OT Portland and surrounding area Homeless Situation

[PtldPlatypus]

The damned wall keeps them from escaping to Mexico!

Funny thing, I just went to Los Algodones last week. Amazed me how there was basically no security going from US into Mexico.

 

[Shaboid]

Why cant the assessment and transition happen at the same time?


And i agree on the fish thing, but that is a statement that backs my thoughts.
Why give them a shelter to make the same mistakes? Fix their issues and they can then build their own shelter… so to speak.
I view giving shelters with little other help in place, the same as giving a fish.
I view getting them help to be productive, more like teaching them to fish to be self sufficient.

My thought is have a carpool van downtown.
A couple people evaluating each individual who says they would like to be off the streets. Those who state as much and are evalled, get in the van and go to the proper place. If they have belongings needing protection, then we figure that out as well.

Going back and forth on analogies never ends well, there's always a million interpretations that can be made.

That's all great and good, I honestly don't know the downtown situation well enough as I have avoided it for a couple years now. I don't know if that could work. I can say that in the surrounding areas, shelter first non profit orgs that work with individuals to build relationships and solutions have been more effective than not.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Going back and forth on analogies never ends well, there's always a million interpretations that can be made.

That's all great and good, I honestly don't know the downtown situation well enough as I have avoided it for a couple years now. I don't know if that could work. I can say that in the surrounding areas, shelter first non profit orgs that work with individuals to build relationships and solutions have been more effective than not.

Fair enough. Was just hoping for a bit more of a political discussion vs a finger-pointing back and forth( not saying thats what just happened) just saying the leaders are having these very discussions, or should be, and i thought we could have our own.

The only thing that concerns me, or I question is assuming models that are successful elsewhere will automatically be successful here. I have not been to every homeless camp in every city, but having lived as an adult in the midwest, East Coast and West Coast, Portland seems to have a consideeably larger percentage of homeless that are homeless because they are fighting the system. They want to be where they are at overall. Free from accountability and responsibility.
I have concerns these types will damper the positive effect programs could have on most of the homeless. So, to me, segregating these types from those in need that also want help, should be top priority.

i personally have no want to fund a shelter for someone who actively wants to buck the system.
How do we weed those who want help out from those who don't? Those who don't will still take advantage of handouts but with no respect to the gift or gifter.

 

[riverman]

Funny thing, I just went to Los Algodones last week. Amazed me how there was basically no security going from US into Mexico.

I spent a summer in San Ysidro and found the same thing as well as in Tecate when I was younger. Tecate was a sleepy border town in the 70s

 

[Phatguysrule]

This is not what i said. This does not aid towards a productive convo, fyi.

what is the difference between building shelters and expanding health care facilities and drug treatment facilities to handle larger capacities?

Yes costs, but ive been told time and time again we can afford to fix this. So if we can, why not expand the facilities that will provide a great encompassing help to those im need vs a shelter without any additional/ conjunctional aid?

And what is the difference between the homeless shitting on the streets downtown, vs the current shelter on the east side by the freeway?

We keep saying most on the streets are in need of mental help aNd addiction treatment. If this is the case, why isn't this top priority? Assess who on the streets need this type of help and get them there and then the balance who just need a pick me up can go directly to shelters?

Because it is easier and cheaper to go the other way, and people are less likely to be abused.

Get the people who want homes into homes and in care (or at least on the waiting list). Virtually everyone else has a problem that they will need help with and will need to be detained.

They will either move into the provided safe, secure, climate controlled homes, or be detained, or leave the area.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Fair enough. Was just hoping for a bit more of a political discussion vs a finger-pointing back and forth( not saying thats what just happened) just saying the leaders are having these very discussions, or should be, and i thought we could have our own.

The only thing that concerns me, or I question is assuming models that are successful elsewhere will automatically be successful here. I have not been to every homeless camp in every city, but having lived as an adult in the midwest, East Coast and West Coast, Portland seems to have a consideeably larger percentage of homeless that are homeless because they are fighting the system. They want to be where they are at overall. Free from accountability and responsibility.
I have concerns these types will damper the positive effect programs could have on most of the homeless. So, to me, segregating these types from those in need that also want help, should be top priority.

i personally have no want to fund a shelter for someone who actively wants to buck the system.
How do we weed those who want help out from those who don't? Those who don't will still take advantage of handouts but with no respect to the gift or gifter.

The type of person you are referring to will either move into a home and follow the law, leave the area, or be arrested.

And we'll have our public spaces back again

 

[barfo]

Is Bend in the surrounding area?

