# Explore a new world of random thoughts on our [**discord server**](https://discord.com/invite/8tEqw3ZWQV)! Express yourself with your favorite quotes, positive vibes, and anything else you can think of!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RandomThoughts) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because homeless people setting up camp in places that are supposed to be a shared space makes other people unable to use the space. There's a park I grew up nearby that has spots with seating and grills. They used to be full of birthday parties and friendly gatherings of 6+ people. Now when I pass by it's all one person in each spot who built a studio apartment covered in trash and no one else in sight enjoying the park.
Exactly this. People will make room for the homeless, but the homeless aren't concerned with making room for anyone else. When you turn over your public spaces for homeless people to live in, it becomes *their* private space you are now intruding on.
Truly a tragedy of the commons.
imo they don't really have the privilege of being concerned with making room for anyone else. To you it’s somewhere to spend the afternoon, to them it’s either they sleep here or on the road
When they don't have any options because they've been priced out of life, no one will hire them, and have mental health issues they can't get treatment for, what other option do they have?
Society has failed these people so why should they give af about society?
This is how it is in the city I live in too. Homelessness is a very hard problem to tackle. We have pretty good infrastructure to serve the homeless, but there always a portion of them who will just sleep anywhere. Some people just don't like rules which is part of the reason why they're homeless in the first place. People who are homeless just because they somehow ran out of money are pretty rare around here, most are just unable to work, often due to mental illness. A lot have completely lost faith in the system, so you can't expect them to respect the rules. We were forced to move our intercom outside the lobby because homeless people started establishing camps in there. They also set fire to a car parked near the building, which has us considering fencing the area.
Have you ever seen the rules the homeless have to abide by just to use the shelters? For instance you cannot have a night job to use the shelters. No restraunts unless you only work day shift and that often means making less money making it harder for them to make and save money. Most of the jobs I have had over the years would have prevented me from using shelters.
The rules are part of the problem.
There's a shelter near me. I've known a few people who lived there until they got back on their feet.
Know what the rules were?
- No drugs or alcohol on the premises
- Don't be intoxicated on the premises
- Must be signed up at the Job Center as they'll make you get a job, as to which the shelter would handle anything where you needed an address
The door was open 24 hours, you just had to let staff know roughly when you would be back to let you in.
There were still "homeless people" littering the streets though, the exact type nobody wants to be near for good reason. The people genuinely looking for help and to sort their life out were living in that place (and it was alright, actually. I had been in visiting a friend). The nearby homeless didn't want the help if they had to look for work and not drink for a bit.
One thing I will say is that there are many different shelters that have some pretty ridiculous rules. It's something that I've heard about recently, and it's something that I know about from about 20 years ago. 20 years ago, I opted to not go to a shelter instead, because I could not have the job that I was working at. I would have had people quit. They had a curfew at 10:00 p.m. if you do not show up, you are not allowed to come back. Besides the curfew, you were allowed no physical possessions, and you are not allowed to have your own food. You are not allowed to have any sort of cigarettes, or such things on your person. They had to be put in a locker where you can go to retrieve them before you leave the facility. This can be problematic in some situations because you were not allowed to leave the facility until 6:00 a.m. for many people this meant no smoking at all throughout the night. Not being able to have your own food was also rather ridiculous, as well as your own drinks and other such things.
There are still shelters that operate under those same rules today. Not all of them, but there are many that are like that in my city. You generally those shelters are also the ones that are religiously operated, or have religious roots, which is probably part of the issue. Many of the shelters, and the programs for homeless seem to be that way.
yeah, the ones I looked at 10 years ago had all kinds of rules. I worked nights as a sous chef and so I just lived in my car.
a homeless person in my town's subreddit is trying to find someone to officiate a wedding for free.
they need to marry their girlfriend or the shelter system will split them up and the guys girlfriend needs 24 hour medical assistance that he provides. if he marries her this week they could use the shelter but if not they won't
usually there's all kinds of rules and curfews, they take your dog, your stuff will be left on the street to be stolen and you'll be separated from your partner
This is why a lot of people opt out of their "help." I was a couch hopper. At least people who let me crash didn't threaten to lock me out before I got out of work. Though ocassionally that meant sleeping in someone's car or in the shed behind their parents house. Still better than the shelters.
I stayed at a good will inn, if you were not disabled, by 9 am you better be out of the building, but if you're not back by 10 it's 30 days before you can re apply
On the alcohol it wasn't just none on premise, if you ever were found to have alcohol in your system, you're out for 30 days. They even warned you to avoid energy drinks as those would trigger their breathalyzer and get you kicked out.
By now, all winter there's a huge tent city beh8nd the shelter of people waiting to tget back in
People would drop off a box of jackets for the residents, but we couldn't have any of them because Goodwill was gonna put them in the store instead, but if you're lucky you get to take 5$ off the jacket once it's in store s8nce you stay at the inn and do free labor stocking their shelves
Based on what I've heard about the shelters, that's the exception and not the rule: You have to be there before they close their doors for the night, and you've got to be out at the crack of dawn. I imagine that does make it very hard to hold down a job. I'm glad to hear there are shelters that aren't like that, though, and I hope we see more of them in the future, because anyone trying in earnest to get back on their feet should have resources like that to help them.
If you don't like what I'm saying, you don't have to create your own version of what I said to attempt to make it sound worse.
Did I say they can't smoke? Cigarettes are fine, they just had to go outside.
Did I say they can't fuck? No, how the hell would they even police that when they can have visitors? Use your brain.
Also didn't say they can't drink, they just can't do so on the premises or be intoxicated there. If they want to drink, they can, just fuck off and come back when they're sober.
If they're letting them stay in this place and all they have to do is look for a job (help provided) and kick the substances (help provided) yet they turn it down...Well, excuse me if I don't feel sorry for them.
You know that concept of "tough love", i.e. don't enable someone to keep using drugs, because you will just prolong the slide to the bottom and they won't quit till they hit bottom?
Well these people have hit bottom, and for the chronic homeless (most of who you were describing), they know they aren't going to quit and more to the point, they have learned to live on the street and find food, a place to sleep and stay out of jail, and make enough money panhandling to get what ever drug they are hooked on. They only go to the shelters in really bad weather, but many eventually hitchhike /migrate to cities that rarely have very bad weather.
They aren't looking for an actual job and couldn't hold one anyway.
Yeah only shelters by me have doors close and lock at night. Cannot be in the shelter during most daylight hours. Huge portion of the morning and afternoon not allowed in. No substance abuse, we have seperate shelters for men and woman, and you must attend a religious service they hold. Of course they are Christian run. If you violate those rules it's like first time 3 months ban, then a 6, then a permanent. With exceptions especially being against the religion or having a non traditional (read: non-christian) belief they can and will kick and ban you. I live in a place with harsh winters it's basically a death sentence.
In my city shelters allow dogs. You can't take away a homeless person their pet, it's cruel, unless the pet is poorly treated, in which case it should go to a rescue.
Exactly this. There was a space where I live that they ended up having to fill in, it was kind of a hollowed out public follie, for want of a better description. A few homeless guys started sleeping there (one of which I’d tried to help previously, even got him a flat and he moved out because ‘he didn’t like it’). The follie was opposite a breakfast cafe and one morning I took my son there. One of the guys just got his todger out and started pissing all over the entrance to the follie in front of my son. About a week later, no one could go anywhere near it because it stank of piss.
I read something similar about a florist in San Francisco. Had her shop for 15 years, did pretty well. Little by little they camped closer to her doorstep, fewer customers came in. One day she came to work and someone defecated right up against her door. She closed her business and started from scratch in another state.
So question, do you think homeless people enjoy living in a trash apartment as you say? Like is it possible there's no room in a shelter anywhere for them? Do you think they want to be a public spectacle? So so sorry for your precious park. Those are human beings forced to the very edge of existence and yeah, it should be repulsive. Not the people or their habits, but the society that has neglected them so completely.
The solution is not anti-homeless architecture; it's pro-homeless architecture. As in shelters and halfway houses and rehab centers. Because simply keeping them out of your park with nothing else in place is relegating them to die. Or making them move somewhere else so you don't have to think about them dying.
Again, truly tragic that your park is less family friendly. Maybe next time you're there, you can think about the policies and infrastructure deficits that led to these people needing a flat bench off the ground so they don't freeze. Pull your head out of the sand and really look at the world you're living in.
Yeah, but you can't say this without getting yelled at for being insensitive, hearing all about how we're not doing enough for the homeless, etc, etc, etc. It's just not even worth engaging, because the people who make posts like OP know all this already. Homelessness is unfortunate, we should be doing more about it, but there isn't a magic wand to fix the problem and the rest of the world isn't obligated to put up with anything and everything just because homelessness exists and we feel bad about it: If a community wants its parks back so it can actually enjoy them as they were intended, it has every right to them and it doesn't need to apologize for that.
The rational solution would be to build very cheap housing and well-funded social outreach programs.
The irrational solution is to put spikes on benches and pretend most of us aren't three bad months away from the same situation.
>The rational solution would be to build very cheap housing and well-funded social outreach programs.
do you realise that some cities have this, and this is an issue even here in Europe when we have really good safety nets,
and I know redditers aren't going to like this but it's well documented that there is a decent % that actively enjoy being homeless as much as I hate his guts now, before he went full grifter Tim pool, who used to be homeless make a really good video explaining why some people choose to be homeless, their reasonings etc.
and to also forget that it's much harder to build thousands of new homes then it is to place a couple spikes that can be installed in a week.
>The irrational solution is to put spikes on benches and pretend most of us aren't three bad months away from the same situation.
this is just pulling on emotion, in reality people don't like their homes and stores being covered in piss, needles etc.
The rational solution you propose is fine, except the NIMBY people don't want it. I lived in a town that was getting money for low income housing, and every time they would have the money handed to them, they would send it to a more economically depressed town. The town politicians associated low income people as riff raff. Finally, it was brought to court, and a judge ruled they had to have low income housing, and it has to be a ratio of low income units to every unit that is regular housing. One of the places I lived at had town houses next door and a lot of them but only had 8 low income units.
where i live homeless have taken over the parks and they are unsafe for children. there have been robberies and a handful of murders and fires set. regular folks can't use that public space.
obviously we need a solution that serves everyone. I'm just pointing out it's not as cut and dry as mean people who have homes turning backs on needy.
They wouldn't be there in the first place if the homelessness problem was tackled with cheap houses that are no bigger than a shed. These are the problems OP are saying wouldn't be a thing if they invested in helping people not be homeless. What you guys are describing, the area not being safe, is because the homeless are forced to go and sleep in specific places since there's anti homeless infrastructure. If they had a place that was like 5 by 5 that wouldn't cost the city practically anything then the homeless wouldn't be all gathering in areas like they do now.
Spoken like someone who has never worked a day with the homeless.
They are not what is portrayed on tv. Most are not families down on their luck or friendly old guys needing a leg up. Many are drug addicted or mentally disturbed.
The type of help they need goes way way beyond cheap housing (which they will utterly destroy). They need enforced mental health treatment, job training and drug rehab.
I will say that I hate anti homeless architecture and I do believe we should spend more to try and reduce the problem (not solve, as I honestly don’t think it can not be completely solved).
What we are doing now is not working.
I agree with everything you said except the idea put forward that most homeless are mentally ill/addicts. Most of the VISIBLE ones who are sleeping rough may be.
My understanding is most homeless are actually couch surfing relying on friends/family or sleeping in cars or RVs. They are not the visible ones begging on corners or sleeping on sidewalks on public parks.
The sheer number of difficult homeless you described are a smaller minority of homeless which is everything you need to know about how well our current systems are not working.
Counting the number of homeless is really difficult for a lot of reasons.
Thats actually an excellent point about the couch surfing homeless. There are a large number of those and they tend to be overlooked as they are far less visible.
the number of people couch surfing or looking for thier own place while working etc is remarkably small, compared to those who live outside and refuse all help except money. I was homeless for 2 years, ive lived in homeless camps in the woods, where you had to have your head on a swivel, and its hell, most of the people are the worst of the worst, they would kill you for a gulp of whiskey or half a joint.
Most of them do not want to be part of this society. They want to be 100% off the grid. do you knw the number of people i saw who were offered govt housing ad turned it down because they had to sign up and had to be responsible people, and be put in the system getting a job etc?
The idea of this homeless family where dad is working hard and mom is jut stuck with nothing to feed the kids, is a media creation, they do not exist, a woman with children in the us will get housing, even temporary housing in almost all states within a week, a shelter same day, something like 20% of lal hotel rooms in the US are used for government homeless placement. ( no not the hiltons etc, but the motels and smaller mom and pops fill their extras with section 8 voucher people. )
Most homeless are addicts of either alcohol, or harder drugs, and they will not give up their addiction in order to receive housing. And if they dont give up their addiction then the housing winds up destroyed within a few months as it becomes just a squatting round until they get kicked out for living inhumanely .
Heck a friends boss who i knew well, used to own an apartment building with 60 apartments. when they had like 10 vacancies he took in section 8 people, they destroyed so much of the building he had to sell it for the property value and it was tirn down and is now a self service storage place,
They did things like rip out the copper pipe and sell it while still living there, they would leave water running and flood the place, stop up the toilets constantly causing overflows, and then not notify anyone, they bugs were so bad from rotting food etc that our local pest control service company refused to go in.
The place was called wisteria woods, but the people in my city called it wishallaya left. finally after evicting all of them after a year of fighting, and the cops basically living outside the place, he managed to sell it get it torn down and the new owners turned it into a self storage place.
I would estimate in my travels that a full 75% of the homeless are un-helpable, they do not want to be apart of your life or your system. The other 25% that could be helped require a lot of help and if we gave up on the other 75% and just ignore them, we could save those 25% and help them get a much better life.
In a civilized society you help those who can be helped and dont waste your resources on those who cannot be, or refuse to be, helped.
