To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use • Hacker News Board

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#631

Post by uoaei » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:43 AM UTC

jmcphers wrote: post #82

I live in the Seattle area, which is struggling with public drug use just like Portland. Like Portland, we've lived for decades with very progressive politicians who have lead successful decriminalization efforts and spent huge sums of public funds on treatment and harm reduction programs. After several decades and many, many millions of dollars spent, the problem is, by every measure, absolutely the worst it's ever…

Harm reduction and rehab still only treats the symptom, not the cause. The cause is financial instability brought on by insecurity in housing, food access, etc. It's an issue of human dignity in the economic sphere that drives people to such depths, not recreation.

Unfortunately we still have a large portion of the population who believe that one must deserve to live a dignified life, and then apply all sorts of caveats on who is deserving. So we can't reshape the economy to support everyone because the people at the top need to feel like the work they did to get there somehow speaks to their character rather than merely their circumstances. They can't accept that they're not actually that special and so have some pathological need to draw lines between "us" and "them" (e.g. "taxpayer" vs "freeloader").

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#632

Post by freetanga » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:43 AM UTC

flir wrote: post #617

freetanga wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I agree halfway… at the core of any social contract are rights and obligations. I think part of those obligations are to contribute to society (I think we agree up to this point) However, I believe a part of that contribution has to be in an objective, quantifiable way - which translates to taxes. The rights we consume from society are tangible and expensive. A city populated only by of poets would collapse of…

So which do you prefer to tack on the end of that: "...except for the disabled" or "...and to hell with the disabled"? Both are widely used.

I have people with disabilities in my family so I know their realities up close - unlike most leftist politicians who only seek them for photo ops.

My wife volunteers pro-bono in a foundation that employs solely people with disabilities. They do work (according to their capacities), they get paid a wage, and they pay (little) taxes off it. And they are super proud that they can “pull their weight” and be equals in a society that tends to look down on them either as limited (usually from the right) or as “must-be-kept-cotton-balled” (usually from the left).

They want to be seen as people, which is what they are.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#633

Post by cjwilliams » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:43 AM UTC

hedora wrote: post #515

Aurornis wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just legalize it and let people get pure product at dirt cheap prices. Having traveled to Portland recently and witnessed the public drug problem first hand, I have no idea how anyone would think that increasing availability of the drugs would improve the situation. The only thing legalization and widespread availability would help is reducing deaths from tainted drugs. While that is a significant problem, anything…

Sociologists recently performed a large multi-region study of homelessness, drug use, etc. It turns out that there’s no real correlation between having drug addicts on the streets and the level of drug use in the area or even mental illness. Unemployment doesn’t even predict homelessness, and neither does weather, or laws pertaining to the homeless. By far, the best predictor is housing affordability and availability…

I know this sounds absurd, but I don't think social studies on such politically hot issues can be trusted outright. Given the state of university social science departments, can you imagine the cost of publishing something that supported ‘war on drugs’ style policy. Im not saying your study is bogus, just that Ive learned to be circumspect around research into such topics. Because often such academics are also activists or involved in public/ nonprofit institutions that have become invested in specific policy.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#634

Post by achierius » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:43 AM UTC

uoaei wrote: post #625

swalling wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, actually we should be trying to fix the stupid mistakes that were made in implementation of the plan, not roll it back and keep on fighting an equally moronic, ineffective, and racist War on Drugs elsewhere. The best available evidence is that decriminalization essentially had no effect on overdose deaths ( https://www.opb.org/article/2023/10/03/ballot-measure-110-di... ). It was going to go up no matter what bec…

This is the classic approach of conservatives: throw wrenches in every part of a welfare system, then point to its failures to justify its dissolution. See: Medicare, public education, etc.

The conservatives who run Portland and Oregon?

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#635

Post by shadowtree » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:44 AM UTC

lannisterstark wrote: post #464

shadowtree wrote: post #176

The US is a very young country, with a burn it down and see what happens culture. A frontier state. It is amazing to watch the speed run of recreating basic civilization from first principles. Why do laws exist? Why do we need traffic signals? You think I am joking? Portland disbanded traffic law enforcement! After quite a lot of traffic deaths, mostly minorities they tried to protect, they just reinstated traffic co…

>The US is a very young country, with a burn it down and see what happens culture. The United States as a nation-state is older than almost all of European nation-states, barring a few. It is one of the few nation-states that has continually existed since its foundation, without interruption. Germany for example was unified in 1871. Were there 'Germans' (who spoke the language) before then? Sure. Germany? No. Neither…

The bureaucracy in Europe predates all the US. Systems of government changed, but hey, you still learn Roman Law in law school for a reason.

The US is a baby in terms of structures and culture.

