Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco is spending $1.7M on one public toilet

sfchronicle.com

831–832 of 832 posts

Re: San Francisco is spending $1.7M on one public toilet

#831

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But for 10 years in downtown Portland, OR, I have lived in rural towns my entire forty-five years. I have also travelled extensively through rural PNW towns with my schooling and work. This does not at all match my experience.

Rural PNW towns not impacted by insane levels of brown/white? Dude, come on. Mexi's (fentanyl pills) are killing so many people right now. Driving so many young girls prostituting themselves. It is horrible. You lived in rural America and didn't experience families whose only source of meat was what they hunted? Dude, come on. Or families living in ancient trailer homes/campers? As for the camps, these places aren't…

I'd like to point out that blue states like NY are making it harder and harder for rural families to support themselves by hunting (legally) through firearm restriction laws that make sense downstate, but no sense upstate.

Re: San Francisco is spending $1.7M on one public toilet

#832
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make any sense. Public toilets are for the public. Anyone who finds themselves in a situation where they need a toilet. A tourist, for example. Or maybe just someone who finds nature calling at an inopportune time. I'm sure we've all been there. Also, even if it WAS for people who have nowhere else, that doesn't mean that it should be covered with shit.

Have you ever taken a shit in a public toilet? It is a disgusting, degrading experience. I’m still traumatized from the one time I had no choice, and I said never again.

All the more reason to not dismiss them as for "people with nowhere else to go" and simply make sure that they are well maintained and people aren't using them as their personal poop graffiti space.
Post reply on HN