California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’ • Hacker News Board

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#81

Post by PopeDotNinja » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:33 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #71

mdorazio wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not quite that simple. The West Coast has seen a huge influx of homeless people (ex. [1] - 12% YoY increase in LA) while the nation overall has seen a drop [2]. If your homeless population is steady or falling it's easier to build enough services for them than if thousands more arrive every year. Also, I agree that more shelters and services need to be built, but it would be nice if the Federal government pitche…

California's also exporting their homeless problems. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/...

I'd be surprised if any states didn't do that. Anyone shouldering the cost providing for you is typically thrilled to buy you a one way ticket anywhere you'd like to go.

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#82

Post by CydeWeys » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:33 PM UTC

"But there was no “defecation crisis”—a term usually associated with rural India—in the 1930s, even with unemployment at 25%, vagabonds roaming the country, and shantytowns and “Hoovervilles” springing up everywhere."

[citation needed]

Bodily waste has been a huge problem for shantytowns across all of recorded history. I doubt that Hoovervilles had some unique solution to the problem that has not been replicated since.

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#83

Post by sbhn » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:34 PM UTC

The defecation crisis is see is the eagerness of law fearing citizens to put a substance that decomposes back into nature in about a week, into a plastic bag that will still have its contents nicely stored, and brewing, ready to be freed, for years to come.

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#84

Post by bradleyjg » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:35 PM UTC

sethammons wrote: post #78

api wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What logic could that person possibly be following? It's just mind boggling. In any case, that's why I want to see local planning just abolished. These people are so clueless or self-serving (not sure which, don't care) that I don't see any reasoning with them or even talking to them. Just fire them all and abolish their offices.

Easy: people require infrastructure and many land developers ignore it. More lanes on roads being a big one. In my former neck of the woods, a developer is putting in 1 or 2 thousands homes. They will connect right onto the two lane highway, miles from the freeway that already has too much traffic causing chaos in the rush hours. The developers will make a bundle if they don't go bankrupt first, and the community wil…

The proposed 5000 unit development which has just been killed by NIMBYs is within blocks of two different subway stations. Few if any any of the residents would have owned cars. Roads are not an issue here.

It's pure against-all-change conservatism. It's fine to have that personality type, but the vast, overwhelming majority of the country is filled with landscapes that change slowly if at all. Can't the small island of Manhattan be set aside for change and growth?

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#85

Post by daenz » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:35 PM UTC

ajross wrote: post #20

archaea_hao wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mental healthcare may be relevant to this issue. But the cost of housing is not. These people cannot hold jobs because they are mentally ill. They need state provided institutional care, otherwise they will remain on the streets.

That's a caricature. In fact there are a near infinite variety of reasons for being homeless, and many homeless folks not only can hold jobs, but work them already. Yet they're on the streets anyway because of financial pressure, look like the "these people" you want to lock up, and would probably get picked up under the same ordinance.

>there are a near infinite variety of reasons for being homeless

Ah, the old "flatten that distribution graph and treat every point as equally probable" argument. Arguments like these are so intentionally misleading that it's easy to construe them as malicious. You'd rather make an asinine point than use language that addresses the true distribution of the problem set, because it doesn't capture every single fringe case you can think of.

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#86

Post by wallace_f » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:37 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #69

wallace_f wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We don't even prioritize homes for taxpaying citizens. There's way too much oppression against simple or niche home designs. The government backlash against Tiny Homes, for instance. And of course taxing homes to death also probably isn't a good thing. Tax bad stuff like gasoline. Don't tax things we need more of.

Property taxes are capped at 1%, and assessment appreciation is tied to inflation. Lowering taxes isn't the answer here. Now if you want to talk about impact fees you might be on to something...

That's true, but that is just traditional property taxes on homes in California. As you noted, there are other taxes and even regulatory capture that drives up costs of new home ownership.

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#87

Post by CydeWeys » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:38 PM UTC

archaea_hao wrote: post #47

ajross wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a caricature. In fact there are a near infinite variety of reasons for being homeless, and many homeless folks not only can hold jobs, but work them already. Yet they're on the streets anyway because of financial pressure, look like the "these people" you want to lock up, and would probably get picked up under the same ordinance.

"In fact there are a near infinite variety of reasons for being homeless" Near infinite in the sense that there are near infinite ways of dying. You could be hit by an asteroid. You could fall off a cliff. But that obscures the fact that most people die from some sickness or disease. I've done volunteer work with the homeless. There are 2 major causes of homelessness: mental illness and drug addiction. Everything els…

It sounds like you've only done volunteer work with specific types of people.

The homeless people who simply can't afford housing and thus live in vehicles, and have jobs, want to stay under the radar. It's unlikely you'd make contact with them during volunteering unless you specifically sought them out. You're not going to find them at soup kitchens, homeless shelters, skid row, etc. They're normal people like you and me who just can't afford to live in a building, and are taking the next best option.

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#88

Post by pmoriarty » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:41 PM UTC

notus wrote: post #43

i wonder if incentivizing the homeless to use bathrooms would work... free meal, joint, w/e

All you have to do is have plenty of public bathrooms nearby and keep them clean.

Neither of those is the case in SF. There are almost no public bathrooms, and those that exist tend to be disgusting.

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#89

Post by CydeWeys » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:42 PM UTC

ajross wrote: post #15

> The triple scourges of drug abuse, mental illness and family breakdown have produced anomie and derangements far deeper than those seen in the 1930s Completely unsourced nonsense. As if there were no homeless families or mental illness in the great depression. Even drug abuse isn't a modern thing, though the chemicals have changed. I mean it doesn't even pass the basic (heh) smell test of "would you rather walk the…

People vastly underestimate just how bad run-of-the-mill alcoholism was in past years, let alone more "exotic" illegal drugs. Look at the gin craze in London a few centuries ago, for example: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/9a8e4e/a-gin-craze-nearly...

Re: California’s Biggest Cities Confront a ‘Defecation Crisis’

#90

Post by weeksie » Sun, Aug 18, 2019, 3:42 PM UTC

holycrapwhodat wrote: post #63

weeksie wrote: post #14

Build. More. Homeless. Shelters. California is so damned NIMBY'd up that they refuse to build shelters and act surprised when homeless people sleep outside. Then they throw their hands up in the air like "uh, it must be the weather" It's stupid. In New York we have more homeless per capita and in absolute numbers but we have nothing like the street issues that west coast cities have. It's because we actually house th…

> In New York we have more homeless per capita... At least based on latest 2018 numbers I found for both cities, that's not true. NYC 78676 homeless with 8398748 residents. SF 9784 homeless with 870877 residents. 106 residents per homeless individual in NYC. Only 89 residents per homeless individual in SF. > And for fuck's sake, it's not the weather. Our parks aren't by any means pristine but we don't suddenly sprout…

My bad, I was quoting from memory, you are correct about the numbers. That said, they're pretty close.

As for the weather I stand by my statement. While year around nice weather does make an encampment more hospitable, the reason why it's cruel to just bulldoze those settlements is because the people have nowhere to go. Still, I acknowledge your point, weather is surely a factor, I just don't believe it carries as much weight as it's frequently given credit for.