Atheistforums.com

 SF MAYOR SAYS HER CITY IS DROWNING IN POOP (https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/15/san-francisco-poop-problem/)

QuoteSan Francisco Mayor London Breed said the streets of her city are flooded with the excrement of the homeless in an interview Friday.

Breed, a Democrat who was inaugurated as San Francisco’s mayor Wednesday, urged homeless advocacy groups that receive money from the city to teach homeless people to “clean up after themselves.”

“There is more feces on the sidewalks than I’ve ever seen growing up here,” Breed told KNTV. “That is a huge problem and we are not just talking about from dogs â€" we’re talking about from humans.”

The streets of San Francisco are littered with a “dangerous mix of drug needles, garbage, and feces”, KNTV’s investigative team reported in February after surveying the city’s streets.

“We see poop, we see pee, we see needles, and we see trash,” preschool teacher Adelita Orellana told KNTV. “Sometimes they ask what is it, and that’s a conversation that’s a little difficult to have with a 2-year old, but we just let them know that those things are full of germs, that they are dangerous, and they should never be touched.”

There are about 7,500 homeless people living in San Francisco according to the city, which will spend nearly $280 million this year on housing services for the homeless.

Breed said San Francisco’s high cost of living cast the city’s homeless onto the streets.

“About 70 percent of the people estimated to be homeless in San Francisco were actually housed in San Francisco before they became homeless,” she said. “We have to make sure people who live here, [and] sadly, people who are homeless here, that they are also held accountable for taking care of our streets.”

It’s unclear how Breed will hold public defecators accountable. She said Friday that harsher penalties for offenders are not on the table.

Instead, she directed her criticism towards homeless advocacy groups, who she said aren’t doing a good enough job teaching their clients how to keep the streets clean.

“I work hard to make sure your programs are funded for the purposes of trying to get these individuals help, and what I am asking you to do is work with your clients and ask them to at least have respect for the community â€" at least, clean up after themselves and show respect to one another and people in the neighborhood,” she said.

Breed promised to address the homeless problem in San Francisco, but some residents don’t have faith she can steer the ship in the right direction.

“Watch your backs â€" nobody else is,” The Fed Up Populace Campaign told the city’s residents in a full-page ad Friday. (RELATED: Someone Took Out A Full-Page Ad In SF Newspaper To Warn Residents To ‘Watch Your Backs’ For Homeless People)

The ad was signed by an “anonymous disgusted female San Francisco resident (for now).”

Why would the homeless gravitate to one of the most expensive cities in America?  I'm not denying it, just wondering what's there for them.

Quote from: SGOS on July 16, 2018, 11:51:41 AM
Why would the homeless gravitate to one of the most expensive cities in America?  I'm not denying it, just wondering what's there for them.

prospects of free handouts the left claim their give them, only don't when they arrive?

Makes me think of how Lily Allen and J. K. Rowling would spread the idea of everyone opening their doors to migrants, only to not do so themselves with their multiple mansions dotted around the uk.

Thats said, maybe not, maybe its because SF hands out free drugs to them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA3t2RqkYVo

Quote from: SGOS on July 16, 2018, 11:51:41 AM
Why would the homeless gravitate to one of the most expensive cities in America?  I'm not denying it, just wondering what's there for them.

If over two thirds of The homeless population used to be housed there, is it maybe not The problem that the homeless drift to an expensive city, but rather that 'ordinary people' move there and become homeless because it's such an expensive city?
Or at least in part?

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on July 16, 2018, 12:48:05 PM
If over two thirds of The homeless population used to be housed there, is it maybe not The problem that the homeless drift to an expensive city, but rather that 'ordinary people' move there and become homeless because it's such an expensive city?
Or at least in part?

The weather in San Fran is nice (California in many places is ideal for Hoovervilles, then and now).  San Fran is one of the most expensive cities on Earth.  There are different kinds of junkies, including political junkies ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89wQ957RvFc

Americans are bored.  We want terrorism, we want nuclear war, we want zombies, we want official going postal on my neighbor day.  Feral!

If your homeless, just move to San Francisco, and become a tycoon.

Quote from: SGOS on July 16, 2018, 01:17:32 PM
If your homeless, just move to San Francisco, and become a tycoon.

Emperor Norton.  Your kingdom awaits.

No doubt they'd rather live in a less expensive place, they just don't have the means to get to such a haven.

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on July 16, 2018, 07:36:32 PM
No doubt they'd rather live in a less expensive place, they just don't have the means to get to such a haven.

We need communism now!  Especially in San Fran.  Make everything free in San Fran, by order of the D party commissars.

Sorry, the only haven a man can have in this world, is some good on-line porn.

When there is a homeless person who could become a functioning member of society with a little help, why not help?  It's cheaper than homeless shelters and free food.

QuoteWhy would the homeless gravitate to one of the most expensive cities in America?

My guess is many of them lived there for a long time before it was the most expensive city in America. It wasn't until the 1990s that SF really became affordable for the middle-class... it was certainly still a stretch to live there, but it was doable. But as prices and taxes run up, the people who moved there when they could afford it, and the people who were living just on the edge, suddenly couldn't anymore.

At that point, it's one stroke of bad luck before you are sitting on the street unemployed and homeless. And yes, they could "just move", but that is a line that I think is only spoken by people who have never actually been broke before. It's not easy to "just move", and it's damned near impossible when you have no savings.

Gentrification is a trend across the United States, and unfortunately a product of it is an increase in homelessness as indigenous populations are no longer able to afford to live where they do.

Leave it to certain posters gut reaction to be blaming the victims.

Quote from: Shiranu on July 17, 2018, 01:54:44 AM
My guess is many of them lived there for a long time before it was the most expensive city in America. It wasn't until the 1990s that SF really became affordable for the middle-class... it was certainly still a stretch to live there, but it was doable. But as prices and taxes run up, the people who moved there when they could afford it, and the people who were living just on the edge, suddenly couldn't anymore.

At that point, it's one stroke of bad luck before you are sitting on the street unemployed and homeless. And yes, they could "just move", but that is a line that I think is only spoken by people who have never actually been broke before. It's not easy to "just move", and it's damned near impossible when you have no savings.

Gentrification is a trend across the United States, and unfortunately a product of it is an increase in homelessness as indigenous populations are no longer able to afford to live where they do.

Leave it to certain posters gut reaction to be blaming the victims.

Not being sarcastic.  Build more affordable housing?  Not massive apartment buildings, but cheap suburban houses.  People who live in houses tend to feel a reason to care for them.

Quote from: Cavebear on July 17, 2018, 02:34:35 AM
Not being sarcastic.  Build more affordable housing?  Not massive apartment buildings, but cheap suburban houses.  People who live in houses tend to feel a reason to care for them.

We have quite Some social housing, relatively speaking, here.
Some do want to take care o a house more, Some don't, Some can't.
But you are right, just shelters won't help much as they allow people to muddle allong in their situation. They need support to get somewhere, and , as you point out, they need somewhere to go.

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on July 17, 2018, 02:58:00 AM
We have quite Some social housing, relatively speaking, here.
Some do want to take care o a house more, Some don't, Some can't.
But you are right, just shelters won't help much as they allow people to muddle allong in their situation. They need support to get somewhere, and , as you point out, they need somewhere to go.

I agree people needing help also need a direction to go.  I want to help them find a direction.

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on July 17, 2018, 02:58:00 AM
We have quite Some social housing, relatively speaking, here.
Some do want to take care o a house more, Some don't, Some can't.
But you are right, just shelters won't help much as they allow people to muddle allong in their situation. They need support to get somewhere, and , as you point out, they need somewhere to go.

Please accept the population of China and India.  Belgium has too much land.  More appropriately, move all the people from Zaire there.  King Leopold and all that shit ... so much guilt to expiate, and no Catholic penance to do ... just as Indonesia all needs to move to the Netherlands.  It was the Dutch who makes Krakatoa blow up ... made the native volcano god angry.

Quote from: Cavebear on July 17, 2018, 01:43:10 AM
When there is a homeless person who could become a functioning member of society with a little help, why not help?  It's cheaper than homeless shelters and free food.

You have a million, give all you have, hypocritically.  I gave blood last Saturday.  They had to stick me twice because my arms are "difficult".  What blood will you share?

Quote from: Cavebear on July 17, 2018, 02:34:35 AM
Not being sarcastic.  Build more affordable housing?  Not massive apartment buildings, but cheap suburban houses.  People who live in houses tend to feel a reason to care for them.

Will you pay their mortgages?  Free cell phones - President Obama (urban myth actually).  Without jobs, they can't pay the mortgage.

Quote from: SGOS on July 16, 2018, 11:51:41 AM
Why would the homeless gravitate to one of the most expensive cities in America?  I'm not denying it, just wondering what's there for them.

Homeless people have not been gravitating to San Francisco. According to the best available data (http://hsh.sfgov.org/research-reports/san-francisco-homeless-point-in-time-count-reports/) the homeless population there has been relatively stable for more than a decade. It has increased from about 6400 in 2007 to about 7500 in 2017. During that same period the general population grew from 760,000 to 880,000. If you do the math that will tell you the homeless rate in San Francisco has increased from 8.39 per 1,000 in 2007 to 8.52 per 1,000 in 2017. That's a high rate for homelessness compared to many US cities, and that is a problem. But it isn't a big problem as far as increasing numbers goes.

