Those rich bastards may have raised 60k, but the city still is fighting and the proles have raised 30k to counter the anti-shelter fundraiser, according to the article. It’s not over yet and the city may still get the desperately needed shelter.
Imagine if they donated to helping others instead of helping lawyers.
That would be communism.
If they choose where their donated money goes, it’s still capitalism
No they mean helping people is communism. According to Republicans, at least.
I feel like it leans a bit more towards being satanist these days. Commies aren’t as scary as they used to be, and you gotta keep those Christians riled.
Also fair, hail Satan.
It’s only capitalism if the recipients have to pay back the donations with interest and the building gets reposessed when they miss a payment.
You’ve aaaaaalmost recreated neoliberalism
That’s crazy talk. You’re crazy. You. Psh.
Noone ever thinks about the lawyers
Can we get a list of donor addresses.
They need to wake up everyday for the next decade with a fresh pile of human poo on their door steps.
Let’s find a local car club and arrange a rice burner parade through their neighborhood at 5am every weekend.
If they live in SF they probably already do that.
Pretty shitty of GoFundMe to allow that type of collection, too. “Please help us force people to sleep on the streets”.
Years ago I had an interview with GoFundMe and as part of the interview process they wanted me to create a campaign and share it with family and friends. Then they asked for feedback on their website. I told them how disgusting that was to ask of me (I didn’t do it) and never heard back.
That reminds me of an interview I did. It was a partial graphic design/videographer sort of job (my focus is in design). I was looking to break into the field, it was entry level. But the guy interviewing didn’t want to fund or provide any kind of equipment like cameras. He suggested to me that I could crowdfund to get equipment so I could work for him. Seriously, lol. It was entry level pay too. Anyway, I was pretty quick to tell him I wasn’t at all okay with my social circles and family funding things necessary for a new job.
Yeah, a for profit company that accepts money to keep people on the streets is communism.
Only you are trying to villainize communism.
Glad it’s not working. That gives me hope.
Wat
I don’t know. It hurts my brain thinking like a liberal.
Ah, NIMBYs.
Eat the rich.
Hey, they vote Democrat and dress like hippies still so they’re not the problem. All the filthy poors and scary minorities just need to stay out of their neighborhood and they’ll be fine.
I’ve yet to meet a Democrat that didn’t have problems with (at least some) Democrats. Democrats aren’t really the “fall in line” types that Republicans tend to be, for good or ill. Before the Pandemic, the Anti-Vaxx movement was largely in left-leaning areas, and every sane Democrat had lots of problems with those types, for example. And the “Let’s help minorities (but not near me)” mentality is fairly prevalent in the more affluent Left-leaning circles, and I don’t think most Democrats would disagree with that.
It’s the big tent party, though they do a better job representing some than others. Republicans have a pretty narrow ideology, but democrats range anywhere left of far right. It really should be multiple parties, but the US is fucked and has a two party system that is somehow both mostly conservative. I’m hoping we’re watching the republican party explode right now and the democrats will split into two parties.
The problem is that basically democrats are the party of ‘protect us from Republicans’ and it’s the one thing we agree on. Dividing by actual beliefs would only reduce the numbers of people available to shut down the nonsense Republicans are pulling.
Seems like a great time to raise all their property taxes.
They voted for the referendum that raised their taxes that paid for this housing that they don’t want in their backyard.
Tax , Law, Rules, policies are meant for poor and disadvantaged.
Ah, classism, the one thing that should truly unite Americans.
Except that by definition it divides?
Meaning, awareness of it should unite people.
I think it’s fair to say “the thing that unites” when it’s about 99.8% (or whatever) of the people.
This isn’t the 1% that fought this, it’s the 10%.
Imagine if all that money actually went to those that need it, instead of lawyers and miscellaneous bullshit. In the end that’ll be way over 100k (and probably much higher) that could have gone to actually helping people, instead of fueling some rich people’s tantrum.
60k is nothing
SF spends about $57k-70k per homeless person. They have around 19k homeless people. It has had no overall effect on the problem due to the high COL and low affordable housing availability, ignoring the willfully homeless and hopelessly lost drug addicts that nothing but “inhumane” force can address.
SF is too favorable to homelessness and inhospitable to poverty to actually meaningfully address the issue with twice as much spending as they have now.
Homeless shelters need to stop treating them like animals. Imagine picking the streets over a shelter with draconian rules.
I bet to cannot because you lack empathy with anyone in a lower socioeconomic situation than yours.
You can’t go in with your bigger stuff, for a fair reason. ( Pests, weapons, drugs). Many avoid it on that reason alone.
But that’s not the big one.