Homeless in the City Where He Was Once Mayor

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/28/us/bend-oregon-mayor-homeless.html

barfo

 

[ABM]

Homelessness is a real and present issue in every major city. I wish it weren't so, but it's prevalent.

https://www.nashvillescene.com/news...cle_5af41074-e2cd-11ed-9cc8-47e785979828.html

 

[Phatguysrule]

Homelessness is a real and present issue in every major city. I wish it weren't so, but it's prevalent.

https://www.nashvillescene.com/news...cle_5af41074-e2cd-11ed-9cc8-47e785979828.html

Sixteen million homes currently sit vacant across the U.S.

582,462 Americans Homeless

A homeless person currently costs approximately $30,000-$50,000 per year in supportive services. That's just over $23 billion. We're already spending this money

Average rent for a 2br in the US is $1320 per month. Or, $15,840 per year. That's for a 2 bedroom.

It's almost like we could just put them in existing homes and save a BUTTLOAD of money... With plenty left over to reimburse landlords for damages.

Oh, that's right... we have to make them suffer. Even if it costs us more and ruins our public spaces. The most important thing is being able to judge them.

 

[Phatguysrule]

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Sixteen million homes currently sit vacant across the U.S.

582,462 Americans Homeless

A homeless person currently costs approximately $30,000-$50,000 per year in supportive services. That's just over $23 billion. We're already spending this money

Average rent for a 2br in the US is $1320 per month. Or, $15,840 per year. That's for a 2 bedroom.

It's almost like we could just put them in existing homes and save a BUTTLOAD of money... With plenty left over to reimburse landlords for damages.

Oh, that's right... we have to make them suffer. Even if it costs us more and ruins our public spaces. The most important thing is being able to judge them.

I read nothing stating these are foreclosed homes. Are you suggesting private home owners just hand over these unsold homes to the homeless?
Are you suggesting the government buy them out?

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

The type of person you are referring to will either move into a home and follow the law, leave the area, or be arrested.

And we'll have our public spaces back again

So we will be back to overcrowded prisons. Cause most wont comply. Not in Portland.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I read nothing stating these are foreclosed homes.

I've made no such suggestion.

Are you suggesting private home owners just hand over these unsold homes to the homeless?
Are you suggesting the government buy them out?

I'm suggesting we remove the incentive to allow homes to remain vacant (a steep tax on unoccupied homes would work) and I'm suggesting that government compensate homeowners fairly for the use as housing, including any repairs which result from said use.

 

[Phatguysrule]

most wont comply. Not in Portland.

So you claim. I've seen no evidence to support that.

 

[julius]

Sixteen million homes currently sit vacant across the U.S.

582,462 Americans Homeless

A homeless person currently costs approximately $30,000-$50,000 per year in supportive services. That's just over $23 billion. We're already spending this money

Average rent for a 2br in the US is $1320 per month. Or, $15,840 per year. That's for a 2 bedroom.

It's almost like we could just put them in existing homes and save a BUTTLOAD of money... With plenty left over to reimburse landlords for damages.

Oh, that's right... we have to make them suffer. Even if it costs us more and ruins our public spaces. The most important thing is being able to judge them.

I wouldn't mind finding a vacant house in the Portland metro area and get to move in there for free (depending on the area of course).

I get that chances are people looking to buy a home are better off than homeless people, but it seems weird to fix a stubbed toe when you have an ax wound.

 

[Hoopguru]

Going back and forth on analogies never ends well, there's always a million interpretations that can be made.

That's all great and good, I honestly don't know the downtown situation well enough as I have avoided it for a couple years now. I don't know if that could work. I can say that in the surrounding areas, shelter first non profit orgs that work with individuals to build relationships and solutions have been more effective than not.

Years ago I had a cousin who got himself in trouble at a young age early teens and seemed to have a chip on his shoulder and thought he could beat any system. Eventually did some jail time and when he turned 18 joined the job core and it seem to really help him mature and understand opportunities are there for him to build on. He left there and went to work in a mill and made decent money of which seemed to be the thing that motivated him as he wanted to acquire a vehicle and afford his own place.
I believe if you couple opportunities for shelter/food & work you will/can, teach a man to fish and excel, and build a life, but there are always those that don't want to0, or aren't capable because of medical/mental issues. They need to be in specialty hospitals and treated. The ones that dont want to be helped, but rather, just bum off others and break laws need to realize, that they will be paying a penalty.
There used to be vacrancy laws and I think there still should be...

After seeing what it cost per year to address homeless with not much improvement to me that starts politically with leaders, and there ability to only spend money, implement efforts that don't work, and justify their existence.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

I've made no such suggestion.


