this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
1238 points (97.5% liked)

Political Memes

5510 readers
2812 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GrammatonCleric 79 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's cute that you think they're trying to save money 😂

[–] Cryophilia 46 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Here in California we're saving the most money, by not jailing the homeless AND not housing the homeless.

[–] PizzaMan 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Leaving them on the streets is also more expensive than housing them.

When they're on the streets, it means the government must pay for emergency services, extra sanitation work, police are called more frequently, etc.

[–] Cryophilia 6 points 1 year ago

True. I should have said "saving money".

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AngryCommieKender 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

San Diego has entered the chat. I'm still fuming over that ban.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] MilitantAtheist 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're making money on people being in jail of course.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] FMT99 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they didn't want to be punished they shouldn't have been poor.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Hell at this point it's that added with another nefarious reason. It's because in places like the US homeless are on par with untouchables.

Our hierarchies are so segmented they may as well be castes: and that's by design. If there's a group as poor off as homeless individuals then it shows other "lower castes" that they better fall in line or get kicked down to their level.

Why not help these homeless individuals? Because it takes money away from the "top castes" money pile. It also takes away the threat of homelessness that the "upper castes" use to keep the "middle castes" in line.

[–] WilliamTheWicked 37 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That's adorable. I assure you, it's actually quite profitable.

[–] VicentAdultman 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's insane to think that the U.S. has private prisons. You have people interested in the incarceration of people.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

It's a 10 billion dollar industry iirc.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (11 children)

I seem to recall reading somewhere that some homeless people would commit crimes so that they would be arrested and get free food and shelter.

[–] scottywh 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Honestly, as a non-homeless person the prison situation is getting more appealing in certain ways.

Food, shelter, less expectations... Life is a fucking grind these days and it didn't really used to be this way.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid 25 points 1 year ago (26 children)

Although at least in prison, they'll at least get a chance to get some medical care. Housing them won't help there. This is why we need universal healthcare.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You are way more likely to acquire an infection in prison (bacterial or viral) and have your health conditions ignored or downplayed than you are to get any real access to medical care.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

Absolutely, the US needs universal healthcare. But not everyone on the internet is American. Tons of us live in places that already offer health care, but still have a long ways to go for helping the homeless.

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] ignotum 16 points 1 year ago

assuming this is talking about the US

Putting homeless people in labour camps and treating them like slaves is unethical,

But if you throw them in prison first...

[–] Alterecho 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes, but why would we dismantle our free slavery system? /S (but not really)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] HKPiax 13 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but it’s where that money goes that matters.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (37 children)

Facts not every unhoused person wants to be housed. We need to address those issues as well if we want to confront the issue.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (14 children)

But just letting people have housing if they want would already massively help so many people.

The argument that because not all of them want a house so we shouldn't do it, is literally just the perfect being the enemy of good.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (14 children)

Many of them "don't want to be housed" because of all the strings attached to having housing. When you simply give people their own warm bed with a roof they'll almost always use it.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] brygphilomena 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Houses are only a small piece of the puzzle.

People are homeless for many different reasons. Mental health and drug addiction are two big ones. Then there are the handicapped, those that can't hold down a job. Those that lost everything they had. And even those that just want to be homeless.

People look at the homeless population though their own biases. Their framing is that people want a house.

We could try and give a house to every one of these people and they wouldn't all take it. Some would destroy it and return to being homeless, either maliciously or as.a byproduct of their mental illness.

We should house the ones we can, feed the ones we can, and treat the health of the ones we can. Those that want rehab should get it, but I don't think every drug addict out there wants to be cured. We should provide showers and clean clothes.

We need to remove the stigma from the homeless.

We need to make it easier for businesses to hire the homeless.

And we could do all that, and more. And we'd still have homeless. We will always have homeless. There is no holistic solution that will magically house everyone.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I wouldn't want to be housed either, if it came with a laundry list of stipulations, requirements, and more or less complete destruction of autonomy. I doubt anyone would turn down a free, no-questions-asked place to call a home. Somewhere safe to rest and begin working on the issues naturally.

Housing first tends to more or less solve, or drastically reduce, homelessness and all the associated negative things - crime, substance abuse, medical issues, etc. Turns out it's easier to get all the other things sorted and get back to society when you have the bare minimum left.

Sure there will probably be a very small percentage of people who just... don't want to. They're actually happy doing their thing, and that's not really a problem. But I'd strongly doubt it's less than a tenth of a percent of the current homeless population.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] surewhynotlem 7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Because... getting housing often means losing the community support they get from other homeless. If you get a house, but lose your friends and support system and the people who (eg) go shopping for you, then how is that a win?

These people would happily be housed if it didn't mean yanking them away from their community.

So the solution is to house entire homeless communities together and at the same time.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)
[–] anarchy79 11 points 1 year ago

But does it make more profit for the shareholders?

Yeah, nah, didn't think so. Try again, bleeding heart liberal communist America hater!

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Without the homeless who would the poor look down on. Raise them up and then you've got a large population at the bottom who might get a little squirrelly being at the bottom.

[–] Lyricism6055 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Its hard to find housing for non homeless at the moment... When is the government going to start incentivizing starter homes?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

lol never. Not enough profit in it and it lowers neighborhood average prices, ruining investment returns and reducing the potential profitability of mortgage-backed securities.

Too much money is now in housing for the prices to fall - they can’t afford it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

prison labor

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes but then we don't get to punish and control them for being a nuisance. Do you really think we actually want to resolve the issue and improve people's lives? Get your head out of your ass.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The types of homeless people who are best helped by "housing first" type aid are not the same ones getting arrested/going to prison. Homeless people aren't some big monolithic group you can throw one solution at and have it work...

Even if you're going to overly simplify things you'd at the very least have two groups; the "entrenched" group (more visible and what people think of when talking about homelessness), and "invisible" group (the ones where the factors causing their homelessness are mostly financial).

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›