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

The Disappearance of the Public Bench

placesjournal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 261 posts

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#141

Post by scoofy »

paganel wrote: post #124
scoofy wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m saying sleeping on a bench that is meant for transit users to wait for a train is, indeed, anti-social. This is fairly trivial to demonstrate using a categorical imperative. If everyone used the transit system to sleep in, then that transit system would likely cease to exist, and the benches would not be maintained. We very much ought to have places for people to sleep. That those resources are rarely provided to…

> If everyone used the transit system to sleep in Nobody ever does that, whatever a "categorical imperative" might be or represent. But not having benches because a victim of capitalism might, Heaven forbid, sleep on it, is the epitome of cultural and societal barbarism. Countries that do that are not part of civilized society, they might be wealthy, and many of them are (I've seen a similar philosophy in regards to…

>whatever a "categorical imperative" might be or represent

If you do not understand the concept of a categorical imperative, I would strongly suggest studying some ethical philosophy. There are folks that have spent lifetimes trying to figure out the best ways to see human flourishing, and they have some very, very good ideas.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#142

Post by pessimizer »

0xBA5ED wrote: post #139
pessimizer wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew somebody who turned his life around after surviving an attempted murder. I still don't think that means that trying to murder people whose lives are going awry is a rational solution.

You're saying that spending time in jail is roughly equivalent to being a victim of attempted murder.

No, I'm saying that both things could have them same effect, so the existence of that effect isn't a proof that the solution makes sense.

If I tell you that covering something in red paint and covering something in tomato sauce will stain them both red, I'm not saying that red paint is tomato sauce.

I also know people who have changed their lives after heart attacks. Am I saying that heart attacks are roughly equivalent to prison stays?

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#143

Post by guilhas »

jdw64 wrote: post #44

I think the reason most people do not sympathize with this argument is that most HN readers are programmers, and many of them are still in a relatively secure class position. Traditionally, programming has had a high barrier to entry, but it has also been a profession where compensation has remained relatively strong. As societies become harsher under pressure from high housing costs and economic displacement, they t…

Your comment sounds like half LLM slop, half confusion

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#144

Post by 0xBA5ED »

pessimizer wrote: post #142
0xBA5ED wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're saying that spending time in jail is roughly equivalent to being a victim of attempted murder.

No, I'm saying that both things could have them same effect, so the existence of that effect isn't a proof that the solution makes sense. If I tell you that covering something in red paint and covering something in tomato sauce will stain them both red, I'm not saying that red paint is tomato sauce. I also know people who have changed their lives after heart attacks. Am I saying that heart attacks are roughly equival…

[dead]

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#145

Post by ratelimitsteve »

cameldrv wrote: post #112
Loughla wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer to that question in a society that allows (mostly) autonomy of choice is that we let them die on the street. I'm not convinced that involuntary incarceration will actually fix the problem. I believe it will just take it off of the streets and out of the public consciousness.

I have a very good friend who was an addict, and I tried to help him turn his life around in many ways, but I couldn’t figure out a way. Professionals told me “he has to hit rock bottom.” Anyhow he wound up getting arrested and spent a couple of weeks in jail where he got clean and decided to turn his life around. He went on to get a couple of masters degrees, get married, have two kids, and has a good job. He credit…

I have a friend who picked up heroin in jail, came out an addict and died of an OD in his basement. His daughter found him.

If your anecdote can prove your point, then mine can disprove it.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#146

Post by HEmanZ »

mmooss wrote: post #79
strictnein wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is apparently the consensus And what a strange consensus it is. The prevailing belief seems to be that preventing people from slowly/quickly killing themselves on the street (or, more accurately, dying from addiction) is somehow not "progressive" and the moral thing to do is to pretend like these people have made the choice of their own volition and that we cannot judge them for this choice. In reality, the peop…

'I think you would be better served by not posting to social media and studying personal liberty and ethics.' Should I be able to enforce it? I think people who make comments like those above are much more dangerous than people on the street - the people on the street can't really do harm. Thankfully, we do have liberty, and they can do what they want - and I can do what I want - and it's none of your business whethe…

Yes the guy who screamed “I’m going to f*ing kill you!” Out of nowhere at my daughter and then chased us, or set fire to random trees in my neighborhood for fun, or cut the copper wiring off the side of my house, or took sledge hammers to local park statues, these people are definitely not a problem. No the problem is really the people who think it should stop. Those horrible, insensitive people.