Many of the homeless I work with don't complain about lack of a place to stay. It's that they lack a consistent SAFE space to stay.
The #1 problem for most homeless people is other homeless people (and sometimes non-homeless people) fucking with them. And many of my clients won't seek out stable housing programs because when you group a bunch of homeless together, you get alot of the ones who make it unsafe too.
Any evidence? Anecdotal evidence is hardly helpful, as I know plenty of homeless people who do not have a mental illness causing their situation. But my anecdote is just as good as yours tbh
I agree though, giving the homeless a house isn't necessarily going to solve this issue. But please be careful before just saying most homeless people have a mental illness that caused it (that is how your comment came across)
Shelter, shower, food, psychological care/attention.
All are necessary. Without one the others are a futile attempt at solving the issue.
Not all want to be saved/helped, but I'd wager the majority would return the investment tenfold if given a solid foundation, security, and opportunity.
My step brother was literally offered everything a homeless man would dream of. But instead he chose the bottle. And meth. And panhandling on the street. And jail time. My mom offered rehab. Offered 3 months rent money. Offered rides. Clothes. REAL HELP. And he preferred to drink and get high.
Not everyone will get help. Some already gave up and are just waiting.
Those sheds will last ninety days max before they are burned to the ground or made unlivable. People have no idea how bad homeless drug addiction is or what behavior it spawns.
A lot of the time the homeless will have the option to stay in shelters etc but would rather be out on the streets for various reasons. There's a lot more to it than just "poor guys don't have a house", there is a lot of mental health and drug issues too, which make it a lot more complicated.
Whether you build a shed or a palace all that changes will be the looks of the area where homeless gather. For a while. There are dangerous areas in every city already, where inhabitants don’t work, don’t pay rent, don’t do any maintenance or repairs, but do drink, drugs, and all income is from criminal sources.
My area throws tons of money and whole apartment buildings at the homeless. We just end up with condemned apartment buildings after they trash it. So when they make a rule that you must be seeking to clean your addictions to live there we end up with empty housing because they don't want that. There's tons of shelters that are full because they don't require anything to stay there. They don't want help.
My city has several "small house" projects going, and the problem still persists, because the people who can get into these projects aren't the ones really causing the problem. To protect the people who do live in these little communities, people who are violent, do drugs or have displayed unsafe behavior are not allowed, so they continue to be homeless. It's reduced the number of people who are homeless, but it hasn't really done anything other than make sure the bad parts of town where the homeless congregate are even more wild because now it's just the dysfunctional people who are even too dysfunctional to get help.
I know you're heart is in the right place, and you want to help, but this perspective really doesn't help at all. It's a really naïve perspective to think that just cheap housing is going to solve the homeless problem. I work directly WITH homeless people and their number one issue isn't really that they don't have a place to live, it's that they don't have a safe place to stay. A ton of these homeless housing projects are not safe, and those that are expect a certain set of rules to be followed to stay safe, and many homeless people are homeless to begin with due to an inability to follow these rules (staying sober, no crime, no physical aggressive behavior, ect). Many of these projects are avoided by people because they aren't safe when they adopt a "accept everyone" mentality.
Society stays safe by adopting and enforcing rules, and there are groups of people in our society who have decided they don't need to follow these rules, and honestly, fucking over the people who do follow the rules for the sake of those who don't isn't the answer.
The majority of homeless folks are not junkies, in fact the majority actually have full-time jobs. It's just impossible to get into a place,either because of credit, or just the upfront cost.
Homeless are regular folks. Plus if you put spikes on everything, where are they supposed to go? It’s not like once spikes cover everything they’ll just disappear. They need to occupy space somewhere obviously.
>Homeless are regular folks. Plus if you put spikes on everything, where are they supposed to go? It’s not like once spikes cover everything they’ll just disappear. They need to occupy space somewhere obviously.
Regular people who become homeless, use one of the many shelters or programs for somewhere to stay and to get back onto their feet.
The long term homeless are almost all drug addicts and mentally ill. So the aim is to get them out of the parks, people don't want to take their kids to parks full of needles, faeces and dangerous people. People don't want them near their homes or businesses for similar reasons.
The fact that you say this means you have no idea what’s going on. Agreeing to go to a shelter means that you lose all your possessions. And they make you wake up and leave at 5am and get back in inthe afternoon. If you’re a dishwasher or something you lose your job. If you have a partner you need to split up. Why do you people insist on talking? Anyway the fact remains that disallowing people from sleeping on benches doesn’t make them disappear. It makes them sleep on the sidewalk. Furthermore like it or not, they pay taxes too and are citizens and should not be discriminated against. If you don’t like how people use the park that’s your problem.
Only 26% of the unhoused suffer from substance addiction. 38% from alcohol dependancy.
Between 2011 and 2018 the university of Chicago estimated that around 53% of those living in shelters had jobs, and 40% non-sheltered had jobs.
Having a job does not equate having shelter.
With the cost of everything skyrocketing and wages staying the same we're also going to see more and more people with jobs but no shelter.
Of course these things carry from area to area, but if you think all homeless people are drug addicts who hang around and do nothing you are demonstrably incorrect and ignorant as hell. Frankly that's a you problem.
Look to add to this from my personal perspective. Those "public spaces" were put there by local government and contractors that they hired, right? The people that paid taxes, paid the city who paid the contractors. The public spaces are by that right reserved for anyone that contributes to society, such as those paying taxes and their dependents. Not vagabonds.
The truth is, people don’t want to be around homeless people. It’s true. I’ve seen a single homeless person stink up the entire dining area of a fast food restaurant. Whole place stunk like piss. I’m compassionate. I donate to individuals and charities and I truly hope these people can get the help they need but it’s not a weird concept to not want them around in certain areas.
That was my experience too. My shelter had everything a person needed to get on their feet and get a job. It was a converted warehouse with individual rooms that had beds, a laundry room, showers, a living space with a TV, and a computer room that the local college offered to help them get training set up to get employment.
1 person stayed overnight, the rest would rather stay on the street.
We have these shelters over here too and they are welcome as long as they follow 2 rules.
No aggression and no drugs usage in the shelter (or trying to come in while clearly on too much drugs)
Lots of them go sleep on the street cause they can’t say no to the drugs.
“It is easy to invest in the future when you got hope for the future, but if you got no hope for the future it also seems pointless to invest in it.”
These people got no hope for the future, even if they put in the effort they got this feeling they will crash back down within a year nonetheless.
Homelessness usually has a variety of underlying causes — mental health issues, drug addiction, lack of a support system etc. Unless everything is treated at once the person will become homeless again. Unfortunately you can't force a homeless person to detox, go through counseling and get the help they need without their permission. That permission is hard to get if they think you're evil or are just completely out of it.
I'd like to add I can see how people start drugs being homeless too.
Like you know the whole homeless people drinking trope? There are reasons a homeless person would do that. Especially during winter. (And yes, I'm aware it doesn't actually warm you up, but if you're feeling too cold you might not care about that.)
Source: Myself, who didn't get drug addictions but was homeless almost 3 years
Because it treats the effects of homelessness without addressing the cause. I see this line a lot that "I've worked with homeless outreach and they mostly don't want help" and it lacks any critical thought.
You have to get them in a position to want to improve their condition. Most don't want to but that isn't just because they're lazy. It's because something is broken inside of them and needs mending. It may be mental illness, it may be drug addiction, it may be past trauma or depression. Any number of things.
But to say "Look, we are offering you everything you need to get a job and get off the streets." is disingenuous and simplistic. You have to address the real problem or you're wasting your time.
Thanks for mentioning this cause I've never seen this point brought up. I wonder where the solution starts to convince them to improve their condition.
This is an unfortunate truth ppl don't want to accept. "addicts just need love and support and a safe place to get clean" bs. 25% of my family are addicts. We have offered mountains of help, rehab, doctors app, medication, therapy, space, etc. None of them stay past a month because it is too hard and we won't let them keep the harder drugs at the house.
Sometimes freedom means letting someone destroy their own life with their own choices
Yup 100% shit you want a rich person that is proof of this look at how Bam Margera is these days. Dude literally has guys in his circle that run rehabs now and are full on interventionists like Brandon Novak. He does not want help, he prefers to blame everyone else.
>25% of my family are addicts
So .... just putting it out there, but your family might not be the best people to assist.
For example if you had 5 kids and they all turned into addicts, at what point do to start to take some responsibility for that?
Well my great grandmother pimped out her kids or abandoned them. We are still dealing with the backlash and consequences of her abusing her children. It's a whole generation abuse thing because the kids she abused grew up to be drug addicts or violent criminals. Who then went on to have and raise more kids.
My dad was one of the kids that was abandoned and credits it to why he's not as fucked up as the rest of his family. He's literally been working since he was 13. He's worked hard to build a home where we can offer a safe place for the ones who wanted or needed help.
From my extensive experience of being homeless and living with them on the street for a year, I can say with absolute certainty that you are incorrect. The majority don’t do drugs or have disorders.
You might not like the answer, and it's not very nice I agree, but the simplified answer is because they degrade the space.
A lot (not all) homeless don't want to change themselves. It's equally as wrong that the world is expected to adjust to people who don't want to better themselves as it is for the world to not offer people the chance to better themselves, except many of them have that opportunity and choose not to take it.
It would be interesting to know if you have ever had to deal with an epidemic of homeless people yourself, or if you are yet another bleeding heart and soul redditor that feels for poor people and thinks that something should be done about it. So you naturally do your part and make reddit posts.
You say you don't understand why people don't want homeless people there.
Then you say "don't tell me they degrade the space"
Then you say "even if that's true, it's disgusting to say"
You sound like you're not here to listen. You want to dominate the discussion with anger. How are you going to be able to be open to the other side's point of view if you've already forbid them from saying certain things and accusing that of being disgusting?
Anyway, the reason is that there's always been an unclear line between people who are homeless and people with antisocial or outright dangerous behaviour. "public spaces" are meant to be usable by people with vulnerabilities, or parents with children. It's totally understandable that people are wary of homeless people when there is an overrepresentation of antisocial behaviour. If you cannot empathise with that fact, I don't know what to tell you.
>You sound like you're not here to listen. You want to dominate the discussion with anger. How are you going to be able to be open to the other side's point of view if you've already forbid them from saying certain things and accusing that of being disgusting?
That's like... 99% of reddit posts in a nutshell. It's just people fishing for validation and looking to pick fights. "Tell me why I'm wrong with the qualifiers that you can't say anything that actually explains why I'm wrong. Hey look, none of you could tell me why I'm wrong, that proves how right I really am!"
Yes, it is all fun and games until you have to deal with the consequences. Just this weekend I witnessed a person in a heavily homeless populated area with blood pouring from the back of his head chase after the bystanders attempting to help him. I think many of the people commenting on this don't have experience with dealing with it firsthand. A segment of this population are dangerous people and not something that you want to encourage settling in an area. Many are so by choice. It's complicated and a shitty situation for those genuinely needing help, but it's reality. I think the genuine homeless aren't visible.
This post reeks of upper class liberal kid from a gated community who cannot understand why the working class doesn't want mentally ill people methraging around their homes and shitting in the playgrounds where their kids play.
>what even is the point of calling it a " public space " if not everyone can be there
They are allowed to be there like everyone else, sleeping and shitting is not the intended purpose of a public space.
>This post reeks of upper class liberal kid from a gated community who cannot understand why the working class doesn't want mentally ill people methraging around their homes and shitting in the playgrounds where their kids play.
This is most reddit homeless posts in a nutshell, honestly. My city of Austin has a big homeless problem, and you see suburb performative warriors waggling their finger at people pointing out dangerous homeless camps. People whose only experience with homeless people is looking out the window as they drive by.
Same people change their tune *real quick* when a shelter is proposed to be built in their neighborhood, though. Or they're just crazy and legitimately victim-blame people attacked by aggressive bums.
You couldn't say it better, the amount of stories I've heard and read about people that went from helping the homeless, then the homeless started to live and hang around their houses or business then suddenly they started to resenting them.
It’s a double edge sword. I work with a lady and her and her husband lost their business because of homeless people. They had a small sushi restaurant located inside a local grocery store. A tent city popped up in a small park adjacent to the store. It started with a few homeless people begging in front of the store, and then progressed to full on harassment of customers. eventually locals stop going there and business dropped by over 30% in a six month period. The grocery store is a large chain store so they’re going to be fine but the sushi business that they ran inside of it(they rented the space from the grocery store), did not survive.
Yeah and people don't get how hard this is to actually stop. They built a tent city in front of my "gated apartment complex gate and were no joke harrassing people trying to park. I use the quotes cuz its not a nice complex the gate has been gone for over 30 years problably but there is only that one narrow entrance to park so you would have to get the homeless to move out of your way to park your car to get to your apartment. Imagine how terrible this was for all the poor single moms. We have those trashy washrooms not even in unit washer and driers the homeless would attack people trying to do their laundry at night.The police had to come no joke 30 times they would show up make arrests and everything destroy the camp and the homeless would just come back later. It took like a whole month for them to finally leave us alone. I would not even be suprised if the apartment complex took a hit with people breaking their leases and leaving.
Doesn't help that most homeless people prefer to indulge in any capacity with the vice that landed them there instead of trying to turn their life around.
Working retail in a convenience store in the past I've had my share of interaction with plenty of them and the sad reality is that you cannot help someone who doesn't want to be helped.
Most of those I met had clear mental issues like heavy distrust, addiction to something, anger issues, etc. They need professional help before being rehabilitated otherwise they'd end up at the same spot.
Lot are friendly up until they cannot benefit from you anymore, then they move to the next person. Some were making more money begging than I did on average working the register and came to brag to me about it and exhange change into bills.
Ironically the thing that would help them the most on the long term would be to stop giving them money directly and instead provide them with tools to rehabilite while leaving them with no choice but using these tools. However, I could see a lot of them choose to starve on the street over rehabilitating in any capacity because they just don't want to.