One of the problems for San Francisco's homeless population is development. Think of it as habitat loss. There aren't many more homeless than there were before. They just have fewer places to go. As far as the homeless people are concerned it doesn't matter much if they are sleeping in an empty lot or on the sidewalk in front of a store. It's the store that has a problem with that. Not the homeless. This habitat loss results in the appearance that the homeless problem is getting worse because it is more visible, but it is just the way it looks. The problem hasn't really gotten any worse.

 We Are a Sanctuary City (https://sfmayor.org/sanctuary-city)

QuoteSince 1989, San Francisco has proudly been a Sanctuary City. We will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our immigrant communities and fight for the progress we’ve achieved in this City. We are a sanctuary city, now, tomorrow and forever.

QuoteSanctuary Cities are safer, heathier, more productive places to live. San Francisco is a city that fights for what is right. We will not waver in our commitment to protect our residents.

And there is the hateful point you wanted to make.

Quote from: Shiranu on July 17, 2018, 01:49:01 PM
And there is the hateful point you wanted to make.

You hate someone, don't you?  So why do you think you are St Shiranu?

Yes, habitat loss is terrible.  Must destroy Silicon Valley .. so that the Chinese coolies can pick more fruit (that is what was done there before).

Projection is a form of defense in which unwanted feelings are displaced onto another person, where they then appear as a threat from the external world. A common form of projection occurs when an individual, threatened by his own angry feelings, accuses another of harbouring hostile thoughts.

Paranoia and incomprehension is the common reason for inter-tribal conflict in New Guinea ... do modern urban monkeys think they can do it better?  In New Guinea they have more reason, for every tribe has a distinct language incomprehensible to the other tribes.

We can make everyone equal .. equally poor.  Wealth on the other hand, ill gotten or not, comes from inequality.  Too bad the limousine liberals don't want to give up all they have .. first.

(http://www.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2018-07/207697_5_.jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRd_fhzQ_uw

Maybe if Californians voted for some decent politicians (if there is such a thing there) then they could change their lives for the better.

But they keep voting for deadbeat politicians forever. So nothing changes. Maybe they like it that way.

Dem party rules.

Quote from: pr126 on July 18, 2018, 12:18:44 PM
Maybe if Californians voted for some decent politicians (if there is such a thing there) then they could change their lives for the better.

But they keep voting for deadbeat politicians forever. So nothing changes. Maybe they like it that way.

Dem party rules.

Going back to ancient Athens, all politicians are deadbeats.  They only are effective after they die.

Quote from: SGOS on July 16, 2018, 11:51:41 AM
Why would the homeless gravitate to one of the most expensive cities in America?  I'm not denying it, just wondering what's there for them.

I don't think it's a matter of influx of people, it's a matter of residents being priced out of their homes and resources. In other words, SF is and was home.

edit: Written before I read Popeye's response.

Quote from: Mermaid on July 18, 2018, 02:03:49 PM
I don't think it's a matter of influx of people, it's a matter of residents being priced out of their homes and resources. In other words, SF is and was home.

edit: Written before I read Popeye's response.

Popeye's response is where?

Quote from: Cavebear on July 21, 2018, 05:12:06 AM
Popeye's response is where?

She is either responding to a different string, or named the wrong poster.

Quote from: Cavebear on July 21, 2018, 05:12:06 AM
Popeye's response is where?

Quote from: Baruch on July 21, 2018, 10:07:54 AM
She is either responding to a different string, or named the wrong poster.

I think it's reply #17 in this thread.

Quote from: SGOS on July 21, 2018, 10:11:01 AM
I think it's reply #17 in this thread.

Damn our lying eyes! ;-))

Quote from: SGOS on July 21, 2018, 10:11:01 AM
I think it's reply #17 in this thread.

The posts are numbered?  I can't find that.

Yes, the posts are numbered.

(https://i.imgur.com/bMpXt3R.jpg)

You can even link individual posts.

Reply Number 17 (http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=12798.msg1223806#msg1223806)

Quote from: PopeyesPappy on July 21, 2018, 11:14:55 AM
Yes, the posts are numbered.

(https://i.imgur.com/bMpXt3R.jpg)

You can even link individual posts.

Reply Number 17 (http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=12798.msg1223806#msg1223806)

And where are the numbers, one might ask, Pappy?

The red arrow in the picture I posted is pointing at the post number.

Quote from: PopeyesPappy on July 21, 2018, 11:34:37 AM
The red arrow in the picture I posted is pointing at the post number.

Forgive me, but "I'll be damned".  I never noticed that.  Cool!~

I am not sure why, but this discussion made me laugh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld6qYJe4pRs

Pr, why don't you take a look at the poverty rates and homelessness in conservative states, then come back, yah?

Here, I'll actually do it for you. In descending order from highest poverty to lowest poverty rates, the percentage, and the state's political leanings. Numbers are based on the United States Census Bureau's findings.

1. Mississippi - 21.9% - Ultra Conservative
2. New Mexico - 20.6% - Moderately Conservative (this is largely due to the Native American population of the state bringing the numbers down)
3. Louisiana - 19.9% - Ultra Conservative
4. Alabama - 19.2% - Ultra Conservative
5. Kentucky - 19.0% - Ultra Conservative
6. Arkansas - 18.7% - Ultra Conservative
7. Georgia - 18.4% - Moderately Conservative
8. West Virginia - 18.3% - Moderately Conservative
9. Tennessee - 18.2% - Strongly Conservative
10. Arizona - 18.2% - Ultra Conservative




So by your logic, if we want to take one set of data and ignore any and all other factors like you want to do with San Fran, then clearly conservatism is the most self-destructive and economically foolish position to take, because it clearly does not work.

There are an absolute shitload of reasons that go into why San Fran has such a problem with homelessness, and most of them have nothing to do with left or right politics; rent costs across the country are rising faster than income, gentrification, zoning laws that making affordable housing damn near impossible to build, job opportunities fluctuating, etc. etc.

To try to narrow it down to just, "HURRR LIBERLS!!!" shows a ghastly lack of any political or economic comprehension since the problems San Fran face are the exact same as you find in any major city across the world, be it liberal or conservative. Cities have always had higher rates of crime, of homelessness, of poverty since as far back as we have records of cities.

Quote from: Shiranu on July 23, 2018, 12:52:53 AM
Snip

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/ed5dce955af3dda66de8ba5c03f23ab0/tenor.gif)

Lemme guess, him talking about how SF's hard liberal standards leading to the city being cover in shit hit a nerve with you and so needed to counter with how conservatives are evil

Its a pity your not as free thinking about political ideologies as you are against religious ideologies, because you only seem set on one side being bad and the other being perfect, despite evidence to the contrary

W.C. Fields â€" 'If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.'

The aim of Shranu’s post is to deflect attention from the problem.
Dangling a bunch of keys saying  “Look, shiny!”

QuoteHere, I'll actually do it for you. In descending order from highest poverty to lowest poverty rates, the percentage, and the state's political leanings. Numbers are based on the United States Census Bureau's findings.

Thanks for nothing. Doing me a favor of showing some statistics. Which incidentally has no relevance to the SF Problems.

Quote1. Mississippi - 21.9% - Ultra Conservative
2. New Mexico - 20.6% - Moderately Conservative (this is largely due to the Native American population of the state bringing the numbers down)
3. Louisiana - 19.9% - Ultra Conservative
4. Alabama - 19.2% - Ultra Conservative
5. Kentucky - 19.0% - Ultra Conservative
6. Arkansas - 18.7% - Ultra Conservative
7. Georgia - 18.4% - Moderately Conservative
8. West Virginia - 18.3% - Moderately Conservative
9. Tennessee - 18.2% - Strongly Conservative
10. Arizona - 18.2% - Ultra Conservative

Interesting about the flavors of conservatism - moderate, strong and ultra and why does that matter?

Do any of those places/cities have the same problem as SF?
The ankle-deep human feces on the streets, rubbish, drug addicts injecting state supplied heroin, (taxes well spent) and the mentally ill roaming the streets?

If yes, why it is not reported by the media? 
After all, exposing the "conservatives" misrule is the media's hobby horse.
It is all Trump's fault, is it not? One more nail in the Rep party's coffin?

While we are here, the SJW's should ask those homeless junkies in Commifornia to check their white privileges.

The problem isn't really Trump Derangement Syndrome ... but Politics Derangement Syndrome.  Medical condition in epidemic state in the US.  I blame the bed bugs (also a real epidemic thanks to Feminism) ... bed bugs probably working for Putin (spins head around, projectile vomits pea soup).

All quotes are from pr126's last post.

QuoteThe aim of Shranu’s post is to deflect attention from the problem.

Oh?

Your point was two-fold;

1. San Francisco is a shithole.
2. The Democrats are to blame for it.

My post was in response to both of those things; there is nothing unique about San Francisco in terms of it's homeless population when compared to other major American cities, and that shithole cities (or states) are not limited to those run by Democrats.