In a bid to have full occupancy you have to line up early for daily intake. That means you don’t have time to get across town for a job interview, for food, for drugs (if you need them, no judge), for safety, etc.
So you line up early hoping to get in, essentially gambling you’ll get a spot. If you don’t you missed food, the good camping spots, etc. If you do get in you’re often only allowed a bag and have to abandon any other stuff you’ve collected.
These places need to be set up with safe isolated storage and some sort of expedited intake methods.
But then these places aren’t even safe, often folks feel safer camped out in the shadows than in a facility.
Shits fucked
Some homeless people chose the streets because they want the freedom. They don’t want to participate in the rules of the system society provides to help them. They don’t want to live in the system, and that is their choice. Choices have consequences, but society should not be expected to tolerate their uncivilized behavior if they chose not to participate.
This take will remain ridiculous until there are systems in place to readily house (and fully assist with support services) every single houseless person to the point at which they can be self-reliant in the city they are currently in with no strings attached. Without those systems in place and showing results, asking any houseless person if they prefer to stay on the street is a poisoned question.
They don’t want to be subject to the rules.
It is our choice as a society to give them no alternative
Their “uncivilized” behavior is us dealing with the consequences of expecting them to be treated like work release prisoners.
eah. im not in the san fran area, seattle, but i had a coworker who was homeless and yet they wouldnt be flexible enough to allow him to come in late from his job to get into the shelter. and it was my coworkers fault they were homeless, he let people stay with him that werent on his lease and didnt have money for get into a new place yet.
Why is inhumane in scare quotes? Do you believe that the state abusing mentally ill people who often can’t even care for themselves is a reasonable course of action?
He wants all of the homeless forcibly removed from his sight, that’s all it is. He doesn’t understand providing cheap housing and easily accessible jobs homeless people can do would solve that problem, but he doesn’t care, because he thinks they’re an eyesore and that’s all he’s concerned about.
Relocation of homeless people to a more favorable economic area is “inhumane”.
So your answer is to do nothing to help them? 100k can still feed a lot of people that otherwise would have gone hungry.
Edit: “An important reason why San Francisco policies continue to fail is that there is little or no accountability within the city’s government to evaluate the efficacy of its spending. Some of the city’s programs are so poorly managed that some homeless people likely prefer living on the streets to the facilities that are being provided to them at enormously inflated costs to taxpayers.” https://www.hoover.org/research/despite-spending-11-billion-san-francisco-sees-its-homelessness-problems-spiral-out
Sounds like the problem isn’t the homeless, it’s the people taking advantage of the system.
The problem with every form of social welfare is abuse of that system, from those who administrate and those who abuse. The most vulnerable are the victims and are made into the villains of a broken and unfixable system due to the character and moral faults of others.
too favorable to homelessness
Mate
The weather and general acceptance/generosity facilitates homelessness.
$57-70k
Source?
Here’s a source that disagrees
https://sfist.com/2016/04/12/no_san_francisco_does_not_spend_360/
Thank you for the information.
So a big chunk of the bad math done by people who never read the article is attributing money intended to prevent homelessness to being spent generically on the homeless. They see one number, divide by the other, and presto…outrage.
So you don’t seem insensitive in the future, they prefer to be called the “housing challenged” now.
A rose by any other name.
Fuck feelings and flowery names to assuage the feelings of the advantaged, I want results instead of a new coat of paint.
Someone once told me it was the material conditions of society that cause poverty and homelessness. But he was drunk a lot and lived with his friend, so he probably didn’t know what he was talking about.
The whole planet’s your god damn backyard you hypocrites! Build a habitat for humanity!
They could have just voted Republican if they were just going to oppose the same policies they voted for…
They are fine with building shelters…just not within 100 miles of their homes.
The most normal lib shit.
Sure, but do you live within a few hundred feet of a shelter? Do you walk your dog during the day and see the the daily cavalcade of ambulances and police cars stopped outside one? Ever been stopped at a red light outside your building and had someone walk up to your window asking for change, then curse and spit on you because you don’t carry cash?
There’s a huge difference between helping people get back on their feet, and just sheltering drug addicts.
I was writing out a response talking about my experience the past 2 years living 1 block away from a bus station they converted to a shelter.
But I fucking hate you. Your post has angered me so much I don’t want to be enlightening or even funny.
Yea it’s objectively pretty shit but rent will also be a lot cheaper
Cool you don’t consider drug addicts to be people that deserve help lol
Removed by mod
Your tax dollars go towards killing brown kids and drone striking weddings not social programs, American.
The first step of any recovery program or mental health treatment is having stable housing.
Lol ur actual garbage
Actually you pay taxes for the American military to murder brown children and for Tesla to fund research into a new car model
Damn, you’re so fucking considerate.
