The trash, and furniture along the roads.....it’s never been this bad. (Portland: sales, rent)

[redguard57]

An easy solution to the homeless problem would be to just build a place for them to be, then illegalize vagrancy, delinquency, etc.., with the sentence being, you have to live to at the campus. Buy some acreage, a few hundred to a few thousand, outside every city that has homeless, build some buildings, put them there. How much would it cost, maybe a few billion? That's nothing.

Of course it sounds a little concentration camp-like.

[southking500]

Originally Posted by redguard57

Like jail?

They could be cared for in jail, but that would actually be more expensive to the tune of 30-40k per person per year.

For 20 billion a year, we could incarcerate every single homeless person.

Jail is where the junkies who steal to support their habits belong anyway.
30-40K a year would be a great net savings to society when you add up the cost of the alternative now being embraced in most US cities:

The thefts alone for each junkie exceed that amount annually + police and court time (expensive catch and release/wristslap programs) public defenders, mental health counseling in lieu of jail, ER visits for psych/detox symptoms, hidden costs to businesses like cleaning up their restrooms and parking lots of trash and human waste, lost business as customers flee, employees quitting after multiple confrontations with crazy, high homeless people etc, degradation of city parks and greenbelts, decreased quality of life for city residents who no longer feel safe in their own neighborhoods PLUS the astronomical amount of money spent on "homeless services" $500K + per unit of "free" housing. And that is just the construction cost, the housing is managed by nonprofits receiving millions annually from the govt.

In other words BIG business providing paychecks for many people (reliable left wing voters) and govt. contracts to private agencies and contractors with close connections to city govt.

And the compliant liberal big city taxpayer picks up the tab not just with their hard earned $$$, but also by sacrificing much of what used to make NW cities so livable.

[Jimrob1]

Originally Posted by redguard57

An easy solution to the homeless problem would be to just build a place for them to be, then illegalize vagrancy, delinquency, etc.., with the sentence being, you have to live to at the campus. Buy some acreage, a few hundred to a few thousand, outside every city that has homeless, build some buildings, put them there. How much would it cost, maybe a few billion? That's nothing.

Of course it sounds a little concentration camp-like.

What you suggest actually and sadly might be all that can be done. The problem obviously has hit the fan and it is completely out of control. It just might be time to do as you suggest in this so called land of plenty. Which we all know or should know by now is not the real America. It's actually a 3rd World Environment in much of this country now.

[redguard57]

Originally Posted by Jimrob1

What you suggest actually and sadly might be all that can be done. The problem obviously has hit the fan and it is completely out of control. It just might be time to do as you suggest in this so called land of plenty. Which we all know or should know by now is not the real America. It's actually a 3rd World Environment in much of this country now.

The problem is that you'd have a hard time convincing voters of something like that. You could make the campus some kind of idyllic estate out in wine country, and the left would call it an Auschwitz. On the right, they would decry the cost and moral hazard of giving freebees to vagrants.

[redguard57]

Originally Posted by southking500

Jail is where the junkies who steal to support their habits belong anyway.
30-40K a year would be a great net savings to society when you add up the cost of the alternative now being embraced in most US cities:

The thefts alone for each junkie exceed that amount annually + police and court time (expensive catch and release/wristslap programs) public defenders, mental health counseling in lieu of jail, ER visits for psych/detox symptoms, hidden costs to businesses like cleaning up their restrooms and parking lots of trash and human waste, lost business as customers flee, employees quitting after multiple confrontations with crazy, high homeless people etc, degradation of city parks and greenbelts, decreased quality of life for city residents who no longer feel safe in their own neighborhoods PLUS the astronomical amount of money spent on "homeless services" $500K + per unit of "free" housing. And that is just the construction cost, the housing is managed by nonprofits receiving millions annually from the govt.

In other words BIG business providing paychecks for many people (reliable left wing voters) and govt. contracts to private agencies and contractors with close connections to city govt.

And the compliant liberal big city taxpayer picks up the tab not just with their hard earned $$$, but also by sacrificing much of what used to make NW cities so livable.

There would be two problems politically - 1) some people, mostly left, would say that this gives the police too much power, and the minute there was abuse of homeless by police it would be a firestorm. 2) On the right they would decry the cost of subsidizing people they deem to be criminals or indolent.

I think Salt Lake City had the best homeless policy - just pay for apartments for them, but not in one place, disperse them in all directions. The cost isn't too bad and if they do get into trouble with the law, they go to jail without attracting undue attention.

