Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk • Hacker News Board

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#371

Post by pseudalopex » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 7:55 AM UTC

zepto wrote: post #370

pseudalopex wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making it illegal to be homeless means making it illegal to be homeless. Not just in encampments. They said homeless shelters have a lot of drug activity. You implied encampments do too. What was your point if it wasn't about encampments?

Their point was about drug activity being a problem in shelters relative to encampments. Your comments about making homelessness illegal seem like a non-sequitur.

foxpurple proposed making homelessness illegal and forcing everyone into shelters. They didn't mention encampments. The strongest plausible interpretation of what they said is outside encampments too.

xnyan explained problems with shelters relative to unspecified alternatives. They didn't mention encampments either. The comment they replied to didn't mention encampments. And you pointed out some of their points don't make sense if they were just comparing to encampments. The strongest plausible interpretation of what they said is they weren't just comparing to encampments.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#372

Post by hattori31 » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 9:54 AM UTC

hintymad wrote: post #352

legitster wrote: post #109

This is becoming such a frustrating issue. As an advocate of public spaces and parks, it's kind of heartbreaking that maybe 1/3 of public spaces in our town are no longer usable for all - they have more or less become private spaces for the homeless. I don't have much respect for communities that solve the issue by just "kicking them out" and passing the problem onto others, but it is almost becoming unacceptably com…

I wonder how Japan could manage their cities so well, even though they also have their own share of homeless people. As for the US, I think the US people brought the problem upon themselves, at least in some degree: it's increasingly rare to see serious discussions on pros and cons of different solutions. Instead, it's all about politics. The moment someone wants to discuss a solution, somewhere some activist or poli…

Resident of Tokyo for years here. The homeless here make some money from picking up trash and selling to the municipalities so noone begs. Also Tokyo is super safe, so they can sleep wherever without worrying. Also you have to count the fact that housing is insanely cheap in places like Tama (although very far from city center)

But lately I have noticed an increase in homeless people, maybe its just Coronavirus? At any rate i wish the city did more. Both for them and for the rest of people. I wish them the best, but let's be honest its not a good sight or smell.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#373

Post by nicoburns » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 11:22 AM UTC

slg wrote: post #286

nicoburns wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're living in a shelter then you're not just less visble, you're also much better off. Obviously it's a problem to be solved too, but a less severe one than people who are literally living on the street.

>If you're living in a shelter then you're not just less visble, you're also much better off. Usually, but not universally. Even when shelter space is available in a city like LA, it is not always easy to convince people to stay there. Lots of shelters have problems ranging from crime to forcing draconian rules onto the people staying there. In a place with a relatively comfortable climate like Los Angeles, some peop…

Yeah, that's a good point.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#374

Post by pandaman » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 1:15 PM UTC

dyingkneepad wrote: post #23

As a non-American person living in the US, I fail to understand one thing about its society. When I walk around town I see tons and tons of places advertising jobs, for simple stuff like kitchen, moving stuff around, etc. I even recently saw a store with a "talk to the manager and start working right now" sign. And then I walk around the streets and see all these homeless. It seems like a paradox to me, but I am obvi…

It's a campaign of gaslighting that makes you think so.

First, the name "homeless" or even "people experiencing homelessness" implies that the lack of housing is the only problem with these individuals, who are, otherwise, perfectly normal and functional human beings.

Then, there is a motte-and-bailey game with "Look at Pedro, he has a wife and children but lives with his in-laws because he lost his job and is looking for a new one, Pedro is homeless, do you want to put him in a mental institution just for losing his job, you heartless bigot?" and "Yeeep, people doing drugs in the open and harassing the passersby are homeless, just like Pedro, you have any problem with Pedro, bigot?".

Then, there is a "solution", always involving real-estate ("abolish zoning!", "build affordable housing" etc.), which is as sane to me as if they'd called the meth-using vagrants "toothless" or "people experiencing toothlessness" and proposed to build more dental clinics to fix the issue.

In my opinion, nobody has problem with people who don't own property as long as they do not impose on the society. For all I care Elon Musk is homeless at the moment as he sold all his properties in CA and lives in a company house. I have absolutely no issues with this. On the other hand, I have a problem with people who shit on the street, scream, and go through my garbage every night regardless of their property ownership. For all I care they are all retired Hollywood producers who own 100s of millions worth of RE in Malibu, still they should be taken to jail for vagrancy.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#375

Post by standardUser » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 1:22 PM UTC

slickrick216 wrote: post #281

standardUser wrote: post #97

I've almost been hit by cars in SF for the exact same reason. Cities need to designate places for encampments to stop them from blocking sidewalks or disrupting residential areas. And they need to rapidly remove any that do block public access or disrupt residences.

They have they’re called homeless shelters. Cities shouldn’t actively endorse camping by marking areas and if you think they should would you like to volunteer the streets outside and surrounding your house. Homeless people should be interviewed and those with mental illnesses treated by the state as they are objectively sick people in need of help. Homeless people under 18 should be taken into care. Homeless people…

Shelters are traditionally far too restrictive and drive people away. If you want to solve the problem, cities need to provide an option people actually want to use, not the option they hope and dream people want to use.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#376

Post by emodendroket » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 1:31 PM UTC

pas wrote: post #365

emodendroket wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a misdiagnosis. To my mind, the obvious problem is the wailing and gnashing of teeth whenever someone suggests building an apartment complex, let alone a homeless shelter. Impossible to take a step to address the problem if every proposal is shut down by concerned homeowners making a scene at every town meeting.

