comment
stringlengths 1
8.79k
| context
sequencelengths 0
817
|
|---|---|
>
People would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone.
It's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.' | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless."
] |
>
Under the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.
Seems reasonable | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'"
] |
>
New York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable"
] |
>
That's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations) | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable."
] |
>
Both groups are homeless. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)"
] |
>
Yes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless."
] |
>
Not necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.
When we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different"
] |
>
Everything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families."
] |
>
Stigma is very much a part of the issue. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work."
] |
>
this is fascism. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue."
] |
>
This is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism."
] |
>
What are you on about? | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course."
] |
>
Homelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?"
] |
>
As opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class."
] |
>
I think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s "oh you're homeless, well that's illegal" | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor."
] |
>
Oh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\""
] |
>
The church will take care of them /s | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class."
] |
>
The fifth column is in the building already. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s"
] |
>
Just get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already."
] |
>
Seems like they will just ship more homeless to California. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way."
] |
>
Well the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California."
] |
>
Instead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay."
] |
>
By the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money?
This is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable."
] |
>
Laws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled "good Christians." | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired."
] |
>
Sorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.
Of course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\""
] |
>
They know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple."
] |
>
What would Jesus do? | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead"
] |
>
It’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?"
] |
>
Such BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor."
] |
>
Are there no workhouses? Are there no prisons? | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off."
] |
>
"Christian Nation"
If these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?"
] |
>
If one were to get register a PO Box with a real street address as their home address, would this defeat any citation of being homeless? | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?",
">\n\n\"Christian Nation\"\n\nIf these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross."
] |
>
Tennessee fixed the homeless problem by making it illegal to be homeless. Other states should follow suit. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?",
">\n\n\"Christian Nation\"\n\nIf these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross.",
">\n\nIf one were to get register a PO Box with a real street address as their home address, would this defeat any citation of being homeless?"
] |
>
most idiotic thing so far this year | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?",
">\n\n\"Christian Nation\"\n\nIf these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross.",
">\n\nIf one were to get register a PO Box with a real street address as their home address, would this defeat any citation of being homeless?",
">\n\nTennessee fixed the homeless problem by making it illegal to be homeless. Other states should follow suit."
] |
>
🤷🏼♂️ Definitely is. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?",
">\n\n\"Christian Nation\"\n\nIf these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross.",
">\n\nIf one were to get register a PO Box with a real street address as their home address, would this defeat any citation of being homeless?",
">\n\nTennessee fixed the homeless problem by making it illegal to be homeless. Other states should follow suit.",
">\n\nmost idiotic thing so far this year"
] |
>
Oh the red white and blue, the funny things you do, America America, this is you. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?",
">\n\n\"Christian Nation\"\n\nIf these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross.",
">\n\nIf one were to get register a PO Box with a real street address as their home address, would this defeat any citation of being homeless?",
">\n\nTennessee fixed the homeless problem by making it illegal to be homeless. Other states should follow suit.",
">\n\nmost idiotic thing so far this year",
">\n\n🤷🏼♂️ Definitely is."
] |
>
What would your God say to you? How very Christian. | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?",
">\n\n\"Christian Nation\"\n\nIf these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross.",
">\n\nIf one were to get register a PO Box with a real street address as their home address, would this defeat any citation of being homeless?",
">\n\nTennessee fixed the homeless problem by making it illegal to be homeless. Other states should follow suit.",
">\n\nmost idiotic thing so far this year",
">\n\n🤷🏼♂️ Definitely is.",
">\n\nOh the red white and blue, the funny things you do, America America, this is you."