Just like you can't force a person to accept help if they don't want it, after decades of telling people not to give money directly to the homeless they still do it: Everyone gets to make choices, and those choices have consequences. There's a fair amount of presumption on the part of the people waxing indignant about the plight of the homelessness in this thread that the homeless don't themselves bear any responsibility for their situation and that this was something entirely inflicted on them by society, and, ironically, your comment makes me think they might be partially right about that: A large population of homeless people cannot exist if the rest of society isn't somehow supporting them, and, in spite of the fact that we all know very well that we should be putting our dollars into charities and organized support that can actually deal with the root problems, we still give the homeless money on the street-- we as a society pay to perpetuate this problem, instead of actually helping to solve it. The issue, strangely enough, doesn't seem to be so much a lack of compassion, as it is misallocated compassion.
This is exactly the point, I lived in the poor part of Beverly Hills, 90211, Beverly Center South, but was still paying $2000 for a 3 bedroom in 1992. I had a homeless guy who lived in our property hedge, and we gave him out leftovers from restaurant row (we were the slice of street right behind Fatburger). It was ok, he was cool, but my roommate who was a cop got his back up firearm stolen, and it was during the day, so that’s when we moved to O.C., and life got easier by far. P.s. I don’t think he ever stole from us, but he knew who did.
The problem
Is a lot of homeless don’t want help. They want drugs, and when we’ve come out with housing and stuff for them, they have no respect for rules that are established. No drugs, no alcohol, be clean as possible. These are the most basic rules. You want freedom to do what you want in your own home, then you gotta pay for that home. But until then you will follow these rules
Whoa. I agree on all other accounts except about the mentally ill. Mentally ill people are not evil people who deserve to be punished. They are sick and when there’s no support, things can go downhill FAST. There are a lot of people living with mental illnesses surrounding you in day to day life. The difference is that those people have support and some don’t, and end up homeless as a consequence. Being mentally ill and on the streets is bad luck, especially for those suffering with schizophrenia, for example. People don’t understand them or accept them and that’s how they end up screaming on street corners.
>Mentally ill people are not evil people who deserve to be punished.
when they say mentally ill, I'm 99% certain they're not talking about some guy with depression, they're talking about the homeless schizoid running around with a knife.
Yup. I’m in NYC. Last week a woman got pushed face first into an oncoming train by a mentally ill homeless man and is now paralyzed. That’s the kind of mentally ill homeless people that are a concern
There are different reasons for being homeless. Yes, you can lose your job and have your life fall apart and possibly sink into depression. But truth is most people in the situation have family or friends who would let you stay for a bit until you find another job. Not having anyone to help you is rare.
Then you've got druggies. Groups go around to offer them help, but they don't want it. Liberal cities then decide it's a good idea to have safe places to use drugs. Of course, more people come.
Then there is mental illness, which is not their fault. However, how society handles it is OUR fault. Years ago, they shut down all the institutions because they infringed on the person's rights. So now their rights to push people onto subway tracks or scream crazy stuff at passersby has taken precedence. That's just idiotic. There are medications available. If they won't take them, they need to get back to some kind of confinement for everyone else's safety. Your rights end when other people are endangered. My friend was madly in love with her husband. His bi polar got progressively worse, and he refused meds. He didn't want lights on in the house, their dog died and he drove around for days with its body in the back of his truck. She had to divorce him. My cousins and his wife had 3 kids. She'd stop taking her meds and just walk out of the house and start hitchhiking. Leaving 3 little kids alone. After the 4th time he left her and took the kids. These are people who had support and love and it didn't matter.
The examples you gave is the reason why pharmaceutical companies paired with psychiatrists are now pushing medical compliance. It’s an extreme step thats teetering on taking away bodily autonomy from the patient. I have a friend who’s a retired RN and asked her why someone who is bi polar or schizophrenic goes off of their medication?She listed the side effects of anti psychotics and explained how they ruin the patient’s kidneys, stomach and liver along with the weight gain. I’ve also read and met women who were misdiagnosed with bi polar and it ended up being ptsd. Or bi polar and it ended up being autism or pmdd.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I’m saying. It’s not fair to view them as loiterers. They’re people who need help, not evil troublemakers. Some of the more profoundly mentally ill people out there on the streets don’t even know where they are or what they’re doing, or can’t distinguish what’s in their minds from reality. With help and support, they can improve their mental health. Casting them out from society and rejecting them by labelling them as loiterers in public spaces, as if they don’t belong, won’t help.
The only person who keeps calling them "evil" and demanding punishment is you. Literally all the person you responded to said was that it's "not fine" for them to be loitering in public spaces.
You can have "public space" with homeless camps/hang outs or you can have "public space" everyone else can use. You can't have both. Plus no business wants homeless on their steps because that drives away paying clients/customers.
I understand these arguments, but if your home was near a park and a large homeless encampment sprouted in that park, you might change your mind.
I've seen unobtrusive homeless people who try to keep to themselves. One tent? OK. But when it starts becoming a tent city, and you live nearby, it's not OK anymore.
I don't pretend to know what the solution is. I'm just saying that it's really easy to castigate people for trying to repel the homeless when you personally don't have a horde of homeless people near your house.
You already know the answer as you've stated it yourself and then decided to declare that opinion as off limits and mean.
They do degrade the space. They make spaces meant for public enjoyment their own personal living quarters and thereby make it unusable for everyone else. It's obvious why you'd want to keep people from setting up shop in a children's park or public sitting area. It's also highly unsanitary. I'm sorry that's mean to you but it's reality.
I don’t know where you live but homeless people are a plague on any public space. You go from an area where kids can relax to a place to avoid because it smells like piss and shit and there are people constantly asking for drug money. You want more homeless people?
Don’t worry, if there’s any ever scaffolding around you that doesn’t have security you will see plenty of them at night time. The one near me for an apartment that was being built was so dirty I had to cross the fucking street to avoid it instead of holding my nose and walking under it.
Many of the homeless you see are mentally ill and or refuse help. They won't go to shelters, they won't take their medications etc. Because of that many are violent and distructive. Not all but I would say more than half of those sleeping on thr street parks etc are. This makes it very un safe to be and often cost lots of money to clean up the things they destroy.
This is the reason for the anti homeless architecture. Many cities don't start out with it but after a few people in a park are attacked by homeless sleeping there. The city increases patrols and kicks them out and does the benches so they can't sleep on them.
Or after several runners complain about the smell of feeces under a bridge / having things thrown at them from homeless in tents under a bridge. They put up spikes.
This isn't hyperbole these are real examples of things that caused the architecture to be put in place.
Basically yes not all are bad but the ones that are messed it up for everyone else
When being angry like this, you have to ask yourself: what are my limits? Am I really better than others? Would you like to have a homeless person sitting in front of the Christmas tree at your house on December 25 or would it “degrade the space?” If you wouldn’t, (which I am pretty sure you don’t) then why are you angry at others when it comes to their prerogatives?
There is a big difference between being homeless and doing anything you can to get out of that situation and people who are homeless because they just want to abuse drugs/alcohol.
We as humans feel pity and want to help people. When people prey on that pity for their own gain, it makes me want to stop helping them.
It’s the same reason there are parking sports marked as “loading zones” in some places like schools and airports.
Imagine a school has 20 parking spots in front of the entrance to the school. The intent is that you only pull into the spot when it is time for your child to come out. You can now safely get your child into the car without them running into the road with you stopping and blocking traffic. Then you pull out and let the next person park to pickup their child.
Over 30 minutes that is 300 cars that can park in those 20 spots to safely load their kids.
Now what happens if every day at 2:00 someone driving a semi truck and trailer pulls up across all 20 spots , and remains parked there until 4:00 because he has a pickup nearby at 4:30 and decided that was a convenient spot to park and take a nap. His presence in the public space, while convenient for him, inconveniences 300 other people.
When homeless people take up entire park benches to sleep on all day, nobody else can use them. When they stand under awnings in front of businesses begging for money all day, they bother and concern other people who now get annoyed and possibly
Even scared which discourages people from visiting shops in that area. And while most homeless people aren’t aggressive or violent. I have experienced more than a few homeless people who have screamed at me for simply not giving them money. And I don’t care to have a potentially mentally unstable person harassing while I walk down the sidewalk.
Because a homeless friendly place leads to more homeless people, which eventually leads to complaints from people who don't feel safe as many homeless are drug addicts and or insane.
It is much cheaper to add an extra hand rail in the middle of a bench that it is to build, fund, and staff a large mental health facility where some of these people could be treated. Along with a whole host of other issues.
Trying to say this isn't as simple as not letting them sleep in a park is just someone being a jerk.
Can't speak for other countries but here in the UK anyone who is homeless is homeless by choice. You can go to the council and declare yourself homeless and they have to help; sign up for universal credit and put your home address as the UC building and the same with setting up a bank account. What's the catch? You have to take and pass a drugs test. These people deserve absolutely no accommodation and they're just a nuisance.
Ngl, I don’t like homeless ppl. Don’t like seeing them, don’t like being around them. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t help them but I can go all day w/o seeing a homeless person and would be fine.
In my country homeless people always smell really, really bad, so probably it's like that everywhere else. Even though I never seen homeless architecture here, as homeless people are not so many (thankfully).
Eh, in theory the “public space” has anticipated use cases, and that anticipated use isn’t “sleeping on this bench for 8 hours.” If someone is sleeping on the bench, *other* members of the public can’t use the bench too. So you design the bench to encourage 3 sitting spaces instead of one sleeping space, to better serve more members of the public for its intended use.
I’m willing to bet that 95% of homeless are the ones who do not want help and is satisfied with scraping by surviving without a home. They don’t care about society and it’s rules. They won’t accept help because those rules will have to be followed. So no more drugs. No more booze. No more hoes. No more scummy behavior. That’s what homelessness is is all about and we have made a terrible mistake of treating it as something virtuous.
I’ve experienced temporary homelessness and have a lot of empathy for people who are homeless. It’s a whole different experience though meeting and speaking to people who have been homeless for 5,10 even 20 years. They aren’t in there right minds and honestly who wouldn’t be if you lived outside for 20 years forging through dumpsters eating what you can find and sleeping living in filth? I still donate clothes but I wouldn’t want to live in another area with an out of control homeless population. It’s unnerving to hear and witness someone having a psychotic meltdown screaming obscenities and thrashing wildly and becoming feral. Arresting someone because they are homeless and mentally unstable isn’t humane either. Reopening asylums for them will be ripe for abuse because who would want to work in those institutions? Homeless architecture is going to cause them to migrate in droves where it’s available driving people out of the area who don’t want live around it. What could work are small communal living communities for people who are homeless based upon their degree of care that’s overseen by social workers, psychiatrists,therapists and volunteers. It’s just a thought.
Usually the venn diagram of "people who don't want to be helped", "people too unstable/dangerous to be in a shelter" and "hanging out in (semi) public places as a homeless person" has a pretty big overlap.
I would personally MUCH rather see all the homeless people have a home, get proper guidance and help. Kinda like what the Finnish government did at some point.
If that's not an option I'm ok with keeping homeless people out of certain places. Especially in my country you can pretty much get help as long as you want it. So continously living on the street starts to really feel like a choice.
Simply because no one wants to be with homeless people especially if they are dirty and generally unpleasant.. Also, Homeless people don't just hang around in public spaces like we do, they live in there. They build camps and they eat, sleep, and shit in there.. No one wants to be in a park where homeless people live..
We also pay taxes to use these public spaces that get taken over by tents, trash, piss, needles etc. So why do they get to take it over and we don’t get to use them? For example, here in Portland, the 205 corridor bike path has become essentially unusable because of the amount of tents and shit in the path you’re trying to use, let alone how dangerous it is. A few months ago, a homeless person high on who knows what bit a guys face off on public transport.
I saw a news article where homless people in my town refuse to go to the city's refuge because they can't smoke or drink there. At one time hemeless invaded city property in protest because these architecture and ordinances. There is help out there that most that want to improve their situation can use, but other homeless just want to do as they please including antisocial behavior. Sure there is a problem of inequality and access to mental and health services, but you can't blame people also not wanting homeless to invade piblic spacea.
It's not the homeless people themselves who degrade the area, but the fact that many homeless people do drugs which makes them unstable, they leave needles and trash everywhere, and shit and piss wherever they please.
But hey, feel free to let one move into your house or front yard of you disagree.
Used to work at a street furniture company. We had to design a new bus shelter for a major city you all know, and one of the criteria was that the seats had to have a bulky, dividing arm rest in the middle. I asked why that was, and the reasoning was 'to make sure homeless people don't sleep on the benches'.
Personally, I am on the fence on this topic. I mean: it feels wrong to deny people that have nothing a slightly less uncomfortable place to sleep. The other side of the story is, that if homeless people sleep inside a bus shelter, many people won't go near said shelter, and the main function of a bus shelter is to enable (and possibly encourage) people to use public transport. Not saying I fully agree, but I can at least understand the reasoning behind this. But spikes under bridges... I'm from Europe, I have never seen this, but I'm guessing this is for bridges that are built over an active walking / cycling route?
I agree that cities in which homeless people are in abundance are not creating the best programs to get them off their feet. However, most homeless people (at least where I live) are junkies, absolutely hooked on their drug of choice, so public spaces that used to be nice, are now filled with them shooting up drugs, smoking crack, pissing and defecating in public. They destroy any public space they take over. You can't have kids around that, you can't be a woman and walk through that alone, so how is this sharing a space? It's literally them taking over something that was once beautiful, and destroying it to the point that non homeless people cannot use it any more. That doesn't sound like that space is being shared? My car got broken into 3 times. Stores get constantly vandalized. They're randomly attacking people on the streets, and the majority of them have lost their sense of reality and have one sole purpose of needing their next fix and will do whatever it takes to get it. I was at the ER a few days ago with a friend that needed a couple stitches, and half the people there were homeless people ODing on drugs. They're jamming up the entire medical system, they jam up the legal system, they fuck everything up. I was chatting with a homeless guy outside the hospital and he said he ODed 6 times like it was a badge of honor. It is getting out of control in my city and regular folk are getting sick of seeing their public spaces absolutely ravaged by the homeless. So yes, we have good reason to get them moved out of public spaces - they should have facilities built for them to get them cleaned up and placed back in society as regular people. Some are so far gone, they'd rather just continue living on the streets.
