Submitted by SnortingCoffee t3_118eh0l in washingtondc
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9gxuv9 wrote
The dozen or 2 people that decided they could build a shanty town in a public park 2 blocks from the White House are not "the homeless". They should have been removed way sooner.
ShitFucker101 t1_j9h26ek wrote
How would you classify them?
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h2g7h wrote
"a dozen or 2 homeless people who decided to build a shanty town in a central park"
glopmod t1_j9h60mz wrote
You... said they weren't homeless. Now you are saying they are. Do you understand why they asked how you would classify them?
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h6t7a wrote
Nope that's just word games. You know exactly what I meant.
glopmod t1_j9h7aoa wrote
I don't, and neither does the other person, because you're communicating like shit and immediately contradicting yourself, which has confused multiple people.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h7v42 wrote
Nah, you're just using a weird aloof super progressive attack pose to try and push me into saying something you can screenshot for a tweet later. Just let it go man. Everyone else knows what I said. I don't need an editor.
umadbr00 t1_j9ha3b7 wrote
​
>The dozen or 2 people that decided they could build a shanty town in a public park 2 blocks from the White House are not "the homeless".
>
>"a dozen or 2 homeless people who decided to build a shanty town in a central park"
You said they werent homeless. Then you said they were homeless. This isn't word games. Either you're trolling or truly contradicting yourself.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9harz5 wrote
You literally just quoted me than paraphrased it wrong.
I can't teach you the nuances of written English.
umadbr00 t1_j9hoky1 wrote
If you are insinuating that "the homeless" has some sort of different meaning than being homeless you're going to need to be explicit about what you mean. Clearly no one else in this comment thread understands you.
HamG0d t1_j9ihidm wrote
He’s separating the individuals from the group.
His argument is that the problem isn’t that they are “the homeless”, the issue is that they were in that specific spot. So this wasn’t to combat “the homeless” or fix homelessness, but only to get those individuals out of that area.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9hph8j wrote
I'm not insinuating anything, I am very bluntly pointing out that you are either trolling me or genuinely don't understand what I clearly and correctly wrote.
We done here?
glopmod t1_j9i0poz wrote
That's at least three people you have insisted are too stupid to understand you.
​
Maybe there's a constant in this issue where so many people can't get your shifting statement
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9i60tz wrote
It's called piling on. Have you been to the internet before?
glopmod t1_j9i65hr wrote
Maybe they're piling on because you said something fucking stupid and contradictory and refuse to back down from the demand that it should make sense to everyone
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9i6co0 wrote
Jesus christ, I got 32 up votes, and 3 confused screamers, so I guess 10% can't fucking read. I'm alright with that.
ShitFucker101 t1_j9h2t3c wrote
What’s your point? That there are other homeless people in other parts of dc? If you have something to say then articulate it
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h3jar wrote
You want me to say something less agreeable so you can do some virtue signaling? Am I getting that right?
glopmod t1_j9h6759 wrote
He wants you to decide if they aren't the homeless or if they are.
​
It's not virtue signaling to try to understand your clear fuckup in your incredibly low level logic
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h7bbo wrote
I don't need to define "homeless" so you comment guys can show how pure you are.
12 guys in a park are not "the homeless". We don't need to solve vagrancy before we kick them out of McPherson square.
glopmod t1_j9h27ik wrote
Why would someone who isn't homeless choose to live in a tent on public land without electricity or water
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h412g wrote
They aren't living on "public land" this isn't fucking Montana. They built a shanty town in a park 2 blocks from the White House. Everyone in that park knew this would happen and they laughed and saw how long they could play it out.
We aren't going to let McPherson SQ be a shanty town because a dozen people put their tents up.
"Without electricity or water" bullshit.. they are sleeping a few hundred yards from the president of the United States of America. Stop it.
glopmod t1_j9h47nr wrote
You did not even attempt to answer that question.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h4cvv wrote
What was the question? They have electric and water in McPherson SQ.
glopmod t1_j9h4np9 wrote
It's right fucking there. I'm not going to repeat it because you're not gonna answer it.
​
No, those tents don't have electric and running water.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h59n2 wrote
Moving the goal posts again? They chose that park to be closer to those things. We still can't let them live there in a shanty town. Even a progressive warrior should understand that.
glopmod t1_j9h5lcu wrote
The homeless are fucking everywhere in this city. They're there because it's where people who may give them money and food are and they had yet to be pushed out of somewhere else that will be closed for months to train them to be elsewhere. We are pushing a problem on top of, not under, a different rug, deciding to clean that run, and pushing it to another.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h6oa1 wrote
No.
