The Los Angeles Homeless Containment Thread (artists, stone, ghost)

[rodentraiser]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Everything is comparative and relative.

Have you ever been to the really bad parts of Mogadishu? The slums of Kolkata or New Delhi? The homeless in LA live very well by comparison.

It is all about comparison.

But this isn't Mogadishu or New Delhi. This is LA, and Seattle, and Portland, and San Francisco. Here, in the US.

You should see how they treat people in jail in Mexico and North Korea and China. Does that mean we can get away with feeding prisoners substandard and rotten food because prisoners here have it so much better?

The homeless have it better here because we have laws about building houses out of sheets of metal, and we don't want to have people dying in the street from a lack of care. We don't want small children to sit at the edge of restaurant tables, begging for a bite to eat. And above all else, we know that disease doesn't stop at an imaginary line between the rich and the poor. Keeping the lowest people in our society healthy keeps the rest of us healthy as well. And doing that means feeding and sheltering them.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by rodentraiser

But this isn't Mogadishu or New Delhi. This is LA, and Seattle, and Portland, and San Francisco. Here, in the US.

You misunderstand my point.

If homeless can cross the street to have a better existence, they will.
If homeless can go 3 blocks to the left and have a better existence, they will do so.
If homeless can go 3 miles to the left and have a better existence, almost all will do so.
If homeless can go 30 miles to the left and have a much better existence, most will do so.

The entire issue is about the comparison of the quality of life in one spot relative to another spot.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by jm1982

There was a good OP ed by Todd Spitzer about this .

One great quote from it

“We don’t accept homelessness as a way of life, and we don’t enable the homeless population.”

There was another great op-ed article about Orange County's handling of the homeless.

"Every homeless person who inconveniences a real housewife or NIMBYer is a living, breathing reminder that our superiority complex has nowhere to pitch its tent anymore. For far too long, we’ve self-mythologized ourselves as a place where good people could live out their three-bedroom, two-bath, swimming-pool suburban American Dream if only they tried hard enough, while “bad” people and their problems went to Los Angeles or the Inland Empire."

The upside of visible homelessness in Orange County: We can't pretend we're better than everyone - LA Times

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

There was another great op-ed article about Orange County's handling of the homeless.

"Every homeless person who inconveniences a real housewife or NIMBYer is a living, breathing reminder that our superiority complex has nowhere to pitch its tent anymore. For far too long, we’ve self-mythologized ourselves as a place where good people could live out their three-bedroom, two-bath, swimming-pool suburban American Dream if only they tried hard enough, while “bad” people and their problems went to Los Angeles or the Inland Empire."

The upside of visible homelessness in Orange County: We can't pretend we're better than everyone - LA Times

I really have to laugh. Quoting Gustavo Arellano, the professed lover of all things Orange County; the same one who is all about identity politics and attacking OC every chance he's given? He needs to get the heck out of OC and stop using OC criticism in LA to ingratiate himself to Angelenos, especially low income Angelenos who are convinced that OC got its money from stealing from them.

Gustavo is so dense that he writes non stop ID politics drivel. In the below article, he is bemoaning the fact that Mexicans in Whittier are against food trucks implying they should be down with their bretheren and presumably not worry about the city's tax base or restaurants in Whittier. Que idiota.

Of course Latinos can assimilate into American society. Just look at Whittier

[V8 Vega]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

You misunderstand my point.

If homeless can cross the street to have a better existence, they will.
If homeless can go 3 blocks to the left and have a better existence, they will do so.
If homeless can go 3 miles to the left and have a better existence, almost all will do so.
If homeless can go 30 miles to the left and have a much better existence, most will do so.

The entire issue is about the comparison of the quality of life in one spot relative to another spot.

If the homeless can go to LA because the cops won't do anything to them they will.
If the homeless can go to LA because they are like a sacred cow here to the politicians they will.
If the homeless can go to LA they can do anything they want they will.
If the homeless can go to LA because they can take drugs and be stone drunk in public and nothing happens they will.
If the homeless can go to LA and go to the bathroom in the street and expose themselves they will.
If the homeless can go to LA and steal everything that isn't bolted down they will.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

I really have to laugh. Quoting Gustavo Arellano, the professed lover of all things Orange County; the same one who is all about identity politics and attacking OC every chance he's given?

Yet Arellano is correct in that we cannot continue to condemn the homeless, and the more NIMBY we are in regard to the issue of homelessness, the greater the problem will become.

"That juvenile narrative created a bubble in which we felt urban blight would never afflict us — because we're Orange County, damn it! Elected officials resisted affordable and high-density housing for decades (and still do), while actively ignoring activists who, Cassandra-like, warned that homelessness was not only not going away, it was getting worse."

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

You might want to brush up on the constitutional amendment process:
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution

I don't need to be 'brushed up' on it, but thanks anyway. What I find amusing is that you think that people would support a constitutional amendment to do away with the 4th, 5th and 8th amendments of the constitution so that the fine people of Los Angeles won't have to be bothered by homeless people.

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

Yet Arellano is correct in that we cannot continue to condemn the homeless, and the more NIMBY we are in regard to the issue of homelessness, the greater the problem will become.

"That juvenile narrative created a bubble in which we felt urban blight would never afflict us — because we're Orange County, damn it! Elected officials resisted affordable and high-density housing for decades (and still do), while actively ignoring activists who, Cassandra-like, warned that homelessness was not only not going away, it was getting worse."

Now that you have Gustavo of Ask A Mexican fame, can you please keep him? But don't let him stay on the West Side because it has white people. Gabachos are bad, you know? Please consider getting him to stay in the vast low income areas in LA where so many people think like him. THe lower the income, the more "real" it is to Gus. That's his paradise.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

You misunderstand my point.

If homeless can cross the street to have a better existence, they will.
If homeless can go 3 blocks to the left and have a better existence, they will do so.
If homeless can go 3 miles to the left and have a better existence, almost all will do so.
If homeless can go 30 miles to the left and have a much better existence, most will do so.

The entire issue is about the comparison of the quality of life in one spot relative to another spot.

But the reality is you have no idea how far they will move for a better existence, do you? You are just guessing. The homeless form communities, not in the traditional sense perhaps but they are communities nonetheless. They learn who they can trust and who to avoid. They form close bonds with other homeless and frequently rely on each other. It is very unlikely that more than a few would agree to move very far from where they are. They also have a distrust of authority figures, they don't believe that outreach workers or police officers want to help them. They believe quite the opposite, that the goal is to lock them up or make their lives miserable.

[LuvSouthOC]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

But the reality is you have no idea how far they will move for a better existence, do you? You are just guessing. The homeless form communities, not in the traditional sense perhaps but they are communities nonetheless. They learn who they can trust and who to avoid. They form close bonds with other homeless and frequently rely on each other. It is very unlikely that more than a few would agree to move very far from where they are. They also have a distrust of authority figures, they don't believe that outreach workers or police officers want to help them. They believe quite the opposite, that the goal is to lock them up or make their lives miserable.

Yes we do know. They will come from even thousands of miles away.