> People in cities are the ones enabling human misery.
And people in locales that solve these problems by kicking out their problem citizens are the ones creating this human misery, but we never seem to be able to hold them to account for it, or to demand that they pull their own weight.
That’s really interesting. Can you document a single locale that is “kicking out their problem citizens?” That was the plot of Rambo and that was a great movie, but I’ve never heard of such a thing in this century. I welcome being educated so please do tell if you can point to some examples that aren’t old enough to legally drink.
> Can you document a single locale that is “kicking out their problem citizens?”
Would Bellevue, Kirkland, and Redmond dumping their homeless people into Seattle, as they NIMBY shelter/housing satisfy you?
There's fewer than 500 sheltered/unsheltered homeless people in those three cities, compared to ~11,000 in the rest of King county - yet they make up ~1/6th of the county's population.
Or, on a smaller scale, nice parts of town calling the cops to sweep the homeless into less nice parts of town? For some reason, I can't say I've seen a lot of tent cities in Magnolia...
> Would Bellevue, Kirkland, and Redmond dumping their homeless people into Seattle, as they NIMBY shelter/housing satisfy you?
That doesn’t sound like kicking out. That sounds like Seattle for reasons that I don’t understand inviting vagabonds from elsewhere in King County.
More to the point, I wasn’t referring to your local county politics, I was asking for specific evidence of rural communities shipping vagrants to far away cities as the person I was replying to implied is happening.
You don't understand that people need a few basic needs to live, and the suburbs aren't pulling their weight in providing them?
You don't understand that the suburbs keep harassing and arresting people for being homeless, and taking their things, until they fuck off to the city?
If we did that to you, until you left whichever town you live in, would you consider yourself getting kicked out of it?
You don't understand that if Seattle did the same thing, all of those suburbs would suddenly discover that they had to pull their own weight, and not just sweep their problem to the other side of lake Washington?
You're splitting hairs over semantics of what 'kicking out' means. The bottom line is that rural America gives it's problem people a choice between jail, harassment, death, or taking themselves and all their problems to urban America.
It then complains about how urban America is a cesspit that 'invites vagabonds'.
Thanks for so vividly exposing the enabler mindset.
I’m still confused though. Do you like vagrancy, violence, drug abuse, and filth? Or is your misplaced resentment of the communities that refuse to tolerate that trash some kind of extreme cognitive dissonance?
> Thanks for so vividly exposing the enabler mindset.
Aha! You have me dead to rights. I'm an enabler, because I don't think that these problems can be solved by just dumping the problem people to the next town over.
> Do you like vagrancy, violence, drug abuse, and filth?
Less than you, since you seem to think that the right thing to do is for your community to export it to its neighbours.
> Or is your misplaced resentment of the communities that refuse to tolerate that trash some kind of extreme cognitive dissonance?
Those communities create 'that trash', and then don't deal with it. If I just start dumping trash on your front lawn, because I don't want to pay the cost of garbage pickup, which one of us is the problem?
> Aha! You have me dead to rights. I'm an enabler, because I don't think that these problems can be solved by just dumping the problem people to the next town over.
Yes, I know, I'm capable of noticing clear objective truths. Big city policies demonstrably enable these social ills. You don't have to get defensive. You just observably believe that it's better to tolerate anti-social behavior than to put a stop to it. We disagree on this point, but perhaps you take some comfort from knowing that your co-urbanites also inexplicably like to live surrounded by filth.
> Less than you, since you seem to think that the right thing to do is for your community to export it to its neighbours.
I never said any such thing. I said I don't believe such a thing is even happening. You have failed to provide any evidence of a systematic push of rural undesirables to cities. Rather, all the evidence indicates that urban policies, that city-dwellers reliably vote for and thus observably want, are attracting undesirables. Furthermore, those policies are enabling people who might otherwise live with some semblance of social responsibility to fully embrace an anti-social manner of living.
> Those communities create 'that trash', and then don't deal with it. If I just start dumping trash on your front lawn, because I don't want to pay the cost of garbage pickup, which one of us is the problem?
The policies that city dwellers support are creating the trash. There is no rural conspiracy to ship undesirables to the cities. Individual vagrants may be attracted by urban enabling policies, but that's the responsibility of the vagrants and urban policymakers, not rural communities. If city people don't want more vagrants then they shouldn't support policies that enable them.
Please link me the free bus tickets to SF/LA from flyover country. I’ve done my googles and can’t find the program where I get my ticket. I don’t believe it exists without evidence.
Any actual evidence of such a program where rural areas are shipping out vagrants. I’m not talking about lateral moves from one major city to another as should be clear from the comment history. Perhaps a local newspaper ad offering free bus tickets?
And people in locales that solve these problems by kicking out their problem citizens are the ones creating this human misery, but we never seem to be able to hold them to account for it, or to demand that they pull their own weight.