] |
> | [
"$750 fine for being homeless is hilarious.",
">\n\nI am sure that will stop it.\nI am losing my job, my income, my house, my family but I will stop all that because I might get fined $750.\nJust insane. Do these people not understand they are homeless because they don't have $750 to their name?",
">\n\nThey don't want to fix homelessness. The cruelty is the point. In some places it's illegal to sleep in your car. In some places it's illegal to have 4 roommates.",
">\n\nThey want to move them out of the towns and into the countryside, where they cannot be seen, so are easier to ignore.\nMaybe some would say eradicate, but we are not at Soylent Green levels yet.",
">\n\nNo, city dwellers in general don't want a bunch of homeless people around either. It's an insanely complex issue that nobody seems to want to address.\nI've never met a homeless advocate who wanted the homeless people to live on their street, on their sidewalk or in their alley.",
">\n\nI think people focus, rightfully, on where homeless people will sleep. I just wish there was A LOT more focus on why people are homeless in the first place. I would argue that a country with a homeless problem like ours is a failure, outright.\nYou don't get as many homeless people as we have without real inequality problems and a complete lack of willingness to assist those who fall on hard times. If every job paid a living wage, people would fall into the homelessness trap far less often. Yes, some would still, but many become homeless due to economic factors outside of their control. And once you're homeless, it's fucking HARD to end that cycle.",
">\n\nIt's complex but people seem to shy away from the drugs as the #1 cause. Hands down drugs is responsible and it doesn't matter how much you earn you can use enough drugs to throw it all away.\nI spend quite a bit of time doing community based drug and alcohol outreach and hands down fentanyl and meth are the #1 offender for why people are homeless and \"a living wage\" isn't even a nearby second.\nI don't necessarily disagree with you, like yeah, people who get treated like animals act like animals, so things like a living wage and a social safety net definitely help people not feel like they need drugs to treat some inadequacy in the first place.\nReally though, at this point drug and alcohol treatment centers instead of jail and prison is the way to go, which is why this new law is so misguided. Sober people up in a safe and understanding way and there's a lot of possibilities.\nBut when people are higher than a kite saying things like \"of they just need a job with a living wage\" is kinda just silly",
">\n\nI don't disagree, but I generally avoid pointing to drugs for the very thing we agree on: The economic conditions that people are forced to work under makes the drug use problems FAR worse than they would be if financial security was the norm. \nDrugs are and always have been an escape. Shit, I smoke weed damn near every day because if I didn't, I wouldn't be able to handle life, straight up. I'm getting better and smoking a lot less than I used to, but I'm also very fortunate to have never lost my house or job. \nI absolutely agree with your point about drug and alcohol treatment centers being an answer to the homelessness issue, rather than jail time. \nI would make the argument that a multi-pronged approach is necessary to tackle homelessness. Namely, we need public housing, drug and alcohol treatment centers (as well as decriminalization of drugs), and we need to ensure a decent living for every citizen who works full time. Throw in Universal healthcare too, since medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the US.\nAs a side tangent, one other reason I avoid the drug part of the conversation is because my experience with bringing that up has always been that right-wingers use drugs as a thin veil for their racism, and I don't like hearing racists talk. I'm not accusing you of that, it's just a knee-jerk reaction due to living in the midwest and being surrounded by republicans most of the time.",
">\n\nHousing imo is usually the number one thing that needs to be fixed, as its the hardest of the basic necessities for survival to maintain. The problem always resorts to that fixing a housong problem always will have pushback to it, regardless of political stance because as long as housing is considered an asset which appreciates in value overtime, there will always be people who will fight against it. People who are specifically hired to fix homelessness have less of an incentive to actually fix the problem, as they are out of the job if its done (similar to how road workers fix roads with temporary methods, because if a road is fixed and no longer breaks, thats less income)",
">\n\nSounds like we should embrace a society where profit isn't the primary motivating factor for anything to get done, eh?",
">\n\nFill our prisons laws",
">\n\nLaws like this are a direct result of Private prisons. For profit incarceration of the most vulnerable.",
">\n\nI really think this doesn't go far enough. Additional fines if you're longterm unemployed, have a longterm ilness or are disabled /s",
">\n\nJust bring back debtors prison.",
">\n\nGross. Somehow, not surprised.",
">\n\nWhy didn't we think of this earlier?! Make it illegal to be poor, and we would have eradicated poverty!",
">\n\nJust like how they outlawed rape in Texas and abortions declined!/s",
">\n\nWhen you talk to random people on reddit about homelessness you realize that unfortunately when many people say the \"homelessness problem\", they don't mean that there are homeless people, they mean that they have to see homeless people.\nMany people seem perfectly happy with out of sight out of mind when it comes to the homeless.",
">\n\nTypical conversation with a liberal (I'm a socdem) about homelessness:\nLiberal: \"the homelessness epidemic is inhumane. We must help these people.\"\nMe: \"yes, I agree with you 100%. Let's start a fundraiser to convert that old building into a homeless shelter or low income housing, so that-\"\nLiberal: \"ewwwww no, I don't want homeless people here. The property value of my family's house will go down and I don't wanna see a bunch of tweakers at night.\"\nMe: \".......... alright, I'll just do it myself. Sorry for bothering you.\"",
">\n\nHonest question, do you own a home yourself?",
">\n\nI'll answer your question if you tell me why you're asking. Seems like bait/a trap to me.",
">\n\nDude’s gonna pull the “WhY aReN’t YoU hOuSiNg ThEm??!!111",
