Mixed mind. I agree with Thor, but also agree with thundercock.

I tend to think some form of "camp ground" setup that's not "pay to enter" but instead designed to cater to the homeless, with all the outhouses and running water and firepits and other such that are seen in "tourist" places would be relatively cheap and easy to set up and maintain, and would help the homeless to at least live with a bit of dignity and basic services, as opposed to tents on highway medians, and also provide a place where social workers, those seeking cheap labor, etc. could go to do some good deeds and maybe help lift some of them out of poverty.

On the flipside, we don't need people shitting in medians and pissing into traffic. I agree that the "cost" of the "median spike" is next to nothing, and would be a drop in the bucket compared to what really addressing homelessness would require. So I support both: Get them out of the medians, underpasses, etc. But provide an alternative that's still going to be close enough to basics like food and water that they can continue to survive.

here's a neat little video about unpleasant design / hostile architecture:



i'm also with thor on this one, i'd rather that money was spent addressing the causes of homelessness.

Why do you presume that social welfare is the exclusive realm of tax subsidies?

If, as in my "campground" style example, homeless were more centrally located, then food banks (willing donation) could be easily arranged. We already subsidize water and outhouse/bathroom services in parks, so that'd be no different. Regarding electricity, I don't know of anyone who suggested electricity. That's what the fire pits would be for. And fire logs could easily be donated via the food bank as well as tents, jackets, parkas, and other such as well.

As it stands right now, we chase the homeless out of our parks, and tend to put most food bank style services as far away from places of business as we can. This puts the source of food for the homeless a world away from where they need to go for bottle returns or showers or like, job interviews, or anything else. Given that only a tiny fraction of the homeless drive, most walk or ride bikes, and even public transportation is not a guarantee, given it costs money they may not have, the sheer inconvenience in placement leads to part of the reason homeless like to tend to set up camp in things like underpasses, under bridges, etc. where they can still be near enough to basic services to get warm, get out of the rain, get into some A/C, get a shower, take a dump in an actual toilet, get food, conduct business, that kind of thing.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Apr 8 2021 04:31pm

lel

Not exclusively but from a reliability standpoint i do see the government stepping in as the only viable long term solution. If individuals were going to solve this voluntarily jeff bezos could have waved a wand and had a facility for the homeless erected instead of sending phallic objects into space.

Did a quick google search and ill be damned, he is opening up a homeless shelter 🤔

feel free to write a check. neither of you two have lifted a utensil in a soup kitchen other than maybe when it was required in high school so spare the faux superiority which is only a cover for your inferiority complexes

This post was edited by excellence on Apr 8 2021 04:48pm

I volunteered for years at a free clinic lol

I helped organize many events to get homeless camps full of people sogned up for charity care

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 8 2021 05:00pm

yes you used to torture mice for free now the govt subsidizes it

again write a check if you want to help