Andy to solarpunk [email protected] • 9 months agoI've got 99 problems but urban planning is all of themslrpnk.netimagemessage-square163fedilinkarrow-up1917arrow-down162file-text
arrow-up1855arrow-down1imageI've got 99 problems but urban planning is all of themslrpnk.netAndy to solarpunk [email protected] • 9 months agomessage-square163fedilinkfile-text
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink1•9 months agoI don’t see how or where I said I am against giving people homes.
minus-square@funkless_ecklink7•9 months agowhen you said… The only thing I don’t see is how it would fix people being homeless. Many homeless are unable to be properly housed because they have mental illnesses, trauma, etc. If you put them in an apartment without extensive further help, many will get back on the street and/or destroy the apartment. You can’t solve their problems with just providing housing. That says to me, four times, that you are against giving people homes. Could you clarify how each of those points is a positive?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink4•edit-29 months agoLiterally none of this says: don’t give people a home. My point is giving them a home is not enough, it won’t solve the problem. Is this a weird English language thing? Is this a Lemmy or an internet thing? People seem to deliberately put stuff into posts that aren’t said. It’s even in the text you quoted from me that my opinion is just giving them housing won’t solve the problem. How the fuck does that say “don’t give them a home”???
minus-square@funkless_ecklink2•9 months agoI think the missing context is that when you write with majority negative phrasing, people assume your argument is against it. Consider: “You have to cover apples in sugar and put them in pastry, and then add custard to make me want to consider eating them!” This sounds like you hate apples, not that you like apple pie.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink3•9 months agoI thought the situation was more like: “If you got apples you can make an apple pie”. And I was: “No, just apples make a bad pie, you also need the other ingredients”. And then people wrote: “How dare you hating apple pie!”
I don’t see how or where I said I am against giving people homes.
when you said…
That says to me, four times, that you are against giving people homes. Could you clarify how each of those points is a positive?
Literally none of this says: don’t give people a home. My point is giving them a home is not enough, it won’t solve the problem.
Is this a weird English language thing? Is this a Lemmy or an internet thing? People seem to deliberately put stuff into posts that aren’t said.
It’s even in the text you quoted from me that my opinion is just giving them housing won’t solve the problem.
How the fuck does that say “don’t give them a home”???
I think the missing context is that when you write with majority negative phrasing, people assume your argument is against it.
Consider: “You have to cover apples in sugar and put them in pastry, and then add custard to make me want to consider eating them!”
This sounds like you hate apples, not that you like apple pie.
I thought the situation was more like: “If you got apples you can make an apple pie”. And I was: “No, just apples make a bad pie, you also need the other ingredients”. And then people wrote: “How dare you hating apple pie!”