QuoteThanks for nothing. Doing me a favor of showing some statistics. Which incidentally has no relevance to the SF Problems.

You're right, they don't really have any relevance to the SF problem, which was my entire point. All I did was take your argument and apply it to Republican states to show how ridiculous it is to base something as complex as this issue on one underlying factor of, "Huuur, the boogiemen did it!" since neither party actually have unified platform on this issue.

I literally said that the sentence after you cut my quote off.

You are also the one who initially proposed that "Democrats" (see; anyone not far-right) are the problem in California and that the people of California would be better off if they got rid of the Dems. You cant bring up an argument and then say that people are changing the subject when they refute it.

QuoteDo any of those places/cities have the same problem as SF?

Yes.

QuoteThe ankle-deep human feces on the streets...

Out of curiosity, how often have you been to San Francisco? Because that was not my experience the multiple times I have been there, though I will say I didn't go to certain parts of town. The point is not that it doesn't exist, but rather that acting like a normal trip through the city you will encounter this situation is ludicrous.

I have however seen human feces in Austin and in El Paso, neither of which are "liberal" cities (Austin culturally is, but politically run by pretty devote neo-cons).

Quote...rubbish...

Yes. Yes they do.

Quote...drug addicts injecting state supplied heroin...

First off, there are no state supplied heroin dealers in California. There are "safe sites" where users who have previously bought a variety of narcotics can go to a clinic and have them tested and provided with clean needles, but that is an extremely different thing all together.

Secondly, San Francisco is discussing supplying drug's to heroin addicts, specifically Buprenophine, which studies have shown is effective in treating heroin cravings and getting people off of the drug.

Quote...and the mentally ill roaming the streets?

Again I ask, how many times have you been to America? That is an every day thing from West Coast to Midwest to South to North.

(Slight hyperbole)

QuoteIf yes, why it is not reported by the media? 

I would assume alot of it is because several of things you said were flat-out lies.

QuoteAfter all, exposing the "conservatives" misrule is the media's hobby horse.

Except it's really not, outside of the delusional and paranoid echo chamber you have found yourself in.

QuoteIt is all Trump's fault, is it not? One more nail in the Rep party's coffin?

Nope and nope.





I love how someone who pretends that he is non-partisan, and holds it over everyone else just how non-partisan he is, actually has the audacity to act like he has some politically moderate moral high ground when ever someone he disagrees with refutes him, but then likes to show his support for your posts time and time and time again when essentially every single argument you have ever made here is, "Huuur, people to the left of me are the death of society!".

Funny how the left have to be civil, have to be polite and even then 90% of the time he will come in to tell them just how wrong they are and how he is moderate who doesn't take sides because "fuck partisanism"... but whenever someone is literally lying through their teeth and attacking people solely for the fact that they are to the left he suddenly has nothing to say other than "I like this post.".

Quote from: Shiranu on July 23, 2018, 05:02:39 PM

I love how someone who pretends that he is non-partisan, and holds it over everyone else just how non-partisan he is, actually has the audacity to act like he has some politically moderate moral high ground when ever someone he disagrees with refutes him, but then likes to show his support for your posts time and time and time again when essentially every single argument you have ever made here is, "Huuur, people to the left of me are the death of society!"

See thats the funny thing with being non-partisan, or middle of the road, given that political position, I am the right to your own political beliefs, and seems these days certain people of a far left leaning decent see's anyone to the right of them as just on the wrong side of history.

QuoteFunny how the left have to be civil, have to be polite and even then 90% of the time he will come in to tell them just how wrong they are and how he is moderate who doesn't take sides because "fuck partisanism"... but whenever someone is literally lying through their teeth and attacking people solely for the fact that they are to the left he suddenly has nothing to say other than "I like this post.".

oh please, when's the last time you conducted yourself in a polite manner when it comes to political discussion ^^.

I really don't see anyone on this forum as having hard right political leanings, I've known actual hard right individuals, I've worked beside people with such ways of thinking, I've even talked them down for things they would say. I know the difference between someone on the hard right and someone who just floats in the middle or even is partly right leaning.
Same can't be said for certain people on these threads, because while I don't consider people like you or even mermaid as being the far left, you certainly had a strong political leaning in that direction sometimes to the point of irrationality and blatant rudeness to other posters. I talk shit about the left side of things not because I'm right leaning, but because they needs to be called out on for being bollocks, the same as I would those on the right.

its easy to typecast someone just because they don't share your exact political standing.

And incase I need to remind you, this is my average political compass.

(https://i.imgur.com/pqmcQpz.png)

Quote from: Munch on July 23, 2018, 06:35:12 PMAnd incase I need to remind you, this is my average political compass.

(https://i.imgur.com/pqmcQpz.png)

That's not far from my own.  Yet you are much more sympathetic (vulnerable?) to PR's disinformation campaigns than most other people here.  PR is a guy who considers Snopes.com to be unreliable (when it contradicts his claims, a curious coincidence), but has no difficulty passing along "information" from laughable sources like American Thinker (with such laudable articles as *picks one at random*  "The Next Ice Age", apparently a dig at global warming), Breitbart, Daily Caller, and Fox News.  It's worth noting that these are a suspiciously narrow ideological range of sources.  It almost gives one the impression of a hyper-partisan demagogue rather than a legitimate student of politics.  (If Shiranu or any other leftists here were even remotely like this, it'd be equally insufferable and that person probably wouldn't last a month)

Like others have already painstakingly pointed out, PR is talking complete bollocks as usual.  Muslims in his closet, feminists under his bed, and liberals in the walls.  Even a cursory glance at the problem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_San_Francisco_Bay_Area) reveals it to be much more complex than liberals --> homelessness crisis.  Yet that is the narrative we're presented with.  Why give this shoddy attempt at manipulation any respect or agreement?

Quote from: Hydra009 on July 23, 2018, 07:13:36 PM
That's not far from my own.  Yet you are much more sympathetic (vulnerable?) to PR's disinformation campaigns than most other people here.  PR is a guy who considers Snopes.com to be unreliable (when it contradicts his claims, a curious coincidence), but has no difficulty passing along "information" from laughable sources like American Thinker (with such laudable articles as *picks one at random*  "The Next Ice Age", apparently a dig at global warming), Breitbart, Daily Caller, and Fox News.  It's worth noting that these are a suspiciously narrow ideological range of sources.  It almost gives one the impression of a hyper-partisan demagogue rather than a legitimate student of politics.  (If Shiranu or any other leftists here were even remotely like this, it'd be equally insufferable and that person probably wouldn't last a month)

Like others have already painstakingly pointed out, PR is talking complete bollocks as usual.  Muslims in his closet, feminists under his bed, and liberals in the walls.  Even a cursory glance at the problem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_San_Francisco_Bay_Area) reveals it to be much more complex than liberals --> homelessness crisis.  Yet that is the narrative we're presented with.  Why give this shoddy attempt at manipulation any respect or agreement?

lets get a couple things clear, I don't look to any of those sources of information as pure legit, its very hard to find any kind of source of information that isn't politically bias these days or with its own agenda for why its being written, its why I always like to try and find equal sources of information to back it up instead of just the one source.
And sure, PR might sometimes use links and info that can't always be corroborated. But then its not like when discussing politics here most other posters don't have their own political  biases and preconceptions going in, therefore you need to take everything someone posts with a grain of salt.

but theres been a lot of stuff PRs said thats is true, and based on varied sources, and even that just gets shot down by certain posters just because of how they feel about his position and political beliefs.

Its also probably a lot to do with attitude too, end of the day I think i care less about what someone believes in, and more how they conduct themselves regardless. Baruch is a theist here, but he's never argued to the point of aggressive insults to anyone here, even with a two and throw between him and cavebear, and I tend to respect that firsthand before someones political and religious beliefs, you can believe whatever you want or not, but using that as a means of going at someone or typecasting people in a box due to your own beliefs doesn't create any respect for me.

Quote from: Munch on July 23, 2018, 07:58:45 PMAnd sure, PR might sometimes use links and info that can't always be corroborated.

That's putting it mildly.  One of his threads was about the so-called "muslim no-go zones".  If memory serves, Fox News went on to apologize for that.

QuoteBut then its not like when discussing politics here most other posters don't have their own political  biases and preconceptions going in, therefore you need to take everything someone posts with a grain of salt.

That's true to some degree, but we're still talking worlds of difference.  It's like Conservapedia VS Wikipedia here.  There's "bias" and then there's BIAS.

Quotebut theres been a lot of stuff PRs said thats is true, and based on varied sources, and even that just gets shot down by certain posters just because of how they feel about his position and political beliefs.

True on a very specific and very technical level.  And even then, you're usually only getting a very small slice of the big picture.  Lying by omission.  In fact, I'd argue that the way he constructs his posts is deliberately intended to mislead people.  Needless to say, I'm not fond of this behavior.

QuoteIts also probably a lot to do with attitude too, end of the day I think i care less about what someone believes in, and more how they conduct themselves regardless. Baruch is a theist here, but he's never argued to the point of aggressive insults to anyone here, even with a two and throw between him and cavebear, and I tend to respect that firsthand before someones political and religious beliefs, you can believe whatever you want or not, but using that as a means of going at someone or typecasting people in a box due to your own beliefs doesn't create any respect for me.

