Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What could go wrong you ask? Plenty. Has anyone here on this site been temporarily assigned to live on a ship? I have (4 months) and it's worse than imaginable. Plus.....the cost, time and effort to operate, maintain, clean, police, etc etc, etc. a ship vs a land based structure is at least 10x more intense in comparison.
This is by fare the absolute dumbest idea these liberal democrat run cities have come up with. I say let them do it. I'm always in the mood to watch a democrat-liberal run train wreck. And this will be a Jim-Dandy of one.
I thought I heard many want to get rid of things like high rise low income housing for things like crime and conditions much of which comes from living in close quarters. This is just taking a vertical problem and making a horizontal one with some maritime make-up.
I could see making it temporary housing, administrative facilities,or a clinic of somekind but permanent residential housing eh.
What if California didn't invite so many illegals into their state and instead created programs to help the homeless become employed and get back on their feet again? What if?
What if we didn't spend $23 Billion in 2018 alone to support illegal aliens? What if we didn't put the rights of the homeless ahead of the rights of the taxpaying home owners and renters? Let's see...our schools would be higher performing, our streets wouldn't smell like crap and be littered with needles, our schools could be modernized, our gas tax could go down, we could partly subsidize the cost of going to university so even the cheapest, least prestigious universities weren't 25k a year. Property taxes would be lower, income tax would be lower, sales tax would be lower. I mean, the list goes on.
But watch our Mr. Durango, Colorado is becoming more Californicated every year.
It's like Section 8 housing. If I owned a Cruise ship no way in heck would I lease it to the city to house homeless.
After they are out the destruction, the fumigating and the cleanup would be massive. No way could the city gurantee the ship would be returned in it's original condition.
I guess if you had a ship ready for the scrap metal it might be a way to get big bucks out of Oakland and the taxpayers.
They were talking about it here on local So Cal radio. It was proposed with a boat that was about to be decommissioned as I understand it.
The homeless advocacy is quickly becoming an industry here in CA. It's big business to get into the helping the homeless. Real estate developers are looking to charge the city 600k to building a single housing unit for the homeless. They fight any and all groups that propose much much cheaper solutions.
It's all a big money making racket here.
If getting these people off of the streets is much cheaper using an older decommissioned cruise ship, it's something that should be investigated in my opinion.
What if California didn't invite so many illegals into their state and instead created programs to help the homeless become employed and get back on their feet again? What if?
The homeless aren't likely to vote.
Illegals granted citizenship and their next two generations are guaranteed DNC voters and likely to vote.
Self contained, controlled access, ample common space, an infirmary and kitchen, and possibly maintained by a crew of residents -- might work. They could go on cruises, too.
They were talking about it here on local So Cal radio. It was proposed with a boat that was about to be decommissioned as I understand it.
The homeless advocacy is quickly becoming an industry here in CA. It's big business to get into the helping the homeless. Real estate developers are looking to charge the city 600k to building a single housing unit for the homeless. They fight any and all groups that propose much much cheaper solutions.
It's all a big money making racket here.
If getting these people off of the streets is much cheaper using an older decommissioned cruise ship, it's something that should be investigated in my opinion.
The truth of the matter is, it's not cheaper, but it is much more expensive by at least 10 times compared to a land based housing. Everything about it is more. Everything! What if a fire breaks out? It takes special fire fighting skills and systems to fight ship board fires compared to fighting fires on land. Sewage waste management/control and upkeep is another. Policing and security is yet another. Ventilation is yet another. Supplying the ship with heat/cooling, fresh air, hot/cold water, refrigeration, electricity, trash, sewage, etc. etc. services is also a very expensive and time consuming operation.
Let them do it, I say. It's going to be a total disaster, but I'm down with that since these are liberal democrat leadership ideas and operations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
