This past weekend I was doing some charity work down in Philadelphia and had to go by Kensington, basically the same as Skid Row in California. A lot of open air drug use, poverty, and homelessness. Crazy to see how people live and act that way, while also that there are families and kids there as well. I don't believe anyone wants to live this way, both the people who live there and can't afford better and the people actually hooked on drugs.
Just trying to brain storm, what would be the best/viable way to clean up that area. Do we basically have to go through military style and lock everyone up? Do we need to make better homes and improve the economy? Is it essentially just a band aid because the users/people who live like this will have to go somwhere?
Would like to hear everyone's thoughts.
(side note: good article on the history of Skid row: https://skidrow.org/about/history/#:~:text=The%20…
TL:DR: Mid-19th century immigrant men built railroads and roads to construction sites. These roads were made of logs, known as "skid roads". As construction took off, business sprang up to cater to these men (taverns and brothels mainly). When men were out of work, they were drunk and sleeping in the streets. Religious communities responded by building shelters. The saw an influx during the Depression, who stayed through the 50s and 60s. The 70s brought Vietnam veterans and heavy drug users. Stricter building codes led hotel owners to demolish buildings rather than pay for more expensive repairs).
This is a good question that's probably only going to get worse with time, and there are entire philosophical/political debates about how to solve it. To put it plainly, I personally think that it would be great if all these people either had jobs or something else to occupy their time (e.g., hobbies, producing art/culture, literally anything that's not destructive), but how that's best supported is a good question. I think people should have enough agency to help themselves and feel like they are part of a society. I don't want this to become a whole political debate, but I think it's important to point out that individuals in these situations should still be respected and that we shouldn't necessarily turn the cold shoulder towards them. At the same time, they should know their actions can have negative effects on society, and so it's hard to create a system of sufficient accountability where the interests of everyone are aligned. I guess that's what democracy and this American experiment are ultimately for.
Agreed. Its difficult because on one hand a lot of these people aren't bad people, they just got caught up and were essentially born into the wrong place/family. On the other hand, they are breaking the law and creating an unsafe environment for all.
So its more a matter to me of, do we try to allocate resources to stop the drug trade and rehab these people, or do we go full force and just keep cleaning up the streets?
Lived in Philly years ago. Pockets of Philly have very very bad drug problems and crime. Unfortunately, it didn't change much while I was there and looks like it has gotten worse in the pandemic (very gritty city, very reminiscent of the late 90s NYC I grew up in before my parents moved to the 'burbs).
Very democratic city from what I remember. A lot of middle class people (including me) turned a blind eye and just made sure we were safe.
Unfortunately, it feels like political and economic policy has moved away from being incentive-based and actually looking to cure the cause not offset the problem (student loan relief)
I think if we gave more people hope in economic mobility and healthcare (eliminate obesity/opoid crisis) it would see massive benefits across society
Few Ideas
Also, I understand as with the PPP loans people will always try to abuse the system. However, if you were able to improve the ability of people to invest in their education, health, and community it would be a massively positive step in the right direction
bruh the homeless problem is not created by top students from poor families being unable to pay for college... at this point that is an extremely rare occurrence
it is created by liberal city governments incentivizing mentally ill drug addicts to camp by handing out free food and supplies (tents, needles, clothes), not prosecuting crimes committed by these people, allowing open air drug markets where these people can get their fix in close proximity to wealthy people they can beg and steal from
the solution is:
- rapid expansion of mental health facilities where these people can be humanely treated by doctors, concurrent with compulsory institutionalization for those who cause public disorder
- zero tolerance for urban camping, elimination of all urban camping subsidies. surge shelter capacity with single bed cells where people can safely sleep, if you refuse to sleep there you are going to jail or a mental institution
-zero tolerance for street drug dealing
-zero tolerance for panhandling & begging - immediate jail with mental health screening for mandatory institutionalization
unfortunately this stuff is politically untenable because all major US cities are run by crazy activists due to 70%+ democratic voting bases
I don't get it, you say that "liberals" incentivize the problem by giving out tents to homeless people but you also say that we should give out free single bed shelters and medical care to every homeless person? That's much more liberal than what the "crazy activists" are doing.
Having the government provide medical assistance and shelter to the poor has always been a liberal/Democrat policy in the USA since LBJ whereas conservatives think that those policies are ineffective or a waste of money.
I feel like you and a lot of other people on this thread desperately need to watch the show "The Wire" so you can gain at least somewhat of a perspective of all the stakeholders in this massive problem. Zero Tolerance has never worked at easing this issue, and only exacerbates it - it's a temporary offset, rather than a cure.
Here comes the agree to disagree guy again.
Most everything you listed out? Already in law (minus the Apollo thing, but that was still a good joke). Just need more awareness so people can take advantage of what's available.
1) Already in place.
2) It's called an HSA/FSA and other discount benefits between your employer and the gym. Secondly, we used to have the Presidential Fitness Test every-year, so I do agree with adding that back in.
3) Getting rid of college bueracracy may be the sticky point between tenure and unions (which for the most part have outlived their purpose IMO).
4) Outside of donating out-right. Form an S-Corp/501(c)3 for yourself and "bill" your time to them through that. Have them expense that cost towarads whatever they need. Tax free both ways! (standard disclaimer, I do not condone tax evasion...just avoidance when allowable).
5) As for the PPP loans, that got treated worse than a red headed stepchild as they say.
Do kids not have to take the Presidential Fitness Test anymore?
unfortunately not every HSA/FSA has that as an eligible expense (which it should be imo), but a cool thing some health insurance plans do is partially reimburse gym membership costs. Mine has a deal with local gyms that's basically half off, better than nothing.