Baruch is too incoherent to truly insult someone, though he does get dangerously close by concluding his posts with some historical non-sequitur of a "question" that sure seems intended to antagonize its recipient.  But that's besides the point.

PR almost seems to be want to have a discussion on the topics he brings up, so I can understand taking him at face value.  It looks as though he's asking an innocent question or broaching some controversial topic that the mainstream/liberal media is afraid to cover, like the imminent imposition of sharia law on the US (that one was years ago, lol) and he's getting slammed for absolutely no reason.

But have you noticed that these threads almost always proceed down a Gish Gallop (arguing a case by cycling through claim after claim as fast as possible)?  Never a retraction or correction or anything remotely resembling an honest discussion.  Why do you think that is?

Munch lives in the same country as pr126 ... do you?  Here in the US, I don't worry about Muslims at all.  I consider them better neighbors than Baptists.

Of course Toronto isn't so safe these days, again it was a psycho Amish guy who terrorized them, with his horse drawn buggy.

PS - you wouldn't like me sober, or coherent.

Etienne who was banned from here was Real Left.  Not little boys dressing up their Ken dolls in Che Guevara t-shirts and berets.

Baruch wrote:

QuoteOf course Toronto isn't so safe these days, again it was a psycho Amish guy who terrorized them, with his horse drawn buggy.

The Toronto shooter was not an Amish. His name was Faisal Hussein.
According to the media, he was Mentally Disturbed, lone wolf, nothing to do with Islam.
Motive unknown.

QuoteHe could easily be one of those new Martian immigrants brought into Canada under Justin Trudeau’s Interplanetary Refugee Resettlement Initiative.

source  (https://gatesofvienna.net/2018/07/mr-smith-goes-to-toronto/) (Not Kosher Halal)

Quote from: Hydra009 on July 23, 2018, 09:14:00 PM

But have you noticed that these threads almost always proceed down a Gish Gallop (arguing a case by cycling through claim after claim as fast as possible)?  Never a retraction or correction or anything remotely resembling an honest discussion.  Why do you think that is?

Quote from: pr126 on July 23, 2018, 11:59:37 PM

The Toronto shooter was not an Amish. His name was Faisal Hussein.
According to the media, he was Mentally Disturbed, lone wolf, nothing to do with Islam.
Motive unknown.

source  (https://gatesofvienna.net/2018/07/mr-smith-goes-to-toronto/) (Not Kosher Halal)

Q.E.D.

Well yes. Beware! The source is outside your comfort zone, safe space, echo chamber.

QuoteSee thats the funny thing with being non-partisan, or middle of the road, given that political position, I am the right to your own political beliefs, and seems these days certain people of a far left leaning decent see's anyone to the right of them as just on the wrong side of history.

Yeah, but that doesn't actually address anything I actually said.

What I said is anything that, realistically, is even a moderate view point (women being treated unequally, African Americans being treated unequally, minorities being treated unequally, the poor being treated unequally) you almost infallibly jump into the thread to tell women who have experienced these things, minorities who have experienced these things, people in debt who have experienced these things that they are wrong and how dare they talk about that issue anyways because other people have it worse.

Any time any subject comes up about any sort of progressive topic, you are one of the first voices in the thread and it is never any message other than, "Shut up, you are wrong!" or "Shut up, other people have it worse!". And if you aren't, you are silently egging people saying even more radical stuff on and nodding your head in agreement with them with like after like.

Quoteoh please, when's the last time you conducted yourself in a polite manner when it comes to political discussion ^^.

Quite often, actually, which is surprising considering some of the abuse I have received here including reaching the point of having racial slurs and extremely hateful rhetoric of how people like me are destroying Western society thrown at me by posters you consistently support.

Those things are all water under the bridge, it's not like I didn't hear enough racial abuse and homophobic language growing up, and as for being yall's boogieman I wear that with pride, but it's when you come in here acting like you are somehow morally superiour to me when you support these behaviour... and then accuse me of being the rude one... that rubs me the wrong way.

I don't mind being called whatever, I do mind someone being so blatantly spineless and one-sided constantly acting like he is the victim because other people share any opinion other than his. I do mind someone trying to hold moral superiority and political moderation over me when he consistently tries to talk over anyone who disagrees with him (only people with progressive ideology, surprisingly) and yet gives a microphone to the people yelling hate, lies and abuses.

And I am curious what part in even this thread you think I haven't been anything but polite about.

QuoteSame can't be said for certain people on these threads, because while I don't consider people like you or even mermaid as being the far left, you certainly had a strong political leaning in that direction sometimes to the point of irrationality and blatant rudeness to other posters.

You literally cant even go on a single post without highlighting the exact thing I am talking about.

Did you read a single post you like, or do you just instantly click it when you see pr or gilga arguing with me or Mermaid? You are going to throw that at me when in this very thread you are cheering on pr for doing exactly that, except taking it to the next level by his outright lies.

Quote...but using that as a means of going at someone or typecasting people in a box due to your own beliefs doesn't create any respect for me.

Now you are just taking the fucking piss.

If I am treated unequally as a Jewish person (and I don't have a big J on my forehead, so people won't know unless I tell them) ... I get to oppress Gentiles, right?

QuoteBut then its not like when discussing politics here most other posters don't have their own political  biases and preconceptions going in, therefore you need to take everything someone posts with a grain of salt.

Missed this earlier, but I guess this is another one of those rules you expect everyone else to follow but not yourself, yeah?

Quote from: Shiranu on July 24, 2018, 07:47:39 PM
I guess this is another one of those rules you expect everyone else to follow but not yourself, yeah?

you responded to PRs post with trying to find any conservative statistics as a counter to it, which was nothing to do with his original post. You then often criticize his sources of information, while citing buzzfeed as a reliable news source on another thread.
Your a dam hypocrite if you think your don't put things forward with a bias agenda in mind.

And yet again your entire response had nothing to do with anything I actually said.

You preach from your high horse that everyone else needs to fact check, but I have not once seen you do that in threads about Muslims, or feminists, or "SJW" doing this or doing that, that turn out to be absolutely bunk. All I ever see is you instantly smash that "Like" button and boast that it's proof the left is on the verge of destroying society, and then when it's proven to be bullshit you just scurry away or say, "Well, okay, but there are SOME people like this!".

Imagine if you held that same standard of fact checking, of taking things with a grain of salt, on any thread about BLM, or Muslims, or "SJW". Let's not even pretend to shit ourselves and act like you do.

That said, I'll still play along with what you posted because fuck it, why not.

QuoteYou responded to PRs post with trying to find any conservative statistics as a counter to it, which was nothing to do with his original post.

Correct. It was in response to replies #18, #23, #24,  and #37 in which he implied (or out-right said) it is because of the "Democrats" (pretending that Democrats aren't conservatives in 2018 lol) that this situation exists.

You will note that my response to OP was reply #10, which didn't mention conservatives at all.

QuoteYou then often criticize his sources of information...

Correct.

Quote...while citing buzzfeed as a reliable news source on another thread.

Wrong on two counts.

First, I posted before the video the source was biased and that it should be taken with a grain of salt, despite the fact that it presents both a conservative and non-conservative view point.

Second, I did not post it as "news" but was rather explicit in it being a source of understanding other people's perspective. No where in the post, nor nowhere in the video, do either I or Buzzfeed present it as being "reality", which would be extremely hard to do since the video itself was all about how Indian's perceive characters.

I really don't believe you are stupid enough to not grasp the difference between a "news article" that is riddled with inaccuracies and a video that is people talking about their perceptions, but I cant for the life of me understand why you would want to pretend like you are.

QuoteYour a dam hypocrite if you think your don't put things forward with a bias agenda in mind.

Yes, I don't think I put things forward with a bias agenda in mind. That's why I literally said the site was biased before I posted it.

Are you done making a fool of yourself yet?

By the way, how many grains of salt did you rub against his, "...drug addicts injecting state supplied heroin..." when you liked it and showed you agreement for it?

 San Francisco moving toward opening nation’s 1st safe injection clinic (https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/San-Francisco-moving-toward-opening-nation-s-12219347.php)

QuoteSan Francisco political leaders have been steadily coming around to the idea of opening safe injection centers where addicts could shoot drugs in a controlled situation instead of outside on the sidewalk. And now, it seems, they won’t let state or federal law get in their way.

“We’ve got to take chances,” said Board of Supervisors President London Breed, who in April became an unexpected champion of safe injection drug sites and was behind the creation of a task force that’s expected to recommend opening them.

Some answers about injection drug use by homeless (https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Some-answers-about-injection-drug-use-by-homeless-11180853.php)

QuoteThe in-your-face injection drug use that pervades downtown San Francisco these days, and the thousands of dirty syringes dangerously discarded on the streets, are downright confusing to average residents, if my email in-box is any indication.

You, dear readers, have questions. Fortunately, Barry Zevin has answers.

The medical director of the city’s Homeless Outreach Team has worked in the Department of Public Health for 25 years. He and his team treat about 1,000 patients a year â€" all of them homeless and more than 75 percent of them addicted to injection drugs.

