Breakdown In Civil Order

[blastula]

They should both be charged obviously.

 

[bilby]

The problem seems to be that the right wing genuinely believes that moving the homeless people away from the places right wing people live, work, travel, and enjoy, is a solution to the problem of homelessness - that the problem here is homeless people in the way, making the place look untidy, making homed people feel unsafe, panhandling, and possibly even committing crimes; certainly provoking fear of their committing crimes.

The idea that the problem of homelessness might not only be about the effect it has on homed people, or that hiding the problem might not constitute a solution, is totally alien to them.

Is a homeless person sleeping on a bench, making it unavailable for homed people to use for a brief sit down? If so, there's a problem here in need of a solution; But if you think that replacing the bench with one that people can sit on (but not sleep on) is even addressing that problem (much less solving it), then presumably you would also accept that sweeping the dust under your living room rug constitutes a solution to the problem that your home is dirty.

If you think that the biggest issue with homelessness is that the homeless people are causing problems for homed people, then you're either a fucking moron, or a fucking sociopath, or both.

 

[Politesse]

The problem seems to be that the right wing genuinely believes that moving the homeless people away from the places right wing people live, work, travel, and enjoy, is a solution to the problem of homelessness - that the problem here is homeless people in the way, making the place look untidy, making homed people feel unsafe, panhandling, and possibly even committing crimes; certainly provoking fear of their committing crimes.

The idea that the problem of homelessness might not only be about the effect it has on homed people, or that hiding the problem might not constitute a solution, is totally alien to them.

Is a homeless person sleeping on a bench, making it unavailable for homed people to use for a brief sit down? If so, there's a problem here in need of a solution; But if you think that replacing the bench with one that people can sit on (but not sleep on) is even addressing that problem (much less solving it), then presumably you would also accept that sweeping the dust under your living room rug constitutes a solution to the problem that your home is dirty.

If you think that the biggest issue with homelessness is that the homeless people are causing problems for homed people, then you're either a fucking moron, or a fucking sociopath, or both.

I wish it were just the "right wing" that felt that way, but it's pretty much the bipartisan consensus in this country. People who genuinely give a shit about the homeless certainly exist, but they are rare even in left-leaning areas like San Francisco. That's why we have a homeless crisis in the first place. To do anything substantive and obvious to prevent someone from becoming homeless - like, say, providing someone a house, or forbidding their eviction from the house they have, - is nearly unthinkable to most of my countrymen. So the problem has grown and grown, to the point that its sheer scale defies the investments we are willing to make in addressing it.

 

[bilby]

I wish it were just the "right wing" that felt that way, but it's pretty much the bipartisan consensus in this country.

Your country has a bipartisan right wing. The Democratic Party is in no way left of centre politically.

 

[Elixir]

I wish it were just the "right wing" that felt that way, but it's pretty much the bipartisan consensus in this country.

Your country has a bipartisan right wing. The Democratic Party is in no way left of centre politically.

Democrats are still the lefternmost thing we got In any significant numbers. With real life fascists already controlling the purse strings and threatening Americans with economic ruin if they don’t do the austerity thing and give all that money they’re spending on shit like Head Start, to its rightful owners (their donors), it’s probably a good idea to go with the democrats.

 

[Politesse]

I wish it were just the "right wing" that felt that way, but it's pretty much the bipartisan consensus in this country.

Your country has a bipartisan right wing. The Democratic Party is in no way left of centre politically.

It's a bit more complex than that; because of the rise of Nixonesque xenophobic authoritarianism evolving over the decades into a rapidly coalescing neofascist state within a state, everyone "left" of the far right is stuck sharing space in a fractious majority party, which then struggles to accomplish anything for any of the particular constituencies under its "big tent". Like, we have legit Leftist movements and parties in this country, and they tend to vote and even often register Democrat. But the Party itself is ruled more "consensus without agreement" than any easily definable political ideology. This effectively curtails any meaningful action to take place on Leftist agendas, since those who would execute them get drowned out by other constituencies within their own party, then eviscerated altogether by the crypto-fascists who have taken over the right wing.

 

[bilby]

I wish it were just the "right wing" that felt that way, but it's pretty much the bipartisan consensus in this country.