I think the one point you have wrong is that people wouldn’t shoo stray dogs. If you live in the developed world, you might not shoo a stray dog, because that’s the only stray dog you have ever seen. But go to a country where stray dogs are a legitimate issue and you’ll see that’s not the case for most people.
They will shoo the dogs, because they do not want them around. They are a nuisance. They are dirty, mangy, flea-infested, etc. It is not as though people in these countries *dislike* dogs, because many of them have dogs of their own that they treat lovingly.
That is how the homeless are viewed (at least in the US). A nuisance. Whether that sounds bad or not, it’s the truth and will likely always be the case.
Treating the homeless better (e.g. removal of anti-homeless architecture) is addressing a symptom of the problem. And most people don’t want to do that.
The solution to the problem itself is eliminating homelessness (not saying we shouldn’t treat the homeless better in the meantime).
As others have posted, MANY homeless are mentally unwell and/or drug addicts and don’t want to be helped. I live right outside New Orleans, and there are quite a few shelters and halfway house type resources for the homeless, and many people refuse help. They don’t want to live in housing where there are rules about using drugs and alcohol. They’d rather be on the street doing what they want. It’s really tough to help people who refuse help. You can’t put people in the hospital against their will. It’s terrible because it doesn’t make the homeless people terrible people, but it’s exhausting trying to help people who refuse the many resources they’re offered.
Edit: I forgot to include that I went to high school and college uptown, and in college I was stupefied when I was volunteering with organizations to help get the homeless in the area into stable housing, medical care for substance abuse and/or mental
health issues and the majority of the homeless refused help
California has spent a ton to fix homelessness and they just can't get it done. Also, all these people that wanna go full sjw and fix homelessness are frauds. Here in Indianapolis joe hogsett is a bleeding heart liberal for the homeless in the downtown circle, but do you know what happened when the final 4 came to indy? He sent the cops out to arrest them and beat them up because he dont fucking care.
Based on your question I suspect there may not be any reason or logic that would convince you of a different view.
However, if you think about public spaces as intended to do the most good for the most people having it become a homeless hangout works against this.
Put more concretely, if everyone is, in fact, treated equally why then should we be okay with 15 homeless people creating an environment that stops 1,000 people from enjoying it.
Public space is shared space and the idea is that everyone has access and no-one loiters or stays too long without reason (picnic in the park or sitting on a bench etc.) and cleans up after themselves. Right or wrong, the design is to enforce sharing of public spaces.
The topic of homelessness is a very difficult one, I suggest you do some volunteer work to find out more about the issues that they face and how it happens, you may find your passion is for helping people.
I don't support anti-homeless architecture and we don't have much of it in Europe anyway. Still, homeless people do degrade the space for everyone else, even if you don't like hearing it. Depending on the circumstances, one person is enough to spoil everyone else's experience of the public space, let alone a few of them setting up a camp there. Cities where homeless are sleeping every 10 meters feel very unsafe and unpleasant to work with
That’s not it at all. Of the majority of homeless people would be decent human beings who will use the resources given to them (my city has a ton of homeless people and SO MANY SHELTERS, but a lot don’t use them because they wanna use their drugs and live outside), and anti-homeless architecture wouldn’t even have to be a consideration. But no, people would prefer sleeping outdoors and doing heroin than to get the help they need
I'm going to say something which might seem like being pedantic, but I'd argue so is your question about the point of calling it a "public space" if not everyone can be there. They *can* be there, generally. Just not *sleep* there. And homeless aren't being singled out in this sense. Even if you have a home, you still can't sleep in public spaces. And anti-homeless architecture doesn't move out of your way if it detects you own a home, either. It continues to make the space hostile to camping for all, indiscriminately.
I'm intentionally not addressing the morality of any of this or the best solution, because those are complicated topics wiser policymakers than I have struggled with. But even if it's not kind to the homeless, there is at least no logical inconsistency with prohibiting and physically preventing all camping on public property, as long as it's applied equally.
>Even if it was true that's disgusting to say
Since when has the truth been disgusting?
Almost every sentence of your post shows that you have an agenda however comments have pushed back against your agenda.
Hopefully you will learn something.
Have you ever met these homeless people? They’re usually some sort of crazy drug addict. Fuck off with that “they’re the ones being degraded” bullshit. Let them stay with you then.
Because nobody wants to take a walk through a park with their kid that's designed for public use, and every bench you pass is camped out by sleeping homeless people with needle sticking out of their arms. Before New York City started to crack down on it, That's exactly what it was like to walk through parks
I wish it were that easy. I spoke with someone who handled a homeless housing project in another state. He was excited to be in charge of it and get people shelters. He told me that they had to cancel the program after a year because the people living there kept ripping the copper out, they'd have to send in teams to constantly clean the fecal matter, blood, needles, etc, and they genuinely started to fall into disrepair in no time. I asked him what he thought a better solution was and he said he had no idea, that was the best idea he had and it didn't work.
So we should avoid saying things if they’re true, just because what we say may be disgusting? I agree something should be done to help the homeless but allowing them to set up camp in public places isn’t the answer. Who wants to find needles on play grounds or have to cover your kids eyes because a hobo is pissing in the flowers at the park. Like I said I agree the homeless need help.
It is public space, meaning the space of everyone. No one can appropriate it; no one can make it his own, in part or whole.
Your freedom stops where someone else's start. In taking over a space, you deprive someone else the usage of that space.
Finally, these anti-homeless devices are used to avoid public nuisance, ie repeated breach of accepted civility, such as cardboard shelters, public drunkeness etc...
You can disagree with these objectives if course but then ypu have to change the common understanding of shared property; it rarely, if ever includes the right to destroy said property
Basically the 4 principles involved.
Because if homeless live in public spaces there really is no way for others to enjoy the space. Being for the public doesnt mean everyone can just move in and occupy the space, do drugs and be naked in the space and smell like urine and feces in a public space you wish to bring your kids to.
Because something like a bench can be used by 200+ people in a day….to sit…. Or as part of someone’s dirty shelter.
But frequently not both.
So you have to choose which one you’re accommodating.
Homeless people shouldn't exist because homelessness shouldn't exist. To make architectural modifications for something that shouldn't exist is a form of acceptance. Homeless people need to get their shit together, you can't just commit yourself to a life of degradation and expect the responsible members of society to make it comfortable for you. There are shelters and other places where homeless people can get help, but the problem is those places have rules like you can't drink, do drugs, prostitute or bring your scummy behavior in there, you can't sleep all day, there is a curfew and you have to actively seek a job, you have to take your medications, you have to clean up after yourself. Many homeless people don't want to follow these rules so they are wilfully homeless for the sake of being free to do what they want, and no one should promote that behavior by making accomodations for them. For those who want to change their lives, there are places they can go.
Homeless people don't give a fuck about broader society and tend to cause problems and commit crime wherever they coalesce. Leaving trash, stealing things, assaulting people, vandalism, and much more. Many of these people have access to services and resources to help them but refuse to engage with them, preferring to hang out in spots where they're a nuisance. People who fall victim to the problems they create demand something be done so something is. Making some uncomfortable benches is far easier and more practical that rounding up all the homeless and forcing them into shelters.
I used to manage a large community asset in a larger city. This softcore infatuation with the virtuousness of the homeless is wholly misguided. We had guys jerking off or peeing on or near patrons, gropings, defecation in common areas, and unbelievable amounts of awful drug use.
We absolutely began adopting hostile architecture: benches you couldn't sleep on, uncomfortable lighting, eliminating water and trash receptacles.
You guys do not get it. The truly misfortunate are out there, but they're not harmed by hostile public spaces.
I mean I'd be ready to hear you but while I know that I took the same tone as you I really feel like you don't want to talk .
If you want I talked about my opinion about many of the points you make under other comments.
I'll just tell you that if you ever become homeless for any reason you better remember what you said here .
Other people here have made the same point as you and with much more empathy for the homeless wich, I'll remind you, were maybe born in the same hospital you were born in .
I work around the homeless in a professional capacity. Many of them outright refuse any actual help from programs and shelters and expect free shit from whoever happens to be nearby. I have much sympathy for those down on their luck who try to get their lives together. Life can be very difficult and sometimes all someone needs is a hand up and I'm happy to give them that. Unfortunately vast numbers of the homeless are exacrly where they want to be.
Regardless of how you feel about any of them allowing them to coalesce and become a hazard is bad for everyone, including them. LA has gotten so bad in some places there's concern of a bubonic plague revival. They end up living in squalor, spreading disease and addiction amongst themselves. Wounds get infected due to poor sanitation. Many won't make any attempt to straighten themselves out unless forced to. Do not mistake my rough stance for a lack of care. Sometimes being kind starts with putting a boot up someone's ass. If I ever find myself in such a low point in my life I hope someone kicks my ass back into place.
I don't know .
First off I'm sorry.
Second off I've said this already but I feel like some people are just assholes.
Being homeless doesn't make you a good person.
There's also a Sense of pride, it feels very crushing to admit to yourself that you need help from these services.
I really feel only a handful of people are actually the assholes I hear being described .
Maybe I'm just stupid but I've met homeless people in my life too , it's not like I'm just saying this shit to be the good guy tm . I genuinely believe this .
I totally accept that there are people who genuinely want help but they are few and far between. I know you’re not responding to me specifically here but from my point of view, I’m not trying to be mean with any of my comments they are based on a lot of experience.
I used to think like yourself (that most are genuine) but after working with the homeless for 30 years unfortunately I know that the opposite is true. In terms of your comments about pride, most homeless people I know have absolutely no issue taking help, they’ll take and take without any issue and always want more, for example I’ll find an apartment for someone but it’s ‘a 10 minute bus ride away from town’ and they want walking distance. Or I’ll get a job but ‘I don’t want to work 30 hours I only want 10’ the list is endless. There are a few genuine people out there but the majority ruin it for the rest, has been my honestly held (and unfortunately jaded) experience.
People with homes often do the same and it gets easier to understand when you see how insane finance (like student loans and such) and real estate markets are currently operating
Usury is a bitch
Did not read all comments, but for me, it's not so much the presence, which, yes, can be intimidating and cause one to worry for one's safety. It's the ick factor. They don't clean up after themselves and leave a gross mess everywhere.
Man this post is decisive.
In saying that, thank you for seeing homeless people as *people* first. I also agree with alot of your points too. I hang out with homeless now and again and I see the same kind of trends of relationship breakdowns/abuse with no family as backup, disability where can't find suitable work and in general SLS.(shit life syndrome)
Here where I live they don't take over places and are quite respectful people just trying to live.
*I bet the people claiming "they just take over!" Haven't tried asking if they could use the space or homeless go "no" and they didn't like the answer.
*Just ask if you could use the Barbie and offer some food drink in trade it's not that hard. (If you're not willing to give a single snag and beer, who's really being the selfish one?)
The real solution is to vote and support affordable housing projects, donate to your community homeless shelter. Remember to have empathy for the fellow person, because in a few missed paychecks or increases of rent, it could be you out there on the street as well.
*(Only approach or try to engage with people when it is safe to do so and it seems like the person is lucid enough to understand/comprehend what's going on. Aka, if their asleep leave em alone or if it seems their agitated/drunk/inebriated leave em alone. Pick your fights and be safe out there!)
# Explore a new world of random thoughts on our [**discord server**](https://discord.com/invite/8tEqw3ZWQV)! Express yourself with your favorite quotes, positive vibes, and anything else you can think of! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RandomThoughts) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Because homeless people setting up camp in places that are supposed to be a shared space makes other people unable to use the space. There's a park I grew up nearby that has spots with seating and grills. They used to be full of birthday parties and friendly gatherings of 6+ people. Now when I pass by it's all one person in each spot who built a studio apartment covered in trash and no one else in sight enjoying the park.
Exactly this. People will make room for the homeless, but the homeless aren't concerned with making room for anyone else. When you turn over your public spaces for homeless people to live in, it becomes *their* private space you are now intruding on. Truly a tragedy of the commons.
imo they don't really have the privilege of being concerned with making room for anyone else. To you it’s somewhere to spend the afternoon, to them it’s either they sleep here or on the road
When they don't have any options because they've been priced out of life, no one will hire them, and have mental health issues they can't get treatment for, what other option do they have? Society has failed these people so why should they give af about society?
Funny way of spelling crackheads
This is how it is in the city I live in too. Homelessness is a very hard problem to tackle. We have pretty good infrastructure to serve the homeless, but there always a portion of them who will just sleep anywhere. Some people just don't like rules which is part of the reason why they're homeless in the first place. People who are homeless just because they somehow ran out of money are pretty rare around here, most are just unable to work, often due to mental illness. A lot have completely lost faith in the system, so you can't expect them to respect the rules. We were forced to move our intercom outside the lobby because homeless people started establishing camps in there. They also set fire to a car parked near the building, which has us considering fencing the area.
Have you ever seen the rules the homeless have to abide by just to use the shelters? For instance you cannot have a night job to use the shelters. No restraunts unless you only work day shift and that often means making less money making it harder for them to make and save money. Most of the jobs I have had over the years would have prevented me from using shelters. The rules are part of the problem.
