• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Poop. Needles. Rats. Homeless camp pushes SF neighborhood to the edge

Greenbeard said:
Red states are basically opium dens at this point so I'm not sure they've cracked that code.
Click to expand...

Thats right Texas is an opium den, Idaho is an opium den. California has an opium den too.
 
I'll tell you this, the failure of the Transbay Transit center is going to matter....just as Seattle citizens are fast losing faith in their leaders so are San Francisco citizens....this matters big time.
 
PleasantValley said:
This is the way the majority of California voters want it to be.
Their state. Their elected officials elected by them.
This is how they want it to be.

Stop complaining or move to one of the other 49 states left.
It will only get worse.

I addressed the root problem in my comments above.
The only solution is for the people of California to vote in other officials to change it.
That will never happen in our lifetime.
This is how they like it and want it to continue this way forever.

The officials and movie stars don't have to live with what they created.
They have armed guards, high walls, and security systems.
They loudly say, "Live like i tell you to, not as I do".
Click to expand...

No thats what the Democrat Californians want. Not the conservative ones. And a lot of it is the state govt does this.

That's right just give up on your state, thats not cowardly!
 
Oceanborn said:
Chronicle receives a deluge of email every day, but one message sent to the news desk on a Saturday evening in April was particularly memorable. “There is a suitcase full of human s— on the corner of Isis and 13th,” the email read. “Last night, I had to threaten violence to a man smoking crystal meth on my front porch. This morning, my 2-year-old son and I watched a rat rummage through the trash in our gutter.

This problem has been increasing in severity for years now with no end in sight. It's an embarrassment that a once great American city is now worse than many third world slums. The far left democrats who control the city (and state) offer no viable solutions. The new governor will not penalize people who defecate on the streets and side walks or openly abuse intravenous drugs. NGOs continue to incentivize the homeless to set up camp, and now the city wants to build government funded centers for addicts to use their drugs. Insanity.

What are some of the root problems of this epidemic?

What are the solutions?
Click to expand...


It depends on what your idea of solution is.
 
Roadvirus said:
This is your city.
This is your city on Liberalism....any questions?
Click to expand...

Do not try to say that the drug problem belongs in the hands of Democrats. It's a bi-partisan problem and the solutions will have to come with partisan cooperation and that's not happening. The drug problem has existed for much longer than anyone realizes. As a matter off fact Benjamin Rush, a founder of the first medical school in the United States and a signer of the Declaration of Independence, was one of the pioneers of U.S. drug abuse research. So, yeah the problem of drug abuse went all the way back to 1776 and even further. The only difference is that as the population grew the drug problem also grew exponentially with the population growth until it became out of control.

There's only thing responsible for our drug problem, money. As the underprivileged in inner cities continued to expand, so did their problems with drug addiction. In the last decades it was only the very poor or very rich that were the drug abusers and they were the basis of the drug addiction problem. Not anymore. When small, white, suburban towns in New Hampshire or in Iowa or Rhode Island....when states that were up to now, immune from the disease of drug addiction, suddenly became towns with epidemic numbers of young people dying from overdose on a nearly hourly basis, the country suddenly sits up and takes notice.

Where does it end? Nobody knows, but we all know where it begins. The only thing is that nobody wants to fix it because there's too much money in it and not only to the guy that deals out on the streets, it's embedded in our politics as well, only it's done legally.
 
enderpotato00 said:
Actually,

1. Liberals

2. Stop supporting Liberals
Click to expand...

It's not liberals that keep a man from protecting himself and his property from these people, it is the government. The government wishes to maintain a monopoly on force, and they subsidize the risk these these bad actors take. Without the government, if you didn't want someone to **** on your porch again, they couldn't.
 
enderpotato00 said:
I agree, but I would be careful using Fox News as a source. They're the CNN of right-wing journalism.
Click to expand...

Besides being easier to dismiss because of its source, why would anyone dismiss information rather than challenge it on the merits.
I guess maybe I answered my own question.
 
Roadvirus said:
This is your city.
This is your city on Liberalism....any questions?
Click to expand...

Please tell us what it specifically was about liberalism that caused the homelessness.
In other words, how would a conservative San Francisco have prevented it?
 
chuckiechan said:
What are the solutions? Turn blue states red.

There is something about democrat governance that turns things to ****. They don’t do it on purpose, they just make the wrong choices
Click to expand...

Tell us what it is then, what is it specifically about Democrats that causes it. What "choices" are we talking about?
What specific liberal values cause chronic homeless, drunks, drug addicts and criminals to congregate in a city, any city?
And please be specific as to how conservatives would deal with the problem.

