• ringwraithfish@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    138
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Can’t afford a home, probably gonna be illegal to be homeless. Guess they should just kill themselves then.

    Fuck the modern conservative movement. No empathy for the downtrodden.

      • Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Born too early to enjoy fully automated luxury gay space communism, born too late to participate in affordable housing, born just in time to go to jail for conspiracy to commit suicide because living is too expensive.

    • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      7 months ago

      Get a load of this lib that doesn’t know virtually every Dem-run city provides full-throated support for the cops and pushes anti-homeless policies.

      You ever stopped a sweep, lib?

      • kamenoko
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Turns out it’s still better to be homeless in a lib city than a conservative shit hole town.

      • ringwraithfish@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s important to acknowledge the complexities of urban governance and the diverse approaches taken by different cities, regardless of political affiliation. While some cities may have policies that prioritize law enforcement and anti-homeless measures, others may take alternative approaches focused on community outreach, social services, and harm reduction. Each city faces unique challenges and adopts policies accordingly. If you have specific examples or cases you’d like to discuss, feel free to share, and we can explore them further.

        • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          7 months ago

          What a pretentious way to say, “some cities don’t do that”. Do you get paid to communicate like ChatGPT?

          So given that you’re asking for specific examples for the thing that is by far the norm, can I assume you know basically nothing about this topic

        • oozynozh@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          Never seen generative AI used to respond to a thread in a random forum, but here we are.

    • tearsintherain@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I don’t think this is just about conservatives, it’s also about the owner class and their quality of life. But def significant overlap.

      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/16/us-homeless-encampments-companies-profiting-sweeps

      Revealed: how companies made $100m clearing California homeless camps Public spending on private sweep contractors is soaring across the state – and unhoused people allege poor treatment

      This reminds of the gross, despicable private detention and private prison industry in America.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        They’re connected. How many times can you get detained overnight and have your entire life belongings destroyed before you fight the police officer detaining you?

        • EstraDoll [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          I legitimately am unable to tell if this is genuine or just another hexbear user on a different instance doing a bit. This sounds exactly like what we would do as a joke

          • SeedyOne@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            15 years ago maybe, to claim it now shows you’ve been in a news bubble. Get some new perspective.

            • beardown@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Depends who you view as progressive.

              Hilldog claimed to be a progressive. Albeit a “progressive who gets stuff done.” There are many politicos similar to her, such as Buttigieg, Newsom, etc

              And then there is Bernie Sanders. And, on some level, the Squad and their allies.

              Clearly these are (at least) two distinct groups. Yet both use the label of progressive when it suits them. Which muddies the waters and (intentionally) confuses the public

              Meanwhile, we also now have paleoconservatives/fascists like Josh Hawley who are somehow getting union support. Labels don’t mean as much as they used to

              https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/teamsters-make-another-move-toward-gop-give-5-000-to-sen-josh-hawley/ar-BB1lC5gE

              • SeedyOne@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                Actually, it doesn’t. Instead of looking at the nuance of the progressive side, you only need to look at the complete lack of vision, policies and outright lies that the right is now full of. Not just voting against their constituents wishes but against their OWN policies. Defense bills that might make a democrat look good, can’t have that. Healthcare plans that they champion until Obama’s name is on it. And those are just the low hanging, obvious fruit.

                “Both sides” have their issues but it’s crystal fucking clear which one has gone off the rails and is against almost everything this country was founded on. If you can’t see it, you’re bubbled. Plain and simple.

                • beardown@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Neoliberals are enemies of the working class.

                  So are fascists, obviously. But Reagan and Clintons neoliberalism is how we got here.

          • ringwraithfish@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            So cute, you want to join an adult conversation. Come on pal, let’s see your work. Gotta back up your claims with evidence if you want to continue sitting at the adult table.

        • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Okay then. What solution do even the most egalitarian or radical progressives/liberals, who you call the “adults”, have to solve capitalism’s contradictions and crises, with capitalism’s inherent unequal division of private property, leading to rising inequality and homelessness, being one of them? Because everything I’ve heard from just sounds like they are talking around the problem and avoiding the elephant in the room, the capitalistic system. In fact, many progressives when talking about issues such as homelessness, do not challenge the notion of private property and accept the inequality inherent to such a system, and then explain it away through bogus reasoning. I do not think that this way of avoiding about talking about how the modern capitalistic system works is adult behaviour. In fact, I’d say that it is childish behaviour, and does not deserve to be called progressive. The right wing being more brazen with it’s lack of ethics does not excuse the failure of liberals to address current issues.

