Red Mosquito

Bammer wrote:I have a co-worker whose son is a cop. They put a bunch of homeless up in a Renton, WA hotel (suburb of Seattle). They are not staying in the rooms and are wreaking havoc in the neighborhood, per her son.

Following up on this:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... cal-hotel/

Bammer wrote:

Bammer wrote:I have a co-worker whose son is a cop. They put a bunch of homeless up in a Renton, WA hotel (suburb of Seattle). They are not staying in the rooms and are wreaking havoc in the neighborhood, per her son.

Following up on this:

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... cal-hotel/

Following the NY and SF housing first mantra?

All good and well for marginal individuals for whom housing is the main issue. For those with significant mental illness or substance issues that cannot be compelled to treatment, maybe not so much.

The mantra of 'mentally ill are more likely to be victims than perpetrators' is true up to year X of the typical paranoid schizophrenic. Can't compel treatment until threatening to act on criminal behavior.

There's a medium between nurse Ratchett and whatever this is, but dedicated institutions sounds generally better than let them live in the streets until they die of poorly managed medical conditions after dozens of ER visits and no improvement in quality of life.

I have only listened to the first two episodes of this podcast so far: https://open.spotify.com/show/5v0ihQNab ... 7pZ4Q&nd=1

Where the producer in the videos at the top of this page points squarely at drugs and failed political policy to enforce criminal punishment, another person (in episode 2 of the podcast) points squarely at rising rents / cost of living increase.

Bammer wrote:I have only listened to the first two episodes of this podcast so far: https://open.spotify.com/show/5v0ihQNab ... 7pZ4Q&nd=1

Where the producer in the videos at the top of this page points squarely at drugs and failed political policy to enforce criminal punishment, another person (in episode 2 of the podcast) points squarely at rising rents / cost of living increase.

The rising rent thing is pretty laughable. What % of homeless don't have mental illness or substance issues? 10%? 20?

simple schoolboy wrote:

Bammer wrote:I have only listened to the first two episodes of this podcast so far: https://open.spotify.com/show/5v0ihQNab ... 7pZ4Q&nd=1

Where the producer in the videos at the top of this page points squarely at drugs and failed political policy to enforce criminal punishment, another person (in episode 2 of the podcast) points squarely at rising rents / cost of living increase.

The rising rent thing is pretty laughable. What % of homeless don't have mental illness or substance issues? 10%? 20?

About 600,000 people are homeless on any given night, and 2 million at some time in any given year. Over a five-year period, 2%–3% of the population, as many as 8 million people, will be homeless for at least one night. Of these, 80% find a home within a few weeks, but about 10% remain homeless for a year or more. The United States Department of Health and Human Services estimates the number of chronically homeless at 100,000–200,000.

About a quarter to a third of the homeless have a serious mental illness — usually schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or severe depression — and the proportion is growing. A study published in 2004 showed a 20-year rise in the rate of psychiatric illness among the homeless in St. Louis. In the year 2000, 30% had a combination of mental health and drug or alcohol problems (dual diagnosis) and another 15% had mental health problems alone. A survey of more than 10,000 patients treated for serious mental illness in San Diego County found that 15% had been homeless during the previous year.

Reminds me of this article from last month:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/photogra ... s-seattle/

One of those organizations, Share/Wheel, not only gave Mejlvang permission to visit, it invited him to stay in Tent City 4, one of the places it has worked to organize to provide homeless people with shelter.

One of the things that struck Mejlvang was that many of the homeless people he encountered actually had full-time jobs. This made photographing in the camp challenging because, as Mejlvang told me, people got up early to go to work and didn’t come back until late in the evening. And while Mejlvang’s overall experience documenting life in the camp was positive, he did tell me, “it is terrifying to face the reality that people with a full-time job have to have a home inside a tent.”

Those were very well done. they could have used more input from homeless advocates though. Mirrors the Vancouver experience. Though council is "trying" to address the drug issue by asking Federal government to make all drugs legal for certain parts of town. That part was never in a platform, no one voted for that. The issue is just going to keep getting worse. I do not know a single person who thinks it will get better over the next decade.

We had a homeless person sleeping under an overhang near the parking area where we live. We had no issue with that except for the mess he would leave each morning and more importantly that he would piss on the gate that was the exit for pedestrians and cyclists. He was asked multiple times to piss across the alley in the bushes. He didn't so we had to put in high powered flood lights that shone on where he slept so he wouldn't sleep there any more. A solution no one is happy with but the city and province are 100% useless in addressing the issue.

The part that struck me is the “compassionate hands off” approach with the goal to benefit a population of 2,000-3,000 people at the expense of the other 700,000 people who live in Seattle. The “social experiment.”

People are struggling desperately. I get it. They need help. They, however, should not be allowed to sell drugs, pick fights, litter, piss everywhere, etc. etc. etc. without law enforcement doing (being allowed to do) something about it.

The idea of a prison/rehab hybrid facility ... why not try it?

