Originally Posted by sandydandy
Oooooh believe me, just hang out in London or Windsor for about a half hour. Might as well be West Virginia.
Oooooh believe me, just hang out in London or Windsor for about a half hour. Might as well be West Virginia.
Bit of local politics...
http://www.sgvtribune.com/social-aff...in-temple-city
Short story: Homeless situation in LA is bad. Voters out of guilt or frustration or mercy voted for a bunch of money to help solve this problem. A site, currently a motel, was picked to be redevelop into low cost housing for homeless and veterans. Local residents were outraged because it's near couple of elementary schools, plus who know what this will do to local housing prices. Residents bulked at the proposal, so the deal is haulted.
My take: This site is right at my neighborhood. Our real estate agent neighboring friend initially informed us few months ago of this bad idea brewing and want us to join her to block this deal. I was hesitant at first... because personally I'd prefer a low cost housing rather than a run down motel in my neighborhood. Few weeks back, I even saw a flyer in my mailbox encouraging us to speak to our city council to block this deal and listed out reasons why. So I asked our friend about this again, but she seemed to have given up fighting because she claimed that it's a done deal... 'kick backs' between politicians and developers are already exchanged.
But just this morning I was surprised to hear on the radio saying the the deal is halted. According to the news, this deal is scrapped thanks to the heartless residents' opposition. However, according to our real estate agent friend, it's only because the motel failed a certain requirement to properly seal the deal...
Anyway, so even local politics is playing out in a similar fashion. We can have 2 polarized residents, one for and one against, duking it out against each other as mortal enemies... all the while not really knowing what's going on behind closed doors. The political fights between voters make little difference really..., in this case, politicians and real state developers stand to gain no matter what. Surely they'll find a new location and profit off of the money intended for the homeless and the veterans else where.
So to the residents who fought hard against this, they probably actually believe they won the battle... and those who are in favor of the housing project probably thought the city is full of Trump supporting haters... Media also further plays on this notion..., but the reality is that it's business and corruption as usual for the 'establishment'.
I really hate NIMBYs. So much. It's not even a rejection of an idea, just a rejection of the location of the idea. So shitty. Especially when it comes to people that need help - you'd rather have an abandoned building than shelter for human beings based on something that might happen? Fuck you. Build the place, see how it goes, and remediate if necessary. Don't not start because it might not work out.
Around here (vaguely) there are a few spots where the homeless set up makeshift camps. It's ugly. But what's the alternative? Sleeping in doorways and park benches? Tearing down the camps isn't going to disappear the homeless people, it's just going to move the effects of the homeless elsewhere. Maybe instead of tearing them down you roll the police through every so often to discourage drugs, etc. and put a fucking trash can in the area so they can clean up after themselves. Give them a chance, it's not like the underpass was being used for something else. Same thing with that motel... put it to work.
I just can't wrap my head around people. We're awful.
They use the underpass near my office for camps periodically. I don't mind the camps as much as I mind the pee smell, piles of feces, and used syringes that are left behind.
The one guy that sweeps the sidewalk every day is cool, though.
Whoomah!
Good call - need some way to handle poo. For real. Nothing is as disconcerting as a human poo on the ground.
Wouldn't they be pooing inside if they have a place inside to poo, though?
Get that weak shit off my track
TSG, I agree NIMBY's are no good, but I can understand their concerns...
But moral of my story isn't about NIMBY's though.
The deal fell thru not really because of NIMBY's, it fell thru just like other real estate deals that fell thru... but media helped blame it on the NUMBY's anyway. Not entirely blaming the media, surely not a lot of folks knows what's really going on behind closed doors...
So next time thru, another more sympathetic city will allow it in their backyard, but I hope local politicians there and developers won't be as corrupt so they can build a bigger facility for the same amount of money...
Anyway, the homeless situation is difficult to solve. From my experience, most folks on the street are there willingly. They don't really want to pay for a permanent place to live nor do they want a typical job. They just beg or dumpster dive to eat... living rather like Jesus while he was roaming on earth. There are also a good portion of homeless who have mental or severe addiction issues. I don't have hard data, but I'd gather that's majority of them. Permanent housing will not help those folks. They need to be in clinics or institution that help them kick addictions. However, I'm sure most of them also wouldn't agree to being 'locked up' in those clinics either.
There's really no easy solution to this problem..., but what I hate the most is that taxpayer money allocated to help these folks are being eaten up by politicians and real estate developers.
Maybe? I think the problem with managing homeless people is that are lot of them are nuts, so you can't really anticipate that if you provided bathrooms (or trash cans, or even beds) that those things would actually get used... or used properly. And it only takes one severely disturbed person to ruin things for everyone. I could easily see a scenario where the locality provided portos and they just ended up vandalized, etc. It really sucks. But, the cost of trying is low. It's always worth trying and while I'm not that well traveled, I don't reckon I've ever seen it tried.
It really upsets me that the government will gleefully foot the bill for food and shelter for someone who likes weed but doesn't try nearly as hard for someone who can't think straight.
Last edited by thesameguy; June 21st, 2017 at 12:54 PM.
All the stats I've ever seen support the idea that the homeless problem is not people who've "fallen on hard times," they are people with various physical and mental issues who have fallen through the gigantic cracks in our shitty healthcare "system."
Okay, glad you've actually seen real stats...
So if this is true, even if my local low cost housing project came thru, after spending millions building these permanent housing, it won't really end up serving majority of these homeless people. Even if no kickbacks were included in these deals, tax payer money intended to help solve the homeless problem will still be wasted.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote