The Los Angeles Homeless Containment Thread (San Diego, San Francisco: quiet, common, homeowners)

[Exitus Acta Probat]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Ok, I will ask again..do you have a source for that? And "what" help are you talking about?

If you are talking about the number of homeless who refuse the nightly shelters, I doubt if it's that high - but it's high. If you were homeless would you wait in line for 5 or 6 hours to get a filthy cot with bed bugs and then have to leave by 7am the next morning? IMO staying in one of those places is a sign of insanity.

90% of people who are offered enrolment in a program to get them off the streets refuse it. That comes from the LACS.

[Genghis]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Oh? Below is a sampling of some of your words from other threads on this topic. There are many more I can add. But the wording, your wording, is quite clear: you trust your “common sense” - read ‘gut feelings’ - more than statistics, research, studies, reports, etc. Read “your words”:

So, are we clear now on “your words”? And do you understand that calling posters “liars” is against TOS?

I haven’t called “every study” absolute proof. Quote me saying that about any other study if you think I have. I referred to this report as ‘absolute’ because it consists of verifiable police reports for every one of its 1657 examples.

It doesn’t matter if it is an advocacy group ... it matters whether the data are concrete and verifiable. Which in this case it all is.


Never ever once anywhere have I said otherwise. Some homeless are where they are by their own errors and failures. And likewise many are not. Do you dispute that many of my expanded characterizations on the list are valid examples of homeless being so by accidents or actions of fate outside their actions? Or not? You ridiculed the list ... and accused me of blaming society for the failures that brought people to homelessness. Ok. Well now do you still blame all those people for the conditions I describe?



No, I did not say that drug and alcohol use on the street was usually a consequence of homelessness. That is yet another of many examples of your inability to read carefully ... what I have said is that drug and alcohol use on the street is sometimes a consequence of homelessness, as well as often a cause. And I recall the exchange and that I didn’t bother to go correct you at the time. I should have. No, I didn’t cite a study that time. But I can. I didn’t bother because, well, look at your quoted statements above: you won’t read research. You go for gut feelings. Lol.

Gut feelings are different from common sense. If you told me you were abducted by aliens yesterday, common sense would tell me you are full of it. If someone called me on the phone telling me I won the lottery, and could collect my winnings by sending some money to Nigeria, common sense would dictate that it's a scam. Common sense comes from years of experience that can be explained out in detail. Gut feelings are just instincts. I remember what I said, you don't have to remind me. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt then. Maybe you weren't lying, but just can't tell the difference.

Oh, I'll read research, if I think it's worth my time. I just won't believe it automatically just because someone has published or presented it. Unlike you, I've dealt with actual scientific research. I've seen groups with blatantly flawed models provide data supposedly proving their case. So yeah, I'm going to be skeptical when I see something that goes against my experience, against what I've seen and heard in life, the interviews I've seen, the people I know, and so on. That's what common sense is to me. If I care enough, then I'll actually try to review the data to form a more definitive opinion.

[Exitus Acta Probat]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Can’t hide from your words now, Exitus. They’re preserved in cyberspace for eternity. You wrote what I quoted. Anyone can go back and read them. Blatant advocacy.

I'm hiding from nothing. Do not make up falsehoods about me.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

I'm hiding from nothing. Do not make up falsehoods about me.

You can read bub. Everyone following this thread here read your posts.

[Genghis]

Originally Posted by Exitus Acta Probat

I'm hiding from nothing. Do not make up falsehoods about me.

Much as I hate to say it, Tulemutt is right. You did advocate violence, as was made abundantly clear in your posts and as he spelled out. I don't know how serious you were but online postings of that nature can encourage violent behavior. Your posts have been read a total of 8,720,584 times. You only need one reader to be inspired to harm someone. Just stop doing that crap.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

this! I looked over the list Tule provided and realized I should be homeless. We live in a society where blame for actions is always placed on the person other than the actor.

OC - while you were looking, apparently you overlooked I didn’t discuss blame.

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

OC - while you were looking, apparently you overlooked I didn’t discuss blame.

I gotcha.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Genghis

Much as I hate to say it, Tulemutt is right. You did advocate violence, as was made abundantly clear in your posts and as he spelled out. I don't know how serious you were but online postings of that nature can encourage violent behavior. Your posts have been read a total of 8,720,584 times. You only need one reader to be inspired to harm someone. Just stop doing that crap.

Good of you to notice. This is a major reason I persist in these homeless threads. You may distrust sociologists and their research and studies, but the entire field involved in studying homelessness agrees on the point that the persistent marginalization, ridicule, and fear mongering is factor #1 in inciting the violence the homeless experience from the general public.

