in California) which limited the amount one's property tax could rise to 2% per year. It would stay that way until you sold the house, at which point it would be re-evaluated and corrected to the current home value. So somebody who bought a house way back in the 70's and paid $300,000 for it might be living in what nowadays would be a $2.1 million dollar house, but if they sold it they wouldn't be able to afford a new house and the current property taxes. Such homes and rates can also be inherited, so if Mom & Dad leave their house to a kid they stay at the same tax rate, where they would have a horrifyingly high hike if the law didn't exist.

Basically, most houses cost at least $1 million, but it's questionable how many who live there now actually paid anywhere near that.
 
Last edited:

TowinKarz

Is it Morning Yet?
kiwifarms.net
Three, modern progressive thought believes that society is to blame for personal-level issues because society is arranged on a structural level to be oppressive; thus, to solve the problem, society needs to spontaneously and completely rearrange itself to get rid of the offending structures, at which point the problem will naturally vanish.

Communism doesn't work, but it's so deeply-woven into leftist conventional wisdom, just like this, that they can't even see it even as they banish those trying to solve problems to the gulag for suggesting The Party is fallible.... or in this case, the analogue is casting out anyone who wants to solve the homeless problem in a way that acutally INVOLVES the homeless instead of the designated surrogates for social ills in the form of corporations and middle-class taxpayers.

It's like how quantum physics is correct, an object can exist in two places at once, but, at some point, as you scale up from subatomic to the macroatomic world we inhabit, the effect weakens to the point that even established physical law no longer works because other things come into play. Electrons may only probably exist at any one place, but the thing the bazillions of them that come together to construct, ME and my physical body, cannot be in two places at once.

What am I getting at with this clunky analogy?

Yes, it's "society" to blame for there being homelessness, and I am a member of society. But, that doesn't change the fact that it's not acceptable for one of them to stab me in the arm as I try to step over his sleeping bag that's blocking the door to my job.... making me suffer an injustice doesn't balance out the cosmic scales and erase whatever injustice was done to make that dude a stab-happy meth-head.

It just makes more misery.

The left however, believes that RIGHTEOUS misery is a thing, so they do nothing about it.
 

neverendingmidi

it just goes on and on and on and on...
kiwifarms.net
Yes, it's "society" to blame for there being homelessness, and I am a member of society. But, that doesn't change the fact that it's not acceptable for one of them to stab me in the arm as I try to step over his sleeping bag that's blocking the door to my job.... making me suffer an injustice doesn't balance out the cosmic scales and erase whatever injustice was done to make that dude a stab-happy meth-head.
You forget, this is the society that comes up with Bike Cuck
76DF5965-22EF-494A-9465-39A59566ECB4.jpeg
 

RodgerDodger

kiwifarms.net
the constitution makes it very difficult to institutionalize unwilling people for being insane. The way I see it, it is not realistic to expect to commit the exact right number of people, you're either going to commit too many people or too few. America errs on the side of too few. Other countries err on the side of too many. Our problems are out in the open where you can see them, yours are in an institution somewhere that you'll never hear about. I don't know what is better for crazy people, but I prefer the constitutional protections functioning this way for the rest of society.
The Constitution didn’t have a problem with it for 200 years. The Constitution is fine with restrictions on a specific individuals liberty so long as due process is followed. Mental Health Care is the perfect example of “any bad situation will invariably be made 1000x worse by injecting lawyers into it.”
 

DuckSucker

kiwifarms.net
Stories like this really make me wonder why anyone who can afford to live in San Francisco does.
They dont, half of California is moving to Texas, theyre keeping their property though to rent out at outrageous prices, to transplants who want to be "cool" Coastal superior. Theyre fucking up Texas, they spread the disease everywhere they go but cant figure out that if everywhere you go turns shitty, it's probably you tracking shit all over the place.
 

3119967d0c

رنج آمریکایی ها
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
the constitution makes it very difficult to institutionalize unwilling people for being insane. The way I see it, it is not realistic to expect to commit the exact right number of people, you're either going to commit too many people or too few. America errs on the side of too few. Other countries err on the side of too many. Our problems are out in the open where you can see them, yours are in an institution somewhere that you'll never hear about. I don't know what is better for crazy people, but I prefer the constitutional protections functioning this way for the rest of society.
Are there any Western countries that don't err on the side of dumping all mentally ill people who cannot function on their own onto the 'community' (i.e. the streets)? This was by no means some great tradition before the middle of the last century, and to the extent it was, people in those countries had normal-sized families and were in a better position to look after them (your cousin could employ your exceptional son in a job sorting the wheat at the intake to his water mill, or something of that sort).

Enoch Powell started this stupid trend in Britain on the grounds that it would somehow be more 'free' for the deranged to be wandering around in the 'community' shitting and pissing on themselves (and cheaper (yeah, mainly cheaper)). From memory, even he realized this was a goddamned terrible idea within a decade or so, but of course individualist politicians are practically incapable of admitting their idiotic ideas about 'freedom' for crazy people to harm themselves, and decent people to be harmed by them, need revision.
 

ZMOT

kiwifarms.net
Ronald Reagan was essentially correct when he warned what soft on drug policies would lead to and that's the last thing boomer politicians want to do.
hard stance or whatever just pushes the problem into another corner without fixing it. and in the hands of those exceptional individuals any policy would end up a shitshow either way.

I don't know what is better for crazy people, but I prefer the constitutional protections functioning this way for the rest of society.
if they are crazy why would it be a good idea to let them run free? surely there's a middle ground.

or you could go the other way and say paying for a full needle so they can get a golden shot is cheaper in the long run while reducing a lot of crime.
 

Kiwi FBI Liason

queen of kiwifarms – varg
kiwifarms.net
It reminds me of an Orson Scott Card novel (one of the Ender novels) where an Indian character starts putting rocks in the road to resist the Chinese occupying her homeland. They're easy to move and trivial, but become a huge symbol of resistance and revolution because the Chinese put so much effort into stopping it and holding down the Indians doing it that it galvanized the world into seeing that the residents found the government's treatment of them unacceptable.
Reminds me of an old /k/ meme that was literally this, except instead of rocks you spraypaint dicks on things. #dicksistance
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino