Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Salem, OR vs Seattle
Comments
-
Great Central Party is greatest central planner of all comrade. One size fits all solution solves all problems!HHusky said:
Isn't the biggest problem with society's current approach the decentralization and lack of uniformity between approaches? As GreenRiver said, a single, federal approach would be better. As things stand, some cities "solve" the problem by buying the homeless bus tickets to Seattle and SF. And I am torn when I give to local homelessness charities, because there is a free rider issue; if some communities are charitable and others aren't, the ones that are will end up bearing more than their share of the burdens.Doogles said:
Stop giving away millions of "free" needles. Off top no google like pump, SF spent over 50 million last year on cleaning up human feces.HHusky said:
Substance abuse and mental health problems are certainly involved. (The cause and effect relationship between those conditions and homelessness probably runs in both directions, depending on the individual.) So do you think mentally ill people can just decide to stop being mentally ill? Substance abuse can be treated, but it's a long process and not inexpensive. Any proposed solutions besides not "enabling" the homeless? Whatever that means.Doogles said:Nobody is homeless because they can no longer afford the 5k a month mortgage. I'd be homeless too if I refused to pay rent and live anywhere but Malibu on the ocean.
It almost always boils down to substance abuse and mental health. Enablement is the cruelest killer.
You need to reopen mental health facilities, i like the idea of a tiered system. If people are cited enough, you take them out of society and evaluate where they are at. If they are insane you go from there, if they are showing rehabilitation you move them along to the next level, until you get them to a point to return to society.
The amount of money being spent on the homeless problem while it only gets worse is proof it's not working. Giving safe zones and encampments only encourages antisocial behavior while killing the value of surrounding property and business.
It may seem inhumane on the surface, but the faster people hit their bottom the better. They need to get wrecked to realize it's not working. Accept reality you can't save everyone.
The sad truth is a lot of people need to die so others can live. People are going to get blood born disease using dirty needles, clean needles, fucking for dope, etc. Enforcing consequences for actions shouldn't be viewed as a negative.
I was a pretty high bottom guy, functioning making 6-figs, but always on the verge of snapping. I hang out and help homeless, former homeless, pretty much everyday now for two years.
They would have all been happy hooked up to a slow drip, drooling out the side of their mouths for eternity if you let them. I used to give the bum begging for change fives all the time. I don't give them a cent anymore, i'll toss them food that's it. The stories i hear and the things i've seen have opened my eyes to the reality you need these people to fail spectacularly for them to change.
Societies current approach is akin to the classic story of the loving mother giving her obvious junkie son another 20, and another 20, and another 20, and where is the TV?, but he's a good boy so here's another 20...this is not a winning strategy and it hurts all parties involved in the most destructive, painful, and drawn out way imaginable.
Imposing deadly consequences for addiction is a bridge too far for me. Addiction is not merely a behavioral issue. Clean needles are the bandaid you apply when treatment is too expensive and/or unavailable. I'd prefer we provided treatment. But it's spendy. Same with mental illness.
Remembers comrade, the wars on poverty never ends! -
Now you see why H sticks to one liners most of the time
-
Or trying his best to wrongly present others statements.RaceBannon said:Now you see why H sticks to one liners most of the time
-
Actually, Jesus said something like that too. I quoted it above. Race told Him to fuck off.UW_Doog_Bot said:HHusky said:
Isn't the biggest problem with society's current approach the decentralization and lack of uniformity between approaches? As GreenRiver said, a single, federal approach would be better. As things stand, some cities "solve" the problem by buying the homeless bus tickets to Seattle and SF. And I am torn when I give to local homelessness charities, because there is a free rider issue; if some communities are charitable and others aren't, the ones that are will end up bearing more than their share of the burdens.Doogles said:
Stop giving away millions of "free" needles. Off top no google like pump, SF spent over 50 million last year on cleaning up human feces.HHusky said:
Substance abuse and mental health problems are certainly involved. (The cause and effect relationship between those conditions and homelessness probably runs in both directions, depending on the individual.) So do you think mentally ill people can just decide to stop being mentally ill? Substance abuse can be treated, but it's a long process and not inexpensive. Any proposed solutions besides not "enabling" the homeless? Whatever that means.Doogles said:Nobody is homeless because they can no longer afford the 5k a month mortgage. I'd be homeless too if I refused to pay rent and live anywhere but Malibu on the ocean.
