feddit.org

0 points

4 months ago

This is a great strategy. Let’s see how much blood they can squeeze from those stones. Can’t afford a place to live? Lets charge rent for that park bench!

But of course the real idea here is to give municipalities the ability to harass people. It’s certainly not about the fines. The less annoying homeless will be driven off by the harassment and then all that will be left is the annoying ones which might be a more manageable number to throw in jail.

report

[ - ]

Amoxtli@thelemmy.club

-5 points

4 months ago

Removed by mod

report

[ - ]

2 points

4 months ago

Homeless people have money, just not enough for housing. People with houses also use drugs. All people get money from different places. Not sure what your point is but your generalizations aren’t useful.

report

[ - ]

Amoxtli@thelemmy.club

-28 points

4 months ago

Removed by mod

report

[ - ]

2 points

4 months ago

You’re making a lot of spurious assumptions and generalizations. The overwhelming majority of the time the homeless are just minding their own business. Some are certainly more annoying than others, some smell worse than others but that doesn’t justify criminalizing all of them nor does it justify abdicating moral responsibility as a society to care for those that often for no fault of their own fail to integrate into the structures that have evolved. There are other solutions, none of them are going to be perfect. Maybe criminalizing sleeping on the street is fine as long as the city provides places to sleep that are reasonable.

report

[ - ]

Amoxtli@thelemmy.club

-27 points

4 months ago

Removed by mod

report

[ - ]

2 points

4 months ago

Now the root of your objections are shown to be just callous indifference to human suffering. That’s fine, just come out and say you don’t care and can’t be bothered. You want to live in a world of machiavellian justice. Be careful what you ask for as maybe that knife will fall on your head or someone you care about if you are capable of that.

It’s hard to take you seriously when you try to conflate Marxism and religion, the guy that viewed religion as “the soul of soulless conditions” or the “opium of the people”. Or when you intimated that society was structurally fair. In what way is it fair that one person can be born to wealth and privlegde and another to poverty and lack of options? But even beyond the rules of society, there is no fundamental fairness in the universe. Some people get lucky others don’t. Some people are healthy others aren’t. It’s impossible to have any reasonable discussion when the starting point is so fundamentally divorced from reality.

report