The problem for SLC has been that with market rents rising, there is heavy pressure on the landlords to drop out of the program if the city will not keep upping the subsidy, and massive NIMBYism, especially as those parts of the city where the subsidized housing was, rose in value. Also many people complaining that the policy attracted homeless from around the country, overwhelming the system causing waiting lists, resulting in new tent cities to pop up in the parks, etc.. which just re-set the problem.

That last point is why any solution probably needs to be national.

[apple92680]

Originally Posted by EasyBeezy

Well, to be fair, unless you were walking directly through a homeless camp, I doubt you smelled anything, especially in February. We have gods cleaning service constantly washing the streets at this time of year.

That said, the homelessness is certainly out of control. Although liberal politics may be part of the problem, in terms of not rousting them in a timely manner from their camping spots, their "decision" to be urban campers is their own. Despite what people say, there is no free money for homeless from the local govt. All cities are liberal, even in Texas. But all cities are not dealing with a homeless epidemic like the West Coast is. My feeling is that the problem is more cultural than political.

Check out Austin TX homeless problem!

[zerp]

Originally Posted by redguard57

There's no easy answer to the homeless problem. It did not appear overnight. It was many years in the making. And it's not just Portland. Look at what has been happening the last few weeks in Belligham, WA. It's more noticeable here on the west coast because we have laws that protect their "human rights" and so they can't just be evicted, and we have more homeless per capita than other similarly populated areas in the country.

I'm from Texas. Once I witnessed with my own eyes what cops in a medium sized conservative Texas town did to unwanted homeless. I was working at Wal-Mart at the time and had been the one to call the police on a homeless shoplifter. Later I regretted it. I was there when the cop threatened to assault or possibly murder this homeless man unless he left town within 24 hours. The cop said his bus ticket would be comped. If the homeless man did not leave, the communication was very clear that something bad would happen to him, and no one in town would care, that no judge or jury in the area would give a crap about a dead homeless person.

If you want to fix the homeless problem, that is one way to do it. Town was clean, had no campers.

At its core the problem is housing costs. In cheap places like rural Arkansas, there are rural slums where people that are near-homeless can live for very little money. On the west coast urban areas there are no such options.

Many of the things you guys are complaining about are beyond the powers of city councilors to fix overnight.

It looks like you didn’t care either.

[zerp]

Originally Posted by LongLeggedOne

I'm quite far left and let me tell u, I dont want to live in this state. I dont think a lot of it is too liberal TBH besides a few pockets. U cant find even sex shops outside of Portland like on the west side. Its sooo conservative, feels more oppressive than the south and going into Portland is a PITA, even if one could consider me ANTIFA unmasked. I dont even go into town and I am moving to the south soon.. Good riddance. Portland/west side will be in the rear view mirror SOON. And as an MtF trans person, I bring this news. I hate this place.

You don’t want to live in the state your votes created?

[zerp]

Originally Posted by redguard57

An easy solution to the homeless problem would be to just build a place for them to be, then illegalize vagrancy, delinquency, etc.., with the sentence being, you have to live to at the campus. Buy some acreage, a few hundred to a few thousand, outside every city that has homeless, build some buildings, put them there. How much would it cost, maybe a few billion? That's nothing.

Of course it sounds a little concentration camp-like.

The solution already exists and at zero additional cost. 3/4+ of Multnomah County has voted blue since Obama or before Obama. This means 3/4+ of the households in Portland support caring for the homeless. However, these blue households don’t want to do it themselves. They want to make someone else pay for it.

If we just passed a law in Portland saying blue households must take in at least one and maybe two homeless people, the streets would be clear. There is certainly capacity based on the # of houses and average # of bedrooms per house in Portland, divided by the average number of household occupants per household in Portland. On top of that, blue households certainly have couches or even just open floor space. Sleeping pads are available from REI for $50 and up. That’s all that is really needed. Instead, greedy Portland homeowners seem to want to AirBnB portions of their house out instead of using common sense to sacrifice for the greater good.

Let’s see the 3/4+ of Portland’s blue households show their love and compassion and host a homeless person or two in their own homes.

[ejisme]

Haha, I hope that's a joke zerp.

Nearly no one would take a homeless stranger into their home. They will spend a "little" money to have someone else take care of the issue, but only their vision of a humane way to approach the issue of homelessness. As the liberal/progressives will say "it's not the homeless people's fault they are homeless, they just need our help." Unfortunately, no one can agree what that help is. They all agree it can't be in their back yard. Can you see Lake Oswego, Dunthorp, West Linn, Wilsonville, etc., building homeless shelters and accepting mass numbers of homeless into their neighborhoods to rehab and assimilate into their communities?!? That all needs to be done somewhere else!!!