The other thing that struck me is the interview with Pete Holmes where he argues that if you lock someone up without help, they’ll just re-offend when they get out. He’s not wrong. But his solution is to just let the offender free with a slap on the wrist. Guess what? They also re-offend. At least locking him up makes the public that much safer for the 364 days that the guy is locked up.

This is such a huge topic. Ugh it’s so sad and frustrating. I am really trying to impress on my young kids how lucky we truly are.

McParadigm wrote:Reminds me of this article from last month:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/photogra ... s-seattle/

One of those organizations, Share/Wheel, not only gave Mejlvang permission to visit, it invited him to stay in Tent City 4, one of the places it has worked to organize to provide homeless people with shelter.

One of the things that struck Mejlvang was that many of the homeless people he encountered actually had full-time jobs. This made photographing in the camp challenging because, as Mejlvang told me, people got up early to go to work and didn’t come back until late in the evening. And while Mejlvang’s overall experience documenting life in the camp was positive, he did tell me, “it is terrifying to face the reality that people with a full-time job have to have a home inside a tent.”

Clearly I'm biased from my own sampling issues. A guy thats employed will probably not be the guy you see in a tent surrounded by garbage.

I would tend to expect that if you didnt have health or substance issues on day 1 of being homeless, you'd have a much higher likelihood of one or both by year 1.

I get why homeless advocates don't distinguish between the temporarily homeless/ employed vs. mentally ill/ drug addicts, but its very confusing for everyone else when they pretend that the homeless are all temporarily down on their luck, virtuous people. That doesn't jive when your interactions tend to be avoiding the psychotic ones having episodes in the middle of the street or the obvious heroin user panhandling on the corner.

The two groups need massively different levels of intervention. As long as you provide resources to the first group, they will tend to help themselves and stabilize. I know they've done studies on housing first, but I have to expect those selected largely demonstrated a willingness and ability to comply with their case workers to qualify for the program.

An “activist group” booked 16 rooms at a small hotel/motel in Fife, WA on Christmas Eve. They paid for one night.

They are now on night four of not leaving, and not paying. There are 43 people now “living” in the hotel and the complicated web of emergency eviction prevention laws won’t allow anyone to help the owner of the hotel get them out.

My first thought when hearing about this: I can think of another building with heat, plumbing, probably even a kitchen, that isn’t being used right now. Let’s let them use Fife City Hall.

Bammer wrote:An “activist group” booked 16 rooms at a small hotel/motel in Fife, WA on Christmas Eve. They paid for one night.

They are now on night four of not leaving, and not paying. There are 43 people now “living” in the hotel and the complicated web of emergency eviction prevention laws won’t allow anyone to help the owner of the hotel get them out.

My first thought when hearing about this: I can think of another building with heat, plumbing, probably even a kitchen, that isn’t being used right now. Let’s let them use Fife City Hall.

Are you going to orgAnize the procedure?
And provide beds, showers, continental breakfast?

Fife amirite bammer? Hopefully the high falluten's in Puyallup never have to deal with that nonsense

E.H. Ruddock wrote:Fife amirite bammer? Hopefully the high falluten's in Puyallup never have to deal with that nonsense

I just read that Spanaway is the most competitive city in the country right now to buy a house (frequency of multiple offers).

Spanaway.

knee tunes wrote:

Bammer wrote:An “activist group” booked 16 rooms at a small hotel/motel in Fife, WA on Christmas Eve. They paid for one night.

They are now on night four of not leaving, and not paying. There are 43 people now “living” in the hotel and the complicated web of emergency eviction prevention laws won’t allow anyone to help the owner of the hotel get them out.

My first thought when hearing about this: I can think of another building with heat, plumbing, probably even a kitchen, that isn’t being used right now. Let’s let them use Fife City Hall.

Are you going to orgAnize the procedure?
And provide beds, showers, continental breakfast?

Any word on what the hotel owners think about this?

Bi_3 wrote:

knee tunes wrote:

Bammer wrote:An “activist group” booked 16 rooms at a small hotel/motel in Fife, WA on Christmas Eve. They paid for one night.

They are now on night four of not leaving, and not paying. There are 43 people now “living” in the hotel and the complicated web of emergency eviction prevention laws won’t allow anyone to help the owner of the hotel get them out.

My first thought when hearing about this: I can think of another building with heat, plumbing, probably even a kitchen, that isn’t being used right now. Let’s let them use Fife City Hall.

Are you going to orgAnize the procedure?
And provide beds, showers, continental breakfast?

Any word on what the hotel owners think about this?

He is not a happy camper. He has done multiple interviews.

He is upset that he pays XX% in taxes and is not getting any help.

Protests in the parking lot are driving away other potential business.

He has a staff of ten people and is afraid he’s gonna have to lay them all off.

Excellent plan. Punish an independent, small-business owner for the national housing crisis.

B wrote:Excellent plan. Punish an independent, small-business owner for the national housing crisis.

Minority-owned at that

One of the big chains MUST be doing something shitty and could have been abused for this particular brand of protest.