Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Groups of Homeless People

acesounderglass.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 66 posts

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#51

Post by shard972 »

educationdata wrote: post #44
ende wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re missing the point. The people that OP is referring to refuse to use all the public facilities offered, they don’t want to sleep indoors, they don’t want to use trash cans, they don’t want to piss in mobile bathrooms or take showers, they don’t want to be corralled into designated hang out spots. They want to go wherever they want to, camp out wherever they want to, they want to collect whatever garbage…

Interesting. How do those people think of jail time? Will arresting scare them away or change their behavior?

Oh no your treating mental illness with jail time, thats bad.

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#52

Post by DrJones1098 »

ghostly_s wrote: post #33
standardUser wrote: post #23

As a many-decades resident of Santa Cruz and San Francisco, and a as someone who has in the past been deeply involved in the street/drug scene and been associated with and friends with many dozens of people who have lived on the streets, I think this bizarre attempt at categorization missed the most visible and important group of people on the streets... People who choose to live on the streets. Go talk to people. As…

Well then, sounds like a problem that can easily be solved with the meager expense of public facilities, trashcans, and open spaces that aren't sidewalks for the unhoused to hang out in.

Completely agree. Walking around San Fran the lack of public restrooms and reticence of shopowners to let you use their private restroom made me want to poop on the street.

Santa Monica had a bunch of public restrooms and you NEVER see poop on the street like on San Fran.

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#53

Post by caconym_ »

lacker wrote: post #41
caconym_ wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do these people not fall under "the ruiners"?

No, the "ruiners" are the ones who impose large costs on the system. Some people are just trying to live peacefully on the streets. In large enough numbers, yeah you'll get people treating public spaces poorly and it'll cause public health problems. The key difference is that people like this who are living on the streets intentionally, if they get kicked out of the area they're living in or if the friend group gets…

Personally I'd call anyone who is homeless "for fun" a ruiner. In addition to overstressing the systems in place to support "legitimately homeless" people, they provide a convenient strawman for those who wish to argue that homeless people aren't deserving of help. The same goes for our welfare system.

> For what it's worth, my source knowledge here is totally personal and anecdotal.

Mine too. Same goes for the author of the article, I suspect. Everyone should take it with a grain of salt.

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#54

Post by diogenescynic »

standardUser wrote: post #23

As a many-decades resident of Santa Cruz and San Francisco, and a as someone who has in the past been deeply involved in the street/drug scene and been associated with and friends with many dozens of people who have lived on the streets, I think this bizarre attempt at categorization missed the most visible and important group of people on the streets... People who choose to live on the streets. Go talk to people. As…

Sounds like you’re talking about the tweakers in RVs and the street kids/crust punks in the Haight who have pit bulls and are just living a “lifestyle” or homeless by choice. I think most of them qualify as “ruiners” according to the article, but maybe you disagree. These are the group of homeless I think that are causing 90% of the issues in the city and they know cops won’t really do much so they are constantly pushing what they can get away with like petty theft, stealing bikes, operating open bike chop shops, openly selling and using drugs, camping wherever they feel like... This is the group who are basically ruining quality of life for everyone else and a drain to homeless resources.

I think there needs to be some kind of program and either homeless are enrolled and attending and getting help, or they aren’t allowed to stay within city limits. It’s just really frustrating how the city has done nothing to sort the homeless into people who want help and the people who don’t. I think between the lazy DAs, cops who don’t care, juries who won’t convict, and judges who won’t sentence—we’ve created a situation where no one is actually improving the homeless crisis, just ignoring it. BART has become a de facto homeless shelter. Antioch trains regularly have 5-7 homeless people sleeping in each car during rush hour. I read in SFGate that they arrested 66 fugitives in the Tenderloin in one sweep this week... it just doesn't seem safe to have this level of lawlessness in a major city.

I feel bad for these people because most of them are mentally ill or struggling with some other issue, but this is not the way to run a world class city. There is clearly money to fix the problem, but no political will to actually put the structures in place.