">\n\nI own a home (well the bank does, but y'know), and I'd fully endorse using a nearby house as a shelter for people experiencing homelessness. Would it potentially lower property values? Maybe, but I don't really care. Would it potentially mean more petty crime in the area? Also maybe yes, but there are things that could be done to counter that, and the whole point is lifting people out of poverty so that crime isn't something they feel they need to resort to. So yeah, bring on the residential shelters!",
">\n\n\"We must solve homelessness by criminalizing it.\"\n\"We must stop abortion by outlawing it.\"\n\"You can't stop gun violence by outlawing guns!\"",
">\n\nDisgusting, inhumane and incredibly immoral. How is walking the earth and poverty a crime?",
">\n\n\nHow is walking the earth and poverty a crime?\n\nWhat's even funnier is that these people claim to be Christians, followers of a man who famously had \"no place to lay his head\" and traveled around mooching off of his followers.",
">\n\nMatthews 25:41-45",
">\n\nThe pillars of democracy are: robust public education, independent journalism, human rights, equality and justice. Promote the pillars of democracy in your house and amongst your friends. Talk about them, talk about how to re-establish them, how to amplify them. Get involved in every democratic process in your community too. Defend democracy good people - it is under direct attack. Rise up and defend democracy and the United States itself from this fascist Republican attack.",
">\n\nHow is the law not fair here? It is equally illegal for both the rich and poor to sleep under a bridge!\n/s",
">\n\nSomething tells me rich people still would never be prosecuted or fined for this lol",
">\n\nFor a party that prides itself on “Christian values” Republicans get off on some really evil shit.",
">\n\nDems involuntarily committing people isnt much better. It's not just a Blue v Red thing. It's a Rich v Poor thing.",
">\n\nOk but that's Eric Adams, he's a cop and a conservative, he's abnormal for Democrats.",
">\n\nGavin Newsome isnt (supposedly) conservative. Neither is Portland, where forced hospitalization of the homeless is also happening.\nAnd really, if he was abnormal, wed see the really blue places creating homes for the homeless. Please god tell me you have proof that I’m wrong though. I would happily be wrong about this.",
">\n\nOk I'll grant you that, but I would hope that these jurisdictions and leaders would not follow that particularly reprehensible lead.",
">\n\nWhy does “We need to get the homeless off the streets.” always sound so progressive in Europe and sinister in the US?",
">\n\nIn the US it often means just put them in prison instead of shoving them in cramped shelters",
">\n\nCapitalism can never solve homelessness, bc they dont make enough money from it. Hence why CA, NY, and WA continue to struggle with it, while places like Missouri make it even worse. There are no pro-homeless states in the US.",
">\n\nThey make a shitload of money off of it lol. Homeless shelters get paid for every bed they have filled. I used to work at a shelter and they’d let dudes stay who were clearly breaking rules or a danger to others because if they have unfilled beds they don’t receive as much money from the government. The entire game is keeping the shelter full, taking the money they give per person (let’s say the budget calls for 200 bucks of resources per resident) they do anything and everything to supply the lowest acceptable level of resources allowed, at as far under that 200 dollar limit as they can. Then they keep the excess money.",
">\n\nShelters aren’t solving homelessness. But good point on how most of our systems designed to help people are still just money making systems at the end of the day.",
">\n\nSpoiler alert, you can’t solve homelessness unless you can somehow force people to not be mentally ill or drug addicted. At the end of the day it has to start with the homeless person. No amount of forcing someone to do x y or z will solve this",
">\n\nCrimes committed against the homeless are already largely ignored. It’s only a matter of time before being homeless becomes grounds for sanctioned murder, like it’s fucking pest control.",
">\n\nLMAO I was homeless for a while and it already is.\nLots of unhoused folks particularly women go missing and never show back up.",
">\n\nThey'll put them in warehouses run by Geo Corp, then bill you, the taxpayer $750 per day for that \"service\". All of this nonsense, so that America can avoid looking at the reasons why there are so many homeless, and how to get someone back on their feet once homeless. It's dystopian.",
">\n\nHave to keep taxpayer dollars going to for-profit prisons somehow",
">\n\nThe choice is to either stay in a homeless shelter full of addicts and mentally ill people, or...? \nIt's so odd to me that we live in a \"free country\" but you can't even live in the woods because the woods is owned by somebody else.",
">\n\nImagine if we tried actually helping people for once instead of just punishing them.",
">\n\nOh you’re broke! Let’s just help you out with a little prison time too. It’s what Jesus would do.",
">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nCities across the country have seen a backlash to attempts by officials to remove homeless encampments or limit where unhoused people can camp.\nProtesters marched through the downtown Chicago area in November to protest against the city's announcement that donated winterized tents for homeless people had to be removed for street cleaning, reported the Chicago Tribune.\nY Robelo, founder of the non-profit Feeding People Through Plants, provided the tents and criticized the city's treatment of homeless people.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: people^#1 city^#2 law^#3 homeless^#4 new^#5",
">\n\n‘Anti-homeless’ laws sound as stupid as ‘anti-sneezing’ laws. \nJust because you rule out something it doesn’t mean it ceases to exist, when the ‘offenders’ have little power over it.",
">\n\nIt’s almost like there’s money to be made in the privatisation of prisons or something.",
">\n\nJust making it illegal to be poor now so they can fill prisons and get slave labor from the inmates, on top of taking away their rights in general and making a profit from it.",
">\n\nWhen their prison budgets blow up at least they will have solved the homeless problem, by actually housing in a WAY more expensive way.\nLocking people is not a solution, it is cruel but that’s republicans.",