I'm suggesting we remove the incentive to allow homes to remain vacant (a steep tax on unoccupied homes would work) and I'm suggesting that government compensate homeowners fairly for the use as housing, including any repairs which result from said use.

wow. So you wants tax payers to supplement the repairs required for when the homeless damage the homes gifted to them in the first place?

sigh…

Thoughts like that move me to my more conservative right. No way I am wanting/willing to pay for that.

 

[Phatguysrule]

wow. So you wants tax payers to supplement the repairs required for when the homeless damage the homes gifted to them in the first place?

sigh…

Thoughts like that move me to my more conservative right. No way I am wanting/willing to pay for that.

Tax payers would be saving money by doing so. Just like taxpayers in Finland are.

You apparently want tax payers to pay more for our current situation. Which is what the conservative right wants.

This supports the theory that the conservative right is ignorant and short sighted with regards to social policy.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I wouldn't mind finding a vacant house in the Portland metro area and get to move in there for free (depending on the area of course).

I get that chances are people looking to buy a home are better off than homeless people, but it seems weird to fix a stubbed toe when you have an ax wound.

If you want to give up all of your income and live that way, so be it.

That would likely be a drastic reduction in your quality of life. I certainly wouldn't choose it for myself.

If you kept your income you would be required to pay 1/3 for rent.

But the reality is that these homes would be rented out or sold (as keeping them vacant would be incredibly expensive), relieving pressure on apartments.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Years ago I had a cousin who got himself in trouble at a young age early teens and seemed to have a chip on his shoulder and thought he could beat any system. Eventually did some jail time and when he turned 18 joined the job core and it seem to really help him mature and understand opportunities are there for him to build on. He left there and went to work in a mill and made decent money of which seemed to be the thing that motivated him as he wanted to acquire a vehicle and his on pad.
I believe if you couple opportunities for shelter/food & work you will/can teach a man to fish and excell and build a life, but there are always those that dont want to, or aren't capable because of medical/menatl issues. They need to be a specialty hospitals and treated. The ones that dont want to be helped, but rather, just bum off others and break laws need to realize, that they will be a penalty that his home.
There used to be vacrancy laws and I think there still should be...

After seeing what it cost per year to address homeless with not much improvement to me that starts politically with leaders, and there ability to only spend money, implement efforts that don't work, and justify their existence.

We've only recently approved enough funding to address homelessness in Oregon.

Will leaders use that funding to enact proven policies in an effective way?

I have my doubts, and think that we need to make sure we're putting leaders in place who will enact data based policy.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Tax payers would be saving money by doing so. Just like taxpayers in Finland are.

You apparently want tax payers to pay more for our current situation. Which is what the conservative right wants.

This supports the theory that the conservative right is ignorant and short sighted with regards to social policy.

lol. No this supports the theory that some people value principles over enabling continual poor decision making. You can try to insult it all you want. Wont change the fact that you are Absolutely trying to take individuals’ rights away from the majority to help a minority who cant make better choices and work harder.

You talk of people making poor choices when desperate. There is no desperate in this country. Our worst neighborhoods are dream communities for many parts of the third world.
This country was founded on hard work to survive and we have gone too soft. Period.
This country provides soooo many opportunities for those who actually put forth effort to improve themselves its ridiculous to claim we have sooo many in such a desperate level of poverty, that their poor decisions should be excused and we should fund then without change in thier behavior.
There are homeless people who do not break laws. They can distinguish right from wrong.
I refuse to buy into any of your insulting propaganda.
You continue to ignore the points made about The homeless specifically in Portland have a larger base of anarchistic desires. You bring up models from other places that do not address the points made several times about specific of the issues in this city.

How do you suggest we deal with the large percentage of healthy homeless youth that want to see the system torn down, live in tents, steal to get high and wait for the next protest to come out and try to instigate and antagonize to push their wants on everyone else?

What is your specific answer in dealing with this sect that runs around in Portland? Straight forward answer.

 

[Phatguysrule]

lol. No this supports the theory that some people value principles over enabling continual poor decision making. You can try to insult it all you want. Wont change the fact that you are Absolutely trying to take individuals’ rights away from the majority to help a minority who cant make better choices and work harder.

This is wrong. All of it.

You talk of people making poor choices when desperate. There is no desperate in this country.

This is false.

Our worst neighborhoods are dream communities for many parts of the third world.
This country was founded on hard work to survive and we have gone too soft. Period.
This country provides soooo many opportunities for those who actually put forth effort to improve themselves its ridiculous to claim we have sooo many in such a desperate level of poverty, that their poor decisions should be excused and we should fund then without change in thier behavior.

All available evidence suggests this is wrong.