For the record, I see two separate groups here. You have the chronic homeless, drunks, addicts and criminals...what we used to call BUMS. That's a law enforcement problem, and law enforcement should have the tools to deal with them.

The other segment are the displaced, people who used to have a place to live. Some of them even still have jobs, they just can't afford an apartment.
That's an economic problem, and I am not so sure that we have the tools to deal with them, not yet.
 
Threegoofs said:
You realize that SF is, in many ways, a Conservatives dreamland, right?

Lots of really wealthy people, great high paying jobs, and housing prices pushing out the low income non-productive types, who won’t get enough subsidies to live there (because it’s too expensive! Those rich folks already pay a lot in taxes!), and ever more disparity between rich and poor...you know, the producers vs the moochers.
Click to expand...

I'll never forget when MasterPO castigated me for suggesting that a wealthy libertarian technocrat faction controls the purse strings in SF and Silicon Valley. As near as I can tell, he's still using my statement as a signature to mock me.

Who are these billionaire technocrats? Are they really liberals? I don't think so.
Where are the commie pinkos with the billions that make the heartbeat of this area?
Google, Apple, Microsoft, are these all hardcore bastions of leftist ideology?
Nope, I don't think so.
 
Nickyjo said:
And the alternative is...??

Reminds me of an old Bob and Ray radio routine: “Here at First Chemical Bank and Trust we are sad to say to our customers that we have lost all deposit records. Therefore we ask all of you to come down to our offices and tell us *honestly* how much you had deposited in the bank. If we all work together we can solve this problem.”
Click to expand...

To most fourteen year olds, anarchy looks and smells like total freedom, and if you're living in your parents basement, you yearn for total freedom.
PS: One might be fourteen years old only in a mental or emotional sense. It happens.
 
Felis Leo said:
If you are genuinely asking, here is my "conservative solution" to these problems in order:

First, we need to bring back community-funded mental healthcare facilities. This is one of the very few health issues that should be funded by taxpayer money because private individuals generally cannot pay the great expense of caring for a person who presents a harm to themselves or others, or is simply does not have the cognizance to care for themselves.

Second, if we want to lower the rates of drug addiction in the United States, we need to stop treating drug addicts as though they are helpless victims of disease, and instead treat them for what they are: Criminals who are hurting everyone around them to feed their pleasure. The people on the streets smoking methamphetamine and burglarizing homes, stealing bikes and breaking into cars to feed their drug habits are the victimizers, not the victims. They are no more victims than someone who enjoys consuming child pornography is a victim. And the way we lower rates drug addiction is very same way we combat people who consume child pornography. By prosecuting and punishing them to the fullest extent of the law. And before you start typing away furiously in anger, please keep in mind that Japan and Korea are both free democratic countries and have far, far lower rates of drug addiction and drug use than we do precisely because they have such harsh anti-drug laws that they regularly enforce not merely against drug dealers but against drug users too.

Finally, my solution to poverty is this: Make it as easy as possible for people to start up businesses so that unemployed and underemployed or poverty-stricken people can find employment in those businesses or, alternatively, start their own businesses themselves.
Click to expand...

There's some useful stuff in there, but I'd like to add that there is a need for cheap housing. Obviously it is not going to be in the Tenderloin district, but it has to be somewhere. A 120 square foot efficiency apartment for a few hundred a month seems to be affordable for minimum wage workers. It's not luxury but it's livable.

Prisons: Kick out the pot offenders and put the meth heads in their place.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Wow. Apparently it escaped your notice that for the past several decades we've done the exact opposite and it's been a colossal failure. Utterly, totally and by every single metric. Those countries that have decriminalized and/or legalized have not experienced what we have. We have tried your get-tough approach. It crashed and burned. Spectacularly.

I've been a rather unwilling participant in the War on Drugs and can tell you from personal, first-hand experience, it has brought about far more horrific results than simple use of the drugs themselves.
Click to expand...

Far as I can see, the overwhelming majority of the get tough drug busts were centered around marijuana.
Every once in a while, cops make a huge bust of coke or heroin, or they bust a meth lab, but it's the pot raids that they devote most of their time and money to.
Reason? LOW HANGING FRUIT.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Please tell us what it specifically was about liberalism that caused the homelessness.
In other words, how would a conservative San Francisco have prevented it?
Click to expand...

You can bet your ass that a city with Joe Arpaio in charge wouldn't have these problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom