The Los Angeles Homeless Containment Thread (Malibu: plans, girl, 2006)

[Finper]

where are they going to build 16k pod houses in LA?? And let them live for free.... The uproar of the chosen city would be deafening.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

Hello again.

That's your argument with LuvOC, not me.

I'm simply pointing out that 12,000 homeless individuals in LA right now were not LA residents before, that's a huge number. Wonder why they are migrating to LA? It's almost as if there is incentive to be there when you're homeless, like... I don't know... people asking for LA to provide housing for all?

It doesn't matter if 30,000 of the homeless came to LA last month. You are stuck with what you have now, you can't force them to leave nor can you deny them benefits that other homeless people would be eligible for. This is from the majority decision in Saenz v. Roe

"The right of newly arrived citizens to the same privileges and immunities enjoyed by other citizens of their new state… is at issue here. That right is protected by the new arrival’s status as both a state citizen and a United States citizen, and it is plainly identified in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause... Since the right to travel embraces a citizen’s right to be treated equally in her new state of residence, a discriminatory classification is itself a penalty. California’s classifications are defined entirely by the period of residency... California’s legitimate interest in saving money does not justify this discriminatory scheme. The Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause expressly equates citizenship with residence… and does not tolerate a hierarchy of similarly placed citizens based on the location of their prior residences."

It's difficult to discuss viable solutions to the problem when people hang on to the idea that the only thing that will work is kicking the homeless out of LA or locking them up when both of those 'remedies' have been held to be unconstitutional.

As far as the homeless flocking to LA because of all the benefits..I find that a little hard to swallow since Los Angeles hasn't even been able to provide shelter for 1/4 of the homeless.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

Uh I did read your links, even using the percentages they claim, you can't use the "savings" to build a 16,000 unit tiny home community that is not only supervised, but also maintained to a hygiene level where you aren't having Hep breakouts.

Seriously, do the math. Look at what LA County is spending on all homeless programs in the county, which is all publicly available info and calculate the percentage adjusted savings (which I'm sure you did not), and you'll see how far off you are on your claims .

There is no need for anyone to "do the math" for you, it's already been done, many times...

https://mic.com/articles/86251/study...eet#.KyIKMjlPG

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...et-7953339.php

https://matadornetwork.com/pulse/pro...eaving-street/

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...k-city/422289/

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...nd-lots-of-it/

[seain dublin]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

I used to live in the Antelope Valley, I already said that in this or one of these other threads about LA homeless.

When a conservator is appointed they keep the person in the area where they are because the point of a conservatorship is to provide regular and consistent monitoring. If appropriate treatment is not available nearby then of course the person could be placed eewhere, but it's unlikely that would be in a homeless camp in the Antelope Valley.

By the way, what makes you think that people living in Antelope Valley would ever agree to this nonsense idea of yours? LA created much of their own problem by trying to contain the homeless to a small geographic area, then ignoring it when it got out of control, LA needs to deal with it no one is going to let them outsource it.

Exactly, we just saw what happened in Koreatown with the protests over a homeless shelter in the area, that that the people who live in Koreatown had no input on.

Why on earth would people in Antelope Valley go along with this...they wouldn't.

Originally Posted by jm1982

Antelope Valley is in L.A county by the walsy . I guess you must of had a negative experience living in the antelope valley as you seem to be so against it .
For San Francisco homeless , Sacramento would make more sense . It’s a lot closer .

Doesn't matter if AV is in LA County, and you didn't answer the question either.

So what makes you think that people living in Antelope Valley would ever agree to this nonsense idea or yours?

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

There is no need for anyone to "do the math" for you, it's already been done, many times...

https://mic.com/articles/86251/study...eet#.KyIKMjlPG

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...et-7953339.php

https://matadornetwork.com/pulse/pro...eaving-street/

https://www.theatlantic.com/business...k-city/422289/

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...nd-lots-of-it/

You already posted the Moore Place example. The Moore Place example doesn't actually help your (or Tule's) case because youre comparing a private charity organization to a large bloated government solution. Two very different things.

The Urban Ministry Center is a private charity organization that partners with corporate entities and state entities to support their interfaith mission of 130 churches and institutions of faith. They are NOT a large state organization run or administered by the government. Private entities can operate far more lean than state entities. They aren't slaves to state unions for one, and secondly they aren't completely reliant on taxpayer dollars to survive or the bloat that comes along with government management of taxpayer money.

That's far different than a 60,000 Unit tiny home community run by LA County. Did you not research how LA's public restroom initiative went in Skid Row? It was poorly run (like most Government programs), and after a decade of fighting and lobbying to get them running, they were closed down anti-climatically. Government sucks at everything.

So if your point is that a private charity organization should try to house homeless, welcome to the club! I will put up my checkbook records against ANYONE here to show what I've donated to help house homeless in LA County.

But that's not the same as the LA County Government asking for hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to house tens of thousands of homeless people.

Apples and Oranges.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

It doesn't matter if 30,000 of the homeless came to LA last month. You are stuck with what you have now, you can't force them to leave nor can you deny them benefits that other homeless people would be eligible for. This is from the majority decision in Saenz v. Roe

Never said anything about forcing them to leave or denying them anything.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

You already posted the Moore Place example. The Moore Place example doesn't actually help your (or Tule's) case because youre comparing a private charity organization to a large bloated government solution. Two very different things.

The Urban Ministry Center is a private charity organization that partners with corporate entities and state entities to support their interfaith mission of 130 churches and institutions of faith. They are NOT a large state organization run or administered by the government. Private entities can operate far more lean than state entities. They aren't slaves to state unions for one, and secondly they aren't completely reliant on taxpayer dollars to survive or the bloat that comes along with government management of taxpayer money.

That's far different than a 60,000 Unit tiny home community run by LA County. Did you not research how LA's public restroom initiative went in Skid Row? It was poorly run (like most Government programs), and after a decade of fighting and lobbying to get them running, they were closed down anti-climatically. Government sucks at everything.

So if your point is that a private charity organization should try to house homeless, welcome to the club! I will put up my checkbook records against ANYONE here to show what I've donated to help house homeless in LA County.

But that's not the same as the LA County Government asking for hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money to house tens of thousands of homeless people.

Apples and Oranges.

When did I say I objected to charities providing housing? What I have said is that charities do not have enough money to take on the entire task alone without government funding. The exception being Delancey which I posted about just the other day.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

When did I say I objected to charities providing housing? What I have said is that charities do not have enough money to take on the entire task alone without government funding. The exception being Delancey which I posted about just the other day.

Never said you objected to private charities.

You should support them, they've been the most effective tool against homelessness anywhere.

But you shouldn't compare Moore Place, a private charity run solution to what TuleMutt was presenting (a huge government run behemoth). Like I said, two totally different solutions.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

Never said you objected to private charities.

You should support them, they've been the most effective tool against homelessness anywhere.

But you shouldn't compare Moore Place, a private charity run solution to what TuleMutt was presenting (a huge government run behemoth). Like I said, two totally different solutions.

Lmfao ... of course, tulemutt never presented any such thing ...

Too funny the way you make up fictions and paraphrase in your ceaseless efforts to create and perpetuate controversy.

Well, that’s show business! ... eh, brotherman?

[Matadora]

I think we should all pick a selfless homeless person and set up a GoFundMe page like this girl did.

Homeless vet who received thousands in donations plans to pay it forward