Your country has a bipartisan right wing. The Democratic Party is in no way left of centre politically.

Democrats are still the lefternmost thing we got In any significant numbers. With real life fascists already controlling the purse strings and threatening Americans with economic ruin if they don’t do the austerity thing and give all that money they’re spending on shit like Head Start, to its rightful owners (their donors), it’s probably a good idea to go with the democrats.

Oh, for sure. They might both ultimately have right of centre policies, but that in no way makes them comparably bad, or makes choosing between them difficult, particularly if the question is "Which party is more likely to make the lives of homeless people even worse?", or even "Which party is more likely to cause more people to become homeless?".

 

[TSwizzle]

Democrat lawmakers in Oregon want to decriminalize homeless camps with a law that would allow the people who live in them to sue for $1,000 if they're harassed or told to leave. The hugely-controversial bill claims 'decriminalization of rest' would allow city leaders to 'redirect' cash from law enforcement into measures that 'address the root causes of homelessness and poverty'. But the radical proposal comes amid an explosion in camps in cities like Portland, which has one of the worst crime rates in America, causing some people to move away. The new homelessness bill has been met with furious complaints from citizens who claim Oregon's metropolitan areas have been ravaged by progressive policies that have cut police budgets while crime and drug use has spiraled out of control. The bill, HB 3501, was sponsored by Democrat representative Farrah Chaichi and her colleague, representative Khanh Pham. It will be discussed at a hearing of the state's House Committee On Housing and Homelessness on May 4.

More than 2,000 letters of opposition have been submitted, compared to just 41 in support.

Daily Mail

Makes perfect sense.

 

[repoman]

I kind of respect the racial ingroup preference that blacks watching this attack are showing here.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Democrat lawmakers in Oregon want to decriminalize homeless camps with a law that would allow the people who live in them to sue for $1,000 if they're harassed or told to leave. The hugely-controversial bill claims 'decriminalization of rest' would allow city leaders to 'redirect' cash from law enforcement into measures that 'address the root causes of homelessness and poverty'. But the radical proposal comes amid an explosion in camps in cities like Portland, which has one of the worst crime rates in America, causing some people to move away. The new homelessness bill has been met with furious complaints from citizens who claim Oregon's metropolitan areas have been ravaged by progressive policies that have cut police budgets while crime and drug use has spiraled out of control. The bill, HB 3501, was sponsored by Democrat representative Farrah Chaichi and her colleague, representative Khanh Pham. It will be discussed at a hearing of the state's House Committee On Housing and Homelessness on May 4.

More than 2,000 letters of opposition have been submitted, compared to just 41 in support.

Daily Mail

Makes perfect sense.

The aim is to decriminalize the act, not normalize it. If they pass this bill and do nothing else on homelessness, that is stupid. If they pass this bill and work on affordable housing, jobs, shelter, etc... to reduce the number of homeless, then that is completely different.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I wish it were just the "right wing" that felt that way, but it's pretty much the bipartisan consensus in this country.

Your country has a bipartisan right wing. The Democratic Party is in no way left of centre politically.

And we still hear about how we are nothing but radical socialists.

 

[Politesse]

I wish it were just the "right wing" that felt that way, but it's pretty much the bipartisan consensus in this country.

Your country has a bipartisan right wing. The Democratic Party is in no way left of centre politically.

And we still hear about how we are nothing but radical socialists.

Mutual exclusion and persecution s exactly what is holding the "big tent" up.

 

[TSwizzle]

Exciting news for the "too many people" crowd;

San Francisco saw a staggering 41 percent surge in the number of drug-related deaths in the first quarter of 2023 compared to the same time last year, as fentanyl ravaged the city's homeless population. The Californian coastal hub saw 200 people die due to overdoses between January and March, compared to 142 deaths in 2022, according to recent data from the city's medical examiner. That amounts to one overdose death every 10 hours in a city that has seen its reputation as a coastal gem ravaged by worsening crime, drugs, and, homelessness rates, even as it remains home to tech billionaires. The overdose victims were disproportionately black and Latino men, and frequently based in the Tenderloin area, a gritty downtown neighborhood, where a drug treatment center was shuttered in December. Those living on the streets were particularly hard hit — with the number of homeless people dying from drug overdoses doubling. Dr Daniel Ciccarone, a professor of addiction medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, said it was a 'crying shame that a city as wealthy as San Francisco can't get its act together to deal with overdose deaths.'

