• SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    8 days ago

    The US doesn’t want to addtess its spiraling homelessness problem because giving them homes means they now treat homeless people better than the people who work 40hrs a week to barely pay for a home.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 days ago

    It’s also funny to me when people say they are Christian but don’t want to help the poor. The good Samaritan is very clear. So is the bit about the sheep and the goats.

    But you can use the Bible to justify anything, I guess.

    • Xanthobilly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Christianity is about control for the powerful and bedtime stories to make you feel better about inexcusable shitty behavior for the masses.

    • Peck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 days ago

      I’m not Christian and I don’t want to see them. Also I didn’t consider housing them to be my job. That’s why we have government that we elect and pay taxes to in order to fund it. This is just bs sign that simply virtue signaling instead of asking hard questions.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        You don’t want to see them because you want them to be housed, or you want them to be forcibly moved so they’re unhoused out of sight?

        The government should be doing more for the housing crisis, but a first step for that is getting people aware of the issue and on board with solutions.

        • Peck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 days ago

          I don’t want to see them because they are dangerous. Reasons don’t matter. I’ve been harassed and my wife was attacked by homeless people in Portland. She has pretty severe PTSD right now because of that.

          • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            8 days ago

            Everyone is dangerous.

            Kind of shitty to oppose systemic changes that would help them and reduce danger

            • Peck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              No housed person has harassed or attacked me since middle school.

  • RedFrank24@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 days ago

    I have more respect for someone who goes “I hate homeless people, I think they’re scum” and pushes for actually housing them because they don’t ever want to see them again, over someone who goes “Oh those poor dears! We really should do something!” and then just likes a social media post about hostile architecture and leaves it at that.

  • But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 days ago

    I have a cousin from a wealthy family who chooses to be homeless. He can’t be committed against his will and he doesn’t want the responsibility of just having a room in his parents house or with relatives.

    A lot of people have this idea that housing everyone will fix the people who just aren’t gonna do it without it being forced on them

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      One of the biggest issues when talking about homelessness is conflating the two different groups - people who are homeless through unfortunate circumstances, and people who are incapable of living in society. One side thinks all homeless are the former group, the other side thinks all homeless are the latter group. Truth is, both exist. You can’t take a schizophrenic drug addict, throw them in a house, and then declare victory. However, there ARE some homeless for whom that’s all they need.

      Ending homelessness requires a granular, personal approach. And that shit is EXPENSIVE.

      • theotherwoman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        You’re just wrong. No granular approach is needed. It’s not complicated at all.

        Offer people housing without conditions and people do take it. Finland did this and it eliminated homelessness there.

        The cousin from a rich family “choosing” to be homeless over living with family is likely “choosing” that option because he doesn’t want to take harsh psychiatric medications, have a curfew of 9 PM in his 20s, and be criticized for going out to socialize. It’s likely the “choice” involves a rejection of extremely oppressive rules and he doesn’t have decent options.

        You can actually take a schizophrenic drug addict, throw them in a house, and then declare victory. Often that type of person chooses voluntarily to deal with some issues once housed. What you can’t do is take a schizophrenic drug addict and offer housing contingent upon really harsh anti-psychotics and weekly drug testing plus loss of housing if they don’t comply, administered by extremely expensive social workers who end up feeling like police. That is also what makes traditional programs so expensive.

        I often think people who think homelessness is a complex nuanced issue just want there to be homelessness or buy into upper class lies justifying homelessness which keep the lower classes fearful and obedient.