There are homeless people who do not break laws. They can distinguish right from wrong.

Okay. I never claimed otherwise.

I refuse to buy into any of your insulting propaganda.

You mean talking about places which have actually solved this problem and saved money in doing so? Yes, I understand you don't like that.

You continue to ignore the points made about The homeless specifically in Portland have a larger base of anarchistic desires.

I've seen no evidence to support this theory, and no evidence which would indicate to what degree this is correct.

You bring up models from other places that do not address the points made several times about specific of the issues in this city.

I have yet to see any evidence that Portland's homeless population is unique in a way that would be resistant to the policies I've suggested.

How do you suggest we deal with the large percentage of healthy homeless youth that want to see the system torn down, live in tents, steal to get high and wait for the next protest to come out and try to instigate and antagonize to push their wants on everyone else?

What is your specific answer in dealing with this sect that runs around in Portland? Straight forward answer.

I've already answered the question of what to do with the people you're referring to. Under my proposal people who refuse to take homes offered or choose to commit violence, property damage, or theft will be arrested.

This will not appeal to their desire for freedom and they will change their ways, leave the area, or spend a lot of time in the system.

No matter what they choose they would not be camping in our public spaces in near the numbers they currently are, and we'd be spending less than we are now.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

This is wrong. All of it.



This is false.



All available evidence suggests this is wrong.



Okay. I never claimed otherwise.



You mean talking about places which have actually solved this problem and saved money in doing so? Yes, I understand you don't like that.



I've seen no evidence to support this theory, and no evidence which would indicate to what degree this is correct.



I have yet to see any evidence that Portland's homeless population is unique in a way that would be resistant to the policies I've suggested.



I've already answered the question of what to do with the people you're referring to. Under my proposal people who refuse to take homes offered or choose to commit violence, property damage, or theft will be arrested.

This will not appeal to their desire for freedom and they will change their ways, leave the area, or spend a lot of time in the system.

No matter what they choose they would not be camping in our public spaces in near the numbers they currently are, and we'd be spending less than we are now.

Thats some funny satire. When you show me neighborhoods in America like this:


https://www.worldatlas.com/amp/articles/where-are-the-poorest-places-in-the-world.html


There is plenty of evidence you are apparently unaware of.




i could post picture after picture and article aFter article and you will still say all evidence points to something else becuase you dismiss valid rebuttals as no opinion or whatever…

you are good entertainment though. I give ya that! Problemsolver? Not so much when you dismiss anything relevant that doesnt fit in your package of crap you sell on here at times.
Fyi the crap isnt your proposals. Its the dismissal of any counter, relevant or not. You dont want to hear about aNy other viewpoint. However truthful it is.

You dont want to dissect the fact that Portland has a larger population of healthy youth that want nothing but anarchy. But you seem to insist if we give them housing it will change them. You say toss them in jail. But these are the very people i have said throw in jail from the fetvgo and your rebuttal is prove they do the crimes. But also dont want police on the ground.
Your wants lead little room to gather good evidence to convict. So you support agendas that make it hard to catch a criminal and then want to house them when ww cant prove the. Rimes they do.

You want to blanket paint the problem with a one world type solution. One answer fits all. It works for Norway and Camden so it should work here.
Camden nj.
71000 people

portland oregon
500,000 people or more.

read this article. It explains how camden got so bad due to defunding the police.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1231677
but i doubt you will have an opinion on it because, it doesn't fit your proposals.
Read these articles about anarchists in portland:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=352015

How many anarchists have a facebook site for thier city?
https://m.facebook.com/pdxaga/

you refuse to acknowledge our situation is different than other countries and even other cities.
Just because you say something is false, doesn't make it so just because you refuse to a acknowledge any valid rebuttal, with different opinions supports by other facts.
That's fox news level head in sand.

“But they arent valid”

“says you..”

satire my friend. Satire.

Good luck with your proposals.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Thats some funny satire. When you show me neighborhoods in America like this:

View attachment 55738
https://www.worldatlas.com/amp/articles/where-are-the-poorest-places-in-the-world.html


There is plenty of evidence you are apparently unaware of.

View attachment 55739


i could post picture picture and article Fter arricle and you will stull say all evidence oounts to somethign ese becuase you dismiss calid rebuttals as no opinion or whatever…

you are good entertainment though. I give ya that! Problemsolver? Not so much when you dismiss anythign relevant that doesnt fit in your package of crap you sell on here at times.
Fyi the crap isnt your proposals. Its the dismissal of any counter, relevant or not. You dont want to hear about aNy other viewpoint. However truthful it is.