Daily Mail

Yes, a crying shame. Oh well.

 

[Politesse]

Do you really not care? I suppose you don't.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah! 2016, Akron (1/4 population of San Francisco) had 200 ODs in less than a month.

From January to June, Akron paramedics responded to about 320 drug overdose calls.

In the three weeks between July 5 and July 26, paramedics logged 236.

The dramatic spike, from two or fewer per day to 11 or more, is thought to be the result of the introduction of carfentanil to the Akron drug market. The heroin-like drug is so potent it's used to sedate elephants in zoos.

It must be hard to understand this, but bad things happen in more places than just San Francisco.

 

[bilby]

Yeah! 2016, Akron (1/4 population of San Francisco) had 200 ODs in less than a month.

From January to June, Akron paramedics responded to about 320 drug overdose calls.

In the three weeks between July 5 and July 26, paramedics logged 236.

The dramatic spike, from two or fewer per day to 11 or more, is thought to be the result of the introduction of carfentanil to the Akron drug market. The heroin-like drug is so potent it's used to sedate elephants in zoos.

It must be hard to understand this, but bad things happen in more places than just San Francisco.

Your link wasn't to the Daily Mail, so it can't possibly be the Truth^TM

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Democrat lawmakers in Oregon want to decriminalize homeless camps with a law that would allow the people who live in them to sue for $1,000 if they're harassed or told to leave. The hugely-controversial bill claims 'decriminalization of rest' would allow city leaders to 'redirect' cash from law enforcement into measures that 'address the root causes of homelessness and poverty'. But the radical proposal comes amid an explosion in camps in cities like Portland, which has one of the worst crime rates in America, causing some people to move away. The new homelessness bill has been met with furious complaints from citizens who claim Oregon's metropolitan areas have been ravaged by progressive policies that have cut police budgets while crime and drug use has spiraled out of control. The bill, HB 3501, was sponsored by Democrat representative Farrah Chaichi and her colleague, representative Khanh Pham. It will be discussed at a hearing of the state's House Committee On Housing and Homelessness on May 4.

More than 2,000 letters of opposition have been submitted, compared to just 41 in support.

Daily Mail

Makes perfect sense.

The aim is to decriminalize the act, not normalize it. If they pass this bill and do nothing else on homelessness, that is stupid. If they pass this bill and work on affordable housing, jobs, shelter, etc... to reduce the number of homeless, then that is completely different.

You think they're actually going to do something that's expensive?? It's much, much easier to make noise (in either direction) than actually solve problems.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Democrat lawmakers in Oregon want to decriminalize homeless camps with a law that would allow the people who live in them to sue for $1,000 if they're harassed or told to leave. The hugely-controversial bill claims 'decriminalization of rest' would allow city leaders to 'redirect' cash from law enforcement into measures that 'address the root causes of homelessness and poverty'. But the radical proposal comes amid an explosion in camps in cities like Portland, which has one of the worst crime rates in America, causing some people to move away. The new homelessness bill has been met with furious complaints from citizens who claim Oregon's metropolitan areas have been ravaged by progressive policies that have cut police budgets while crime and drug use has spiraled out of control. The bill, HB 3501, was sponsored by Democrat representative Farrah Chaichi and her colleague, representative Khanh Pham. It will be discussed at a hearing of the state's House Committee On Housing and Homelessness on May 4.

More than 2,000 letters of opposition have been submitted, compared to just 41 in support.

Daily Mail

Makes perfect sense.

The aim is to decriminalize the act, not normalize it. If they pass this bill and do nothing else on homelessness, that is stupid. If they pass this bill and work on affordable housing, jobs, shelter, etc... to reduce the number of homeless, then that is completely different.

You think they're actually going to do something that's expensive?? It's much, much easier to make noise (in either direction) than actually solve problems.

I'm not in Portland (and I don't read The Daily Mail), so I have no pulse on what is happening in Portland and what their leaders are doing or not planning on doing.