It almost always boils down to substance abuse and mental health. Enablement is the cruelest killer.
You need to reopen mental health facilities, i like the idea of a tiered system. If people are cited enough, you take them out of society and evaluate where they are at. If they are insane you go from there, if they are showing rehabilitation you move them along to the next level, until you get them to a point to return to society.
The amount of money being spent on the homeless problem while it only gets worse is proof it's not working. Giving safe zones and encampments only encourages antisocial behavior while killing the value of surrounding property and business.
It may seem inhumane on the surface, but the faster people hit their bottom the better. They need to get wrecked to realize it's not working. Accept reality you can't save everyone.
The sad truth is a lot of people need to die so others can live. People are going to get blood born disease using dirty needles, clean needles, fucking for dope, etc. Enforcing consequences for actions shouldn't be viewed as a negative.
I was a pretty high bottom guy, functioning making 6-figs, but always on the verge of snapping. I hang out and help homeless, former homeless, pretty much everyday now for two years.
They would have all been happy hooked up to a slow drip, drooling out the side of their mouths for eternity if you let them. I used to give the bum begging for change fives all the time. I don't give them a cent anymore, i'll toss them food that's it. The stories i hear and the things i've seen have opened my eyes to the reality you need these people to fail spectacularly for them to change.
Societies current approach is akin to the classic story of the loving mother giving her obvious junkie son another 20, and another 20, and another 20, and where is the TV?, but he's a good boy so here's another 20...this is not a winning strategy and it hurts all parties involved in the most destructive, painful, and drawn out way imaginable.
Imposing deadly consequences for addiction is a bridge too far for me. Addiction is not merely a behavioral issue. Clean needles are the bandaid you apply when treatment is too expensive and/or unavailable. I'd prefer we provided treatment. But it's spendy. Same with mental illness.
Remembers comrade, the wars on poverty never ends!
Why must we atheists always do the Lord's work? -
Deflect deflect deflect. If you were funnier I'd think you were one of J's alts attempting to mimic a bad attorney.HHusky said:
Actually, Jesus said something like that too. I quoted it above. Race told Him to fuck off.UW_Doog_Bot said:HHusky said:
Isn't the biggest problem with society's current approach the decentralization and lack of uniformity between approaches? As GreenRiver said, a single, federal approach would be better. As things stand, some cities "solve" the problem by buying the homeless bus tickets to Seattle and SF. And I am torn when I give to local homelessness charities, because there is a free rider issue; if some communities are charitable and others aren't, the ones that are will end up bearing more than their share of the burdens.Doogles said:
Stop giving away millions of "free" needles. Off top no google like pump, SF spent over 50 million last year on cleaning up human feces.HHusky said:
Substance abuse and mental health problems are certainly involved. (The cause and effect relationship between those conditions and homelessness probably runs in both directions, depending on the individual.) So do you think mentally ill people can just decide to stop being mentally ill? Substance abuse can be treated, but it's a long process and not inexpensive. Any proposed solutions besides not "enabling" the homeless? Whatever that means.Doogles said:Nobody is homeless because they can no longer afford the 5k a month mortgage. I'd be homeless too if I refused to pay rent and live anywhere but Malibu on the ocean.
It almost always boils down to substance abuse and mental health. Enablement is the cruelest killer.
You need to reopen mental health facilities, i like the idea of a tiered system. If people are cited enough, you take them out of society and evaluate where they are at. If they are insane you go from there, if they are showing rehabilitation you move them along to the next level, until you get them to a point to return to society.
The amount of money being spent on the homeless problem while it only gets worse is proof it's not working. Giving safe zones and encampments only encourages antisocial behavior while killing the value of surrounding property and business.
It may seem inhumane on the surface, but the faster people hit their bottom the better. They need to get wrecked to realize it's not working. Accept reality you can't save everyone.
The sad truth is a lot of people need to die so others can live. People are going to get blood born disease using dirty needles, clean needles, fucking for dope, etc. Enforcing consequences for actions shouldn't be viewed as a negative.