How can the homeless afford expensive illicit drugs unless it is supplied free by the state?
Has anyone heard drug sellers include free syringes with their wares?

Quote from: pr126 on July 23, 2018, 05:39:09 AM
W.C. Fields â€" 'If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.'

The aim of Shranu’s post is to deflect attention from the problem.
Dangling a bunch of keys saying  “Look, shiny!”
Thanks for nothing. Doing me a favor of showing some statistics. Which incidentally has no relevance to the SF Problems.
Interesting about the flavors of conservatism - moderate, strong and ultra and why does that matter?

Do any of those places/cities have the same problem as SF?
The ankle-deep human feces on the streets, rubbish, drug addicts injecting state supplied heroin, (taxes well spent) and the mentally ill roaming the streets?

If yes, why it is not reported by the media? 
After all, exposing the "conservatives" misrule is the media's hobby horse.
It is all Trump's fault, is it not? One more nail in the Rep party's coffin?

While we are here, the SJW's should ask those homeless junkies in Commifornia to check their white privileges.

Do you really claim that SF has ankle-deep feces in the streets?  I doubt the residents think so.  Don't write stupid.

QuoteDo you really claim that SF has ankle-deep feces in the streets?  I doubt the residents think so.  Don't write stupid.

I don't. The Major of San Francisco does.
Have a look at the video I posted.

Here it is again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=ld6qYJe4pRs

I don’t know why are you so defensive about this.
You can always shift the blame to Donald Trump. Your fall guy.
It’s what you do.

Actually it is still George W's fault, just ask Obama ;-)

Quote from: pr126 on July 25, 2018, 05:11:29 AM
I don't. The Major of San Francisco does.
Have a look at the video I posted.

Here it is again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=ld6qYJe4pRs

I don’t know why are you so defensive about this.
You can always shift the blame to Donald Trump. Your fall guy.
It’s what you do.

Well, not "ankle deep" but I do stand corrected in a general sense.  I am surprised.  But, BTW, I wouldn't blame Trump for that when he isn't responsible.  He has plenty of blame for a lot of things, but that SF feces probably isn't one of them.  But if he reads this, he will say it Hillary's fault.  LOL!

It is not Hillary's fault either.
It is the local incompetent government ignoring federal law.

Quote from: pr126 on July 25, 2018, 10:25:45 AM
It is not Hillary's fault either.
It is the local incompetent government ignoring federal law.

Well, actually, homeless people poop on the sidewalks in every city.  SF just attracts more of them because the climate is mild year-round.  It's hard to blame the mayor for that.

Quote from: Cavebear on July 25, 2018, 10:39:13 AM
Well, actually, homeless people poop on the sidewalks in every city.  SF just attracts more of them because the climate is mild year-round.  It's hard to blame the mayor for that.

Dude, seriously, that could be one factor, but its obvious with the freedom of drug handouts in the state its not the weather that has them staying there. And that is something to can blame local politics on.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/07/health/safe-injection-sites-san-francisco-opioid-epidemic-bn/index.html

Why not blame it on Climate change previously called global warming?
The hot weather fries the brain.

Quote from: Munch on July 25, 2018, 11:43:24 AM
Dude, seriously, that could be one factor, but its obvious with the freedom of drug handouts in the state its not the weather that has them staying there. And that is something to can blame local politics on.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/07/health/safe-injection-sites-san-francisco-opioid-epidemic-bn/index.html

Then wouldn't all of them live in Mexico?

Quote from: Munch on July 25, 2018, 11:43:24 AM... but its obvious with the freedom of drug handouts in the state...

Grain of salt indeed, when you apparently don't even read your own links. All these next quotes are from your own link.

1. They don't do "drug handouts", it's a place where people who have purchased dangerous drugs can safely inject them with trained medical personal around.

QuoteThe facilities provide a safe space where people can consume previously obtained drugs, such as heroin and fentanyl, under the supervision of staff trained to respond in the event of an overdose or other medical emergency.

2. We have a serious drug overdose problem here in the United States, and while these places are not an ideal solution they do help reduce the death rate as well as drug use rate.

QuoteAt this rate, over half a million people will die from overdose in the US in the next 10 years, exceeding the number of Americans killed in World War II, the deadliest conflict in human history.

...

More than 100 peer-reviewed studies on safe injection sites -- otherwise known as supervised consumption facilities -- have consistently shown them to be effective at reducing overdose deaths, preventing transmission of HIV and viral hepatitis, reducing street-based drug use and linking people to drug treatment and other services.

3. Besides saving lives and reducing drug use rate, they save the city money.

QuoteIn addition to saving lives, the facilities are projected to save the city approximately $3.5 million a year in overdose related medical costs, according to Rachel Kagan, director of communications at the San Francisco Department of Public Health.

4. It has proven effective across the world.

QuoteIn Australia, a safe injection site in Sydney managed 3,426 overdose-related events without a single fatality over a period of nine years, according to a 2010 government report. The report also found that residents were half as likely to observe people injecting drugs in public at the end of the nine-year period.

5. This is not a left-vs-right issue, with roughly half of both sides being in favour of it.

QuoteAccording to the poll, more than half of all self-described progressives, liberals and moderates supported the idea, compared with 42% of  self-described conservatives.

Quote from: pr126 on July 25, 2018, 11:53:31 AM
Why not blame it on Climate change previously called global warming?
The hot weather fries the brain.

Because, as Mark never said, "The coldest winter I ever spent was a summer in San Francisco.”.  Actually, the local climate has nothing to do with overall global warming.  The temperature of the planet is warming; the local weather changes.  In some places it gets cooler.  But in most places it warms most years.  Beetles attack trees where they never survived before.  Trees retreat higher up mountains.  Animals move to places they could survive before.  Insects find new places they can live.

Ice is gone from national parks.  Ice is gone above Canada.  The Northwest Passage does now exist.

Global warming is real, and there are consequences.  Siberian permafrost is no longer permafrost.  Millennia of frozen organic material (CO2) is being sent into the air.  As the oceans slowly warm, methane ice is melting and bubbling to the surface and methane is 20 times the greenhouse effect of CO2.

Its not a joke, its not a conspiracy, its real. 

You want to know why the earliest mammals  didn't do as well as the earliest dinosaurs?  Mammals are hot blooded and need more oxygen.  The dinosaurs succeeded partly because they needed less.

Breathe deep, you might have to...

Quote from: Shiranu on July 25, 2018, 11:58:23 AM
Grain of salt indeed, when you apparently don't even read your own links. All these next quotes are from your own link.

1. They don't do "drug handouts", it's a place where people who have purchased dangerous drugs can safely inject them with trained medical personal around.

2. We have a serious drug overdose problem here in the United States, and while these places are not an ideal solution they do help reduce the death rate as well as drug use rate.

3. Besides saving lives and reducing drug use rate, they save the city money.

4. It has proven effective across the world.

5. This is not a left-vs-right issue, with roughly half of both sides being in favour of it.

Nicely done!

Quote1. They don't do "drug handouts", it's a place where people who have purchased dangerous drugs can safely inject them with trained medical personal around.

1 Selling drugs is illegal. A criminal offense.
2  How can homeless with no jobs afford to buy drugs?
3 If the drugs are injected, then it must be in a sterile liquid form with syringes supplied.

Do drug pushers provide this service? I don't think so
If those "safe" places do this, aren't they also guilty of criminal collusion?

Lastly, how do you know all this?

Quote from: pr126 on July 25, 2018, 12:33:10 PM
1 Selling drugs is illegal. A criminal offense.
2  How can homeless with no jobs afford to buy drugs?
3 If the drugs are injected, then it must be in a sterile liquid form with syringes supplied.

Do drug pushers provide this service? I don't think so
If those "safe" places do this, aren't they also guilty of criminal collusion?

Lastly, how do you know all this?

Many Very Bad Drugs are legal. 

Tobacco and Alcohol top the list of all drugs (legal or not) in total damage.

Homeless isn't exactly the same as unemployed.  44% of people who live on the street have day jobs (facebook study).   

"IF" drugs are injected.  Many aren't.  And among those who use injected drugs, needles are often shared.  One reason some city governments want to provide free needled to injection drug users is to prevent or reduce communicable diseases which cost the city money.

About "criminal collusion":  Sometimes it is better to limit the damage  than enforce the law.  Remember Prohibition?  Rotgut gin and gangs...  People died from wood alcohol use.

Does that sound better?

"Lastly, how do you know all this?".  Boy did you walk into THAT one...  I'm educated.   I read.  I study facts instead of opinions.  I check things for sources of information.  And you aren't and don't.  Sorry dude, you DID ask.

Oh boy. Nil desperandum.

The rise and fall of western civilization.


(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*AWDE6XfSt2clGAfdk7Ru9w.png)

Quote from: pr126 on July 25, 2018, 01:25:32 PM
Oh boy. Nil desperandum.

The rise and fall of western civilization.


(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*AWDE6XfSt2clGAfdk7Ru9w.png)

It is hard to argue with Mr Clemens...

Quote from: pr126 on July 25, 2018, 01:25:32 PM
Oh boy. Nil desperandum.

The rise and fall of western civilization.


(https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*AWDE6XfSt2clGAfdk7Ru9w.png)

And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

Quote from: Shiranu on July 25, 2018, 02:20:48 PM
And what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

Trump and stupid merchantalistic tariffs?

What fucking illegal free drugs do some of you guys think the city of San Francisco is handing out? Because whatever it is that you think is going on there that is different than any other big city in the US simply isn't happening.

There are a few methadone clinics in town, but that kind of place is everywhere. They aren't illegal either. Fucking hell, two of the methadone clinics in San Francisco are run by the VA. They are federally funded. Most of the methadone clinics in the Bay area aren't free either. They are for profit private drug treatment centers. They bill your freaking insurance company.

Quote from: PopeyesPappy on July 25, 2018, 03:12:44 PM
What fucking illegal free drugs do some of you guys think the city of San Francisco is handing out? Because whatever it is that you think is going on there that is different than any other big city in the US simply isn't happening.

There are a few methadone clinics in town, but that kind of place is everywhere. They aren't illegal either. Fucking hell, two of the methadone clinics in San Francisco are run by the VA. They are federally funded. Most of the methadone clinics in the Bay area aren't free either. They are for profit private drug treatment centers. They bill your freaking insurance company.

Chill Pappy, most of of us are on your side.  You did write good though...  I heard your concern.

Quote from: Cavebear on July 25, 2018, 03:38:29 PM
Chill Pappy, most of of us are on your side.  You did write good though...  I heard your concern.

I keep reading in this thread that government of San Francisco's liberal policies are responsible for the homeless problem there. To date the only liberal policy I remember anyone mentioning in this thread in connection with the homeless was the government there is giving out free illegal drugs. Well that's a bullshit claim. It concerns me that people keep repeating it.

Quote from: PopeyesPappy on July 25, 2018, 04:27:05 PM
I keep reading in this thread that government of San Francisco's liberal policies are responsible for the homeless problem there. To date the only liberal policy I remember anyone mentioning in this thread in connection with the homeless was the government there is giving out free illegal drugs. Well that's a bullshit claim. It concerns me that people keep repeating it.

So you agree the free drugs claim in SF is BS?  Your previous post suggested otherwise.

The government hands out free drugs on a regular basis. Some methadone clinics are an example of this. What they aren't doing is handing out illegal drugs.

Quote from: PopeyesPappy on July 25, 2018, 05:09:40 PM
The government hands out free drugs on a regular basis. Some methadone clinics are an example of this. What they aren't doing is handing out illegal drugs.

I think me are the same page here but crossing up on the terms.  I'm in favor of medically safe drug use for addicts.    And legal minor drugs like MJ for all. 

Are we good?

Quote from: Cavebear on July 25, 2018, 11:56:09 AM
Then wouldn't all of them live in Mexico?

Too many %*&$& Aztecs.  They cut heads off there too.

Quote from: PopeyesPappy on July 25, 2018, 05:09:40 PM
The government hands out free drugs on a regular basis. Some methadone clinics are an example of this. What they aren't doing is handing out illegal drugs.

Nothing is illegal, except illegal governments criminalize what they want to criminalize ... except they don't do that to their own political party.  The world is Helter Skelter.  Let Charles Manson out, so all the life forms in Cali can be exterminated.

Quote from: Baruch on July 25, 2018, 07:32:06 PM
Nothing is illegal, except illegal governments criminalize what they want to criminalize ... except they don't do that to their own political party.  The world is Helter Skelter.  Let Charles Manson out, so all the life forms in Cali can be exterminated.

If nothing is illegal, how is a government illegal?

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on July 26, 2018, 03:52:15 AM
If nothing is illegal, how is a government illegal?

That is what Nixon said.  But not everyone is equally equal.  Some are more equal than others.  America unique status in the world too.  All nations unique, but some are more unique than others, at least Five Eyes.

Does anyone know how the homeless in SF are financing their drug addiction?

Quote from: pr126 on July 26, 2018, 06:17:12 AM
Does anyone know how the homeless in SF are financing their drug addiction?

Free from government = free from taxpayer.  F**k the taxpayers, natch.  That is the new universal health plan.  Free prescriptions, but you have to become homeless druggie first ;-)  Cheaper than the Obama Bronze Plan.

So one way or another, it is still the state financing/supplying the drugs.
From the tax payers. Boy, what a surprise.

The Dems will explain that it is all for the greater good. No biggie.

What is the average income for a homeless addict?

How is the tourist industry doing in SF?

Quote from: pr126 on July 26, 2018, 06:51:37 AM
So one way or another, it is still the state financing/supplying the drugs.
From the tax payers. Boy, what a surprise.

The Dems will explain that it is all for the greater good. No biggie.

What is the average income for a homeless addict?

How is the tourist industry doing in SF?

Don't need tourism.  Chinese expats hiding tax dodged in Canadian/American overpriced real estate that they buy without even seeing it.

Quote from: pr126 on July 26, 2018, 06:51:37 AM
So one way or another, it is still the state financing/supplying the drugs.
From the tax payers. Boy, what a surprise.

Those goalposts sure do keep a movin'.

QuoteHow is the tourist industry doing in SF?

Considering it is the 10th most visited city in the United States with over 25 million visitors in 2016 (and that number has been steadily increasing for years), I would say it's quite fine.

Also, can we take a moment and appreciate just how much of a douchebag you are for basing your argument on, "A few poor people might be using government aid on drugs, so clearly the government should never aid poor people!"?

Like, that is some top-level dickishness.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/15/san-francisco-defecation-map/

http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/15/san-francisco-defecation-map/

Good Grief!  This site wants me to pay $5 and read ads just to see a poop map of San-Francisco?  I don't need to see the map that bad.  Now that I think about it, I feel silly for even clicking on the link.

Quote from: SGOS on July 29, 2018, 07:51:40 AM
http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/15/san-francisco-defecation-map/

Good Grief!  This site wants me to pay $5 and read ads just to see a poop map of San-Francisco?  I don't need to see the map that bad.  Now that I think about it, I feel silly for even clicking on the link.

I think you have malware, I clicked the link and nothing like that popped up.

QuoteSAN FRANCISCO IS A LITERAL S***HOLE, PUBLIC DEFECATION MAP REVEALS
10:32 PM 01/15/2018
Benny Johnson | Reporter At Large
32942
1956



There is an ongoing debate currently going on in the country about what locations can be classified as shitholes. The debate sprung from a report that Donald Trump referred to some third world countries as “shitholes” in a meeting with lawmakers last week.

While the debate might rage on as to what constitutes a “shithole” of a country, one thing is not up for debate: the American city of San Francisco is a shithole.

We know this thanks to an interactive map created in 2014 called Human Wasteland.

The map charts all of the locations for human excrement “incidents” reported to the San Francisco police during a given month. The interactive map shows precise locations of the incidents by marking them with poop emojis:

(http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Screen-Shot-2018-01-15-at-5.20.02-PM-768x438.png)


The project shows that the heatmap for poo is most heavily concentrated directly in downtown San Francisco.

According to the SF Weekly, San Francisco has a major shithole problem:

St. George Alley can harbor up to 30 piles of poop per week, Department of Public Works employee Steve Mahoney told SFist. That’s exceptional. But it also illustrates a seemingly intractable problem in a city with limited public restrooms, constricted homeless services, and a line of filthy JCDecaux bunker toilets that often sit unused.

So if you live in San Francisco and are offended by Trump’s comments, just watch where you’re stepping.

Quote from: Munch on July 29, 2018, 08:00:53 AM
I think you have malware, I clicked the link and nothing like that popped up.

I think it's because of my anti-popup or ad blocker.  Usually, they just tell me I have to turn off my ad blocker if I want to see the article, but I'm too stubborn to do that... ever!  This one was unusual because it wanted me to send them $5.  It could be malware, but it appears to only happen with certain sites.  One of the New York papers does it too.

The way I see it, there is nothing being printed in the News today, that will make my life better.  Some of it makes me mad, but by far, most of it is worthless propaganda like press releases from political parties.

But thanks for including the poop map in your post.  Actually, I've never been to San Francisco and have no plans to visit, so the map wasn't something I really needed, but like I said,... There is nothing in the news that I can't live without.

@ SGOS

Install Malwarebytes. Free. Or paid, which is automatic daily checks.

We used to have public restrooms. The Grim Old Party objected. People could go to McDonalds or such. (Kinda anti-business, but they didn't actually name any businesses.) Perhaps the solution for SF is to bring back public restrooms and pay homeless people to keep them clean.

Quote from: pr126 on July 29, 2018, 09:11:04 AM
@ SGOS

Install Malwarebytes. Free. Or paid, which is automatic daily checks.

I have it, but maybe it's not working.  How would I know?

Quote from: SGOS on July 29, 2018, 09:34:13 AM
I have it, but maybe it's not working.  How would I know?

Uninstall,  download latest, re-install.

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on July 29, 2018, 09:17:43 AM
We used to have public restrooms. The Grim Old Party objected. People could go to McDonalds or such. (Kinda anti-business, but they didn't actually name any businesses.) Perhaps the solution for SF is to bring back public restrooms and pay homeless people to keep them clean.