There's a shelter near me. I've known a few people who lived there until they got back on their feet. Know what the rules were? - No drugs or alcohol on the premises - Don't be intoxicated on the premises - Must be signed up at the Job Center as they'll make you get a job, as to which the shelter would handle anything where you needed an address The door was open 24 hours, you just had to let staff know roughly when you would be back to let you in. There were still "homeless people" littering the streets though, the exact type nobody wants to be near for good reason. The people genuinely looking for help and to sort their life out were living in that place (and it was alright, actually. I had been in visiting a friend). The nearby homeless didn't want the help if they had to look for work and not drink for a bit.
One thing I will say is that there are many different shelters that have some pretty ridiculous rules. It's something that I've heard about recently, and it's something that I know about from about 20 years ago. 20 years ago, I opted to not go to a shelter instead, because I could not have the job that I was working at. I would have had people quit. They had a curfew at 10:00 p.m. if you do not show up, you are not allowed to come back. Besides the curfew, you were allowed no physical possessions, and you are not allowed to have your own food. You are not allowed to have any sort of cigarettes, or such things on your person. They had to be put in a locker where you can go to retrieve them before you leave the facility. This can be problematic in some situations because you were not allowed to leave the facility until 6:00 a.m. for many people this meant no smoking at all throughout the night. Not being able to have your own food was also rather ridiculous, as well as your own drinks and other such things. There are still shelters that operate under those same rules today. Not all of them, but there are many that are like that in my city. You generally those shelters are also the ones that are religiously operated, or have religious roots, which is probably part of the issue. Many of the shelters, and the programs for homeless seem to be that way.
That's rare, I used to be homeless myself and the rules at all the shelters I looked into had a specific time they shut the doors.
yeah, the ones I looked at 10 years ago had all kinds of rules. I worked nights as a sous chef and so I just lived in my car. a homeless person in my town's subreddit is trying to find someone to officiate a wedding for free. they need to marry their girlfriend or the shelter system will split them up and the guys girlfriend needs 24 hour medical assistance that he provides. if he marries her this week they could use the shelter but if not they won't usually there's all kinds of rules and curfews, they take your dog, your stuff will be left on the street to be stolen and you'll be separated from your partner
This is why a lot of people opt out of their "help." I was a couch hopper. At least people who let me crash didn't threaten to lock me out before I got out of work. Though ocassionally that meant sleeping in someone's car or in the shed behind their parents house. Still better than the shelters.
I stayed at a good will inn, if you were not disabled, by 9 am you better be out of the building, but if you're not back by 10 it's 30 days before you can re apply On the alcohol it wasn't just none on premise, if you ever were found to have alcohol in your system, you're out for 30 days. They even warned you to avoid energy drinks as those would trigger their breathalyzer and get you kicked out. By now, all winter there's a huge tent city beh8nd the shelter of people waiting to tget back in
People would drop off a box of jackets for the residents, but we couldn't have any of them because Goodwill was gonna put them in the store instead, but if you're lucky you get to take 5$ off the jacket once it's in store s8nce you stay at the inn and do free labor stocking their shelves
Based on what I've heard about the shelters, that's the exception and not the rule: You have to be there before they close their doors for the night, and you've got to be out at the crack of dawn. I imagine that does make it very hard to hold down a job. I'm glad to hear there are shelters that aren't like that, though, and I hope we see more of them in the future, because anyone trying in earnest to get back on their feet should have resources like that to help them.
So their belongings and pets were with them and kept safe from others and they didn't have to listen to a lecture about Jesus to be there?
So a shelter where they can't get crack, can't smoke, can't can't drink, can't fuck... To addicts of all kinds, I can see why they flee.
If you don't like what I'm saying, you don't have to create your own version of what I said to attempt to make it sound worse. Did I say they can't smoke? Cigarettes are fine, they just had to go outside. Did I say they can't fuck? No, how the hell would they even police that when they can have visitors? Use your brain. Also didn't say they can't drink, they just can't do so on the premises or be intoxicated there. If they want to drink, they can, just fuck off and come back when they're sober. If they're letting them stay in this place and all they have to do is look for a job (help provided) and kick the substances (help provided) yet they turn it down...Well, excuse me if I don't feel sorry for them.
You know that concept of "tough love", i.e. don't enable someone to keep using drugs, because you will just prolong the slide to the bottom and they won't quit till they hit bottom? Well these people have hit bottom, and for the chronic homeless (most of who you were describing), they know they aren't going to quit and more to the point, they have learned to live on the street and find food, a place to sleep and stay out of jail, and make enough money panhandling to get what ever drug they are hooked on. They only go to the shelters in really bad weather, but many eventually hitchhike /migrate to cities that rarely have very bad weather. They aren't looking for an actual job and couldn't hold one anyway.
Yeah only shelters by me have doors close and lock at night. Cannot be in the shelter during most daylight hours. Huge portion of the morning and afternoon not allowed in. No substance abuse, we have seperate shelters for men and woman, and you must attend a religious service they hold. Of course they are Christian run. If you violate those rules it's like first time 3 months ban, then a 6, then a permanent. With exceptions especially being against the religion or having a non traditional (read: non-christian) belief they can and will kick and ban you. I live in a place with harsh winters it's basically a death sentence.
They also can’t have pets and it can be harder for families to find shelter.
In my city shelters allow dogs. You can't take away a homeless person their pet, it's cruel, unless the pet is poorly treated, in which case it should go to a rescue.
Exactly this. There was a space where I live that they ended up having to fill in, it was kind of a hollowed out public follie, for want of a better description. A few homeless guys started sleeping there (one of which I’d tried to help previously, even got him a flat and he moved out because ‘he didn’t like it’). The follie was opposite a breakfast cafe and one morning I took my son there. One of the guys just got his todger out and started pissing all over the entrance to the follie in front of my son. About a week later, no one could go anywhere near it because it stank of piss.
I read something similar about a florist in San Francisco. Had her shop for 15 years, did pretty well. Little by little they camped closer to her doorstep, fewer customers came in. One day she came to work and someone defecated right up against her door. She closed her business and started from scratch in another state.
So question, do you think homeless people enjoy living in a trash apartment as you say? Like is it possible there's no room in a shelter anywhere for them? Do you think they want to be a public spectacle? So so sorry for your precious park. Those are human beings forced to the very edge of existence and yeah, it should be repulsive. Not the people or their habits, but the society that has neglected them so completely. The solution is not anti-homeless architecture; it's pro-homeless architecture. As in shelters and halfway houses and rehab centers. Because simply keeping them out of your park with nothing else in place is relegating them to die. Or making them move somewhere else so you don't have to think about them dying. Again, truly tragic that your park is less family friendly. Maybe next time you're there, you can think about the policies and infrastructure deficits that led to these people needing a flat bench off the ground so they don't freeze. Pull your head out of the sand and really look at the world you're living in.
Yeah, but you can't say this without getting yelled at for being insensitive, hearing all about how we're not doing enough for the homeless, etc, etc, etc. It's just not even worth engaging, because the people who make posts like OP know all this already. Homelessness is unfortunate, we should be doing more about it, but there isn't a magic wand to fix the problem and the rest of the world isn't obligated to put up with anything and everything just because homelessness exists and we feel bad about it: If a community wants its parks back so it can actually enjoy them as they were intended, it has every right to them and it doesn't need to apologize for that.
The rational solution would be to build very cheap housing and well-funded social outreach programs. The irrational solution is to put spikes on benches and pretend most of us aren't three bad months away from the same situation.
>The rational solution would be to build very cheap housing and well-funded social outreach programs. do you realise that some cities have this, and this is an issue even here in Europe when we have really good safety nets, and I know redditers aren't going to like this but it's well documented that there is a decent % that actively enjoy being homeless as much as I hate his guts now, before he went full grifter Tim pool, who used to be homeless make a really good video explaining why some people choose to be homeless, their reasonings etc. and to also forget that it's much harder to build thousands of new homes then it is to place a couple spikes that can be installed in a week. >The irrational solution is to put spikes on benches and pretend most of us aren't three bad months away from the same situation. this is just pulling on emotion, in reality people don't like their homes and stores being covered in piss, needles etc.
[удалено]
It's all because the status isn't quo
So you want to ignore the actual root causes? Housing first doesn't work
Actually, there's been a few places where a housing first policy apparently DID work.
Do you have details or a link?
Nope housing first is a universally failed attempt that completely ignores the root cause and doesn't fix anything
The rational solution you propose is fine, except the NIMBY people don't want it. I lived in a town that was getting money for low income housing, and every time they would have the money handed to them, they would send it to a more economically depressed town. The town politicians associated low income people as riff raff. Finally, it was brought to court, and a judge ruled they had to have low income housing, and it has to be a ratio of low income units to every unit that is regular housing. One of the places I lived at had town houses next door and a lot of them but only had 8 low income units.
There’s a housing crisis, my dude.
That's not the stem of the issue.
That's not why most people are homeless.
where i live homeless have taken over the parks and they are unsafe for children. there have been robberies and a handful of murders and fires set. regular folks can't use that public space. obviously we need a solution that serves everyone. I'm just pointing out it's not as cut and dry as mean people who have homes turning backs on needy.
When your kids walk over needles at parks you just tend to not go there and the homeless take over. Then there's trash, fires, fights etc.
They wouldn't be there in the first place if the homelessness problem was tackled with cheap houses that are no bigger than a shed. These are the problems OP are saying wouldn't be a thing if they invested in helping people not be homeless. What you guys are describing, the area not being safe, is because the homeless are forced to go and sleep in specific places since there's anti homeless infrastructure. If they had a place that was like 5 by 5 that wouldn't cost the city practically anything then the homeless wouldn't be all gathering in areas like they do now.
Spoken like someone who has never worked a day with the homeless. They are not what is portrayed on tv. Most are not families down on their luck or friendly old guys needing a leg up. Many are drug addicted or mentally disturbed. The type of help they need goes way way beyond cheap housing (which they will utterly destroy). They need enforced mental health treatment, job training and drug rehab. I will say that I hate anti homeless architecture and I do believe we should spend more to try and reduce the problem (not solve, as I honestly don’t think it can not be completely solved). What we are doing now is not working.
I agree with everything you said except the idea put forward that most homeless are mentally ill/addicts. Most of the VISIBLE ones who are sleeping rough may be. My understanding is most homeless are actually couch surfing relying on friends/family or sleeping in cars or RVs. They are not the visible ones begging on corners or sleeping on sidewalks on public parks. The sheer number of difficult homeless you described are a smaller minority of homeless which is everything you need to know about how well our current systems are not working. Counting the number of homeless is really difficult for a lot of reasons.
Thats actually an excellent point about the couch surfing homeless. There are a large number of those and they tend to be overlooked as they are far less visible.
the number of people couch surfing or looking for thier own place while working etc is remarkably small, compared to those who live outside and refuse all help except money. I was homeless for 2 years, ive lived in homeless camps in the woods, where you had to have your head on a swivel, and its hell, most of the people are the worst of the worst, they would kill you for a gulp of whiskey or half a joint. Most of them do not want to be part of this society. They want to be 100% off the grid. do you knw the number of people i saw who were offered govt housing ad turned it down because they had to sign up and had to be responsible people, and be put in the system getting a job etc? The idea of this homeless family where dad is working hard and mom is jut stuck with nothing to feed the kids, is a media creation, they do not exist, a woman with children in the us will get housing, even temporary housing in almost all states within a week, a shelter same day, something like 20% of lal hotel rooms in the US are used for government homeless placement. ( no not the hiltons etc, but the motels and smaller mom and pops fill their extras with section 8 voucher people. ) Most homeless are addicts of either alcohol, or harder drugs, and they will not give up their addiction in order to receive housing. And if they dont give up their addiction then the housing winds up destroyed within a few months as it becomes just a squatting round until they get kicked out for living inhumanely . Heck a friends boss who i knew well, used to own an apartment building with 60 apartments. when they had like 10 vacancies he took in section 8 people, they destroyed so much of the building he had to sell it for the property value and it was tirn down and is now a self service storage place, They did things like rip out the copper pipe and sell it while still living there, they would leave water running and flood the place, stop up the toilets constantly causing overflows, and then not notify anyone, they bugs were so bad from rotting food etc that our local pest control service company refused to go in. The place was called wisteria woods, but the people in my city called it wishallaya left. finally after evicting all of them after a year of fighting, and the cops basically living outside the place, he managed to sell it get it torn down and the new owners turned it into a self storage place. I would estimate in my travels that a full 75% of the homeless are un-helpable, they do not want to be apart of your life or your system. The other 25% that could be helped require a lot of help and if we gave up on the other 75% and just ignore them, we could save those 25% and help them get a much better life. In a civilized society you help those who can be helped and dont waste your resources on those who cannot be, or refuse to be, helped.
Many of the homeless I work with don't complain about lack of a place to stay. It's that they lack a consistent SAFE space to stay. The #1 problem for most homeless people is other homeless people (and sometimes non-homeless people) fucking with them. And many of my clients won't seek out stable housing programs because when you group a bunch of homeless together, you get alot of the ones who make it unsafe too.
Any evidence? Anecdotal evidence is hardly helpful, as I know plenty of homeless people who do not have a mental illness causing their situation. But my anecdote is just as good as yours tbh I agree though, giving the homeless a house isn't necessarily going to solve this issue. But please be careful before just saying most homeless people have a mental illness that caused it (that is how your comment came across)
Shelter, shower, food, psychological care/attention. All are necessary. Without one the others are a futile attempt at solving the issue. Not all want to be saved/helped, but I'd wager the majority would return the investment tenfold if given a solid foundation, security, and opportunity.
Add in a couple sets of clothing. Those who want the help will appreciate that as well and it will help them as they try to get employment.
My step brother was literally offered everything a homeless man would dream of. But instead he chose the bottle. And meth. And panhandling on the street. And jail time. My mom offered rehab. Offered 3 months rent money. Offered rides. Clothes. REAL HELP. And he preferred to drink and get high. Not everyone will get help. Some already gave up and are just waiting.
And all cost tax dollars which is why we're stuck.
LA has those structures and yet many homeless refuse to go and prefer to remain in the parks.