">\n\nIf there wasn't so much financial inequality, affordable housing, decent wages and healthcare for all, there wouldn't be anti-homeless laws. Jfc this is not hard but due to corruption and a broken system, here we are.",
">\n\nSo damned wrong!!!!",
">\n\nThis is a cash grab to fill private prisons.",
">\n\nIm not sure about other areas laws but up here in the PNW the new laws are going after large camp sites, and areas of increased crime/violence. \nMore notably the only ones in effect that make it illegal to sleep out in public is if there is a support center within walking distance and it has enough capacity to house the person. \nWe get a lot of people echoing the sentiment that its an attack on the homeless and what not but when you have someone setup a tent behind your backyard or see your family threatened youll change your tune too.",
">\n\nIf you set up actual housing for them then itd stop being seen as an attack.",
">\n\nAre you volunteering your backyard for their housing? \nBecause no one else is.",
">\n\nI mean, some people in Eugene do exactly that. But like, if you put a mentally unstable tweaker in a house, they'll just magically become a valuable part of society? Mentally ill cannot care for themselves. Putting homeless in houses isn't going to solve shit, they'll still be out there doing their thing. Being in a house isn't going to stop people from shitting on the sidewalk in front of your store if you piss them off.",
">\n\nYes thank you!\nThat is exactly why our area is focusing more on supporting services AND affordable housing. \nIm so tired of people claiming that the only solution to just build tiny villages or just let them camp out then everything will work itself out.",
">\n\nPeople don’t act as if it’s the only solution, it’s the required first step. Having housing makes all the rest of the support services infinitely easier.",
">\n\nWe should pass laws saying it’s illegal to have less than a million dollars.\nThat way, I would magically have a million dollars.",
">\n\nIsn't Missouri where Brett Favre and the governor stole millions of dollars of welfare funds to build a volleyball stadium for Favre's daughter's college in his name? Wonder why they're perpetually last in most important metrics... lol",
">\n\nMississippi",
">\n\nIt's really simple: anything that is required to maintain living should be guaranteed by society for all. Food, water, shelter, and healthcare--at a minimum. Beyond that, electricity, internet access, and transportation should also be included as guaranteed services. I would also include things like education and work and/or UBI.\nOur government has trillions and yet we somehow cannot guarantee a basic standard of living for every human being who lives here. It's shameful.",
">\n\nWhen you have homeless shitting and throwing used needles in your yard, you start to understand the anger behind these laws.\nThis isn't the right way to go about it, but people want something done.",
">\n\nIt seems most people here who are criticizing these policies don't have to actually live near homeless people. Anyone who lives in a downtown area or nearby knows how bad it is. We all have to smell and see the shit, piss and trash left by homeless people every day on our streets and even our entrances. People are also getting stabbed and beaten by homeless people. Cities are unsafe and filthy partly because of them. It's really easy to criticize these policies from your comfortable suburban home far away from all the homeless people. If you had to live near them, you would be the first to scream at city hall to do something about it.",
">\n\nYeah no, they could spend the effort trying to actually rehouse these people and get them back in the work force instead of signing laws fining them money they obviously don't have to feed into the prison industry. Fuck outta here",
">\n\nThere are programs to help them, but you have to participate in the program. Lots of these people do not want that kind of help. They don't want a job. They prefer panhandling and being drug addicts. \nMaking it harder to live like that reroutes them to the help programs.",
">\n\nNo it doesn’t. Making life harder to live means people do whatever it takes to make it easier. Including especially the drugs you folks love to pretend is a problem for homeless people but not for you.",
">\n\nSo much for \"the land of the free\"",
">\n\nThis is sick. Fuck this place man.",
">\n\nJust like Jesus would want right?",
">\n\nHomelessness has crushed downtown Portland. The main tourist sector is quite literally filled with human shit, tents and violent crime. The police department was defunded and remade and the result is antipathy.\nEdit: Here is the link. Funds were removed from the budget and it is now branded as the Portland Police Bureau.",
">\n\nCan you please explain how charging these people with a $750 fine would put an end to this? Would they just all be moved to prison since they can't pay?",
">\n\nI never said it wasnt a problem. I was in Portland last Spring and I see that it's a problem there. I'm asking how a fine would alleviate the solution or at least asking for an alternative.",
">\n\nPretty sure we need anti-homelessness laws, not anti-homeless.",
">\n\nPeople would rather pay for hostile architectural designs like benches that are uncomfortable to sit on or prevent anyone from lying down, adding spikes in front of businesses than help anyone. \nIt's always 'Let's see if making them suffer more works first before we consider other solutions.'",
">\n\n\nUnder the New York mayor, Eric Adams, who is entering the second year of his four-year tenure, city officials outlawed houseless people from sleeping on the city’s subway system or riding the trains all night.\n\nSeems reasonable",
">\n\nNew York has more vacant apartments than homeless people. Nothing about this is reasonable.",
">\n\nThat's not relevant. Most of these people are not capable of having their own apartment (to be clear, I'm talking about the homeless that are living on the streets/subways, not the people who lost their jobs and are crashing on a friends couch or whatever. People often conflate the two populations)",
">\n\nBoth groups are homeless.",
">\n\nYes, but the issues they face and therefore the solutions that would be effective are vastly different",