Vienna has been continuously operating as a city since being a Roman fort, Vindobona = you can see the ruins directly in the city center.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#636

Post by morsch » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:44 AM UTC

xyzzyz wrote: post #552

jandrewrogers wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you define “low wages”? Current minimum wage in Seattle is $18.69/hr, which is higher than the median wage in several US States and almost all of Europe. Cost of living is high but not that much higher than the more expensive parts of Europe. There are legitimate causes for the blight in Seattle but lack of jobs and low wages aren’t one of them.

Americans have no idea how high the cost of living is in Europe relative to wages. Median sale price in Seattle is $560/square foot, which is almost exactly $6000/square meter. With minimum wage at $18.69/hr, that's 320 hours of minimum wage work per square meter. For comparison, average price per square meter in Paris is over 10 000 EUR ($10 700), whereas the minimum wage is 11.50 EUR, giving you a ratio of 870 hour…

Prices per square meter:

Marseille: 4300 EUR

Birmingham: 3000 GBP

Bremen: 3000 EUR

Liege: 3000 EUR

Antwerp: 2500 EUR

València: 2200 EUR

Poznan: 2000 EUR

These are all major, but not the biggest, cities in their respective country. I'm not saying they are representative (for what, anyway). You'll find major cities that are much more expensive (eg Munich) or cheaper.

As for income tax, at first glance, PWC disagrees:

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/france/individual/taxes-on-pers...

https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/germany/individual/taxes-on-per...

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#637

Post by uoaei » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:49 AM UTC

achierius wrote: post #634

uoaei wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the classic approach of conservatives: throw wrenches in every part of a welfare system, then point to its failures to justify its dissolution. See: Medicare, public education, etc.

The conservatives who run Portland and Oregon?

You will note of course that the rules and regulations around how to implement these things are always 'bipartisan' and meant to stir up as little backlash as possible. There's many opportunities to install bottlenecks and roadblocks in systems that end up shaping the entire way they function. To some extent it is progressives anticipating conservative backlash but there's plenty of lines in plenty of laws written into and insisted on by conservatives that have wide-ranging consequences.

Reductionist perspectives on how politics works always end up at this "one side is dominating the other" kind of narrative but it's never actually that way, both sides still have a lot of influence on the various specifics of the outcome.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#638

Post by etchalon » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:50 AM UTC

plandis wrote: post #222

cortesoft wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone has a viable option for not living on the street I guess it depends on how we define viable. In my experience working with the homeless, there are a lot of valid reasons shelters are avoided; they can be more dangerous, don't allow pets (who are sometimes the only companions they have), and don't allow families or couples. Whether that is viable or not depends on how you use the word.

I really doubt homeless people are good pet owners. Food scarcity, lack of medical care for your pets, etc, etc…

They'll often, if not always, prioritize their animals over themselves. They're no different from housed pet owners in that way.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#639

Post by golergka » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:52 AM UTC

notfed wrote: post #471

felizuno wrote: post #168

So much sympathy for drug users and business owners, but what about the private citizens who get victimized by these drug users? I was beaten nearly to death (in broad daylight, in a residential neighborhood) in Seattle in 2020 by two men enabled to descend into meth addiction by permissive policies. In my victim support group I met so many people - innocent people - permanently injured & disfigured like me, or raped…

I'm sorry for your experience, but consider this: in central and south America, drug cartels are murdering and beating people every day. I think it would be an understatement to say there are more beatings and murders being dealt by drug cartels than meth-induced psychos. Why do drug cartels thrive? Simple: because drugs are illegal in the USA. By legalizing drugs, we would bankrupt them.

I have been travelling through Latin America, going through Cancun, Bogota, Lima and Buenos Aires, spent a few weeks in each city. I've been walking around these cities a lot, including at night. I've never seen any people who looked dangerous or felt afraid for my safety.

I really think that a lot of stereotypes about the region are outdated by about 20 or 30 years by this point.

Re: To revive Portland, officials seek to ban public drug use

#640

Post by etchalon » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 6:52 AM UTC

InSteady wrote: post #596

notyofriend wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can someone pushing themselves to the limit of heroin od have anything sustainable.

Kind of valid. In Portland "housing first" has been all the rage, but having lived with pretty severe addiction for some years, and spent lots of time around fellow addicts in considerably worse circumstances, it's pretty hard to imagine that a house on its own is some kind of solution. Especially when compared to a support network and high quality addiction treatment, medical care, and mental health services. In ter…

"Housing first" isn't the belief that providing a house "on its own is some kind of solution". It's the belief and practice of not refusing to provide housing support until people meet certain criteria – which is often how governments approach the problem.

"We only help those who help themselves", etc.

You get people a safe place to sleep and then provide them with resources to become re-integrated into society, not the other way around.