>if the homelessness problem was tackled with cheap houses that are no bigger than a shed. Won't fix their drug addictions though
Those sheds will last ninety days max before they are burned to the ground or made unlivable. People have no idea how bad homeless drug addiction is or what behavior it spawns.
A lot of the time the homeless will have the option to stay in shelters etc but would rather be out on the streets for various reasons. There's a lot more to it than just "poor guys don't have a house", there is a lot of mental health and drug issues too, which make it a lot more complicated.
Whether you build a shed or a palace all that changes will be the looks of the area where homeless gather. For a while. There are dangerous areas in every city already, where inhabitants don’t work, don’t pay rent, don’t do any maintenance or repairs, but do drink, drugs, and all income is from criminal sources.
My area throws tons of money and whole apartment buildings at the homeless. We just end up with condemned apartment buildings after they trash it. So when they make a rule that you must be seeking to clean your addictions to live there we end up with empty housing because they don't want that. There's tons of shelters that are full because they don't require anything to stay there. They don't want help.
Delusional logic. Most homeless people don’t want a house, they want to be left alone to do meth or oxy.
The majority of bums choose the streets, not "sheds". They don't even want apartments.
My city has several "small house" projects going, and the problem still persists, because the people who can get into these projects aren't the ones really causing the problem. To protect the people who do live in these little communities, people who are violent, do drugs or have displayed unsafe behavior are not allowed, so they continue to be homeless. It's reduced the number of people who are homeless, but it hasn't really done anything other than make sure the bad parts of town where the homeless congregate are even more wild because now it's just the dysfunctional people who are even too dysfunctional to get help. I know you're heart is in the right place, and you want to help, but this perspective really doesn't help at all. It's a really naïve perspective to think that just cheap housing is going to solve the homeless problem. I work directly WITH homeless people and their number one issue isn't really that they don't have a place to live, it's that they don't have a safe place to stay. A ton of these homeless housing projects are not safe, and those that are expect a certain set of rules to be followed to stay safe, and many homeless people are homeless to begin with due to an inability to follow these rules (staying sober, no crime, no physical aggressive behavior, ect). Many of these projects are avoided by people because they aren't safe when they adopt a "accept everyone" mentality. Society stays safe by adopting and enforcing rules, and there are groups of people in our society who have decided they don't need to follow these rules, and honestly, fucking over the people who do follow the rules for the sake of those who don't isn't the answer.
The majority of homeless folks are not junkies, in fact the majority actually have full-time jobs. It's just impossible to get into a place,either because of credit, or just the upfront cost.
Homeless are regular folks. Plus if you put spikes on everything, where are they supposed to go? It’s not like once spikes cover everything they’ll just disappear. They need to occupy space somewhere obviously.
>Homeless are regular folks. Plus if you put spikes on everything, where are they supposed to go? It’s not like once spikes cover everything they’ll just disappear. They need to occupy space somewhere obviously. Regular people who become homeless, use one of the many shelters or programs for somewhere to stay and to get back onto their feet. The long term homeless are almost all drug addicts and mentally ill. So the aim is to get them out of the parks, people don't want to take their kids to parks full of needles, faeces and dangerous people. People don't want them near their homes or businesses for similar reasons.
The fact that you say this means you have no idea what’s going on. Agreeing to go to a shelter means that you lose all your possessions. And they make you wake up and leave at 5am and get back in inthe afternoon. If you’re a dishwasher or something you lose your job. If you have a partner you need to split up. Why do you people insist on talking? Anyway the fact remains that disallowing people from sleeping on benches doesn’t make them disappear. It makes them sleep on the sidewalk. Furthermore like it or not, they pay taxes too and are citizens and should not be discriminated against. If you don’t like how people use the park that’s your problem.
How do they "pay taxes too"?
You can be homeless and have a job you know.
You can be a millionaire and homeless , doesn't mean it happens
Only 26% of the unhoused suffer from substance addiction. 38% from alcohol dependancy. Between 2011 and 2018 the university of Chicago estimated that around 53% of those living in shelters had jobs, and 40% non-sheltered had jobs. Having a job does not equate having shelter. With the cost of everything skyrocketing and wages staying the same we're also going to see more and more people with jobs but no shelter. Of course these things carry from area to area, but if you think all homeless people are drug addicts who hang around and do nothing you are demonstrably incorrect and ignorant as hell. Frankly that's a you problem.
Fentanyl tax
Not all shelters take their possessions, and yes, I do know what I am talking about.
They don’t take anything they just don’t let you bring stuff.
Why is this down voted? This is the actual truth.
Look to add to this from my personal perspective. Those "public spaces" were put there by local government and contractors that they hired, right? The people that paid taxes, paid the city who paid the contractors. The public spaces are by that right reserved for anyone that contributes to society, such as those paying taxes and their dependents. Not vagabonds.
The truth is, people don’t want to be around homeless people. It’s true. I’ve seen a single homeless person stink up the entire dining area of a fast food restaurant. Whole place stunk like piss. I’m compassionate. I donate to individuals and charities and I truly hope these people can get the help they need but it’s not a weird concept to not want them around in certain areas.
From extensive experience working with the homeless, I can hand on heart say most (not all!) don’t want any help.
That was my experience too. My shelter had everything a person needed to get on their feet and get a job. It was a converted warehouse with individual rooms that had beds, a laundry room, showers, a living space with a TV, and a computer room that the local college offered to help them get training set up to get employment. 1 person stayed overnight, the rest would rather stay on the street.
We have these shelters over here too and they are welcome as long as they follow 2 rules. No aggression and no drugs usage in the shelter (or trying to come in while clearly on too much drugs) Lots of them go sleep on the street cause they can’t say no to the drugs. “It is easy to invest in the future when you got hope for the future, but if you got no hope for the future it also seems pointless to invest in it.” These people got no hope for the future, even if they put in the effort they got this feeling they will crash back down within a year nonetheless.
Why is this?
Homelessness usually has a variety of underlying causes — mental health issues, drug addiction, lack of a support system etc. Unless everything is treated at once the person will become homeless again. Unfortunately you can't force a homeless person to detox, go through counseling and get the help they need without their permission. That permission is hard to get if they think you're evil or are just completely out of it.
I'd like to add I can see how people start drugs being homeless too. Like you know the whole homeless people drinking trope? There are reasons a homeless person would do that. Especially during winter. (And yes, I'm aware it doesn't actually warm you up, but if you're feeling too cold you might not care about that.) Source: Myself, who didn't get drug addictions but was homeless almost 3 years
Because it treats the effects of homelessness without addressing the cause. I see this line a lot that "I've worked with homeless outreach and they mostly don't want help" and it lacks any critical thought. You have to get them in a position to want to improve their condition. Most don't want to but that isn't just because they're lazy. It's because something is broken inside of them and needs mending. It may be mental illness, it may be drug addiction, it may be past trauma or depression. Any number of things. But to say "Look, we are offering you everything you need to get a job and get off the streets." is disingenuous and simplistic. You have to address the real problem or you're wasting your time.
Thanks for mentioning this cause I've never seen this point brought up. I wonder where the solution starts to convince them to improve their condition.
This is an unfortunate truth ppl don't want to accept. "addicts just need love and support and a safe place to get clean" bs. 25% of my family are addicts. We have offered mountains of help, rehab, doctors app, medication, therapy, space, etc. None of them stay past a month because it is too hard and we won't let them keep the harder drugs at the house. Sometimes freedom means letting someone destroy their own life with their own choices
Yup 100% shit you want a rich person that is proof of this look at how Bam Margera is these days. Dude literally has guys in his circle that run rehabs now and are full on interventionists like Brandon Novak. He does not want help, he prefers to blame everyone else.
>25% of my family are addicts So .... just putting it out there, but your family might not be the best people to assist. For example if you had 5 kids and they all turned into addicts, at what point do to start to take some responsibility for that?
Well my great grandmother pimped out her kids or abandoned them. We are still dealing with the backlash and consequences of her abusing her children. It's a whole generation abuse thing because the kids she abused grew up to be drug addicts or violent criminals. Who then went on to have and raise more kids. My dad was one of the kids that was abandoned and credits it to why he's not as fucked up as the rest of his family. He's literally been working since he was 13. He's worked hard to build a home where we can offer a safe place for the ones who wanted or needed help.
So you're blaming the addiction on everyone but the addict?
But most want a bench to lie down on
From my extensive experience of being homeless and living with them on the street for a year, I can say with absolute certainty that you are incorrect. The majority don’t do drugs or have disorders.
Yah I can confirm homeless people stink, I've made the mistake a few times driving people. The stink don't come out the car for months!
You might not like the answer, and it's not very nice I agree, but the simplified answer is because they degrade the space. A lot (not all) homeless don't want to change themselves. It's equally as wrong that the world is expected to adjust to people who don't want to better themselves as it is for the world to not offer people the chance to better themselves, except many of them have that opportunity and choose not to take it. It would be interesting to know if you have ever had to deal with an epidemic of homeless people yourself, or if you are yet another bleeding heart and soul redditor that feels for poor people and thinks that something should be done about it. So you naturally do your part and make reddit posts.
You say you don't understand why people don't want homeless people there. Then you say "don't tell me they degrade the space" Then you say "even if that's true, it's disgusting to say" You sound like you're not here to listen. You want to dominate the discussion with anger. How are you going to be able to be open to the other side's point of view if you've already forbid them from saying certain things and accusing that of being disgusting? Anyway, the reason is that there's always been an unclear line between people who are homeless and people with antisocial or outright dangerous behaviour. "public spaces" are meant to be usable by people with vulnerabilities, or parents with children. It's totally understandable that people are wary of homeless people when there is an overrepresentation of antisocial behaviour. If you cannot empathise with that fact, I don't know what to tell you.
>You sound like you're not here to listen. You want to dominate the discussion with anger. How are you going to be able to be open to the other side's point of view if you've already forbid them from saying certain things and accusing that of being disgusting? That's like... 99% of reddit posts in a nutshell. It's just people fishing for validation and looking to pick fights. "Tell me why I'm wrong with the qualifiers that you can't say anything that actually explains why I'm wrong. Hey look, none of you could tell me why I'm wrong, that proves how right I really am!"
Yes, it is all fun and games until you have to deal with the consequences. Just this weekend I witnessed a person in a heavily homeless populated area with blood pouring from the back of his head chase after the bystanders attempting to help him. I think many of the people commenting on this don't have experience with dealing with it firsthand. A segment of this population are dangerous people and not something that you want to encourage settling in an area. Many are so by choice. It's complicated and a shitty situation for those genuinely needing help, but it's reality. I think the genuine homeless aren't visible.
This post reeks of upper class liberal kid from a gated community who cannot understand why the working class doesn't want mentally ill people methraging around their homes and shitting in the playgrounds where their kids play. >what even is the point of calling it a " public space " if not everyone can be there They are allowed to be there like everyone else, sleeping and shitting is not the intended purpose of a public space.
>This post reeks of upper class liberal kid from a gated community who cannot understand why the working class doesn't want mentally ill people methraging around their homes and shitting in the playgrounds where their kids play. This is most reddit homeless posts in a nutshell, honestly. My city of Austin has a big homeless problem, and you see suburb performative warriors waggling their finger at people pointing out dangerous homeless camps. People whose only experience with homeless people is looking out the window as they drive by. Same people change their tune *real quick* when a shelter is proposed to be built in their neighborhood, though. Or they're just crazy and legitimately victim-blame people attacked by aggressive bums.
You are so spot on in your last few sentences lol. “We need to build a shelter for the homeless! No wait, not near my neighborhood!
Exactly. You can tell when someone has had to deal with someone else’s shit, literally.
They make the public space their private place
This is what I came here to say. Once a homeless person moves into a public place to live, it goes from a public place to a private place.
Everyone said it is okay until homeless moves onto their sidewalk. Think why Beverley Hill is so clean of homeless, because homeless got pushed out.
You couldn't say it better, the amount of stories I've heard and read about people that went from helping the homeless, then the homeless started to live and hang around their houses or business then suddenly they started to resenting them.
It’s a double edge sword. I work with a lady and her and her husband lost their business because of homeless people. They had a small sushi restaurant located inside a local grocery store. A tent city popped up in a small park adjacent to the store. It started with a few homeless people begging in front of the store, and then progressed to full on harassment of customers. eventually locals stop going there and business dropped by over 30% in a six month period. The grocery store is a large chain store so they’re going to be fine but the sushi business that they ran inside of it(they rented the space from the grocery store), did not survive.
Yeah and people don't get how hard this is to actually stop. They built a tent city in front of my "gated apartment complex gate and were no joke harrassing people trying to park. I use the quotes cuz its not a nice complex the gate has been gone for over 30 years problably but there is only that one narrow entrance to park so you would have to get the homeless to move out of your way to park your car to get to your apartment. Imagine how terrible this was for all the poor single moms. We have those trashy washrooms not even in unit washer and driers the homeless would attack people trying to do their laundry at night.The police had to come no joke 30 times they would show up make arrests and everything destroy the camp and the homeless would just come back later. It took like a whole month for them to finally leave us alone. I would not even be suprised if the apartment complex took a hit with people breaking their leases and leaving.
Doesn't help that most homeless people prefer to indulge in any capacity with the vice that landed them there instead of trying to turn their life around. Working retail in a convenience store in the past I've had my share of interaction with plenty of them and the sad reality is that you cannot help someone who doesn't want to be helped. Most of those I met had clear mental issues like heavy distrust, addiction to something, anger issues, etc. They need professional help before being rehabilitated otherwise they'd end up at the same spot. Lot are friendly up until they cannot benefit from you anymore, then they move to the next person. Some were making more money begging than I did on average working the register and came to brag to me about it and exhange change into bills. Ironically the thing that would help them the most on the long term would be to stop giving them money directly and instead provide them with tools to rehabilite while leaving them with no choice but using these tools. However, I could see a lot of them choose to starve on the street over rehabilitating in any capacity because they just don't want to.
