Kansas City is first major city in U.S. to offer no-cost public transportation

Post by proc0 » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:19 AM UTC

jMyles wrote: post #222

proc0 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so infuriating to see big cities completely incapable of dealing with homeless people as if they are delicate creatures that can't be touched, and then have the majority of people ignore them even though they are assholes that make a scene every single time. Most of these people act that way because no one has taught them any better and therefore they have no incentive to act otherwise.

Having the spent almost the entire past 5 years living happily houseless, I need neither your judgment nor your support. I do think you are being malicious, though, and I think you know that you are just totally incorrect.

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:21 AM UTC

toomanybeersies wrote: post #127

nostromo wrote: post #23

Seattle used to have this for an area of the city. It was called the "Free Ride Zone" - and it had some unexpected consequences. The primary problem is that homeless people would get on the bus because it's warm, and would fall asleep. The busses became rolling homeless shelters. This caused other people to take the bus less, because of public safety concerns, as well as simple quality-of-life issues like unpleasant…

Interestingly, here in Melbourne we have a similar system when it comes to paying fares. It's not the bus/train/tram drivers responsibility to ensure you pay your fare, you can walk onto a bus without tagging on and the driver won't even blink, it's the job of roaming ticket inspectors to enforce fare payment. In my experience, we don't have a particularly significant problem with homeless people and other "undesirab…

Post by shadowgovt » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:23 AM UTC

weberc2 wrote: post #221

shadowgovt wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could cease to provide social security as it is structured if one replaced it with an alternative. We already know from US history that it is unwise (in a humanitarian sense) to trust the public to just save enough to retire comfortably (including having the foresight to keep their savings in assets that don't diminish in value before they are needed to offset continued life without labor into the system).

I thought postwar America was known for investing in real estate to great wealth-building effect? I’m not sure how worthwhile other time periods are for comparison as our economy is so much different.

Post by ALittleLight » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:26 AM UTC

baroffoos wrote: post #236

ALittleLight wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enforcing laws against the homeless is not the done thing in Seattle. The problem is not thinking of ways to detect their law breaking, but rather that the city chooses compassion over order and consequently ignores their lawlessness instead of enforcing the law. If you do come to Seattle, you'll find the streets teeming with the homeless who are completely undisturbed by the police. Just walking around the city, and…

Its strange how the American version of compassion is to totally ignore homeless people rather than do anything to help them.

Post by Fricken » Tue, Dec 17, 2019, 3:29 AM UTC

fiblye wrote: post #238

new_realist wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Seattle bus rider, I would have to disagree. A few outlier homeless (e.g. those who shit on the bus) can create irrational triggers among the general public which decrease bus use.

Wanting to avoid literal shit on a bus isn’t irrational. If it’s a common enough issue that it’s acknowledged as more than a one-off thing, it’s rational to want to avoid that. And it’s not only wanting to avoid shit on a bus, but wanting to avoid people who have no concerns with shitting on a bus. They’re unpredictable.