This is not "ignoring the problem" or fixing homeless. They are a dozen vagrants removed from a central park.
We have neither added to or subtracted from the homeless population. They are where they would have been anyway, today.
glopmod t1_j9h71a1 wrote
Correct. If they leave this park, they go to a different place in the city. Very good. Your insistence that this park be clean for you does not resolve it.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h7ley wrote
Well the park is clean now, so while you work on that other business, my issue is in fact resolved.
glopmod t1_j9h8jt6 wrote
And a different park is not. In a year, they will come back to this park when the current dirty park is cleaned.
​
If your issue is resolved, you lack object permanence.
WontStopAtSigns t1_j9h8osv wrote
That's what the ADHD pros tell me.
dynospectrum7 t1_j9his10 wrote
Many have denied the temporary housing available.
glopmod t1_j9hjojm wrote
You're getting that information from?
dynospectrum7 t1_j9hlsz2 wrote
Please don’t make me do this. A wapo article came out a week ago staying that of the individuals offered housing. Half didn’t take it. And when the camp was being surveyed half didn’t take it. So take that “concern” elsewhere.
glopmod t1_j9hm1ob wrote
Did they deny it, or did they not take it? Different things.
​
My apologies for expecting you to know what you're saying and have it be true, I won't do that again, seems to put you in a rough mood
dynospectrum7 t1_j9hthhq wrote
Oh. You probably just can’t help it. And I’m trying to be respectful here. But there is no difference between someone denying housing and just not taking it. Then again, you sound like someone that would walk into a clearly condemned establishment and ask for pizza.
glopmod t1_j9hu2lq wrote
"I'm trying to be respectful but I am going to dig through your shit to find a way to insult you." Gimme a fucking break.
​
There is a difference between denying a service that is directly offering to you and being counted as "not taking" something you were unaware of or not offered specifically; these programs are often seen as being not utilized by those who need them while in reality getting them, or having them offered at all, is more difficult or unlikely than you imply, and the numbers are offered publicly to appear as if people simply refuse. I am sorry you can't grasp that difference and believe the city's statement without question.
dynospectrum7 t1_j9hwiju wrote
Oh god. Your emotions are yours to deal with. I’ll give you some stats. Half of the 55~ in the camp were not surveyed. It was because they weren’t able to be found, or declined to even go through the process.
You mean to tell me that these people have been trying to get housing for the several months they set up shop in the square?
And no, I didn’t have to dig through your posts. I just remember how ridiculous it was when I saw it.
glopmod t1_j9hx4md wrote
So... you understand that's not denied, right? Half aren't even counted in this data.
I don't know how you can smugly "give me some stats" and not understand they oppose your entire point.
​
I think that's enough time for your man. You should take the time you would give to being smug to a stranger to think about what little information you have and how it counters your own position.
dynospectrum7 t1_j9i2pqe wrote
What. Half of those offered housing denied it. What is so hard to understand here?
As someone that works with this population, my position is the same.
When it comes to these camps, the only way to get these people off their ass is to force them to take action. A camp shouldn’t be around indefinitely because people won’t take it seriously. Same with the eviction moratorium and people just saying fuck it when it comes to paying their rent. And if you don’t have experience in the matter, I’m not trying to hear it.
glopmod t1_j9i32dn wrote
Half of those there were not reached. That means a quarter denied it. What is so hard to understand here?
dynospectrum7 t1_j9i51ui wrote
Lmao. I’m going to assume you are a middle school aged person or are something else. They weren’t reached because they didn’t want to be reached. Many declined the survey. How the fuck you live in the park but somehow miss canvassing for two weeks.
Layman’s (your) terms.
If, over the course of two weeks, someone is taking a an assessment of the clothes washing ability of the people who live in your home, and even though the three other occupants actually wash clothes, yet you refuse to wash clothes, can they give you a score? Or were you simply not reached?
glopmod t1_j9i5kqo wrote
"They weren't reached because (makes something up with no information)"
Keep the insults to yourself. I apologize for suggesting you might not have all the answers. Obviously whatever you have decided is correct is.
dynospectrum7 t1_j9i6gdc wrote
Haaaaa. Well let’s get to it. I work with this population on the daily. Do you?
dynospectrum7 t1_j9i5jd3 wrote
And while we’re at it. Why the f are peoples denying housing?
Sluzhbenik t1_j9hu704 wrote
Denying an offer for free housing = not taking an offer of free housing. What are you on about?
glopmod t1_j9hucht wrote
You should read more than you write.
​
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments