The Los Angeles Homeless Containment Thread (Blythe: condo, to live in, prices)

[CALGUY]

Any one who has followed my post over the last year or so dealing with the homeless subject know I have used the term, "BUILD THE CAMPS".
Perhaps this phrase should be the battle cry to get this northern desert encampment built.

It is high time the elected officials used some common sense in dealing with the homeless situation.
Perhaps a news conference by some of us on this forum could get the ball rolling to persuade the city council, and the mayor, that the desert would be the best place to engage the homeless situation.

I'm in for it, any one else care to get involved?

Bob.

[BlinkingBlythe]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Probably is that most of the homeless don't want housing or to live a "normal life "

What's the point of spending billions of tax payer money on housing if they don't want it ?

So what about those who DO want a normal life? Should we just say "HAHA! f--- you! Now stay in the dirt, you dog!"? How very American!

Maybe we should drop the Money Uber Alles attitude and allow people to climb back up? Otherwise, shut up and stop complaining, because then you WANT people to be homeless. Don't complain when you get what you want.

[streetscenes]

Originally Posted by Texamichiforniasota

You not forcing them. They have the choice. Housing or jail for violating vagrancy laws. Some will probably choose jail. Most, given those two options, will choose housing. Arresting homeless is exactly what used to happen in the city outside skid row when when people violated vagrancy laws. The courts have said vagrancy laws can't be enforced while there is no shelter available. Once shelter is available, the homeless no longer have the right to monopolize public space for their own private use, and the city/county has every righht to enforce the law.

As for public land, look into it. Publicly owned land is already being used for other public purposes. Most of the lots are small, and converting them to housing While trying to preserve their current use is incredibly expensive compared to open land in the AV where you could build much less expensive two story apartment complexes on a huge site. As for NIMBYs in the AV, build it on rural ranch land .

Rural ranch land? Really? Let's push the homeless out to some encampment in the middle of the Antelope Valley. Further from transportation, further from jobs, further from medical services, further from access to the appropriate government resources. Sounds like a recipe for success.

A plan to house L.A.'s homeless residents could transform parking lots across the city

Advocates denounce VA delays in developing housing for homeless veterans at West L.A. site

[seain dublin]

Originally Posted by streetscenes

I don't think it would be constitutional to forcibly move a homeless person from LA to the AV just because that's where you have built the housing for them. Would some of them move there and could that be part of the solution, absolutely. Some parts of greater LA are more affordable. Between the city of LA, county of LA and other incorporated cities there is more than enough publicly owned land to accommodate even more housing. There are also opportunities on VA and US military owned lands.

One of the biggest hurdles will be NIMBY resistance. And BTW there is plenty of NIMBY attitude in the Antelope Valley.

You're someone who has a lost skill, called "critical thinking".

Some of the dummies on here who exercise(although the don't seem to know it) their Constitutional rights on a daily basis, seem to think it doesn't apply to others.

And you're spot on about the NIMBY attitude in Antelope Valley, as well as other places.

Besides how long do you keep people there? What jobs are they supposed to be trained for and where are those jobs?

Talk about an absolutely poor plan with no thought given.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by Texamichiforniasota

This doesn't need to be political, as that poster made it. It's not a left or right issue. It's a serious problem and needs to be addressed in a rational manner.

Unfortunately, it is political.

1. When we fund solutions via the public fisc, the receivers of funds (contractors, consultants, etc) have an ongoing incentive not to solve the problem. If the problem were solved, then funds would be cut off. Therefore, the problem is treated but never solved.

2. Public sector employees whose paychecks and livelihood depend on the existence of the homeless have a strong incentive not to solve the problem. After all, if the problem were solved, those public sector employees could lose their jobs because they are no longer needed.

3. Elected representatives whose campaign funds rely upon donations from contractors, consultants and public sector employees have no incentive to dry up the flow of campaign contributions from those contractors, consultants and public sector employees who profit from the existence of the homeless.

Because the problem is political, so also must the solution be political.

Here's how to solve the problem (note it is a political solution):

Via the state initiative process, pass a proposition that says if the rate of homelessness exceeds X% in any year, no elected official may run for re-election or for election into a new public role. And, if homelessness exceeds X%, then public sector employees will incur an automatic pay cut of Y%, and have their pensions docked by Z%.

I guarantee within 2 years homelessness would be a thing of the past. And, while a political solution, note it has nothing to do with Republicans or Democrats or Libertarian Party or Green Party or Peace & Freedom or The Rent's Too Damn High Party.

[Finper]

Originally Posted by BlinkingBlythe

So what about those who DO want a normal life? Should we just say "HAHA! f--- you! Now stay in the dirt, you dog!"? How very American!

Maybe we should drop the Money Uber Alles attitude and allow people to climb back up? Otherwise, shut up and stop complaining, because then you WANT people to be homeless. Don't complain when you get what you want.

Calm down SJW we're trying to come up with solutions here. Antelope Valley is one of them. What's your solution?

What the heck is money uber alles??? That whole paragraph has me baffled.

The people who want a normal life are living a normal life. Either here or out of state if the can't afford it here. Nobody's forcing them to live in the dirt.

[seain dublin]

Originally Posted by Finper

Calm down SJW we're trying to come up with solutions here. Antelope Valley is one of them. What's your solution?

What the heck is money uber alles??? That whole paragraph has me baffled.

The people who want a normal life are living a normal life. Either here or out of state if the can't afford it here. Nobody's forcing them to live in the dirt.

How about instead of Antelope Valley, house them down in Orange County by you?

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by seain dublin

How about instead of Antelope Valley, house them down in Orange County by you?

"OCers complain about declining property values, whine that nonprofits that feed and bathe homeless people just enable them, rant that politicians and police should forcefully drive them away from us.

To that angst, I say: good. We deserve to be bothered..."

The upside of visible homelessness in Orange County: We can't pretend we're better than everyone

[TCROX]

Lots of fires started in my area by the "homeless/ Jerry's kids" so we obviously have no problem spending money on what they destroy-but can we spend money on getting them off the streets and sobered up? or is all of the big, big money earmarked for public servants' overtime? I think the insurance companies have grounds for a nice lawsuit or two...
jerry's kids started the Skirball fire, but, home many fires near you have been started by them? A LOT in my area I can tell you...With all the money we've spent and lost this year just on fires alone, we could have built them a very, very nice place to live somewhere far from temptation with lots of clean water and food and health care etc... and maybe a few of them could have turned their lives around by now..... I guess the liberals want to use these souls in need to further their disgusting agenda at any cost... so they will suffer and suffer and so with a lot of other good people.... seems like their bizarre and counter-intuitive people and legislation win every election somehow....somehow

[Finper]

Originally Posted by seain dublin

How about instead of Antelope Valley, house them down in Orange County by you?

OC is pretty full up but guess they could set up some homeless facilities in Modjeska canyon. Oh wait you all think it's unconstitutional to ship the homeless out of LA proper.