SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’ • Hacker News Board

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#311

Post by tomjen3 » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:16 PM UTC

beatpanda wrote: post #212

basseq wrote: post #129

I'm kind of disappointed in the Post on this one. From reporting on internet outrage to repeating another publication's "tech bro" slur, this isn't set up to engender a real debate. Justin Keller is a terrible "face" for the debate (and so is Edna Miroslava Raia for the opposition). The facts are that San Fran has an economic problem and a homeless problem. Those problems are not mutually exclusive, but neither are t…

Thank you for being more concerned about the media image of comfortable, well-paid tech workers than San Francisco's increasing number of homeless people.

Which of them is contributing positively to our future?

And for the record how much have you personally, directly, contributed to helping homeless people (Both in dollars and hours)?.

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#312

Post by lintiness » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:16 PM UTC

wfo wrote: post #274

themartorana wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's great, then. It seems like a liberal calling card but appeals to everyone's desire to save money while providing actually useful social services. So what's the political argument against it?

The political argument against it is "I don't want a single dime of my money going to worthless scumbag lowlifes who are too lazy to get a job" or "anything the government does is by definition wasteful, the private sector needs to handle this problem like all problems" -- the same one that galvanizes the right against welfare, regulations, healthcare, etc. The conservatives we have in the US are so extreme they make…

wrong. conservatives in the states are more than happy to donate to programs that help the homeless and mentally ill, they're consistently the most charitable americans. they do tend not to like taxes and government waste, however.

it's a myth that the only way to solve these problems is with government.

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#313

Post by knughit » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:16 PM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #22

Afforess wrote: post #9

To play devil's advocate, he's right. He shouldn't have to see the pain, struggle, and despair of homeless - the city government should be providing affordable housing and shelters for the homeless. That it hasn't is a failure of the local government, and should be addressed. Much of the reason that affordable housing is out of reach of many in San Francisco is due to government regulation, not market capitalism. Ext…

I visited SF a few times, and I was always horrified to see how such a wealthy city leaves its homeless people to wander around, sleep in the cold and generally live in inhuman conditions. I won't claim I know enough about the city from two visits to propose any solutions, but I know that the fact that there are hundreds or thousands of people living like that is inexcusable. I've never seen this before to such exten…

SF cares for a substantial fraction of the entire nation's homeless population, who migrate to SF for weather and public services. SF gets blamed because SF helps homeless folks the most, not the least.

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#314

Post by yuudu_literal » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:16 PM UTC

_b8r0 wrote: post #288

monkmartinez wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a complex issue... but in my experience, most of the homeless are not looking for help to find jobs and/or contribute to society in manner that will lead them out of "homelessness." A lot of them prefer this "lifestyle"... we try very hard to help the people that want help. Most don't. Go talk to your local EMS/Fire department personnel and most of them will have similar stories. I know the homeless people in…

> A lot of them prefer this "lifestyle"... we try very hard to help the people that want help. Most don't. As someone who's been homeless twice, I appreciate that you don't intend to offend, but this is a very loaded and offensive statement. You appear to work with homeless people and have very little sympathy for their situation, which I can understand but it still makes me a little sad. Becoming homeless is somethi…

These kind of responses have a chilling effect on debate and progress.

> this is a very loaded and offensive statement

So the fuck what? If you aren't allowed to consider anything offensive, we'd never discuss the difficult issues and make progress on them.

> something that can happen to anyone for any number of reasons, and there are different kinds of being homeless

Yeah blah blah blah he's not saying 'absolutely every homeless person is like this', he's suggesting that maybe the situation isn't as everyone assumes, which may be the case. But you've shut him down with some 'not every homeless' person bullshit.

> It's not that people choose a lifestyle as such

He didn't say choose did he? He said they prefer it - I presume he means prefer it to being institutionalised. You seem to suggest that he thinks they prefer it to being a millionaire, which of course they do not.

Have you ever heard of the idea of being charitable in how you interpret other people's thoughts?

> Being homeless is the suckiest thing you can probably reasonably imagine.

Who are you arguing with here? Who disagrees with you? All he said is that some of these homeless people may prefer being on the street to being taken into the care of the state.

You are destroying debate!

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#315

Post by knughit » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:17 PM UTC

ryanlol wrote: post #202

jimmytucson wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To play devil's advocate, he's right. You're not really agreeing with him though, are you? He's saying homeless people are an eyesore. You're saying the government should create more homeless shelters. I don't think you guys are even on the same planet in terms of your views.

He's saying homeless people are an eyesore and trashing the city, that's unquestionably true. He's also saying the government should fix it, what other options are there but homeless shelters? I don't get why people are acting like this guy wants to send the homeless to concentration camps and gas them.

The article specifically coted the Super Bowl as a positive example. The Super Bowl bullied people away from the venue, didn't help them into homes.

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#316

Post by yuudu_literal » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:17 PM UTC

monkmartinez wrote: post #104

creshal wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A lot of them prefer this "lifestyle"... we try very hard to help the people that want help. Most don't. A lot of them are mentally handicapped or dealing with acquired mental illnesses. Even under good conditions, treating either is hard . Of course EMS/fire fighters/volunteers working in shelters aren't able to do that.

I've loaded many a homeless into my fire engine to take to the local Crisis Resource Center/ Behaviour Rehabilitation center because they begged and pleaded that they want help. Great! More often than not, we see them a few days later with Steel Reserve cans littered about after someone calls 911 for what appears to them a dead man on the side of the road. Mental illness is brutal. I feel for these guys, especially a…

> I've loaded many a homeless into my fire engine

Err... why? Were they on fire? Why is the fire department involved in homeless people?

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#317

Post by aback » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:18 PM UTC

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #208

kauffj wrote: post #55

It's ironic that Keller will get so much shit dumped on him for making the same exact argument that people make against more permissive immigration. Compare: A : Allowing people trapped in unproductive countries to move to US/Canada/Europe would significantly improve their quality of life. B : But think of burden to the welfare state! We wouldn't be able to afford the flood of people moving here for benefits. A : Sim…

I have a theory that "left" and "right" can be replaced with how a big a circle of humanity you care about. The people towards the right care about their family, or their community. The people on the left care about a slightly wider circle. On the far "right" you get sociopaths that only care about themselves. On the far "left" you get utopian hippies that care about people suffering on the other side of the world. W…

I have long agreed with this theory.

There's a reason why the right is like that IMO, and it gets down to this diagram:

http://33.media.tumblr.com/e1aaee07d8101970433020eee016ff9b/...

It is my opinion that people naturally care mostly about themselves, then the people closest to them, and less about people on the other side of the world. It is also my opinion (referring to the diagram) that the closer you are to being the person with the "need", the more effectively and efficiently you can address the need.

So in general, a person is best able to help themselves, less able to help the people closest to them, and even less able to help others. This can be envisioned as rings of concentric circles, where each larger circle represents more and more people, but less and less sphere of influence or ability to understand the "needs".

Along with that goes trust. The closer you are to someone (literally and figuratively) the more trust you will have. So these concentric rings are also rings of trust. I can count on my wife to be there for me when it's time to have my butt wiped. You, who I've never met, probably won't even offer help out. When my BFF tells me something, I automatically believe it, because after 30 years, AFAIK he's never lied to me. When a stranger on the street tells me something, I'm hard-pressed to even pay attention.

So if someone is close to you, then not only can you assess / relate to that person's needs, but you can also trust that person not to abuse your generosity.

So in a family or among close friends, communism (from each according to ability, to each according to need) is usually the norm and usually works fine. What's mine is yours. Mi casa es su casa. I know you, you know me, we won't hurt each other.

But in the world, capitalism / plutocracy / might makes right is the norm. As distasteful as it is, and as much as I understand that the people on the other side of the world desperately need my money, I'm much more inclined to give it to my wife, or friend, because I have far more trust that it will be used effectively and efficiently. And I have to also consider that, being someone very foreign to me, that you might be hostile to me, and use my generosity against me. So sorry, if I don't know you, you're on your own.

That's why I like to call myself a "micro communist" and "macro capitalist."

Now in reality of course I offer kindness to strangers because I'm not a sociopath.

But let's be honest: the kindness I show a homeless man (a dollar or two, or a meal) is not the kindness I show my wife or child (my kidney, my home, my life).

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#318

Post by aggieben » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:18 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #243

citizensixteen wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A lot of them prefer this "lifestyle" I used to also think that many homeless "preferred the lifestyle of homelessness" but I recently learned of a town in Canada (Medicine Hat) that found it more cost effective to house the homeless. This myth that people prefer to be homeless was shattered and this town found that nearly all homeless were able to reintegrated back into having their own places. The mayor was skepti…

There are more than one kind of homeless person. There are the ones who simply fell on hard times and don't have money to pay for rent. There are the ones suffer addiction, there are the ones who suffer mental trauma there are the ones who have severe mental disorders, there are the ones avoiding regular society, etc. Housing first works best for the fist class as well as those who have succumbed to addiction. Some o…

Yep, I agree. They're definitely not all the same, and some are more helpable (better word please?) than others.

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#319

Post by knughit » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:19 PM UTC

dsaint-pierre wrote: post #220

ryanlol wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's saying homeless people are an eyesore and trashing the city, that's unquestionably true. He's also saying the government should fix it, what other options are there but homeless shelters? I don't get why people are acting like this guy wants to send the homeless to concentration camps and gas them.

Well, repealing the Ellis Act, for one. You (and he) are looking at this as if the homeless spontaneously came to exist as NPCs in the RPG that is his wonderful techie San Francisco existence rather than identifying the things that led them to this place in life like the Ellis Act, skyrocketing inflation, lack of lower-middle income jobs, etc.

What? The homeless are here because the city attracts more people than there are room for (development reasons) and because SF spends huge sums to care for homeless immigrants

Re: SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

#320

Post by dclowd9901 » Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:19 PM UTC

themartorana wrote: post #145

mabbo wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our super-Conservative government for the last decade (now replaced by a young, hip, Liberal one) was actually really big behind the 'housing-first' method of helping the homeless (you get an apartment, no questions asked, then we work on your drug problems, etc later), and put a lot of money towards it. At first, this seems very socially liberal and at odds with a Conservative party kind of thing until you look at t…

Well, that's great, then. It seems like a liberal calling card but appeals to everyone's desire to save money while providing actually useful social services. So what's the political argument against it?

There's no more political arguments to it. Conservatives, anymore, are simply a tool to attempt to dismantle the government, full stop. They simply don't believe we should have a government, mostly because they don't like paying taxes.