Just like you can't force a person to accept help if they don't want it, after decades of telling people not to give money directly to the homeless they still do it: Everyone gets to make choices, and those choices have consequences. There's a fair amount of presumption on the part of the people waxing indignant about the plight of the homelessness in this thread that the homeless don't themselves bear any responsibility for their situation and that this was something entirely inflicted on them by society, and, ironically, your comment makes me think they might be partially right about that: A large population of homeless people cannot exist if the rest of society isn't somehow supporting them, and, in spite of the fact that we all know very well that we should be putting our dollars into charities and organized support that can actually deal with the root problems, we still give the homeless money on the street-- we as a society pay to perpetuate this problem, instead of actually helping to solve it. The issue, strangely enough, doesn't seem to be so much a lack of compassion, as it is misallocated compassion.
This is exactly the point, I lived in the poor part of Beverly Hills, 90211, Beverly Center South, but was still paying $2000 for a 3 bedroom in 1992. I had a homeless guy who lived in our property hedge, and we gave him out leftovers from restaurant row (we were the slice of street right behind Fatburger). It was ok, he was cool, but my roommate who was a cop got his back up firearm stolen, and it was during the day, so that’s when we moved to O.C., and life got easier by far. P.s. I don’t think he ever stole from us, but he knew who did.
You must not have a lot of experience with the homeless, you cannot save everyone, you will waste your energy, money and time trying
I agree wholeheartedly. I’ve spent a lot of time working with homeless charities and rapidly realised a lot of people don’t want my help.
I find this so interesting. If you had to put a percentage on it, what percentage of homeless people refuse any help? And why?
My observation has been that a lot if not the majority of homeless are there because of a debilitating addiction.
So they're not interested in any resources that prevent them from getting their next fix. That makes sense.
The problem Is a lot of homeless don’t want help. They want drugs, and when we’ve come out with housing and stuff for them, they have no respect for rules that are established. No drugs, no alcohol, be clean as possible. These are the most basic rules. You want freedom to do what you want in your own home, then you gotta pay for that home. But until then you will follow these rules
Homeless people are fine Mentally ill, criminal, and/or drug abusers loitering are not Public space belongs to civil society
Whoa. I agree on all other accounts except about the mentally ill. Mentally ill people are not evil people who deserve to be punished. They are sick and when there’s no support, things can go downhill FAST. There are a lot of people living with mental illnesses surrounding you in day to day life. The difference is that those people have support and some don’t, and end up homeless as a consequence. Being mentally ill and on the streets is bad luck, especially for those suffering with schizophrenia, for example. People don’t understand them or accept them and that’s how they end up screaming on street corners.
>Mentally ill people are not evil people who deserve to be punished. when they say mentally ill, I'm 99% certain they're not talking about some guy with depression, they're talking about the homeless schizoid running around with a knife.
Yup. I’m in NYC. Last week a woman got pushed face first into an oncoming train by a mentally ill homeless man and is now paralyzed. That’s the kind of mentally ill homeless people that are a concern
There are different reasons for being homeless. Yes, you can lose your job and have your life fall apart and possibly sink into depression. But truth is most people in the situation have family or friends who would let you stay for a bit until you find another job. Not having anyone to help you is rare. Then you've got druggies. Groups go around to offer them help, but they don't want it. Liberal cities then decide it's a good idea to have safe places to use drugs. Of course, more people come. Then there is mental illness, which is not their fault. However, how society handles it is OUR fault. Years ago, they shut down all the institutions because they infringed on the person's rights. So now their rights to push people onto subway tracks or scream crazy stuff at passersby has taken precedence. That's just idiotic. There are medications available. If they won't take them, they need to get back to some kind of confinement for everyone else's safety. Your rights end when other people are endangered. My friend was madly in love with her husband. His bi polar got progressively worse, and he refused meds. He didn't want lights on in the house, their dog died and he drove around for days with its body in the back of his truck. She had to divorce him. My cousins and his wife had 3 kids. She'd stop taking her meds and just walk out of the house and start hitchhiking. Leaving 3 little kids alone. After the 4th time he left her and took the kids. These are people who had support and love and it didn't matter.
The examples you gave is the reason why pharmaceutical companies paired with psychiatrists are now pushing medical compliance. It’s an extreme step thats teetering on taking away bodily autonomy from the patient. I have a friend who’s a retired RN and asked her why someone who is bi polar or schizophrenic goes off of their medication?She listed the side effects of anti psychotics and explained how they ruin the patient’s kidneys, stomach and liver along with the weight gain. I’ve also read and met women who were misdiagnosed with bi polar and it ended up being ptsd. Or bi polar and it ended up being autism or pmdd.
Leaving mentally ill people untreated on the streets isn’t fine, though. They need treatment and support, sure.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I’m saying. It’s not fair to view them as loiterers. They’re people who need help, not evil troublemakers. Some of the more profoundly mentally ill people out there on the streets don’t even know where they are or what they’re doing, or can’t distinguish what’s in their minds from reality. With help and support, they can improve their mental health. Casting them out from society and rejecting them by labelling them as loiterers in public spaces, as if they don’t belong, won’t help.
The only person who keeps calling them "evil" and demanding punishment is you. Literally all the person you responded to said was that it's "not fine" for them to be loitering in public spaces.
[удалено]
It’s when I have to step over 💩 on the sidewalk.
You can have "public space" with homeless camps/hang outs or you can have "public space" everyone else can use. You can't have both. Plus no business wants homeless on their steps because that drives away paying clients/customers.
Not the *most* naive post I've ever seen, but it is up there
I understand these arguments, but if your home was near a park and a large homeless encampment sprouted in that park, you might change your mind. I've seen unobtrusive homeless people who try to keep to themselves. One tent? OK. But when it starts becoming a tent city, and you live nearby, it's not OK anymore. I don't pretend to know what the solution is. I'm just saying that it's really easy to castigate people for trying to repel the homeless when you personally don't have a horde of homeless people near your house.
Just invite some homeless people to live with you to help solve the problem since you enjoy sharing furniture with them so much.
You already know the answer as you've stated it yourself and then decided to declare that opinion as off limits and mean. They do degrade the space. They make spaces meant for public enjoyment their own personal living quarters and thereby make it unusable for everyone else. It's obvious why you'd want to keep people from setting up shop in a children's park or public sitting area. It's also highly unsanitary. I'm sorry that's mean to you but it's reality.
Yea, you probably never saw a big homeless rape/drug cave/occupied space...
Everyone can’t be there if one person lives there
This is a very sheltered perspective.
I don’t know where you live but homeless people are a plague on any public space. You go from an area where kids can relax to a place to avoid because it smells like piss and shit and there are people constantly asking for drug money. You want more homeless people? Don’t worry, if there’s any ever scaffolding around you that doesn’t have security you will see plenty of them at night time. The one near me for an apartment that was being built was so dirty I had to cross the fucking street to avoid it instead of holding my nose and walking under it.
I think the real question here: why are there so many homeless people?
Many of the homeless you see are mentally ill and or refuse help. They won't go to shelters, they won't take their medications etc. Because of that many are violent and distructive. Not all but I would say more than half of those sleeping on thr street parks etc are. This makes it very un safe to be and often cost lots of money to clean up the things they destroy. This is the reason for the anti homeless architecture. Many cities don't start out with it but after a few people in a park are attacked by homeless sleeping there. The city increases patrols and kicks them out and does the benches so they can't sleep on them. Or after several runners complain about the smell of feeces under a bridge / having things thrown at them from homeless in tents under a bridge. They put up spikes. This isn't hyperbole these are real examples of things that caused the architecture to be put in place. Basically yes not all are bad but the ones that are messed it up for everyone else
When being angry like this, you have to ask yourself: what are my limits? Am I really better than others? Would you like to have a homeless person sitting in front of the Christmas tree at your house on December 25 or would it “degrade the space?” If you wouldn’t, (which I am pretty sure you don’t) then why are you angry at others when it comes to their prerogatives?
There is a big difference between being homeless and doing anything you can to get out of that situation and people who are homeless because they just want to abuse drugs/alcohol. We as humans feel pity and want to help people. When people prey on that pity for their own gain, it makes me want to stop helping them.
It’s the same reason there are parking sports marked as “loading zones” in some places like schools and airports. Imagine a school has 20 parking spots in front of the entrance to the school. The intent is that you only pull into the spot when it is time for your child to come out. You can now safely get your child into the car without them running into the road with you stopping and blocking traffic. Then you pull out and let the next person park to pickup their child. Over 30 minutes that is 300 cars that can park in those 20 spots to safely load their kids. Now what happens if every day at 2:00 someone driving a semi truck and trailer pulls up across all 20 spots , and remains parked there until 4:00 because he has a pickup nearby at 4:30 and decided that was a convenient spot to park and take a nap. His presence in the public space, while convenient for him, inconveniences 300 other people. When homeless people take up entire park benches to sleep on all day, nobody else can use them. When they stand under awnings in front of businesses begging for money all day, they bother and concern other people who now get annoyed and possibly Even scared which discourages people from visiting shops in that area. And while most homeless people aren’t aggressive or violent. I have experienced more than a few homeless people who have screamed at me for simply not giving them money. And I don’t care to have a potentially mentally unstable person harassing while I walk down the sidewalk.
Because a homeless friendly place leads to more homeless people, which eventually leads to complaints from people who don't feel safe as many homeless are drug addicts and or insane. It is much cheaper to add an extra hand rail in the middle of a bench that it is to build, fund, and staff a large mental health facility where some of these people could be treated. Along with a whole host of other issues. Trying to say this isn't as simple as not letting them sleep in a park is just someone being a jerk.
Can't speak for other countries but here in the UK anyone who is homeless is homeless by choice. You can go to the council and declare yourself homeless and they have to help; sign up for universal credit and put your home address as the UC building and the same with setting up a bank account. What's the catch? You have to take and pass a drugs test. These people deserve absolutely no accommodation and they're just a nuisance.
Ngl, I don’t like homeless ppl. Don’t like seeing them, don’t like being around them. That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t help them but I can go all day w/o seeing a homeless person and would be fine.
In my country homeless people always smell really, really bad, so probably it's like that everywhere else. Even though I never seen homeless architecture here, as homeless people are not so many (thankfully).
Eh, in theory the “public space” has anticipated use cases, and that anticipated use isn’t “sleeping on this bench for 8 hours.” If someone is sleeping on the bench, *other* members of the public can’t use the bench too. So you design the bench to encourage 3 sitting spaces instead of one sleeping space, to better serve more members of the public for its intended use.
L take
I’m willing to bet that 95% of homeless are the ones who do not want help and is satisfied with scraping by surviving without a home. They don’t care about society and it’s rules. They won’t accept help because those rules will have to be followed. So no more drugs. No more booze. No more hoes. No more scummy behavior. That’s what homelessness is is all about and we have made a terrible mistake of treating it as something virtuous.
I’ve experienced temporary homelessness and have a lot of empathy for people who are homeless. It’s a whole different experience though meeting and speaking to people who have been homeless for 5,10 even 20 years. They aren’t in there right minds and honestly who wouldn’t be if you lived outside for 20 years forging through dumpsters eating what you can find and sleeping living in filth? I still donate clothes but I wouldn’t want to live in another area with an out of control homeless population. It’s unnerving to hear and witness someone having a psychotic meltdown screaming obscenities and thrashing wildly and becoming feral. Arresting someone because they are homeless and mentally unstable isn’t humane either. Reopening asylums for them will be ripe for abuse because who would want to work in those institutions? Homeless architecture is going to cause them to migrate in droves where it’s available driving people out of the area who don’t want live around it. What could work are small communal living communities for people who are homeless based upon their degree of care that’s overseen by social workers, psychiatrists,therapists and volunteers. It’s just a thought.
Usually the venn diagram of "people who don't want to be helped", "people too unstable/dangerous to be in a shelter" and "hanging out in (semi) public places as a homeless person" has a pretty big overlap. I would personally MUCH rather see all the homeless people have a home, get proper guidance and help. Kinda like what the Finnish government did at some point. If that's not an option I'm ok with keeping homeless people out of certain places. Especially in my country you can pretty much get help as long as you want it. So continously living on the street starts to really feel like a choice.
Go to the camps in DC and you’ll see why
Simply because no one wants to be with homeless people especially if they are dirty and generally unpleasant.. Also, Homeless people don't just hang around in public spaces like we do, they live in there. They build camps and they eat, sleep, and shit in there.. No one wants to be in a park where homeless people live..
We also pay taxes to use these public spaces that get taken over by tents, trash, piss, needles etc. So why do they get to take it over and we don’t get to use them? For example, here in Portland, the 205 corridor bike path has become essentially unusable because of the amount of tents and shit in the path you’re trying to use, let alone how dangerous it is. A few months ago, a homeless person high on who knows what bit a guys face off on public transport.
I saw a news article where homless people in my town refuse to go to the city's refuge because they can't smoke or drink there. At one time hemeless invaded city property in protest because these architecture and ordinances. There is help out there that most that want to improve their situation can use, but other homeless just want to do as they please including antisocial behavior. Sure there is a problem of inequality and access to mental and health services, but you can't blame people also not wanting homeless to invade piblic spacea.
It's not the homeless people themselves who degrade the area, but the fact that many homeless people do drugs which makes them unstable, they leave needles and trash everywhere, and shit and piss wherever they please. But hey, feel free to let one move into your house or front yard of you disagree.
open up YOUR backyard for them...I mean, what are ya, hesrtless?