I was a pretty high bottom guy, functioning making 6-figs, but always on the verge of snapping. I hang out and help homeless, former homeless, pretty much everyday now for two years.
They would have all been happy hooked up to a slow drip, drooling out the side of their mouths for eternity if you let them. I used to give the bum begging for change fives all the time. I don't give them a cent anymore, i'll toss them food that's it. The stories i hear and the things i've seen have opened my eyes to the reality you need these people to fail spectacularly for them to change.
Societies current approach is akin to the classic story of the loving mother giving her obvious junkie son another 20, and another 20, and another 20, and where is the TV?, but he's a good boy so here's another 20...this is not a winning strategy and it hurts all parties involved in the most destructive, painful, and drawn out way imaginable.
Imposing deadly consequences for addiction is a bridge too far for me. Addiction is not merely a behavioral issue. Clean needles are the bandaid you apply when treatment is too expensive and/or unavailable. I'd prefer we provided treatment. But it's spendy. Same with mental illness.
Remembers comrade, the wars on poverty never ends!
Why must we atheists always do the Lord's work? -
Et tu DooglesThomasFremont said:
Look, I’m. It saying I want it to happen. But if you and all your homeless friends got the Rona and died, society would be better off.salemcoog said: -
Deflect? Funny, I don't see you proposing anything on the topic of homelessness.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Deflect deflect deflect. If you were funnier I'd think you were one of J's alts attempting to mimic a bad attorney.HHusky said:
Actually, Jesus said something like that too. I quoted it above. Race told Him to fuck off.UW_Doog_Bot said:HHusky said:
Isn't the biggest problem with society's current approach the decentralization and lack of uniformity between approaches? As GreenRiver said, a single, federal approach would be better. As things stand, some cities "solve" the problem by buying the homeless bus tickets to Seattle and SF. And I am torn when I give to local homelessness charities, because there is a free rider issue; if some communities are charitable and others aren't, the ones that are will end up bearing more than their share of the burdens.Doogles said:
Stop giving away millions of "free" needles. Off top no google like pump, SF spent over 50 million last year on cleaning up human feces.HHusky said:
Substance abuse and mental health problems are certainly involved. (The cause and effect relationship between those conditions and homelessness probably runs in both directions, depending on the individual.) So do you think mentally ill people can just decide to stop being mentally ill? Substance abuse can be treated, but it's a long process and not inexpensive. Any proposed solutions besides not "enabling" the homeless? Whatever that means.Doogles said:Nobody is homeless because they can no longer afford the 5k a month mortgage. I'd be homeless too if I refused to pay rent and live anywhere but Malibu on the ocean.
It almost always boils down to substance abuse and mental health. Enablement is the cruelest killer.
You need to reopen mental health facilities, i like the idea of a tiered system. If people are cited enough, you take them out of society and evaluate where they are at. If they are insane you go from there, if they are showing rehabilitation you move them along to the next level, until you get them to a point to return to society.
The amount of money being spent on the homeless problem while it only gets worse is proof it's not working. Giving safe zones and encampments only encourages antisocial behavior while killing the value of surrounding property and business.
It may seem inhumane on the surface, but the faster people hit their bottom the better. They need to get wrecked to realize it's not working. Accept reality you can't save everyone.
The sad truth is a lot of people need to die so others can live. People are going to get blood born disease using dirty needles, clean needles, fucking for dope, etc. Enforcing consequences for actions shouldn't be viewed as a negative.
I was a pretty high bottom guy, functioning making 6-figs, but always on the verge of snapping. I hang out and help homeless, former homeless, pretty much everyday now for two years.
They would have all been happy hooked up to a slow drip, drooling out the side of their mouths for eternity if you let them. I used to give the bum begging for change fives all the time. I don't give them a cent anymore, i'll toss them food that's it. The stories i hear and the things i've seen have opened my eyes to the reality you need these people to fail spectacularly for them to change.
Societies current approach is akin to the classic story of the loving mother giving her obvious junkie son another 20, and another 20, and another 20, and where is the TV?, but he's a good boy so here's another 20...this is not a winning strategy and it hurts all parties involved in the most destructive, painful, and drawn out way imaginable.