">\n\nNot necessarily. You can have a raging case of addiction and still have a job, an place to live, and let your addict buddies crash at your place. There's quite a number of high functioning addicts.\nWhen we make judgements on who is addicted, there's always leniency granted for the ones who have money to burn, even if they're a liability to the workplace and their families.",
">\n\nEverything you said is a complete non-sequiter. Nobody is denying that high-functioning addicts exist, but we are not talking about them. The issue is that with the street/subway homeless, the vast majority have serious addiction and other mental illnesses which need to be treated, so simply giving them apartments wouldn't work.",
">\n\nStigma is very much a part of the issue.",
">\n\nthis is fascism.",
">\n\nThis is much worse than fining people for their opinions, which far-righters oppose with a passion, of course.",
">\n\nWhat are you on about?",
">\n\nHomelessness is a multifaceted issue. Mental health, addiction, financial, et cetera. If we beef up social services that could mean more taxation on the middle class.",
">\n\nAs opposed to using that same money to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. We already spend many times more appeasing the rich than it would cost to help the poor.",
">\n\nI think it's good and normal that our states have the same approach to homelessness that emperor Bokassa had ^/s \"oh you're homeless, well that's illegal\"",
">\n\nOh, now we give a shit about hard-dollar taxing the lower class.",
">\n\nThe church will take care of them /s",
">\n\nThe fifth column is in the building already.",
">\n\nJust get housing under control and realize housing is a right. Housing shouldn’t be seen as a capital asset. It wasn’t seen as one until right after desegregation in US and should go back that way.",
">\n\nSeems like they will just ship more homeless to California.",
">\n\nWell the prisons will soon be filled to the brim with those who are unable to pay.",
">\n\nInstead of spending money to make our nation a better place to live, we just make it illegal to be undesirable.",
">\n\nBy the miracle why can't they just figure out that people can't just stop being homeless. We can't just say gee golly how about I magically buy myself a house or maybe even rent an apartment with no money? \nThis is just another law/policy that shows how tone deaf those at the top which are law makers really are. People can't control the housing market nor can they control if they companies stock falls through and they are fired.",
">\n\nLaws that are in every case written, advocated, and supported by self-styled \"good Christians.\"",
">\n\nSorry but this is a terrible article. It starts with Missouri and then bounces to LA, NY and Portland. There are many reasons people become homeless and many reasons they stay that way and the solutions in Missouri are likely to be very different from Los Angeles or Portland.\nOf course someone will show up to downvote me and perhaps comment with something like “but but Portugal” or “housing first!” or some other “painfully obvious” one-size fits all solution so I’ll just add in advance that it’s not that simple.",
">\n\nThey know soon drug based mass incarceration is no longer going to be the cash cow it once was, and the for profit prison industry has to change gears to lobbying for filling their cells with the homeless people instead",
">\n\nWhat would Jesus do?",
">\n\nIt’s so they can fill private prisons with free labor.",
">\n\nSuch BS, just kick people while their down. They won't be able to pay these fines, they're homeless, pisses me off.",
">\n\nAre there no workhouses? Are there no prisons?",
">\n\n\"Christian Nation\"\n\nIf these people ever find out what Jesus actually said, they would nail him to a cross.",
">\n\nIf one were to get register a PO Box with a real street address as their home address, would this defeat any citation of being homeless?",
">\n\nTennessee fixed the homeless problem by making it illegal to be homeless. Other states should follow suit.",
">\n\nmost idiotic thing so far this year",
">\n\n🤷🏼♂️ Definitely is.",
">\n\nOh the red white and blue, the funny things you do, America America, this is you.",
">\n\nWhat would your God say to you? How very Christian."
] |
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)
On January 4, Emmanuel Macron promised to give Ukraine "Wheeled tanks" - the first tanks of Western production.
France's decision to transfer AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicles brings Europe's security assistance to Ukraine to a new level, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his evening address on Jan. 4.
France leading the charge in stepping up the quality of Western arms shipments to Ukraine puts more pressure on Berlin, as it remains reluctant to provide Kyiv with Leopard main battle tanks.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Ukraine^#1 tanks^#2 Western^#3 France^#4 put^#5 | [] |
>
Modern? They're from the 70s I'm pretty sure. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nOn January 4, Emmanuel Macron promised to give Ukraine \"Wheeled tanks\" - the first tanks of Western production.\nFrance's decision to transfer AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicles brings Europe's security assistance to Ukraine to a new level, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his evening address on Jan. 4.\nFrance leading the charge in stepping up the quality of Western arms shipments to Ukraine puts more pressure on Berlin, as it remains reluctant to provide Kyiv with Leopard main battle tanks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Ukraine^#1 tanks^#2 Western^#3 France^#4 put^#5"
] |
>
The modernity vehicle is mostly classified by its soft factors, optics, targeting systems sensors etc. All best Western tanks have been designed in the 70s, but their modern version is not comparable to one produced then without refit. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nOn January 4, Emmanuel Macron promised to give Ukraine \"Wheeled tanks\" - the first tanks of Western production.\nFrance's decision to transfer AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicles brings Europe's security assistance to Ukraine to a new level, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his evening address on Jan. 4.\nFrance leading the charge in stepping up the quality of Western arms shipments to Ukraine puts more pressure on Berlin, as it remains reluctant to provide Kyiv with Leopard main battle tanks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Ukraine^#1 tanks^#2 Western^#3 France^#4 put^#5",
">\n\nModern? They're from the 70s I'm pretty sure."