I think it's pretty obvious. Have to prohibit setting up tents and sleeping on the streets. And provide everybody in need with shelters. For drug use, can provide people with specifically designated facilities for drug use - it's better to keep it off the streets. For people with mental issues, take them to mental hospitals. US government has enough funds to cover all these, they're wasting a lot of money on much less important things - just redirect.
So, in other words, imprison the homeless and violate their civil liberties because you think they are smelly?
All of this exists. People have to choose to take advantage of it. If they choose not to, then forcing them into a mental health facility or a rehab facility is just straight up involuntary incarceration. Maybe think this through a little more; you may not believe it, but plenty of smart people work in government and genuinely want to help others, and the reason they haven't found a solution yet is because it's not as easy as "lock 'em all up!"
What if I said the same thing about people who carry guns in public? They're way more threatening than a panhandler, but every gun owner i the country would erupt in mass violence if it was suggested they should lose their precious right to open carry.
Freedom ends when it interferes with freedom of others. My civil right is to live in an environment without exposure to indecent behavior. If somebody exposes others to their indecent behavior, they should be removed from society until they can behave properly again. That includes criminals, homeless who set up tents in the cities (I'm ok if you set up a tent somewhere where people don't live, like outside of cities or in some woods or something), and mentally unstable people who behave indecently in public (I don't mind if you're mentally unstable and are sitting at home, but if you're in public and are acting weird then it's different). I thought it through and these are my thoughts.
In terms of guns, I'm actually against guns, but now is too late to take them away, cause only law-abiding citizens will surrender them, and the others will keep. So, you'll make the situation worse. Same probably with open carry. Only law-abiding citizens will stop carrying if you prohibit. But guns is a more difficult topic to discuss. In terms of tents and junkies, I think it's more obvious that government needs to interfere.
It's a really difficult question.
First off, we need more housing. That is priority #1. It will help an enormous amount. The thornier issue is getting the mentally ill or those addicted to drugs off the streets and into supportive housing systems that can help them get clean or address/ameliorate their mental health issue. Unfortunately this isn't easy, because there people are unwilling to volunteer to do this.
I see people on this thread like @arbjunkie basically implying we should be imprisoning the homeless, which is the solution of a teenager. Compulsory institutionalizing is just "jail" in fancier terms. For better or worse, the homeless have just as many rights as anyone else and jailing them for hanging out on the streets isn't a solution that fits with general notions of civil liberties. I feel more threatened by a guy in a Starbucks with a gun than a guy panhandling in the park, but god forbid we try and lock someone up for the former!
And while it's easy to blame homelessness on "liberal activists" that also betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how homelessness and mental illness works. At best you can argue that policy making that treats the homeless and mentally ill as human beings may attract them to a certain municipality, but that isn't the same as causality. And as well see in the news every day, the the conservative "solution" to this is to bus undesirables to liberal cities. In other words, liberals are trying to actually do something to solve the issue, even if it isn't working, instead of sweeping the problem under the rug and letting someone else deal with it.
I think you overestimate the proportion of homeless people who are willing/able to get clean and live a normal life.
I'm not sure how it's relevant. If someone chooses to be homeless, that is a choice. Until they do something that genuinely merits incarceration, I'm not sure how you "fix" their homelessness save through some draconian measures that open a real ethical can of worms.
Yes, we should imprison or hospitalize the homeless. No that is not the solution of a teenager. It is the only solution to people who abdicate adult responsibility for themselves and commit crimes constantly, destroying the public square.
No, being homeless is not an acceptable lifestyle that we must tolerate. I absolutely agree we need more housing. We should restrict the ability of local officials to prohibit the building of new apartments in urban metros. There is absolutely no reason why the majority of small, decrepit, aging buildings in NYC, SF, other major US cities, should not be torn down and replaced with new, larger, market rate buildings. This would lower rental prices by increasing competition, allowing high earning professionals to move to new buildings, cutting prices on older buildings to a more affordable level. But you can't simply wait for this to happen before you stop the constant street crime.
Most of them are severe addicts. Give them a couple chances to get clean, go through a halfway house and become a somewhat productive member of society. If that fails, put them all on a defunct cruise ship and set them off to sea, I don’t care anymore. I shouldn’t need to constantly be on guard from tweakers and mothers shouldnt have to shield their 5yos from crazies shitting and shouting obscenities and threats in public.
And in that same vein, take all the drug dealers, small time to capos, line them up in the town square and let a firing squad do their thing while productive people cheer the scene on. Normal, hardworking people don’t deserve this shit.
and people act like im unreasonable for wanting to imprison the drug dealers, put the mentally ill in a hospital against their will, and have the police take the junkies to inpatient rehab...
Velit sapiente libero vel fuga eum. Sed perspiciatis ipsam et iure ut quasi iste. Reprehenderit consequuntur rem laboriosam eum sunt temporibus quisquam. Quibusdam voluptate aliquid est voluptatum et autem amet.
A iusto nihil illum voluptates rerum. Quasi expedita optio odio est eos delectus sed sint. Sapiente atque nobis sint deleniti.
Quo et nihil dolores eum. Sed maxime quae necessitatibus omnis voluptas incidunt ullam. Culpa voluptates sint quisquam. Velit distinctio pariatur tempore doloremque non. Molestias deleniti pariatur qui non facere. Minima qui nisi beatae minus.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Voluptas sunt voluptates totam perspiciatis consequatur dolores nobis. Rerum consequatur sed sunt non iusto quia.