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

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

#371

Post by hifreq » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:11 AM UTC

notfed wrote: post #352

hifreq wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Available shelter space, housing vacancies: https://www.kqed.org/news/11668623/why-do-thousands-of-l-a-s... https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/san-f... https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/top-stories/story/2020-... > wages are the lowest they have been in decades This is an endless argument. Why can't a person with 0 skills rent an apartment in San Francisco? Some wages are very low. If you can't…

The articles you've cited don't show a problem with "vacancies", but with mismanagement, lack of funding, and lack of sanitization/maintenance. To add an independent voice, here's ChatGPT responding to "summarize this article in one paragraph", for each article you linked to: > https://www.kqed.org/news/11668623/why-do-thousands-of-l-a-s ... The article discusses the significant problem of empty beds in Los Angeles C…

Thanks for the summary. All of that confirms that the shelters are not full, they are underutilized. I am opposed to the idea that we just need to pump more money into this issue, which then gets distributed among "case managers".

E.g. we have invested $62M in case managers to handle 2100 approved cases? With the program's annual budget being $365M? This shows a ridiculous level of bloat and corruption. Do we need to spend $30K per case, considering that this doesn't cover the shelter expense?

I am not opposed helping people in need, I am opposed the idea that we just need to spend more money. And then next year a little bit more. More taxes, more case managers, more street cleaning teams, more safe injection sites. None of that is solving homelessness, all of that is contributing to making the homeless industry bigger.

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

#372

Post by shiroiuma » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:12 AM UTC

hifreq wrote: post #126

afarrell wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have come to the conclusion that lots of humans have a religion-shaped hole in their psyche. It is far better to fill it with a stable, local, hope-giving religion. Hymns are a better opiate of the masses than fentanyl.

While I agree that the reduction in the role of religion in the US is partially to blame for the increase in severe cases of drug addition, the idea that we need to bring religion back essentially to control people is extremely patronizing. Basically, we are saying that some people are too stupid to live productively if they are not controlled by fairy tales. This is the same approach as we are seeing in the "far lef…

>the idea that we need to bring religion back essentially to control people is extremely patronizing. Basically, we are saying that some people are too stupid to live productively if they are not controlled by fairy tales.

Can something be simultaneously true and patronizing?

Just looking at how humans in general behave worldwide, I'd say that yes, people are really quite stupid.

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

#373

Post by graeme » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:13 AM UTC

rjbwork wrote: post #282

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 actually don't think we should decriminalize. Just legalize it and let people get pure product at dirt cheap prices. There's no reason to fund crime (drug dealers/organized crime), maim and kill users, push users into poverty, and generate and push the externalizes of drug use onto the rest of society. This is the choice we have made and continue to make a society under a prohibitionist regime, decriminalization or…

This doesn't really address the comment. Decriminalize = production is criminal, consumption is legal. Legalize = production is legal, consumption is legal.

The parent comment was complaining that legal consumption made the environment threatening.

>maim and kill users, push users into poverty, and generate and push the externalizes of drug use onto the rest of society.

None of these appear to hinge on decriminalization vs. legalization. Alcohol, for example, maims and kills users, pushes severely addicted users into poverty, and externalizes the problems of its use onto society.

Use went down during prohibition, use went up during legalization. So in effect you're proposing we increase these problems as related to meth and other hard drugs.

(This is not an argument for prohibition of alcohol, it is merely listing the cons of legalization)

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

#374

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:14 AM UTC

somewhereoutth wrote: post #253

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.vox.com/2015/10/31/9650030/denmark-prime-ministe... https://www.economist.com/briefing/2019/11/28/in-sweden-bill... I'm always happy to learn from countries which have succeeded at something, but insofar as Europe has succeeded at things, it hasn't been a simple matter of "end capitalism". The devil is in the details. Also remember that Europe freerides on the US a great deal. They get bargain prices on d…

During the cold war it was realized that unless the broad mass of people in Europe were reasonably happy / well off, they would turn to communism as it was right next door. The US had no such compelling imperative, so capitalism was allowed a freer rein. Drugs+innovations are largely funded by the public sector (see a previous discussion on HN I can't find right now), but in Europe we don't have a predatory healthcar…

>Drugs+innovations are largely funded by the public sector (see a previous discussion on HN I can't find right now)

Insofar as Europe pays less for drugs than the US, the US is subsidizing drug development. (I.e. when pharma companies decide whether they will recoup their R&D costs for a new drug, they are disproportionately looking to countries that pay the most.) Public/private doesn't affect my point here -- the US shouldn't necessarily copy the European model if the success of the European model is based on freeriding, even if it's freeriding on US govt spending.

>As for NATO, that was formed to stop the entirety of the Eurasian landmass falling under Soviet control. It is hard to imagine an isolated US fairing too well in that kind of world.

The US has oceans on both sides and friendly nations on our borders. We're gonna be fine. Isolationism was working perfectly well for us prior to WW2.

If you really believe in the European model, you should advocate for Europe to defend itself. Stand up for what you believe in. If the European model is truly effective, then Europe should be perfectly capable of taking care of itself. The US can then offer humanitarian alliances to other, poorer countries that actually need help.