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#55

Post by squish78 »

forevertogether wrote: post #35

Oh sure! Project your fears onto other people, and put them into psuedo-categories. Much easier to do this than to humanize them. Bravo for your technical analysis! Oh boy! This sarcasm is what living in Britain for 10 years has helped me master. I think deep down my sarcasm actually represents pain. - “We Americans stubbornly resist the possibility that what we do is profoundly shaped by policies, norms, systems, an…

This whole comment reads like AI generated a 'woke college freshman' parody

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#56

Post by Woberto »

caconym_ wrote: post #26
standardUser wrote: post #23

As a many-decades resident of Santa Cruz and San Francisco, and a as someone who has in the past been deeply involved in the street/drug scene and been associated with and friends with many dozens of people who have lived on the streets, I think this bizarre attempt at categorization missed the most visible and important group of people on the streets... People who choose to live on the streets. Go talk to people. As…

Do these people not fall under "the ruiners"?

That's what it sounds like from the last paragraph.

> And they shit and piss on our streets, block sidewalks, litter profusely and otherwise do whatever they feel like.

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#57

Post by Woberto »

caconym_ wrote: post #53
lacker wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the "ruiners" are the ones who impose large costs on the system. Some people are just trying to live peacefully on the streets. In large enough numbers, yeah you'll get people treating public spaces poorly and it'll cause public health problems. The key difference is that people like this who are living on the streets intentionally, if they get kicked out of the area they're living in or if the friend group gets…

Personally I'd call anyone who is homeless "for fun" a ruiner. In addition to overstressing the systems in place to support "legitimately homeless" people, they provide a convenient strawman for those who wish to argue that homeless people aren't deserving of help. The same goes for our welfare system. > For what it's worth, my source knowledge here is totally personal and anecdotal. Mine too. Same goes for the autho…

I think it depends on how they go about their lifestyle. Shouldn't we be free to choose whether we want to settle down in one location or wander around, as long as we're not hurting anybody? It seems unlawfully (un-American at least) restrictive to dictate how a person must live when it comes to their choice of residence

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#58

Post by treis »

glangdale wrote: post #31
ericmcer wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the 'ruiners' label though, especially living in SF, the vast majority of homeless are minding their own business and trying to get by. If you pass by 100 in your day and just one happens to be openly shitting in front of you, you might walk away saying, 'the homeless are really ruining the city', in spite of 99% of your encounters being neutral.

I'm not convinced that characterizing people who are mentally ill as "ruiners" is a particularly helpful taxonomy whether you're looking to understand homelessness or help fix it. I think it just serves as a tough-talking catchall category for "homeless I don't like" here (like we'll cut the 'bad ones' out of the herd and then be nice to everyone else). I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of labelling people as 'rui…

>I'm not convinced that characterizing people who are mentally ill as "ruiners"

They're not. They fall into:

>4. People who can’t survive the modern world without assistance

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#59

Post by wasdfff »

pjc50 wrote: post #50
ende wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re missing the point. The people that OP is referring to refuse to use all the public facilities offered, they don’t want to sleep indoors, they don’t want to use trash cans, they don’t want to piss in mobile bathrooms or take showers, they don’t want to be corralled into designated hang out spots. They want to go wherever they want to, camp out wherever they want to, they want to collect whatever garbage…

So, libertarians, but without the money? (How do these people get into this state? Is this just a concentration phenomenon, where people who think that all move to the same place?)

Many were bussed in by other cities to California

Re: Groups of Homeless People

#60

Post by maxpupmax »

arkades wrote: post #4
_ikuh wrote: post #2

I was pretty with it until 4 and 5. The premise that certain groups of people without housing "can't survive without the kind of assistance that money can't buy" is condescending and elitist at best.

There’s a guy on my psych floor right now that, at his best, is too psychotic and paranoid to hold a job for more than a few days. At his worst - where he usually is, because his paranoia includes medications, and he believes he’s completely healthy - he’s only loosely tethered to reality. It’s a good day if he’s clothed even vaguely appropriate to the season, and manages to eat actual food. It’s not uncommon for him…

Yeah thank you for your comment -- there are tons of people out there who need that kind of help, I have known some of them as well (maybe not as closely as in your profession!) and the us mental health system is not adequate

My point wasn't articulated well in my first comment. I am worried more about painting homeless people with such a broad stroke. Getting a roof over someone's head is entirely different from getting them mental health services -- we need to fix both to actually solve the problem. And the specific language around "ruiners" in the post really struck a nerve with me... I think that everyone is deserving of some degree of help and shouldn't be thrown in prison like OP suggested.

That said, I don't appreciate the personal attack. While I did find reading about your experience helpful and appreciate you sharing, I think your comment at the end is part of what makes the internet bad. Look to some of the other comments critical of my post for some better examples.

Post reply on HN