Imposing deadly consequences for addiction is a bridge too far for me. Addiction is not merely a behavioral issue. Clean needles are the bandaid you apply when treatment is too expensive and/or unavailable. I'd prefer we provided treatment. But it's spendy. Same with mental illness.
Remembers comrade, the wars on poverty never ends!
Why must we atheists always do the Lord's work? -
I did not see it was responding to you, but the idea society would be better off if the rona wiped out the homeless is not wrong.salemcoog said:
Et tu DooglesThomasFremont said:
Look, I’m. It saying I want it to happen. But if you and all your homeless friends got the Rona and died, society would be better off.salemcoog said: -
Fuck off theocratHHusky said:
Actually, Jesus said something like that too. I quoted it above. Race told Him to fuck off.UW_Doog_Bot said:HHusky said:
Isn't the biggest problem with society's current approach the decentralization and lack of uniformity between approaches? As GreenRiver said, a single, federal approach would be better. As things stand, some cities "solve" the problem by buying the homeless bus tickets to Seattle and SF. And I am torn when I give to local homelessness charities, because there is a free rider issue; if some communities are charitable and others aren't, the ones that are will end up bearing more than their share of the burdens.Doogles said:
Stop giving away millions of "free" needles. Off top no google like pump, SF spent over 50 million last year on cleaning up human feces.HHusky said:
Substance abuse and mental health problems are certainly involved. (The cause and effect relationship between those conditions and homelessness probably runs in both directions, depending on the individual.) So do you think mentally ill people can just decide to stop being mentally ill? Substance abuse can be treated, but it's a long process and not inexpensive. Any proposed solutions besides not "enabling" the homeless? Whatever that means.Doogles said:Nobody is homeless because they can no longer afford the 5k a month mortgage. I'd be homeless too if I refused to pay rent and live anywhere but Malibu on the ocean.
It almost always boils down to substance abuse and mental health. Enablement is the cruelest killer.
You need to reopen mental health facilities, i like the idea of a tiered system. If people are cited enough, you take them out of society and evaluate where they are at. If they are insane you go from there, if they are showing rehabilitation you move them along to the next level, until you get them to a point to return to society.
The amount of money being spent on the homeless problem while it only gets worse is proof it's not working. Giving safe zones and encampments only encourages antisocial behavior while killing the value of surrounding property and business.
It may seem inhumane on the surface, but the faster people hit their bottom the better. They need to get wrecked to realize it's not working. Accept reality you can't save everyone.
The sad truth is a lot of people need to die so others can live. People are going to get blood born disease using dirty needles, clean needles, fucking for dope, etc. Enforcing consequences for actions shouldn't be viewed as a negative.
I was a pretty high bottom guy, functioning making 6-figs, but always on the verge of snapping. I hang out and help homeless, former homeless, pretty much everyday now for two years.
They would have all been happy hooked up to a slow drip, drooling out the side of their mouths for eternity if you let them. I used to give the bum begging for change fives all the time. I don't give them a cent anymore, i'll toss them food that's it. The stories i hear and the things i've seen have opened my eyes to the reality you need these people to fail spectacularly for them to change.
Societies current approach is akin to the classic story of the loving mother giving her obvious junkie son another 20, and another 20, and another 20, and where is the TV?, but he's a good boy so here's another 20...this is not a winning strategy and it hurts all parties involved in the most destructive, painful, and drawn out way imaginable.
Imposing deadly consequences for addiction is a bridge too far for me. Addiction is not merely a behavioral issue. Clean needles are the bandaid you apply when treatment is too expensive and/or unavailable. I'd prefer we provided treatment. But it's spendy. Same with mental illness.
Remembers comrade, the wars on poverty never ends!
Why must we atheists always do the Lord's work? -
The "poor" aren't homeless. HTHHHusky said:"The poor you will always have with you."
Those who wanted to see an end to boardinghouses and flophouses, and also want to limit or curtail publicly subsidized housing, didn't leave the poor--especially the single poor--a lot of alternatives. And charity raises the NIMBY cries too.
Salem rents are only low relative to Seattle, Portland, SF and LA. And supply?