This town meeting driven zoning is ridiculously unique to America. In most places there's a faceless bureaucracy that decides whether the to issue the permit or not. They mechanistically check the zoning and other regulations and that's it. The neighbors can go to court if they seriously think the bureaucracy missed something. Public hearing only happens when it's a public project.

I’d be curious to see a comparison with other countries with a federal system. My suspicion is that a fetish for local control makes these kind of beggar-thy-neighbor outcomes likelier, but most comparisons have people going for examples like Japan which don't have anything like a federal system.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#377

Post by zepto » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 1:36 PM UTC

pseudalopex wrote: post #371

zepto wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their point was about drug activity being a problem in shelters relative to encampments. Your comments about making homelessness illegal seem like a non-sequitur.

foxpurple proposed making homelessness illegal and forcing everyone into shelters. They didn't mention encampments. The strongest plausible interpretation of what they said is outside encampments too. xnyan explained problems with shelters relative to unspecified alternatives. They didn't mention encampments either. The comment they replied to didn't mention encampments. And you pointed out some of their points don't…

The strongest plausible interpretation is that the comments haven’t randomly thrown away the context of the conversation.

This entire conversation is about the dangers of encampments, and how to solve that problem.

Also you haven’t explained how your comment isn’t a non-seqitur. As far I can see it is an out of context contradiction that doesn’t change anything about the meaning of anything.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#378

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 1:49 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #275

legitster wrote: post #109

This is becoming such a frustrating issue. As an advocate of public spaces and parks, it's kind of heartbreaking that maybe 1/3 of public spaces in our town are no longer usable for all - they have more or less become private spaces for the homeless. I don't have much respect for communities that solve the issue by just "kicking them out" and passing the problem onto others, but it is almost becoming unacceptably com…

> The rise of homelessness is almost equal to the decline of single occupancy housing (flophouses, chicken wire hotels, etc). This has specifically been a huge problem in cities with expensive real estate like Los Angeles and San Francisco. It is why the free market approach to fixing the housing crisis doesn't work. The land is so expensive that it doesn't make financial sense to waste it on low margin affordable ho…

> It is why the free market approach to fixing the housing crisis doesn't work.

There is no free market approach to fixing any crisis; “free market” means the absence of pursuit of centralize goals like fixing crises.

There may be market-oriented approaches (i.e., subsidies and/or taxes to alter supply and/or demand to incentivize the desired results), but that's a different issue.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#379

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 2:10 PM UTC

nybble41 wrote: post #325

slg wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The rise of homelessness is almost equal to the decline of single occupancy housing (flophouses, chicken wire hotels, etc). This has specifically been a huge problem in cities with expensive real estate like Los Angeles and San Francisco. It is why the free market approach to fixing the housing crisis doesn't work. The land is so expensive that it doesn't make financial sense to waste it on low margin affordable ho…

> The land is so expensive that it doesn't make financial sense to waste it on low margin affordable housing. It doesn't make sense, period. The market is making the ration decision. The city could always buy the expensive real estate and turn it into slums—sorry, "affordable housing"—but this is clearly not a reasonable allocation of limited resources. You want to ensure that everyone has a home, fine, I agree that…

> But those homes don't need to be located in the most expensive areas on the planet.

A substantial fraction of the homeless are currently employed and another bug chunk are only transitorily unemployed. Forcing them away from where the work is not a great solution; its a form if welfare trap where in exchange for improving their current condition you remove their ability to get out of a dependent situation.

> You'd be doing those in need of such housing a favor by relocating them to less expensive areas on the outskirts of the city

The outskirts aren't that much less expensive in terms of either capital or ongoing costs for housing, but have less infrastructure to support an influx of new population. By the time you pay for the capital and ongoing costs for the additional transportation, etc., you probably have come up with a much more expensive solution.

While “the market is doing the rational thing for the market to do” isn't, IMO, an argument against doing something different to address social ills, you have to realize that if you deploy that argument against housing in the inner city, it applies with at least equal force in the outskirts.

Re: Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents block sidewalk

#380

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Aug 05, 2021, 2:33 PM UTC

michaelt wrote: post #337

xnyan wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in the best case, homeless shelters have serious downsides (to put it mildly) that you may not have considered. -Have a pet? Not coming with you. A stint at the pound, likely followed by euthanization due to overcrowding. -How about a family? If you can even get into a shelter, odds are it's going to be male or women and children. -Shelters are often unsafe and filled with people who have untreated problems. Vio…

> Shelters are often unsafe and filled with people who have untreated problems. Violence is a real risk. I've always found it a bit ironic when people intending to advocate for better treatment of the homeless proclaim that homeless shelters are havens of violence, full of dangerous people with drug and mental health problems.

> I've always found it a bit ironic when people intending to advocate for better treatment of the homeless proclaim that homeless shelters are havens of violence, full of dangerous people with drug and mental health problems.

Homeless shelters typically lack privacy and security from other residents (something most, even high density, regular housing does not lack for very good reasons). So, even if dangerous people were no more common in the homeless population than the general population, the small number of them would drive others out of shelters, and they'd become super concentrated there.

And advocates for better treatment of the homeless tend to acknowledge the greater incidence of serious drug and mental health problems in the population as something services need to address.

So, where is the irony?