Nah, that makes too much sense, and people would think either Trump or Hillary was trying to pull a fast one on the American public.  You need lots of public rest rooms too.  You can't expect a homeless person to walk 6 blocks to take a shit.  So San Francisco would install one public restroom per 10 acres of area, and homeless people would still shit in public places and whatever political party wasn't in power would declare the project a failure and waste of money.  Also, how do we know it's the homeless people?  People with lots of money have to take a shit too.  It could be tourists.  Or Europeans.

I think if a city has as many homeless people in it that its causing the streets to be covered in shit, its gonna take more then just a public toilets to fix.
Doesn't the city or state have funds to convert abandoned places into relief centers, I know that doesn't fix the drug problem but if they have facilities and a bed for people to sleep indoors it might be a start.

Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on July 29, 2018, 09:17:43 AM
We used to have public restrooms. The Grim Old Party objected. People could go to McDonalds or such. (Kinda anti-business, but they didn't actually name any businesses.) Perhaps the solution for SF is to bring back public restrooms and pay homeless people to keep them clean.

I first visited San Fran as a boy back in 65.  It was very interesting.  Chinatown was my favorite.

Quote from: Munch on July 29, 2018, 09:49:12 AM
I think if a city has as many homeless people in it that its causing the streets to be covered in shit, its gonna take more then just a public toilets to fix.
Doesn't the city or state have funds to convert abandoned places into relief centers, I know that doesn't fix the drug problem but if they have facilities and a bed for people to sleep indoors it might be a start.

For profit model.  That is why the immigrant children were being kept in cages.

Quote from: SGOS on July 29, 2018, 09:43:35 AM
Nah, that makes too much sense, and people would think either Trump or Hillary was trying to pull a fast one on the American public.  You need lots of public rest rooms too.  You can't expect a homeless person to walk 6 blocks to take a shit.  So San Francisco would install one public restroom per 10 acres of area, and homeless people would still shit in public places and whatever political party wasn't in power would declare the project a failure and waste of money.  Also, how do we know it's the homeless people?  People with lots of money have to take a shit too.  It could be tourists.  Or Europeans.

I can vouch for this.

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on July 30, 2018, 12:57:46 AM
I can vouch for this.

But you can tell European shit from American shit .. because it is tres bon ;-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnyNMpIBmZA

Left California twice.  Don't miss it.

Quote from: Baruch on July 31, 2018, 01:40:31 PM
Left California twice.  Don't miss it.

did you check your shoes before you left. might wanna wash them.

Quote from: Munch on July 31, 2018, 01:42:50 PM
did you check your shoes before you left. might wanna wash them.

Had to burn my clothes ;-)

Quote from: pr126 on July 26, 2018, 06:17:12 AM
Does anyone know how the homeless in SF are financing their drug addiction?

Working at McDonalds?

Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2018, 04:08:16 AM
Working at McDonalds?

Would you employ a homeless addict? In the food industry?
The one who turns up for work on time every day?
You gotta be kidding.

Quote from: pr126 on August 01, 2018, 04:10:41 AM
Would you employ a homeless addict? In the food industry?
The one who turns up for work on time every day?
You gotta be kidding.

They could wash dishes and sweep floors.  Most homeless people don't want to be homeless.

We are talking about addicts financing their drug supplies. Not “most homeless”.

How reliable are they to turn up for work and stay in regular employement.

Quote from: pr126 on August 01, 2018, 04:20:43 AM
We are talking about addicts financing their drug supplies. Not “most homeless”.

How reliable are they to turn up for work and stay in regular employement.

The good ones are and that's how they get out out of their problems.  You can't get out of a bad life without a job and a cheap apartment.  You have to start somewhere.  I know.

The original question was - how are addicts financing their habits?
Lets go from there.

I do not think it is from regular employment.

Quote from: pr126 on August 01, 2018, 04:32:54 AM
The original question was - how are addicts financing their habits?
Lets go from there.

I do not think it is from regular employment.

OK, suppose it is crime (just for discussion purposes).  So is the solution to jail them at idiotic cost or detoxify them more cheaply?

I do not have a solution, apparently neither has the Major.
However, the situation will only get worse.

At one point the whole edifice will come crashing down, as it must.
Then what?

QuoteI do not have a solution...

Well, at least you are right about that. All you have is some super judgmental bullshit and no solutions.

Your side have already linked the statistics that these programs are effective at reducing the drug problem, both in reducing the number of addicts and deaths but also reducing the cost to the state. Are they perfect? Fuck no. But do they work towards making the problem less severe? From your own sources, yes.

So all I really hear now is, "Things are still not perfect, so I guess we should just fuck over everyone else and look out for ourselves!".

If you hate the world so much, which you clearly do since you bitch about anything and everything... even when people trying to make it better all you can do is put them down... go find a hole and live in it and leave it for the people who actually give a shit.

Quote from: Shiranu on August 01, 2018, 05:10:56 AM
Well, at least you are right about that. All you have is some super judgmental bullshit and no solutions.

Your side have already linked the statistics that these programs are effective at reducing the drug problem, both in reducing the number of addicts and deaths but also reducing the cost to the state. Are they perfect? Fuck no. But do they work towards making the problem less severe? From your own sources, yes.

So all I really hear now is, "Things are still not perfect, so I guess we should just fuck over everyone else and look out for ourselves!".

If you hate the world so much, which you clearly do since you bitch about anything and everything... even when people trying to make it better all you can do is put them down... go find a hole and live in it and leave it for the people who actually give a shit.

Well, PR is an angry person, and sometimes we get a clue about why.

But mostly, the answer to his complaint about druggies isn't to lock them up (at great expense and trauma) but to get them into therapy to return them to a normal productive life.

LOL.
I always manage to trigger the TS (https://www.tourettes-action.org.uk/67-what-is-ts.html) in comrade Shiranu.

Those needles littering the streets? The city gave them out (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/Those-needles-littering-the-streets-The-city-12898656.php)

QuoteFor all of City Hall’s tough talk of late about getting needles off the streets, the city itself is responsible for helping fuel the problem â€" handing out millions of syringes a year with little or no controls over their return.

No doubt that goal is well-intentioned, but what wasn’t mentioned is that the health department is the biggest source of the needles â€" it hands out an estimated 400,000 syringes a month through various programs aimed at reducing HIV and other health risks for drug users.

The program began under Mayor Frank Jordan in 1993. It was originally billed as a “needle exchange,” but there never have been strict rules for returns, and the number handed out has steadily climbed.

In fiscal 2013-14, for example, health department records show the city handed out 3.3 million needles at a cost of $400,397. Two years later, it handed out 4.45 million needles at a cost of $523,363.

Garcia said the program’s goal of ensuring access to sterile syringes is intended “to eliminate the transmission of blood-borne pathogens among people who inject drugs and their sexual partners.”

Health department statistics show the program appears to be working, at least on one level: The number of new HIV infections among people who inject drugs in San Francisco dropped from 106 in 2010 to 38 in 2016.

And while the city sees the public health benefit for users, the math on retrieving the free syringes and keeping them off of the streets has come up short.

Of the 400,000 needles distributed monthly, the health department estimates that about 246,000 come back though its 13 syringe access and disposal sites.

That leaves more than 154,000 needles a month still circulating. No one knows how many are tossed into garbage cans or into private needle retrieval boxes â€" but thousands wind up on streets and sidewalks, in tent camps, and in parks and playgrounds.

“It is hard to arrive at an exact number,” said health department spokeswoman Rachael Kagan. “That said, there is clearly needle litter on our streets, and we are working hard to address that.”

To combat the problem, the health department sends out crews who pick up about 8,000 needles per month off the streets.

San Francisco’s public works department also reports collecting an average of 12,640 needles per month when it cleans out homeless hot spots and encampments.

“Those are just the encampments crews,” said DPW spokeswoman Rachel Gordon.

How many of the remaining 133,000 or so needles are picked up by regular street cleaning crews is unknown, but walking some streets shows that the retrieval efforts are falling short.

Health officials maintain that the unlimited syringe access actually lowers the risk that a used needle on the street carries disease.

“When clean needles are available, there is less sharing, less disease transmission, and the discarded needles are less likely to be infectious,” Kagan said.

And there are no known cases of disease from needle sticks in San Francisco.

Still, in recent years the visible proliferation of needles on streets and in parks has become both a growing political and public relations problem for City Hall, as residents point to the problem when they call for cleaner streets.

The public clamor is one of the chief reasons Farrell announced a plan to spend $750,000 a year so the San Francisco AIDS Foundation could hire 10 people just to collect used needles.

“People are, quite frankly, fed up with the conditions of our streets, and so am I,” Farrell said at the news conference announcing the cleanup team.

But there was no mention of changing the policy of handing out unlimited numbers of needles.

“There are no changes to our syringe access programs,” Garcia said. “Research shows that reducing access to clean syringes increases disease and does not improve the problem of needle litter.

“Syringe access is part of a bigger picture,” she said.

The mayor agrees.

“My investment in a dedicated syringe clean team will tackle one of the unintended consequences of this program,” Farrell said. “But I will not walk back our health policy back to the stone ages.”

In the last half of 2017 alone, needle handouts grew to 3 million, meaning, if the rate continues, it will hit 6 million by the close of the fiscal year on June 30.