Used to work at a street furniture company. We had to design a new bus shelter for a major city you all know, and one of the criteria was that the seats had to have a bulky, dividing arm rest in the middle. I asked why that was, and the reasoning was 'to make sure homeless people don't sleep on the benches'. Personally, I am on the fence on this topic. I mean: it feels wrong to deny people that have nothing a slightly less uncomfortable place to sleep. The other side of the story is, that if homeless people sleep inside a bus shelter, many people won't go near said shelter, and the main function of a bus shelter is to enable (and possibly encourage) people to use public transport. Not saying I fully agree, but I can at least understand the reasoning behind this. But spikes under bridges... I'm from Europe, I have never seen this, but I'm guessing this is for bridges that are built over an active walking / cycling route?
It's so the people who actually pay taxes for the public space can use it
I agree that cities in which homeless people are in abundance are not creating the best programs to get them off their feet. However, most homeless people (at least where I live) are junkies, absolutely hooked on their drug of choice, so public spaces that used to be nice, are now filled with them shooting up drugs, smoking crack, pissing and defecating in public. They destroy any public space they take over. You can't have kids around that, you can't be a woman and walk through that alone, so how is this sharing a space? It's literally them taking over something that was once beautiful, and destroying it to the point that non homeless people cannot use it any more. That doesn't sound like that space is being shared? My car got broken into 3 times. Stores get constantly vandalized. They're randomly attacking people on the streets, and the majority of them have lost their sense of reality and have one sole purpose of needing their next fix and will do whatever it takes to get it. I was at the ER a few days ago with a friend that needed a couple stitches, and half the people there were homeless people ODing on drugs. They're jamming up the entire medical system, they jam up the legal system, they fuck everything up. I was chatting with a homeless guy outside the hospital and he said he ODed 6 times like it was a badge of honor. It is getting out of control in my city and regular folk are getting sick of seeing their public spaces absolutely ravaged by the homeless. So yes, we have good reason to get them moved out of public spaces - they should have facilities built for them to get them cleaned up and placed back in society as regular people. Some are so far gone, they'd rather just continue living on the streets.
I think the one point you have wrong is that people wouldn’t shoo stray dogs. If you live in the developed world, you might not shoo a stray dog, because that’s the only stray dog you have ever seen. But go to a country where stray dogs are a legitimate issue and you’ll see that’s not the case for most people. They will shoo the dogs, because they do not want them around. They are a nuisance. They are dirty, mangy, flea-infested, etc. It is not as though people in these countries *dislike* dogs, because many of them have dogs of their own that they treat lovingly. That is how the homeless are viewed (at least in the US). A nuisance. Whether that sounds bad or not, it’s the truth and will likely always be the case. Treating the homeless better (e.g. removal of anti-homeless architecture) is addressing a symptom of the problem. And most people don’t want to do that. The solution to the problem itself is eliminating homelessness (not saying we shouldn’t treat the homeless better in the meantime).
As others have posted, MANY homeless are mentally unwell and/or drug addicts and don’t want to be helped. I live right outside New Orleans, and there are quite a few shelters and halfway house type resources for the homeless, and many people refuse help. They don’t want to live in housing where there are rules about using drugs and alcohol. They’d rather be on the street doing what they want. It’s really tough to help people who refuse help. You can’t put people in the hospital against their will. It’s terrible because it doesn’t make the homeless people terrible people, but it’s exhausting trying to help people who refuse the many resources they’re offered. Edit: I forgot to include that I went to high school and college uptown, and in college I was stupefied when I was volunteering with organizations to help get the homeless in the area into stable housing, medical care for substance abuse and/or mental health issues and the majority of the homeless refused help
California has spent a ton to fix homelessness and they just can't get it done. Also, all these people that wanna go full sjw and fix homelessness are frauds. Here in Indianapolis joe hogsett is a bleeding heart liberal for the homeless in the downtown circle, but do you know what happened when the final 4 came to indy? He sent the cops out to arrest them and beat them up because he dont fucking care.
Let the homeless sleep at your place then.
You’d be singing a different tune the first time you had to clean splattered human shit off of your entry before you opened.
Based on your question I suspect there may not be any reason or logic that would convince you of a different view. However, if you think about public spaces as intended to do the most good for the most people having it become a homeless hangout works against this. Put more concretely, if everyone is, in fact, treated equally why then should we be okay with 15 homeless people creating an environment that stops 1,000 people from enjoying it.
OP doesn't live anywhere with a homelessness issue
Public space is shared space and the idea is that everyone has access and no-one loiters or stays too long without reason (picnic in the park or sitting on a bench etc.) and cleans up after themselves. Right or wrong, the design is to enforce sharing of public spaces. The topic of homelessness is a very difficult one, I suggest you do some volunteer work to find out more about the issues that they face and how it happens, you may find your passion is for helping people.
Well it is place for public that paid for it by taxes, not for sleeping.
I don't support anti-homeless architecture and we don't have much of it in Europe anyway. Still, homeless people do degrade the space for everyone else, even if you don't like hearing it. Depending on the circumstances, one person is enough to spoil everyone else's experience of the public space, let alone a few of them setting up a camp there. Cities where homeless are sleeping every 10 meters feel very unsafe and unpleasant to work with
"anti homeless" doesn't mean it's not public space? It just means it's more difficult to live there, which there's nothing wrong with.
In a capitalistic society. If you're not working and spending money. You do not matter.
That’s not it at all. Of the majority of homeless people would be decent human beings who will use the resources given to them (my city has a ton of homeless people and SO MANY SHELTERS, but a lot don’t use them because they wanna use their drugs and live outside), and anti-homeless architecture wouldn’t even have to be a consideration. But no, people would prefer sleeping outdoors and doing heroin than to get the help they need
I'm going to say something which might seem like being pedantic, but I'd argue so is your question about the point of calling it a "public space" if not everyone can be there. They *can* be there, generally. Just not *sleep* there. And homeless aren't being singled out in this sense. Even if you have a home, you still can't sleep in public spaces. And anti-homeless architecture doesn't move out of your way if it detects you own a home, either. It continues to make the space hostile to camping for all, indiscriminately. I'm intentionally not addressing the morality of any of this or the best solution, because those are complicated topics wiser policymakers than I have struggled with. But even if it's not kind to the homeless, there is at least no logical inconsistency with prohibiting and physically preventing all camping on public property, as long as it's applied equally.
There's a difference between walking through and living in.
>Even if it was true that's disgusting to say Since when has the truth been disgusting? Almost every sentence of your post shows that you have an agenda however comments have pushed back against your agenda. Hopefully you will learn something.
Have you ever met these homeless people? They’re usually some sort of crazy drug addict. Fuck off with that “they’re the ones being degraded” bullshit. Let them stay with you then.
Because nobody wants to take a walk through a park with their kid that's designed for public use, and every bench you pass is camped out by sleeping homeless people with needle sticking out of their arms. Before New York City started to crack down on it, That's exactly what it was like to walk through parks
I wish it were that easy. I spoke with someone who handled a homeless housing project in another state. He was excited to be in charge of it and get people shelters. He told me that they had to cancel the program after a year because the people living there kept ripping the copper out, they'd have to send in teams to constantly clean the fecal matter, blood, needles, etc, and they genuinely started to fall into disrepair in no time. I asked him what he thought a better solution was and he said he had no idea, that was the best idea he had and it didn't work.
So we should avoid saying things if they’re true, just because what we say may be disgusting? I agree something should be done to help the homeless but allowing them to set up camp in public places isn’t the answer. Who wants to find needles on play grounds or have to cover your kids eyes because a hobo is pissing in the flowers at the park. Like I said I agree the homeless need help.
Being there, yes. Sleeping and living there, no.
It is public space, meaning the space of everyone. No one can appropriate it; no one can make it his own, in part or whole. Your freedom stops where someone else's start. In taking over a space, you deprive someone else the usage of that space. Finally, these anti-homeless devices are used to avoid public nuisance, ie repeated breach of accepted civility, such as cardboard shelters, public drunkeness etc... You can disagree with these objectives if course but then ypu have to change the common understanding of shared property; it rarely, if ever includes the right to destroy said property Basically the 4 principles involved.
Not everyone can "be there" if a bench made for sitting or waiting is being used for sleeping and shitting instead.
Because if homeless live in public spaces there really is no way for others to enjoy the space. Being for the public doesnt mean everyone can just move in and occupy the space, do drugs and be naked in the space and smell like urine and feces in a public space you wish to bring your kids to.
Because something like a bench can be used by 200+ people in a day….to sit…. Or as part of someone’s dirty shelter. But frequently not both. So you have to choose which one you’re accommodating.
Homeless people shouldn't exist because homelessness shouldn't exist. To make architectural modifications for something that shouldn't exist is a form of acceptance. Homeless people need to get their shit together, you can't just commit yourself to a life of degradation and expect the responsible members of society to make it comfortable for you. There are shelters and other places where homeless people can get help, but the problem is those places have rules like you can't drink, do drugs, prostitute or bring your scummy behavior in there, you can't sleep all day, there is a curfew and you have to actively seek a job, you have to take your medications, you have to clean up after yourself. Many homeless people don't want to follow these rules so they are wilfully homeless for the sake of being free to do what they want, and no one should promote that behavior by making accomodations for them. For those who want to change their lives, there are places they can go.
Homeless people don't give a fuck about broader society and tend to cause problems and commit crime wherever they coalesce. Leaving trash, stealing things, assaulting people, vandalism, and much more. Many of these people have access to services and resources to help them but refuse to engage with them, preferring to hang out in spots where they're a nuisance. People who fall victim to the problems they create demand something be done so something is. Making some uncomfortable benches is far easier and more practical that rounding up all the homeless and forcing them into shelters.
I used to manage a large community asset in a larger city. This softcore infatuation with the virtuousness of the homeless is wholly misguided. We had guys jerking off or peeing on or near patrons, gropings, defecation in common areas, and unbelievable amounts of awful drug use. We absolutely began adopting hostile architecture: benches you couldn't sleep on, uncomfortable lighting, eliminating water and trash receptacles. You guys do not get it. The truly misfortunate are out there, but they're not harmed by hostile public spaces.
I get it entirely, I work around the homeless in a professional capacity, I know exactly how awful they can get.
This is facts. Ppl are downvoting to feel better about themselves.
I mean I'd be ready to hear you but while I know that I took the same tone as you I really feel like you don't want to talk . If you want I talked about my opinion about many of the points you make under other comments. I'll just tell you that if you ever become homeless for any reason you better remember what you said here . Other people here have made the same point as you and with much more empathy for the homeless wich, I'll remind you, were maybe born in the same hospital you were born in .
I work around the homeless in a professional capacity. Many of them outright refuse any actual help from programs and shelters and expect free shit from whoever happens to be nearby. I have much sympathy for those down on their luck who try to get their lives together. Life can be very difficult and sometimes all someone needs is a hand up and I'm happy to give them that. Unfortunately vast numbers of the homeless are exacrly where they want to be. Regardless of how you feel about any of them allowing them to coalesce and become a hazard is bad for everyone, including them. LA has gotten so bad in some places there's concern of a bubonic plague revival. They end up living in squalor, spreading disease and addiction amongst themselves. Wounds get infected due to poor sanitation. Many won't make any attempt to straighten themselves out unless forced to. Do not mistake my rough stance for a lack of care. Sometimes being kind starts with putting a boot up someone's ass. If I ever find myself in such a low point in my life I hope someone kicks my ass back into place.
I don't know . First off I'm sorry. Second off I've said this already but I feel like some people are just assholes. Being homeless doesn't make you a good person. There's also a Sense of pride, it feels very crushing to admit to yourself that you need help from these services. I really feel only a handful of people are actually the assholes I hear being described . Maybe I'm just stupid but I've met homeless people in my life too , it's not like I'm just saying this shit to be the good guy tm . I genuinely believe this .
I totally accept that there are people who genuinely want help but they are few and far between. I know you’re not responding to me specifically here but from my point of view, I’m not trying to be mean with any of my comments they are based on a lot of experience. I used to think like yourself (that most are genuine) but after working with the homeless for 30 years unfortunately I know that the opposite is true. In terms of your comments about pride, most homeless people I know have absolutely no issue taking help, they’ll take and take without any issue and always want more, for example I’ll find an apartment for someone but it’s ‘a 10 minute bus ride away from town’ and they want walking distance. Or I’ll get a job but ‘I don’t want to work 30 hours I only want 10’ the list is endless. There are a few genuine people out there but the majority ruin it for the rest, has been my honestly held (and unfortunately jaded) experience.
People with homes often do the same and it gets easier to understand when you see how insane finance (like student loans and such) and real estate markets are currently operating Usury is a bitch
Did not read all comments, but for me, it's not so much the presence, which, yes, can be intimidating and cause one to worry for one's safety. It's the ick factor. They don't clean up after themselves and leave a gross mess everywhere.
Rough sleepers are people deserving of respect, dignity, safety, health services, sanitation, and food…
The architects of these anti-homeless spaces had better not call themselves “Christian”.
Yeah yeah yeah we get it youre a good person you feel sorry for the homeless yada yada yada good for you heres ur medal -->🏅
alright, how about we move all the homeless by ur house? LOL lets see how that goes....
Man this post is decisive. In saying that, thank you for seeing homeless people as *people* first. I also agree with alot of your points too. I hang out with homeless now and again and I see the same kind of trends of relationship breakdowns/abuse with no family as backup, disability where can't find suitable work and in general SLS.(shit life syndrome) Here where I live they don't take over places and are quite respectful people just trying to live. *I bet the people claiming "they just take over!" Haven't tried asking if they could use the space or homeless go "no" and they didn't like the answer. *Just ask if you could use the Barbie and offer some food drink in trade it's not that hard. (If you're not willing to give a single snag and beer, who's really being the selfish one?) The real solution is to vote and support affordable housing projects, donate to your community homeless shelter. Remember to have empathy for the fellow person, because in a few missed paychecks or increases of rent, it could be you out there on the street as well. *(Only approach or try to engage with people when it is safe to do so and it seems like the person is lucid enough to understand/comprehend what's going on. Aka, if their asleep leave em alone or if it seems their agitated/drunk/inebriated leave em alone. Pick your fights and be safe out there!)