] |
>
NATO partners are clearly spreading around "firsts" as they deliver new weapons to show unity. The US gave a patriot missile system, then France gave light tanks and then Germany is giving a patriot system as well. It's a terrible sign for Russia. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nOn January 4, Emmanuel Macron promised to give Ukraine \"Wheeled tanks\" - the first tanks of Western production.\nFrance's decision to transfer AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicles brings Europe's security assistance to Ukraine to a new level, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his evening address on Jan. 4.\nFrance leading the charge in stepping up the quality of Western arms shipments to Ukraine puts more pressure on Berlin, as it remains reluctant to provide Kyiv with Leopard main battle tanks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Ukraine^#1 tanks^#2 Western^#3 France^#4 put^#5",
">\n\nModern? They're from the 70s I'm pretty sure.",
">\n\nThe modernity vehicle is mostly classified by its soft factors, optics, targeting systems sensors etc. All best Western tanks have been designed in the 70s, but their modern version is not comparable to one produced then without refit."
] |
>
And now the US is sending Bradleys while Germany is sending Marders. | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nOn January 4, Emmanuel Macron promised to give Ukraine \"Wheeled tanks\" - the first tanks of Western production.\nFrance's decision to transfer AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicles brings Europe's security assistance to Ukraine to a new level, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his evening address on Jan. 4.\nFrance leading the charge in stepping up the quality of Western arms shipments to Ukraine puts more pressure on Berlin, as it remains reluctant to provide Kyiv with Leopard main battle tanks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Ukraine^#1 tanks^#2 Western^#3 France^#4 put^#5",
">\n\nModern? They're from the 70s I'm pretty sure.",
">\n\nThe modernity vehicle is mostly classified by its soft factors, optics, targeting systems sensors etc. All best Western tanks have been designed in the 70s, but their modern version is not comparable to one produced then without refit.",
">\n\nNATO partners are clearly spreading around \"firsts\" as they deliver new weapons to show unity. The US gave a patriot missile system, then France gave light tanks and then Germany is giving a patriot system as well. It's a terrible sign for Russia."
] |
> | [
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 71%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nOn January 4, Emmanuel Macron promised to give Ukraine \"Wheeled tanks\" - the first tanks of Western production.\nFrance's decision to transfer AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicles brings Europe's security assistance to Ukraine to a new level, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his evening address on Jan. 4.\nFrance leading the charge in stepping up the quality of Western arms shipments to Ukraine puts more pressure on Berlin, as it remains reluctant to provide Kyiv with Leopard main battle tanks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Ukraine^#1 tanks^#2 Western^#3 France^#4 put^#5",
">\n\nModern? They're from the 70s I'm pretty sure.",
">\n\nThe modernity vehicle is mostly classified by its soft factors, optics, targeting systems sensors etc. All best Western tanks have been designed in the 70s, but their modern version is not comparable to one produced then without refit.",
">\n\nNATO partners are clearly spreading around \"firsts\" as they deliver new weapons to show unity. The US gave a patriot missile system, then France gave light tanks and then Germany is giving a patriot system as well. It's a terrible sign for Russia.",
">\n\nAnd now the US is sending Bradleys while Germany is sending Marders."
] |
I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious. | [] |
>
I definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever.
The fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious."
] |
>
What’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there.
Probably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger.
They will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny."
] |
>
Many in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over."
] |
>
The idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go."
] |
>
Dem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want."
] |
>
I’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments.
Seems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up."
] |
>
Sounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself."
] |
>
Not just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion."
] |
>
Yeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years."
] |
>
Well we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement."
] |
>
It was a red ripple.
Specifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.
Now we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting."
] |
>
Except in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV."
] |
>
The t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself."
] |
>
Turns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV"
] |
>
In their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral."
] |
>
"They're the same picture" | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either."
] |
>
Venn Diagram is a circle. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\""
] |
>
Remember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle."
] |
>
I haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram"
] |
>
Braggart.
1, 2, 3, 8, 9....
Fuck! | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three."
] |
>
I love the people who were saying "Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces.
Sure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!"
] |
>
I mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican "oversight" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining."
] |
>
Along with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made."
] |
>
Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.
If the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown? | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want."
] |
>
what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?
Oh please, the "defections" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?"
] |
>
The Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down."
] |
>
What's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the "Trumpiest" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote.
In fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government."
] |
>
This is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round"
] |
>
I imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support.
The problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image.
Some of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power.
The question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour?
The problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here."
] |
>
They were talking about THE RED WAVE
Now they are struggling with THIS Lol | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise."
] |
>
REDRUM not RED WAVE | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol"
] |
>
Red Rocket, red rocket! | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE"
] |
>
‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’ | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!"
] |
>
Maybe it’s Dominion Voting Software. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’"
] |
>
No no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote! | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software."
] |
>
Is that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing? | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!"
] |
>
Fr fr | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?"
] |
>
No cap on god | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr"
] |
>
Gallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god"
] |
>
But the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny."
] |
>
Those twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol"
] |
>
I think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest."
] |
>
Need twelve R to just vote "present" and the Dems would retain the speaker position. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol"
] |
>
Sucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position."