BaconIsAVeg
What time does the narwhal bacon my gentle goodsir?
Wow, shocking that a liberal with a le epic bacon username holds Reagan-tier ”fuck the poors and druggies” views
wow, ok fuck you too then lol
Except that your taxes go into making bombs to blow up kids in the Middle East and for Zelenskyy to launder money in a country with an economy 1/3rd the size of South Africa, with immeasurably worse pay, labour conditions and lower quality of life. Oh yeah and all infrastructure in central and west Ukraine sold off to Blackrock for a back-alley handjob on Goebbels Boulevard.
:pigpoop: :PIGPOOPBALLS: :horsepoo-theory: :eat-ass:
thank you for opnion, Mr.
Epic Bacon @ lemmy.malding-liberals
Jesus.
deleted by creator
But that entitlement wouldn’t allow them the privilege of feeling superior.
Whats the difference in a one party free-market state?
Yes but they would feel bad for putting a GOP sticker on their Tesla
More likely it would make things awkward with friends and neighbors. That was a whole thing in Floridian retirement communities people would straight up rock Trump stickers but voted Biden so they wouldn’t be ostracized.
“Vote Republican? But that’s for poor people!”
I know some of these people.
They are literally clinking wine glasses over this sort of thing.
You have a responsibility comrade
:ira: (this is not legal advice)
Weird hexbear posting
Weird is when you think we should fight back when we’re losing a class war
They’re probably on the opposite side of you in this war lol
weird shitlib posting
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
Make all the Marxist declarations you want, but I bet dollars to donuts, if the compassion received in your daily existence was withheld (compassion you don’t recognize due to your lack of compassion for others), you would be a much more miserable person than you’re already showing yourself to be.
I honestly don’t understand the point of this comment.
The quote HappyBadger posted is from philosopher (among other things) Karl Marx; it has been abbreviated and taken out of context. The full quote says:
“We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror. But the royal terrorists, the terrorists by the grace of God and the law, are in practice brutal, disdainful, and mean, in theory cowardly, secretive, and deceitful, and in both respects disreputable.”
Marx made the declaration when Prussia sent soldiers to shut down his newspaper; he was saying force will be used against the State’s attempt to use force as a way to suppress people.
The article to which HappyBadger is responding is about PEOPLE suppressing people while the State is trying to show compassion; antithesis of the original purpose of the Marx statement.
By abbreviating/misrepresenting the quote, HappyBadger is saying that he wants no compassion, in turn will show no compassion, and that he’s not apologetic for his behavior.
My response attempts to call out his post as a lie. Our everyday lives are filled with moments of exchanged compassion; all of which enrich the lives of the givers and receivers. It is an unspoken aspect of how individuals relate to one another within a social context.
If HappyBadger truly has no compassion, then he is likely a very unhappy person. And if all the unspoken, unsolicited compassion received throughout his daily life was truly taken away because he didn’t ask for it (and supposedly doesn’t want it), his life would be made all the more miserable because of the lack.
You’re being way to fucking literal about it. The quote is about resisting oppression, period. In that case, yeah, it was the state, but any opressor group is applicable.
People really need to get this hyper-autistic need for everything to be a perfect 1:1 analog in order to be valid, because there is no such fucking thing.
If a post not addressed to or in reply to you has got you this upset, why not just block the user instead of getting all sweary and pissed at them?
I could be wrong. Maybe GASP you could be wrong. But isn’t Lemmy a wonderful beacon of freedom in which we can express our (potentially) mutually wrong opinions? 🤔
Don’t do quote -surgery, just write your own thoughts.
If you quote someone expect analysis on that source’s intent and context
Can’t rich people ruin Texas or something? Why one of the closest thing to a semi-redeemable part of the US?
Rich people are ruining Texas. Same as all of the other red states.
Ports, food, and various entertainment and tech industries are there. Only way for them to move to HellWorld is if Texas offers more attractive policies for those industries which are unlikely to happen. Not to mention the government is also supportive of this faux progressivism. Newsom defended against removing prison slavery because minimum wage costs too much lol
Ironically, all those amenities were propped up by America’s so-called “undesirables”.
Whether CHUDs want to admit it or not, America is a boring place and the few places that aren’t boring are dominated by the very people Americans are told to hate.
Wait what? Where is this story taking place?
excusiez moi, monsieur; what the fuck?
they are pro birth for free labor, but also anti homeless. those pesky rich! rules for thee, but not for me
I guarantee you that if they were asked, more than half of these people would support rounding up the homeless and putting them in forced labor camps to “contrubute to society.”
making bills allowing 10 year olds to work is one step in that direction.
land of the fee!
Nowadays you don’t even need to scratch a liberal, you just have to show them that they live in Omelas.