They’r being so selfish. Drug addicted should have every right to pull you down screaming by your hair because they’re tweaked out of their mind. And after seeing that, you should be welcoming every one you see to your home.

You’re really the problem for feeling uncomfortable walking by the man jerking off to passerby’s, so intolerant of you.

(Every one of these is a true example I have witnessed, along with too much other insanity to write down, from just the last year in Seattle. so don’t tell me im exaggerating)

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#148

Post by loglog »

canjobear wrote: post #4
pstuart wrote: post #2

Gosh, if only there was some way we could solve homelessness! Don't worry about it, as at least we can drop tens of billions of dollars to show the Iranians how big and powerful we are.

Is there a $10 billion "fix everything easily" button you have in mind for homelessness?

The "fix everything" button is abolishing zoning laws, and its aggregate cost is negative. Aggregate cost is not the issue preventing problems from being solved.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#149

Post by mlsu »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #14
strictnein wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is apparently the consensus And what a strange consensus it is. The prevailing belief seems to be that preventing people from slowly/quickly killing themselves on the street (or, more accurately, dying from addiction) is somehow not "progressive" and the moral thing to do is to pretend like these people have made the choice of their own volition and that we cannot judge them for this choice. In reality, the peop…

What a strange false dichotomy. Either we do absolutely nothing to help people, or we involuntarily incarcerate them? The actually progressive option is to provide meaningful public support programs , and also make housing affordable (by building enough housing). The US mostly doesn't do either of those, but it should.

At least in California, there are a lot of public support programs. I mean, a looooot of public support programs. A LOT. Like, to the point where the state is spending tens of thousands of dollars for each homeless person, and probably north of $100k per person per year for a subset. Talk to a firefighter or paramedic in a CA city sometime. They will tell you, there's "regulars" that they have to deal with every single week. The cops and firefighters know all of them by name.

We're paying hours a day in overtime to basically have the cops, firefighters, and EMTs deal with the same small population of mentally ill people on the same street corner every week, for years. These people cannot get better because they choose not to stay in the mental hospital or substance abuse programs offered to them. Someone is 5150'd, placed on a 3-day hold, and 72 hours later they walk out of the hospital and back to the same street corner, where they have a mental breakdown again the following week. You can offer support -- they will basically tell you the same thing, I'm not sick at all, there's nothing wrong with me, I am not a danger to myself or others, and you are shit out of luck.

At the same time, there are way more homeless people who are silently and cleanly living in their cars and showing up to work every day at a low wage job. Most people won't ever see them unless they look closely. Visit /r/urbancarliving sometime to get an idea of what that population looks like. Those people might get a 15 minute "knock" from the cops once a month.

The actually progressive option is to involuntarily incarcerate people who need it, while not criminalizing car/RV living, offering work placement services, housing assistance etc. The most realistic thing would probably be to build subsidized mobile homes and clean, low-rent central places to park an RV.

You correctly identified the biggest thing here though which is making housing affordable. Unfortunately, that will never happen.

Re: The Disappearance of the Public Bench

#150

Post by showerst »

mlsu wrote: post #149
JoshTriplett wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a strange false dichotomy. Either we do absolutely nothing to help people, or we involuntarily incarcerate them? The actually progressive option is to provide meaningful public support programs , and also make housing affordable (by building enough housing). The US mostly doesn't do either of those, but it should.

At least in California, there are a lot of public support programs. I mean, a looooot of public support programs. A LOT. Like, to the point where the state is spending tens of thousands of dollars for each homeless person, and probably north of $100k per person per year for a subset. Talk to a firefighter or paramedic in a CA city sometime. They will tell you, there's "regulars" that they have to deal with every sing…

I mostly agree with your points, but I think the involuntary incarceration is a major rock and a hard place situation.

There are definitely people for whom it would be a compassionate (and often societally optimal) thing to do. Giving the government the power to decide to take people away indefinitely is just a spectacularly bad precedent. Especially right now.

Post reply on HN