] |
>
McCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.
Kevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious."
] |
>
Bring me a very small violin | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it."
] |
>
I mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin"
] |
>
They don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden? | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing."
] |
>
It’s looking less and less like we’re going to see Hunter’s dick pics in the House anytime soon… | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing.",
">\n\nThey don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden?"
] |
>
I've never seen this before and it just absolutely made my day. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing.",
">\n\nThey don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden?",
">\n\nIt’s looking less and less like we’re going to see Hunter’s dick pics in the House anytime soon…"
] |
>
I have, but I forgot about it so now I’m laughing all over again! 🤣 | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing.",
">\n\nThey don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden?",
">\n\nIt’s looking less and less like we’re going to see Hunter’s dick pics in the House anytime soon…",
">\n\nI've never seen this before and it just absolutely made my day."
] |
>
What does Mike Lindell have to say about this? | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing.",
">\n\nThey don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden?",
">\n\nIt’s looking less and less like we’re going to see Hunter’s dick pics in the House anytime soon…",
">\n\nI've never seen this before and it just absolutely made my day.",
">\n\nI have, but I forgot about it so now I’m laughing all over again! 🤣"
] |
>
Somebody get Ja Rule on the phone. Maybe he can make sense of all this. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing.",
">\n\nThey don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden?",
">\n\nIt’s looking less and less like we’re going to see Hunter’s dick pics in the House anytime soon…",
">\n\nI've never seen this before and it just absolutely made my day.",
">\n\nI have, but I forgot about it so now I’m laughing all over again! 🤣",
">\n\nWhat does Mike Lindell have to say about this?"
] |
>
It'll be interesting to see if Donalds gets more than 20. If the numbers keep moving in the wrong direction for him, McCarthy may give it up.
Speaker George Santos coming up. One of the Dems should nominate him. According to his resume, he's already been speaker previously, so it should be an easy position for him to assume again. | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing.",
">\n\nThey don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden?",
">\n\nIt’s looking less and less like we’re going to see Hunter’s dick pics in the House anytime soon…",
">\n\nI've never seen this before and it just absolutely made my day.",
">\n\nI have, but I forgot about it so now I’m laughing all over again! 🤣",
">\n\nWhat does Mike Lindell have to say about this?",
">\n\nSomebody get Ja Rule on the phone. Maybe he can make sense of all this."
] |
>
Santos: "I meant that I was a speaker of English, not a speaker of the house." | [
"I thought it would get less amusing the more times he failed, but here we are and it's still hilarious.",
">\n\nI definitely thought yesterday was the end of it, they'd adjourn, have some private meetings in the evening, and come back united under McCarthy after he dishes out some committee seats or whatever. \nThe fact that they came back this morning and he still doesn't have the votes is just so goddamn funny.",
">\n\nWhat’s even funnier is there doesn’t seem to be a viable route at all right now. Those hold outs will never vote for him. The people those hold outs want like Gym Jordan and Andy Biggs are never going to get the majority either. There will be just as many if not more hold outs there. \nProbably the best way for the GOP to save face right now is to reach across to the Dems and see if they could muster up enough votes between them for someone like Cheney or Kinzinger. \nThey will never do that though since they have pretty much made their platform, “owning the libs”. Instead they will choose to make America watch their internal dysfunction over and over.",
">\n\nMany in GOP want to do away with investigating themselves for ethics violations. Cheney or Kinzinger wouldn't allow that. So no go.",
">\n\nThe idea of going across the aisle is that you don't need any of the crooked GQP who fear the office of ethics, you just need 6 or so Republicans who haven't done anything wrong along with the 212 Dems to elect anyone they want.",
">\n\nDem speaker in a republican majority house? Sign me up.",
">\n\nI’m amazed there aren’t 6 self-serving republicans willing to broker with democrats for choice committee assignments. \nSeems like the ideal moment to cross the isle and cut a very powerful deal for oneself.",
">\n\nSounds like a good way to be moderately more powerful for two years and then get primaried into oblivion.",
">\n\nNot just moderately more powerful. Being a committee chair is dramatically more powerful and easily parleyed into a nice cushy lobby job after the two years.",
">\n\nYeah but they might not be too excited about the death threats and crazies that would get riled up by that behavior. America doesn't just negotiate with terrorists nowadays, it has a policy of flat out appeasement.",
">\n\nWell we may not have got a red wave, but we might get to see a bloodbath as the r's start infighting.",
">\n\nIt was a red ripple.\nSpecifically, the shot in Jurassic Park that shows the cup of water on the dashboard rippling.\nNow we're watching the T-Rex destroy the SUV.",
">\n\nExcept in this scenario it'd be one T-Rex fighting itself.",
">\n\nThe t-rex was kind of fighting itself when it attacked the SUV",
">\n\nTurns out conspiracy based governance doesn't work well. Too many loons, too hard to corral.",
">\n\nIn their defense, republican based government doesn't work too well either.",