 

[Jarhyn]

Democrat lawmakers in Oregon want to decriminalize homeless camps with a law that would allow the people who live in them to sue for $1,000 if they're harassed or told to leave. The hugely-controversial bill claims 'decriminalization of rest' would allow city leaders to 'redirect' cash from law enforcement into measures that 'address the root causes of homelessness and poverty'. But the radical proposal comes amid an explosion in camps in cities like Portland, which has one of the worst crime rates in America, causing some people to move away. The new homelessness bill has been met with furious complaints from citizens who claim Oregon's metropolitan areas have been ravaged by progressive policies that have cut police budgets while crime and drug use has spiraled out of control. The bill, HB 3501, was sponsored by Democrat representative Farrah Chaichi and her colleague, representative Khanh Pham. It will be discussed at a hearing of the state's House Committee On Housing and Homelessness on May 4.

More than 2,000 letters of opposition have been submitted, compared to just 41 in support.

Daily Mail

Makes perfect sense.

The aim is to decriminalize the act, not normalize it. If they pass this bill and do nothing else on homelessness, that is stupid. If they pass this bill and work on affordable housing, jobs, shelter, etc... to reduce the number of homeless, then that is completely different.

You think they're actually going to do something that's expensive?? It's much, much easier to make noise (in either direction) than actually solve problems.

I'm not in Portland (and I don't read The Daily Mail), so I have no pulse on what is happening in Portland and what their leaders are doing or not planning on doing.

I mean it's a good start to the problem of homelessness to make sure the homes people do have are protected for now, but we need to also immediately starting plans to fix the issue in reasonable ways, and that costs a bunch of money... As much money as, say, a decently sized college campus with a medical focus costs to build from the ground up, and a HUGE, constant flow of money to keep active.

Of course, I would expect the overall social costs of spending that money will dramatically relieve burdens elsewhere in society. I would expect that much of those costs can be offset by creating a feedback loop that enables people to transition to working or volunteering at such facilities rather than living in them, but that doesn't remove the need to pay those who do work on a non-volunteer basis.

Very few people understand why it is actually in their best interests to pay taxes so that people "WhO DonT WaNt tO WoRk"* can "JuSt sIt ARouNd aNd ShOot Up tHe MarIjuAnAs"** all day.

*People nobody will even hire to do work even if they wanted to
**Be afforded every opportunity for self-improvement or self-termination as is their wont.

 

[lpetrich]

Hochul cites media coverage in decision to roll back bail reforms - City & State New York

On Thursday evening, Hochul announced a tentative deal with legislative leaders on the $229 billion state budget and then took questions from the press. Post reporter Zach Williams asked the governor about a provision in the budget that would remove the “least restrictive means” standard that judges currently must follow when deciding whether to set bail for defendants accused of crimes. In response, the governor alluded to negative media coverage of instances in which judges did not set bail for people accused of particularly heinous crimes.

“There's some horrific cases splashed on the front pages of newspapers where they talk about individuals where a judge and the defense lawyer said following ‘least restrictive means,’ you have to let this person out,” Hochul said. “And some of those cases literally shocked the conscience. You cannot believe they let the person out. And they said, ‘My hands are tied, I have to follow the least restrictive means.’ So it was important to remove that to give the judges the clarity. Don't fall back on that but look at other factors in determining whether or not the person should be remanded or whether or not they should be let out on recognizance or with bail.”

Which got responses

“The Governor has now openly admitted that tabloid headlines are driving her policy positions,” said Katie Schaffer, director of advocacy and organizing at the Center for Community Alternatives. “This should be an affront to all New Yorkers.” Schaffer also called for policy changes such as the Clean Slate Act, which would seal some criminal records after certain time periods.

Scott Hechinger:

“As a public defender, everyone knew that judges were making bail decisions based on a fear that they’d end up on the cover of the NY Post,” he told City & State in a message on Twitter. “They’d of course never admit it. It is SHOCKING the Governor of New York just admitted that’s what’s driving her racist mass jailing fight.

Eliza Orlins, public defender:

“Her saying that the framing of even any of these crimes that, quote unquote, ‘shock the conscience’ by the vile and racist New York Post should not be what we're making legislative decisions based on,” she added.