So, watch your step.

 SF’s proposed employee cafeteria ban not to everyone’s tastes (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-s-proposed-employee-cafeteria-ban-not-to-13121402.php)

We want you to go out into the city and enjoy the scenery and the company of others. Bon Appetit!

But mind your step.

Quote from: pr126 on August 01, 2018, 10:05:11 AM
SF’s proposed employee cafeteria ban not to everyone’s tastes (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-s-proposed-employee-cafeteria-ban-not-to-13121402.php)

We want you to go out into the city and enjoy the scenery and the company of others. Bon Appetit!

But mind your step.

They need more commissars, but only gay or lesbian commissars (not that I mind that sexual preference).  Straight commissars will be out of luck.

Beware of Commie Obi Wan ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1iQ5hQTR5s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmk4-T-DEm0

Well one thing Marxism got right ... the bourgeoisie really does suck.

Quote from: pr126 on August 01, 2018, 09:26:16 AM
LOL.
I always manage to trigger the TS (https://www.tourettes-action.org.uk/67-what-is-ts.html) in comrade Shiranu.

Trigger all you want.  But do keep in mind that the rest of us are reading your "triggers" too.  And such statements don't make you look good.

Quote from: Cavebear on August 04, 2018, 01:45:53 AM
Trigger all you want.  But do keep in mind that the rest of us are reading your "triggers" too.  And such statements don't make you look good.

I have long past caring.

Quote from: pr126 on August 04, 2018, 01:53:59 AM
I have long past caring.

If you are "long past caring", it might be time for you to move on...

Quote from: Cavebear on August 04, 2018, 01:56:54 AM
If you are "long past caring", it might be time for you to move on...

You invented the Survivor reality TV show, right?  Always trying to push people off the "island".

 It’s no laughing matter â€" SF forming Poop Patrol to keep sidewalks clean (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/It-s-no-laughing-matter-SF-forming-Poop-13153517.php)

QuoteIn a city where filthy sidewalks are many residents’ No. 1 complaint, City Hall has come up with a new way to deal with No. 2.

It sounds like silly elementary school banter, but it’s real. San Francisco is about to launch the Poop Patrol.

In about a month, a team of five Public Works staffers will begin patrolling the alleys around Polk Street and other hot spots in a vehicle equipped with a steam cleaner.

They’ll begin their shifts in the afternoon, as the city starts losing its sheen from overnight cleaning. The Poop Patrol’s mission? To spot and clean piles of feces before anybody complains about them.

“We’re trying to be proactive,” explained Public Works director Mohammed Nuru. “We’re actually out there looking for it.”

Quote from: pr126 on August 16, 2018, 12:35:46 AM
It’s no laughing matter â€" SF forming Poop Patrol to keep sidewalks clean (https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/It-s-no-laughing-matter-SF-forming-Poop-13153517.php)

They have that in Paris too I hear.  Too many dog lovers who don't clean up.  Maybe the SF mayor can put leashes on all the "furries".  SF finally getting some French culture, oui?

Quote from: Baruch on August 16, 2018, 06:02:18 AM
They have that in Paris too I hear.  Too many dog lovers who don't clean up.  Maybe the SF mayor can put leashes on all the "furries".  SF finally getting some French culture, oui?

furries already one upped on that, their advanced to harnesses.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3013/2829143834_41f9baffd4_b.jpg)(https://pm1.narvii.com/6494/4154a00c4ad33d2d25e4e68b976f4fa41bd18644_hq.jpg)

Two .. two .. fetishes in one!  Double pervert, double pervert, double pervert gum.

My boyfriend's a self confessed furry, having a fursona he uses in gaming and writing short stories. He draws the line at the fur suit though, finds it awkward and weird

Quote from: Munch on August 16, 2018, 03:52:08 PM
My boyfriend's a self confessed furry, having a fursona he uses in gaming and writing short stories. He draws the line at the fur suit though, finds it awkward and weird

I would think it hot (temp) also.  Also a bad choice, if out in the woods.

If The hottest person you could imagine would come to you and offer sex,  but it would have to be with him/her in a full-body (and head) fursuit: would you?
You're not tied doWn by a relationship in this scenario.

I mean, as long as we are derailing The thread and all.

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on August 17, 2018, 04:23:51 AM
If The hottest person you could imagine would come to you and offer sex,  but it would have to be with him/her in a full-body (and head) fursuit: would you?
You're not tied doWn by a relationship in this scenario.

I mean, as long as we are derailing The thread and all.

I prefer my play toy in latex, thanks ;-)

Quote from: Mr.Obvious on August 17, 2018, 04:23:51 AM
If The hottest person you could imagine would come to you and offer sex,  but it would have to be with him/her in a full-body (and head) fursuit: would you?
You're not tied doWn by a relationship in this scenario.

I mean, as long as we are derailing The thread and all.

Probably not, it's a costume, you don't get the benefit of skin to skin contact

Quote from: Munch on August 17, 2018, 12:09:24 PM
Probably not, it's a costume, you don't get the benefit of skin to skin contact

Roll around in honey or chocolate syrup first, then on a shag carpet.

Skin contact is rather better.  Hairiness is not really high on my list of turn-ons.

The Billion Dollar Homeless Scam (https://canadafreepress.com/article/the-billion-dollar-homeless-scam)

QuoteNew York City will be spending $2.06 billion on its Department of Homeless Services. There are 61,421 homeless people in the city which is spending $33,539 per homeless person.

That’s only a little short of the starting salary of an FDNY firefighter at $39,000.

More money will be spent on the homeless than on the firefighters who save New Yorkers from burning buildings. The FDNY will have to make do with $2.04 billion, and the health department with $1.6 billion.

That’s impressive for DHS, a department that was only created in 1993 by the disgraced Dinkins administration and is now burning through more cash than agencies fulfilling actual vital city functions.

Two years ago, DHS had over 2,600 employees. That’s 1 employee to every 23 homeless people. Meanwhile 234 New Yorkers get only 1 police officer to serve and protect them from criminals.

Has this vast infusion of cash solved homelessness in the city? Nope.

New York’s homeless population has kept on growing until it now has more homeless people than any other city. New York City’s homeless growth rate is also faster than that of any other city.

Maybe because it spends more than any other city. But Los Angeles is catching up.

Its $4.6 billion package of homeless tax increases are staggering. Los Angeles doubled its homeless budget to $450 million. Los Angeles County plans to spend $374 million. That’s 1 percent of a budget meant to service a population of over 10 million going to just 53,193 people.

As Los Angeles threw more money at the homeless problem, its homeless population increased 26%.

New York, Los Angeles, Washington D.C., Portland, Seattle and the Bay Area are responsible for much of the national growth in homelessness

New York City and Los Angeles only account for 3 to 5 percent of the country’s population, but for a quarter of the country’s homeless population. Even considering inflated real estate prices in both cities, a national problem should not be this disproportionately concentrated in only two cities.

San Francisco will be spending $279 million on 7,499 homeless people. Seattle is spending $63 million, up from $39 million four years ago, while the Puget Sound area may be spending up to $1.06 billion.

Seattle’s homeless population is up 44% in two years to 5,500. The Seattle Times claims that Seattle has a higher concentration of homeless than New York and Los Angeles.

New York, Los Angeles, Washington D.C., Portland, Seattle and the Bay Area are responsible for much of the national growth in homelessness. Activists blame the crisis on soaring real estate prices. While those are some of the most expensive cities in the country, they’ve been that way for quite some time.

Rapid gentrification may catch local residents by surprise in cities with more recent booms. But no one is likely to be surprised by the cost of living in the Bay Area, Los Angeles or New York City. And those cities are also dedicating the most resource to fighting homelessness while only making the problem worse.

The statistics on homelessness are full of such curious mysteries. Why do New York and California have more homeless people than 30 states combined?

Why does Texas have only 17% of the homeless population of California? Why does Colorado have four times the homeless population of Utah? Why do Oregon and Washington have more homeless than Montana, Idaho, South and North Dakota, Wyoming, Utah, Nebraska, Kansas, and Iowa combined?

The pattern is political. And lucrative.

QuoteIt’s a scam that runs easily into the billions while destroying lives and communities

‘Homeless’ is a fake political term that deliberately misstates the problem. The issue is mostly not a lack of housing, but some combination of mental illness and drug use that make it difficult to maintain residential status. There are ordinary people who are genuinely homeless, and the media makes a point of highlighting their stories, but homelessness is mostly not a problem of housing, but of treatment.

While the media tells only one side of the story, it’s the mentally ill and the severe addicts who are the public face of the homeless crisis that the residents of major cities encounter every day. It’s these sights that move them to approve of spending hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars on programs that they believe will remove the horrible sights that they’re seeing from public view.

And that incentivizes the social welfare system and its allied activists to worsen the problem so as to squeeze more money out of taxpayers. Every budget increase means more homeless on the street, more street crime, drug use, and random abuse. Funding the system isn’t the solution, it’s the problem.

The homeless crisis is a billion dollar scam. It isn’t being solved. It’s only getting worse.

Socialism in the US takes different forms than in Venezuela.  If you ban voting, then you won't have to bother bribing the public for its damn votes.