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

#375

Post by pcthrowaway » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:15 AM UTC

billy99k wrote: post #365

rjbwork wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually don't think we should decriminalize. Just legalize it and let people get pure product at dirt cheap prices. There's no reason to fund crime (drug dealers/organized crime), maim and kill users, push users into poverty, and generate and push the externalizes of drug use onto the rest of society. This is the choice we have made and continue to make a society under a prohibitionist regime, decriminalization or…

Selling hard drugs as a legitimate business owner has lots of liability attached, so prices will never be 'dirt cheap'. In addition to this, drug legalization is only sold to the masses if the cities/states that legalize them get tax revenue. Again, this will not lead to less expensive drugs. What's already started happening is that the black market prices continue to be cheaper (because dealers don't have to pay tax…

Socialize the drug distribution then. The government can manufacture and distribute drugs at dirt cheap prices.

I don't want legal drugs for me, but to get rid of the criminal distribution networks, and reduce the lengths addicts need to go to in order to procur drugs (which may often culminate in robbery and theft)

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

#376

Post by graeme » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:15 AM UTC

toofy wrote: post #331

losteric wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting assaulted sounds like the main problem. Police are a reactive force, they're useless to prevent or break up an assault unless it's a very ineffective (slow) attack

> Police are a reactive force, they're useless to prevent or break up an assault unless it's a very ineffective (slow) attack This seems like you’re implying that stricter enforcement and tougher punishments are useless? I tend to agree, we saw bright and clear as day with the “war on drugs” that being more vicious to addicts didn’t work and the problem only grew. Im certainly no expert though, and what often seems t…

>I tend to agree, we saw bright and clear as day with the “war on drugs” that being more vicious to addicts didn’t work and the problem only grew.

Drug use has grown much faster under the current regime of tolerance of drug use. There were lots of problems with the war on drugs, but the idea that it didn't reduce drug use isn't based on evidence.

As an analogy, skin cancer had been rising despite sunscreen.

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

#377

Post by matrix87 » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:16 AM UTC

hifreq wrote: post #245

anon291 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not fairy tales. Its human need for attachment to something greater. America has not filled that with anything else. The previous flag waving civic nationalism has become demonized so now there's nothing.

> America has not filled that with anything else That's not an issue that America has to solve (i.e. the government or the society). It's an individual need that every individual is responsible for.

I'm pretty sure they anticipated this attitude in Revelation 3:15

Indifference is worse than extreme atheism or fundamentalism because those two options are actually concerned about others

The indifferent person could care less whether you believe or don't, it's your own "individual responsibility", they owe nothing to you and you owe nothing to them

Widespread indifference will bring about the slow dismantlement of society

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

#378

Post by boh » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:17 AM UTC

amluto wrote: post #360

boh wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oxycontin was legal, how well did that go?

It’s not clear to me that making it legal was the problem. The marketing was catastrophic. The amount of messaging, in doctors’ offices and otherwise, about using long-acting painkillers, getting ahead of the pain, making sure your pain was treated, etc was ridiculous. Nowadays, the messaging is quite different. And we’re starting to learn that the opioids may not even work for the things people like using them for,…

I'm sure the marketing for legalized Meth will be more responsible (just like it is for everything else that isn't good for us).

What is the compulsion to find some tiny fragment of an argument to go against the obvious? Maybe it's because you'd need an absolutely idealized scenario to take legalizing drug use seriously.

You know those countries that legalized drugs? Feel free to look up how well that's going.

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

#379

Post by port914 » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:17 AM UTC

Drug use is illegal. Assault is illegal. Robbery is illegal. Rape is illegal.

Enforce the laws.

My car was broken into in San Francisco, robbed in broad daylight. The police told me to just turn it in to my insurance.

Who pays insurance? We do.

So I got robbed and you all who pay for insurance got robbed.

I wonder why.

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

#380

Post by shiroiuma » Tue, Dec 12, 2023, 2:17 AM UTC

1letterunixname wrote: post #147

afarrell wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have come to the conclusion that lots of humans have a religion-shaped hole in their psyche. It is far better to fill it with a stable, local, hope-giving religion. Hymns are a better opiate of the masses than fentanyl.

This is also true. The decline in community (where religion played a large part in cementing personal and local bonds) and increase in anomie has led not just to deaths of despair and to other symptoms not just loneliness and depression, but on the fringes of alienation and disconnection to where some volatile people go as far hate-fueled "blaze of glory" mass shootings. I find one of the biggest losses, especially i…

>I wouldn't recommend that all things must attempt to recapture the 1950's apartheid and social conservativism in all regards

I don't think you can avoid this. If you bring back religion, you necessarily have to accept apartheid and social conservatism. The two go hand-in-hand.

Religion probably worked well for bonding communities back when communities were small and homogeneous and had little contact with the outside world. But in an era of global travel and communications, it doesn't work: we have to have huge wars to decide whose religion is the correct one. Just look at what's going on with Israel lately. Different religions can't peacefully co-exist, so devastating wars are necessary to maintain order.