In response to the ideological purists who will read about these signs with horror, let me say that the many people I know who are sick of the homeless presence are not sick of the people themselves ( and in fact support an effective providing of needed services) but rather are sick of the garbage dumped all over green spaces, damaged trees, and blocking of sidewalks with more hoarded garbage per person (office chairs,, broken and unrepairable items of all sorts) than fit in a pickup truck. Taking care of someone's hunger, need for a bed, need for mental health services etc, does not need to mean tolerating or enabling behaviors that trash our public spaces and turn them into private shit holes that taxpayers must pay to have cleaned up.
I have no problem with someone with a backpack unrolling a sleeping bag in the park, gone by morning, and as we we're all taught in preschool, picking up their litter.
Show up late, leave early, and leave nothing behind = possibilities open up. So many that in a town like Portland you hardly need to bother with parks the domesticated classes cling so tightly to (why nobody knows - they don't use them). Hence these signs deter campers but hardly affect those just sleeping. Unless you have the time/ energy/ money to constantly monitor a place you cannot stop that crowd - which are the harmeless ones anyway. We could become like LA though and just put bars and barbwire on everything. Then the homeless will be even dirtier and more unpleasant just like LA.
I try telling ted there is a difference between mass sleeping and mass camping. one is territorial garbage producing stagnation and the other is just safety in numbers. One favors the bad apples and the other visually exposes and outnumbers them and their activities. One breeds distrust and degeneracy the other trust and belonging.
It is a wonder why cities then see mass sleeping as a big target. Having a designated safe place to sleep would favor both sides. It would not work for the tweakers who need their privacy and territory nor the one or two adjacent business owners who think they own the world not just their property. Ultimately there will come a time when the city will base policy on that one property owner and break everything up and it will disperse into neighborhoods instead of centralized localities. People will seek safety in tents rather than one another. Trash will ensue along with sedentary establishments and the illicit activities the privacy affords.
In the meanwhile, domesticated suburbanites will fail to see anything but the degenerate outcome and will automatically equate people with no roof of their own to a bad thing. More money for more services for people who need help instead of options for people who needed something different. More money for more cops to patrol and less people to trust. More money for more infrastructural deterrents and less room to breathe. More money for clean up crews instead of making money off of charging for garbage service for legitimized locations.
Just a few examples of how and why domestication and fitting in has replaced survivial and social intelligence resulting in a 10-15% reduction in human cranial size in the last 400,000 years. Coincidently or not, the oldest evidence of permanent structures was about that old as well....
I don't think you read my comment. Actually the complete lack if comprehension supports the last paragraph though.
You wanna talk trashing forests don't gete started. Middle class produce more trash than the worst tweakers. Landfills are so packed an apple turns to methane instead of decomposing. Just because something is out if sight out of mind does not make it sustainable. In terms of consumption and destruction the house you build is responsible for the annihilation of trees and so many living things we're considered to live in a genetic age if extinction by scientists
And weve not eben started talking about what you do for fun or the multiple two ton metallic global warming deathachined you drive to get there....and your bringing that ' save the forest' crap to people who tie up a tent next to trees instead of killing them? Who ride their bike to pick up the useless stuff you produced and were not going to use and at least dispose of it in dispersed localities such that mother nature at least has a chance at decomposing that apple?
Finally consider how much drug use is actually a response to a culture and society of organized repression and how a more natural dynamic might ensue were people not so occupied being chased like rats every time they try to do anything more than merely survive in small numbers and in hiding were it not illegal to be without property. Hans were evolved to be social creatures and it is conformational bias to extricate drug use from the culture which produced it.
You know what contemplating that is too much to ask. So consider this instead; what if we just offered them garbage service for a fee same as we enjoy? Do you have any idea how difficult it is to get rid of a simple bag of trash without compromising your camp sight?
And f*"" you too merc. Quit this gossiping every move some local representative makes and do some real journalism instead of thriving off of gossiping about other peoples lives.
I would like to know the city ordinance giving this neighborhood the right to limit parking on a public street for no reason other than to make sure people don't sleep in cars. I have seen the people living on the street in that neighborhood and there have been some bad examples and there's also a lot of people living on the street in this neighborhood who pick up after themselves and don't leave trash and other debris laying around. So not only does the Laurelhurst neighborhood get to ban camping in Laurelhurst Park which was already banned to begin with but also they get to decide who parks their car overnight on the street.A srreet that the entire city of Portland pays for.
I have no problem with someone with a backpack unrolling a sleeping bag in the park, gone by morning, and as we we're all taught in preschool, picking up their litter.
I try telling ted there is a difference between mass sleeping and mass camping. one is territorial garbage producing stagnation and the other is just safety in numbers. One favors the bad apples and the other visually exposes and outnumbers them and their activities. One breeds distrust and degeneracy the other trust and belonging.
It is a wonder why cities then see mass sleeping as a big target. Having a designated safe place to sleep would favor both sides. It would not work for the tweakers who need their privacy and territory nor the one or two adjacent business owners who think they own the world not just their property. Ultimately there will come a time when the city will base policy on that one property owner and break everything up and it will disperse into neighborhoods instead of centralized localities. People will seek safety in tents rather than one another. Trash will ensue along with sedentary establishments and the illicit activities the privacy affords.
In the meanwhile, domesticated suburbanites will fail to see anything but the degenerate outcome and will automatically equate people with no roof of their own to a bad thing. More money for more services for people who need help instead of options for people who needed something different. More money for more cops to patrol and less people to trust. More money for more infrastructural deterrents and less room to breathe. More money for clean up crews instead of making money off of charging for garbage service for legitimized locations.
Just a few examples of how and why domestication and fitting in has replaced survivial and social intelligence resulting in a 10-15% reduction in human cranial size in the last 400,000 years. Coincidently or not, the oldest evidence of permanent structures was about that old as well....
You wanna talk trashing forests don't gete started. Middle class produce more trash than the worst tweakers. Landfills are so packed an apple turns to methane instead of decomposing. Just because something is out if sight out of mind does not make it sustainable. In terms of consumption and destruction the house you build is responsible for the annihilation of trees and so many living things we're considered to live in a genetic age if extinction by scientists
And weve not eben started talking about what you do for fun or the multiple two ton metallic global warming deathachined you drive to get there....and your bringing that ' save the forest' crap to people who tie up a tent next to trees instead of killing them? Who ride their bike to pick up the useless stuff you produced and were not going to use and at least dispose of it in dispersed localities such that mother nature at least has a chance at decomposing that apple?
Finally consider how much drug use is actually a response to a culture and society of organized repression and how a more natural dynamic might ensue were people not so occupied being chased like rats every time they try to do anything more than merely survive in small numbers and in hiding were it not illegal to be without property. Hans were evolved to be social creatures and it is conformational bias to extricate drug use from the culture which produced it.
You know what contemplating that is too much to ask. So consider this instead; what if we just offered them garbage service for a fee same as we enjoy? Do you have any idea how difficult it is to get rid of a simple bag of trash without compromising your camp sight?
Life on the run...from you