          The contemporary version of bourgeois emancipating reason, egalitarian liberalism, made fashionable by an insistent media popularization, provides nothing new because it remains prisoner of the liberty, equality, and property triplet. Challenged by the conflict between liberty and equality, which the unequal division of property necessarily implies, so-called egalitarian liberalism is only very moderately egalitarian. Inequality is accepted and legitimized by a feat of acrobatics, which borrows its pseudo concept of “endowments” from popular economics. Egalitarian liberalism offers a highly platitudinous observation: individuals (society being the sum of individuals) are endowed with diverse standings in life (some are powerful heads of enterprise, others have nothing). These unequal endowments, nevertheless, remain legitimate as long as they are the product, inherited obviously, of the work and the savings of ancestors. So one is asked to go back in history to the mythical day of the original social contract made between equals, who later became unequal because they really desired it, as evidenced by the inequality of the sacrifices to which they consented. I do not think that this way of avoiding the questions of the specificity of capitalism even deserves to be considered elegant.

          • Samir Amin, Eurocentrism
          • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            How about UBI? Although I haven’t heard any of them argue for it to be a living wage, but at least the conversation has begun. Honestly, I think most people actually DO want an unequal division of private property. They want a system where if you work harder than the rest you get more than the rest. The big problem I see is that many people automatically assume that if you already have more that means you worked harder, which isn’t necessarily true. We have people who work very little and get to hoard vast wealth. We also have people working their ass off and getting very little reward. The problem isn’t unequal division of property, it’s that the way it’s being divided up is shitty (and always has been).

      • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        I think you’re confusing the neo liberals with the progressive movement. (Basically Clinton vs Bernie)

  • Shanedino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    7 months ago

    Would these people rather homeless people break into places and sleeping inside? This seems like the only plausible alternative.

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Of course they would. Homeless people aren’t criminals and they can’t make being homeless a crime, per se, so they just do as much as they can to drive them towards crimes. It’ll be safer to avoid being caught if they break in and can be hidden but if they do get caught it’ll be horrendous. They’ll put them in slave camps-I’m sorry, “jails” and away we go.

      It is the most heinous shit imaginable and these broken monsters get off to it.

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Watch closely as they make providing shelter illegal as well (just like they made providing food illegal). The cruelty is the point.

  • Hyperreality@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Sounds like a great idea.

    Of course, if it’s a crime to be homeless, it’s also a crime to force or coerce someone into commiting that crime.

    I look forward to the officials and landlords responsible to be jailed for each crime they helped commit.

    • rhandyrhoads@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      I will say I’m somewhat optimistic about this case. Yes the current supreme court has a heavy partisan lean, but I’ve seen some decisions from the court which my pessimistic side didn’t expect to go the way they did.

  • BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    7 months ago

    I know this guy who goes to the New York state courthouse everyday to sleep. He doesn’t even try to hide. He does it in an occupied court room during a trial, on tax-paid furniture.

  • nomnomdeplume@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Where do we put them if every city, every village, every town lacks compassion and passes a law identical to this

    This is why there needs to be a national effort around this, rather than this patchwork approach which often just (expensively&wastefully) moves the problem around without solving it.

  • penquin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    So, they won’t help them and won’t let them be on the streets? Man, homeless folks need to learn to levitate then, so they can sleep in the air instead.

  • Coolkidbozzy [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I slept in this town once when I was temporarily homeless. I was lucky enough to not be harassed by cops. Letting people sleep in public spaces doesn’t harm anyone except landlords, the housing market, and the hotel/airbnb industry. How the fuck is an unemployed unhoused person supposed to eventually afford rent if they’re fined for existing outside?

    • Tb0n3
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      How about the people trying to use those public spaces for the activities they were designed for? Doesn’t it harm them when the sidewalk is half full of tents? How about when the park is full of drug addicts and human shit?

  • DaSaw@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 months ago

    This seems like a no-brainer to me… though it probably isn’t. Obviously you have a constitutional right to sleep, wherever you can make space for yourself. If these cities and downs don’t want people sleeping outside, they need to provide indoor space for people who haven’t actually committed crimes. We treat our criminals better than we treat our homeless.

    • melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      fuck their laws, I think, is the ruling here. just fuck them completely. we do not have a society. your conscience is the only guide.

  • HeChomk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 months ago

    Something something, sanctuary districts, something something, Bell Riots. Almost on schedule. WW3 next, then first contact.

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      Unfortunately, due to a budget restriction, first contact has been canceled. Please accept our apology in the form of nuclear winter.