">\n\n\"They're the same picture\"",
">\n\nVenn Diagram is a circle.",
">\n\nRemember Republican Leaders are too dumb to understand a Venn Diagram",
">\n\nI haven't had so much fun counting to 5 since I was three.",
">\n\nBraggart.\n1, 2, 3, 8, 9....\nFuck!",
">\n\nI love the people who were saying \"Who cares if it wasn't a wave, the Rs still won!\" This is why we care. Their lead is not large enough to overcome the infighting and now we get to watch them fall to pieces. \nSure, in the end, there will probably still be a republican speaker, but at least getting there is entertaining.",
">\n\nI mean the infighting is a decent consolation prize, but I would rather have had Dems keep control of both Chambers even with a razor thin majority. Once this shit is over we are still going to have 2 years of republican \"oversight\" that will consist of every digital communication Hunter Biden has ever made.",
">\n\nAlong with passing budgets and preventing government shutdowns. Which, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.",
">\n\n\nWhich, as recent history has shown, the GOP is willing to actually let the government shut down for as long as is necessary to get what they want.\n\nIf the GOP can't even agree on who their speaker will be, what makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?",
">\n\n\nwhat makes you think there won't be 5 defections to avoid a government shutdown?\n\nOh please, the \"defections\" will not be in the direction you are thinking. It'll be 203 votes to shut the government down, and 19 votes to burn the government down.",
">\n\nThe Freedom Caucus is making a lot of enemies in the moderate wing of the GOP with this stunt, it would make sense that some more moderate Republican House members (especially in purple districts in CA or NY) wouldn't want to be tied to the Freedom Caucus to shut down the government.",
">\n\nWhat's interesting is that Donald Trump endorsed McCarthy before the 4th vote, and none of the 20 who voted against McCarthy (who are mostly the \"Trumpiest\" bunch of the MAGA republicans) changed their vote. \nIn fact, McCarthy even lost a vote this round",
">\n\nThis is the part that has me genuinely confused. The people who were all in favor of overturning the election are now the same ones who won't back the guy that the guy they were gonna overturn the election for endorses...? It feels like it started eating its own tail overnight and I feel like I'm taking crazy pills trying to understand what the goal is here.",
">\n\nI imagine they only follow Trump if, and only if, he is useful to their gaining and retaining power. Do enough member of the public support Trump to make it worth their while? If so then they support Trump too so they can tap into those voters for support. \nThe problem is that Trump has been seen to be a liability and a loser. Being a loser goes against one of the main parts of his fictitious public image. \nSome of the politicians will be out for concessions and favours from McCarthy. You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours. Others may be holding a grudge and will use this to humiliate him and show him who holds the real power. \nThe question is can enough of them come to an understanding, an agreement, where enough people get what they want without each others wants conflicting and blocking votes in his favour? \nThe problem is that a lot of people have learnt that obstruction and acting tough is a viable alternative to talking and compromise.",
">\n\nThey were talking about THE RED WAVE\nNow they are struggling with THIS Lol",
">\n\nREDRUM not RED WAVE",
">\n\nRed Rocket, red rocket!",
">\n\n‘Red Rover Red Rover would more Republicans please come over’",
">\n\nMaybe it’s Dominion Voting Software.",
">\n\nNo no, george soros is bussing in antifa to vote!",
">\n\nIs that what the youths mean when they say things are bussing?",
">\n\nFr fr",
">\n\nNo cap on god",
">\n\nGallagher was so confident in his opening nomination of McCarthy, with his cheeky little jabs at the Dems and their popcorn emojis. He actually made me wonder for a second if they sorted their playground fights since yesterday. Too funny.",
">\n\nBut the cockiness McCarthy did really have his office stuff moved in early? A wee premature? Lol",
">\n\nThose twenty republicans should stage a walkout in protest.",
">\n\nI think only 4 or 5 need to do it lol",
">\n\nNeed twelve R to just vote \"present\" and the Dems would retain the speaker position.",
">\n\nSucks to suck. But seriously, this is hilarious.",
">\n\nMcCarthy has been after the speakers gavel for his whole career. This was supposed to be his swan song. In his mind he did everything right and deserves this.\nKevin is watching his dream fall apart and he has absolutely no control over it. He had one shot and missed. He will never be the speaker in whatever is left of his career and he now knows it.",
">\n\nBring me a very small violin",
">\n\nI mean they are accomplishing exactly what they would be getting done even if they did elect a speaker and by that I mean nothing.",
">\n\nThey don't get to run pointless investigations though. How are they going to rile up their base if they can't pound the table during endless hearings about Hunter Biden?",
">\n\nIt’s looking less and less like we’re going to see Hunter’s dick pics in the House anytime soon…",
">\n\nI've never seen this before and it just absolutely made my day.",
">\n\nI have, but I forgot about it so now I’m laughing all over again! 🤣",
">\n\nWhat does Mike Lindell have to say about this?",
">\n\nSomebody get Ja Rule on the phone. Maybe he can make sense of all this.",
">\n\nIt'll be interesting to see if Donalds gets more than 20. If the numbers keep moving in the wrong direction for him, McCarthy may give it up. \nSpeaker George Santos coming up. One of the Dems should nominate him. According to his resume, he's already been speaker previously, so it should be an easy position for him to assume again."
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.