You dont want to dissect the fact that Portland has a larger population of healthy youth that want nothing but anarchy. But you seem to insist if we give them housing it will change them. You want to blanket paint the problem with a one world type solution. One answer fits all. It works for Norway and Camden so it should work here.

you refuse to acknowledge our situation is different than other countries and even other cities.
Just because you say something is false doesn't make it so just because you refuse to a acknowledge any valid rebuttal. That's fox news level head in sand.

“But they arent valid”

“says you..”

satire my friend. Satire.

Good luck with your proposals.

Lol. You can't find any evidence that any of my proposals have any of the drawbacks you've been harping on so you bring up cases I've never mentioned using policies I've never advocated for.

Please show me where I've suggested any of India, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Nigeria as examples we should replicate here.

You can't, because I haven't.

I've given you too much attention. From now on I'll just laugh at your pathetic attempts to make the world fit your twisted perspective.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Lol. You can't find any evidence that any of my proposals have any of the drawbacks you've been Harping on so you bring up cases I've never mentioned using policies I've never advocated for.

Please show me where I've suggested any of India, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Nigeria as examples we should replicate here.

You can't, because I haven't.

I've given you too much attention. From now on I'll just laugh at your pathetic attempts to make the world fit your twisted perspective.

Lol. I didn't think you could answer anything with honest relevance.
You responded to quickly to click links and read before responding so that tells me right there you haven't a clue what i actually even posted you just quoted.
Did you check out the links?

yes or no?
Bet you cant answer this because you wont lie and say yes and wont tell the truth and say no.

Thats some more next level fox news behavior.
I knew you couldnt be on the up and up and then the rebuttals got tough you would dismiss other facts and remain on your singular mindset.
So the next time i post something to someone else you wont but in with your self grandizing posts? Nobody said this. Nobody said that?
Please????
You dont want a discussion you want robots to fall in line with your proposals. Nothing more.
Good luck with that.
Now id just ignore my posts unless you actually have feedback on the links, etc.
But we know the only feedback is dismissing any and all evidence that is contrary to yuor proposals as false.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Lol. You can't find any evidence that any of my proposals have any of the drawbacks you've been harping on so you bring up cases I've never mentioned using policies I've never advocated for.

Please show me where I've suggested any of India, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo, or Nigeria as examples we should replicate here.

You can't, because I haven't.

I've given you too much attention. From now on I'll just laugh at your pathetic attempts to make the world fit your twisted perspective.

This is false. Because I say so.
Sew how this works?


Lol. Read the links and get back to me or be laughed off as comedic satire. Period.

 

[Phatguysrule]

This is false. Because I say so.
Sew how this works?


Lol. Read the links and get back to me or be laughed off as comedic satire. Period.

Not worth my time. Nice try though.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Lol. I didn't think you could answer anything with honest relevance.
You responded to quickly to click links and read before responding so that tells me right there you haven't a clue what i actually even posted you just quoted.
Did you check out the links?

yes or no?
Bet you cant answer this because you wont lie and say yes and wont tell the truth and say no.

Thats some more next level fox news behavior.
I knew you couldnt be on the up and up and then the rebuttals got tough you would dismiss other facts and remain on your singular mindset.
So the next time i post something to someone else you wont but in with your self grandizing posts? Nobody said this. Nobody said that?
Please????
You dont want a discussion you want robots to fall in line with your proposals. Nothing more.
Good luck with that.
Now id just ignore my posts unless you actually have feedback on the links, etc.
But we know the only feedback is dismissing any and all evidence that is contrary to yuor proposals as false.

Nah, I'll keep calling you out for posting ignorant BS. I scanned your links giving them all the attention they are worth. You posted examples and pictures of places nobody has suggested Portland try to copy in an attempt to move the attention away from how wrong you are.

Same old BS you've always done.

I'll keep calling it out for the garbage it is. But I won't just let you spam your garbage unchallenged.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Not worth my time. Nice try though.

I know. The links and info that doesn't match your proposal isn't worth your time. Makes you tucker2.0. You go tucker2.0. Dismiss anything that doesn't fit. Don't even look into articles that have other info provided to you.

“read my links! I have answers to this problem!!!
I wont read your links though. But read mine!!!!”

Lmao. This is better than sitcom.

 

[SharpeScooterShooter]

Nah, I'll keep calling you out for posting ignorant BS. I scanned your links giving them all the attention they are worth. You posted examples and pictures of places nobody has suggested Portland try to copy in an attempt to move the attention away from how wrong you are.

Same old BS you've always done.

I'll keep calling it out for the garbage it is. But I won't just let you spam your garbage unchallenged.

Did you check out the link with info?
Did you?