News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
You have had conversations with many unhoused people and they've indicated they would much rather prefer sleeping in places with little security, a high risk of their few possessions being stolen, and little protection from the elements, to a safe, stable place of residence?
I'm quite skeptical.
I've been homeless. This person is either full of shit or the population they were around was drastically different than mine.
There are circumstances I recall where people turned down shelter space, opting to sleep on the streets, but that's because the shelters imposed conditions that were unacceptable to them. Primarily, it was drug addicts refusing to get clean or shelters that imposed religious requirements. The rest was mostly untreated mental illness.
probably nimby person. the last thing Nimby neighborhoods want is low-income housing being built near them. thats what NEWSOM caters to.
"but that’s because the shelters imposed conditions that were unacceptable to them."
There are people for whom conditions are not acceptable. I'm not saying they shouldn't have access to a safe place to live.
Not what I said
I'm curious then, you seem to know the thoughts and experience of unhoused people, yet you're saying you haven't conversed with them. How did you form such an opinion?
My comments have been removed for some reason but I started the first one with "I can't speak for all unhoused people but there are some."
Not sure how you could read that as me speaking for all homeless people. I've lived in all kinds of situations with all kinds of people. I've known some who flat out reject being involved in programs designed to help them, preferring to go it alone. Yes, giving up access to safe shelters and other resources. I'm not saying they deserve to go without help or that they should be rounded up and placed in camps. I'm saying understanding their choices can be complex and requires more than just access to shelters or housing.
Your initial comment read like, "we shouldn't provide access to housing for anyone because some don't actually want it."
I believe a better solution would be, "we should provide access to housing and if some don't want it, they won't be forced to use it."
It's definitely a complex issue, but the first step should be compassion and not eliminating practical options because they might not suit a small subset of the population.
You might have read my comment that way but you also read it as me speaking for all homeless people for some reason.
There is a risk of using already limited funds for housing projects that pay out to contractors/land developers (profiting off social programs) without having enough to go towards other issues facing unhoused people. The solution is more complex than simply "build more homes" which is what the original message I responded to was intimating.
All people deserve safe, stable living environments, some just choose to forgo those for reasons people seem unwilling to acknowledge.