Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_izhpji2 wrote

Reply to comment by aelius_aristides in Manchester conducts health, welfare check of downtown homeless camp by rabblebowser

Yeah that just doesn't seem right at all that's horrible

9

aelius_aristides t1_izhq5jh wrote

It is. And it’s even worse when they get evicted from their camps in winter. Concord PD evicted a camp under a bridge last December, with a number of disabled and elderly people. They had to go live in the woods, miles outside of town. And it achieved nothing. Other people immediately moved under the bridge, and a few people came back, but all their tents and most of their belongings had been bulldozed. It was just utterly needless cruelty.

21

Bill2k t1_izkbiox wrote

If I'm not mistaken the city did that because a propane tank exploded and set fire to the area under 293. What the city did was not ideal, but I think they had to do something to protect the infrastructure.

4

aelius_aristides t1_izkje5y wrote

But they didn't even do that. And they could not have expected what they did to accomplish that. If they wanted to "protect the infrastructure" they would have fenced off the area after bulldozing everything or found some means of keeping people away from the bridge. But they did nothing to prevent people from immediately moving back. And they did it knowing that the very close proximity of the camp to the soup kitchen, and it's sheltered position under the bridge were literally life-saving factors for people. Propane tank explosions and brush fires by roads and bridges are not ideal, but they cause a lot less harm than an unnecessary eviction and the willful destruction of lifesaving shelter and property.

3

manicmonkeys t1_izjyjch wrote

On the other hand, what's the alternative?

0

smartest_kobold t1_izkev0l wrote

Build public housing.

6

manicmonkeys t1_izkjgp5 wrote

And when it's quickly destroyed by the people living there?

1

smartest_kobold t1_izkxgzh wrote

Why would you think people who have built their own encampment are going to tear down permanent housing?

7

lendluke t1_izshwk9 wrote

Unfortunately I think you'd need to build any public housing for these people out of concrete without much finishes. The reason most of these people are homeless is drug addiction and/or mental illness, think about the type of person who can't get a better place to stay in NH winter. Just like Pruitt Igoe in St. Louis, the place would become a wreck very quickly without huge amounts of maintenance.

Homeless people are people, but I've gotten a bit tired of people in this subreddit acting like most of them are responsible adults when we live in a state with one of the biggest labor shortages. There are plenty of entry level jobs that pay enough to not be homeless in winter without even having to work crazy hours. I think there is much more justification for providing cheap housing for the elderly or disabled that are in their situation by more that is out of their control.

1

smartest_kobold t1_izsodhx wrote

It would be considered inhumane to put zoo animals in the housing you suggest. I'd suggest sitting with that.

2

lendluke t1_iztemnh wrote

There is limited resources voters are willing to allocate to housing for homeless (as seen by homeless on the streets in the winter). Given that fact, would you prefer we have a fortunate fraction live in nicer less robust free housing than having a larger fraction housed in more robust (albeit less pretty) housing? I'd suggest you sit with that.

I would take concrete floors and walls in a heartbeat if it meant I get my housing for free, and I'm not even homeless. For god's sake I'm not saying they be sprayed down by water jets for showers or be given slop from a trough, I'm saying free housing shouldn't have carpet and other permeable surfaces people can wreck.

1

aelius_aristides t1_izk1mky wrote

Don’t evict them. Especially during winter, and especially when alternate housing is not provided.

2

manicmonkeys t1_izkje61 wrote

The part about it being during winter may have some validity to it. But at the end of the day, society can't stay functioning if there's an ever-increasing vagrant presence like that.

If you give them housing, they quickly destroy the housing.

0

aelius_aristides t1_izkkra7 wrote

It's simply untrue that they would destroy proper housing if it was given to them. Yes, some with severe mental illness or addiction may do some damage. But plenty of working people with homes also trash them. Ever been to a hoarders house, or a rural property with 20 rusting cars in the yard? Some people make a mess. Homeless people are just people.

​

To your point about society, our society is designed around competition in such a way that necessitates the creation of a permanent houseless underclass. They have existed as long as this society has. It is in fact a function of our society, not an obstacle to its function. The real solution is of course a restructuring of society on the basis of cooperation, not competition. But I somehow imagine that you will have plenty of objections to that.

6

manicmonkeys t1_izkn6q8 wrote

Every society has poor/homeless people. That's not a unique commentary of any sort.

Those are nice platitudes, but sadly they are devoid of practicality.

0

aelius_aristides t1_izkor0y wrote

Every society does have poor and homeless. None have as much as we do, because we manufacture homelessness. That’s no platitude.

4

manicmonkeys t1_izle512 wrote

That's just... factually wrong.

0

aelius_aristides t1_izlepca wrote

Hedge funds buying up housing and raising rent, artificially induced inflation, low minimum wage, inaccessible healthcare. How are we NOT manufacturing homelessness? Plenty of countries have extreme poverty and slums etc etc. but none have the wealth and resources that we do, the mass of unoccupied housing sitting empty. We have no excuse to have this many people on the streets.

2

manicmonkeys t1_izlx5du wrote

>Every society does have poor and homeless. None have as much as we do

This is factually wrong.

0

aelius_aristides t1_izm0y07 wrote

Well, you're not making any arguments or providing any information, so this is pointless. And you're wrong anyway. I'm certain that I have spent a great deal more time investigating the issue of homelessness than you have, and a great deal more time with homeless people. Your armchair conservative opinions aren't worth my time.

1

manicmonkeys t1_izm2v5a wrote

I'm pointing out that at least part of your statement was wrong. If you don't value truth though, that's on you.

0

aelius_aristides t1_izm5isu wrote

Again, saying I'm wrong over and over again is neither a meaningful nor interesting contribution, if you have nothing else to offer. And, as I also stated, you simply do not know what you are talking about.

1