1657 police-documented incidences of violence against the homeless by non-homeless, including 423 murders between 1999 and 2016. California leads the nation.

Knock it off is right.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Genghis

Gut feelings are different from common sense. If you told me you were abducted by aliens yesterday, common sense would tell me you are full of it. If someone called me on the phone telling me I won the lottery, and could collect my winnings by sending some money to Nigeria, common sense would dictate that it's a scam. Common sense comes from years of experience that can be explained out in detail. Gut feelings are just instincts. I remember what I said, you don't have to remind me. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt then. Maybe you weren't lying, but just can't tell the difference.

Oh, I'll read research, if I think it's worth my time. I just won't believe it automatically just because someone has published or presented it. Unlike you, I've dealt with actual scientific research. I've seen groups with blatantly flawed models provide data supposedly proving their case. So yeah, I'm going to be skeptical when I see something that goes against my experience, against what I've seen and heard in life, the interviews I've seen, the people I know, and so on. That's what common sense is to me. If I care enough, then I'll actually try to review the data to form a more definitive opinion.

I don’t know how you know whether I’ve dealt with scientific research or not.

And sure I understand about flawed models. Happens all the time. And results are particularly hard to replicate in sociological and psychological studies. Which is why I pointed out to you the studies on % of homeless transience are many ... and all pointing to similar results, which strongly supports validity. These organizations aren’t a giant conspiracy. They include advoacy groups, but also universities, polling firms, and media.

Meanwhile:

Albert Einstein said common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by the age of 18.

I can post one hell of a long list of common sense assumptions that are false under scrutiny.

[USDefault]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

But, let’s say it was MY house and B&B, for discussion. Why would I be called to turn it over to homeless

We've told you a hundreds times. We need to spell it out again? One last time. You should house the homeless using your own resources because this is the logical conclusion of the apologist policies and programs you hold dear. You excuse the criminals, the lazy, the violent homeless, the drug abusers, of any personal responsibility. You then demand young and productive citizens provide free housing, resources for "needs," supervision, counseling, and on and on and on. You want free housing for the homeless? Then put your money and resources where that gaping maw is -- you provide it, instead of forcing others to do so via governmental force and taxation. You do what you say others should do and pay for.


Frightening this needs to be explained to you again. And again and again and again

when YOU’VE done nothing? What a juvenile argument.

How wrong you are. I do not -- not -- advocate "free stuff" for criminals, the purposefully lazy, and drug abusers. You do. This is why you are a hypocrite, and I am not.

I don’t create homelessness.

Once again: that which is tolerated, is acceptance. You apologize for it. Rationalize it. Defend it. You nurture the conditions by which homelessness grows exponentially.

I haven’t taken a dime from you. And YOU need to make a decision here: do you want the homeless off the streets - or not? They’re not going just because you chastise them. So, as I keep asking you: what are YOU, Default, going to do? You either pay through taxes to get them off the street - or you fight the programs so you reduce tax expenditures and live with them and their disruption, filth and danger.

You may not have physically taken a dime from me personally, but your action plan is far worse. You would use the threat of government force to take money, resources, and labor from everyone, and provide "free stuff" to criminals, drug abusers, the violent homeless, the purposefully lazy. It's disgusting, because socialism is disgusting. You are an enemy of the young and of the productive. Your prescriptions are poison.

You can’t put them in prison as you wish, nor kill them off as Exitus advocates. Tulemutt didn’t write the constitution nor write the laws. Just a messenger here. You don’t like it, take it up with the leadership you hate. See where it gets you.

Criminals, drug abusers, and the violent homeless absolutely can be put in prison, and for long periods of time.

I’ve got nothing to do with it being the way it is.

You, and those who think like you, have everything to do with it being this way. Your worldview is San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. Head-in-the-sand apologist for miscreants, criminals, drug abusers, the violent homeless, and the purposefully lazy. They now infest all major cities in California. Congratulations on the urban dystopia you so fervently defend. Wallow in it.

Me giving a homeless person my ficticious B&B house wouldn’t make even a slight dent in the problem.

Absolutely irrelevant. Totally, laughably, irrelevant. The point is, do that which you advocate. You want "free stuff" for the criminals, like housing, "needs" counseling, resources, services. So, start providing it. Stop asking everyone else to provide it. You want these things done? You do it. Start ingesting your own medicine. The rest of us refuse.

California go bankrupt? States can’t go bankrupt. Look it up.

Bankrupt, meaning the shorthand reference to one's inability to pay current liabilities and future debt obligations. Not meaning whether a state can seek reorganization under Chapter 9, 11, or 13. But who cares.