East Village toilets now closed

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by peter12

No, I think the drop-in centre was the worst thing to happen to the downtown.

Oh, and I assume that is because the colour just clashes with the river in the sunlight. It has nothing to do with the fact that it means that lots of homeless people will be nearby.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Oh, and I assume that is because the colour just clashes with the river in the sunlight. It has nothing to do with the fact that it means that lots of homeless people will be nearby.

Hulkrogan was exactly right when he said that services should be distributed and specialized in smaller locations around the city, preferably out of the core.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Not really the same though. A lot of the homeless population has some sort of addiction or mental illness or combination of both. You can offer all the programs and help you want, but they have to actually want it and continue to use them to get out of their situation.

You would think people with cancer for the most part would do whatever they could to get better.

Homeless people often suffer the effects of issues out of their control (including mental health issues and societal issues) and the desire to fix their situation is less than ideal.

Cancer patients generally smoke, eat poorly, or do many other that have a great impact on the likelihood of developing the disease, and then seek help and a cure once they inevitably get it.

They really aren't much different. One's desire for a cure does not absolve them of fault for their diagnosis. I'm not trying to demonise cancer patients of course, it's a horrendous disease and no matter how you lived your life you should get any treatment you'd like. Homelessness is the same. It's not a problem to simply be policed or relocated.

Claims of the East Village failing because people were doing drugs in the toilet are based in profound ignorance. These are still people like you and I, and can be lived WITH, not around.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by peter12

Hulkrogan was exactly right when he said that services should be distributed and specialized in smaller locations around the city, preferably out of the core.

Are most of the people that access the services located "out of the core"?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Are most of the people that access the services located "out of the core"?

The idea might be to move these people out of the surroundings that cause them so much hardship.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by peter12

Hulkrogan was exactly right when he said that services should be distributed and specialized in smaller locations around the city, preferably out of the core.

I understand what you are suggesting, but what purpose does that serve?

Would it be cheaper to build and staff 5 locations that would house the same number of people as the DropIn center? Would there be a bigger benefit to the people who use it? Would it be easier to get to them? Would there be less drug users in these individual centers?

[Madman]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I understand what you are suggesting, but what purpose does that serve?

Would it be cheaper to build and staff 5 locations that would house the same number of people as the DropIn center? Would there be a bigger benefit to the people who use it? Would it be easier to get to them? Would there be less drug users in these individual centers?

It would sure be less Homeless Mecca.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by peter12

The idea might be to move these people out of the surroundings that cause them so much hardship.

Living downtown causes people hardship? I wonder why it costs so much to live there then.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I understand what you are suggesting, but what purpose does that serve?

Would it be cheaper to build and staff 5 locations that would house the same number of people as the DropIn center? Would there be a bigger benefit to the people who use it? Would it be easier to get to them? Would there be less drug users in these individual centers?

We can pretend as much as we want that the homeless not suffering from a severe mental illness (I am not denying that bipolar disorder, psychosis, or schizophrenia aren't important factors) do not bear any sort of responsibility for their actions, but the truth remains is that homeless people often make choices that make them homeless. Substance abuse is not a get out of jail free card either. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that addicts are born out of criminality, and not the other way around.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Madman

It would sure be less Homeless Mecca.

But what difference does it make, really?

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Madman

It would sure be less Homeless Mecca.

And what purpose would that serve? There needs to be a tangible benefit for people to be claiming that it would be better for them to not be downtown.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by strombad

Homeless people often suffer the effects of issues out of their control (including mental health issues and societal issues) and the desire to fix their situation is less than ideal.

Cancer patients generally smoke, eat poorly, or do many other that have a great impact on the likelihood of developing the disease, and then seek help and a cure once they inevitably get it.

They really aren't much different. One's desire for a cure does not absolve them of fault for their diagnosis. I'm not trying to demonise cancer patients of course, it's a horrendous disease and no matter how you lived your life you should get any treatment you'd like. Homelessness is the same. It's not a problem to simply be policed or relocated.

Claims of the East Village failing because people were doing drugs in the toilet are based in profound ignorance. These are still people like you and I, and can be lived WITH, not around.

Here is where I don't agree with you though. To simplify how people become homeless let's say they get addicted drugs, or don't get help for a mental health issue. The same can be simplified for a cancer patient saying they ate bad, smoked, didn't exercise. So what happens is they are now homless or a cancer patient based off of their actions.

Now a lot of cancer patients seek help because they want to get better. What I was saying about the homeless is that a lot of them don't seek help. That is why I said you can offer all the programs you want, but people have to want to use them.

This of course says nothing about the programs that are available to help homless people, but I assume we spend more money on trying to cure cancer than we do on curing homelessness.

[peter12]

Claims of the East Village failing because people were doing drugs in the toilet are based in profound ignorance. These are still people like you and I, and can be lived WITH, not around.

Central Memorial Park, for a brief time, was one of the most beautiful public spaces in the city. It is now rife with homeless gangs, and a drug dealers. The public building by the library is routinely broken into for use by prostitutes, and evidence of their liaisons strewn about the pavement afterwards. I do not like living with these people.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by peter12

We can pretend as much as we want that the homeless not suffering from a severe mental illness (I am not denying that bipolar disorder, psychosis, or schizophrenia aren't important factors) do not bear any sort of responsibility for their actions, but the truth remains is that homeless people often make choices that make them homeless. Substance abuse is not a get out of jail free card either. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that addicts are born out of criminality, and not the other way around.

ok, so homeless people are responsible for their situation in some way. Yep, of course.

You have any plans to answer the question about how it would provide any benefit to be split into several facilities rather than just one?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Rathji

ok, so homeless people are responsible for their situation in some way. Yep, of course.

You have any plans to answer the question about how it would provide any benefit to be split into several facilities rather than just one?

Decentralizing services tends to increase efficiency. Separating addicts from potential enablers is another benefit. Integrating homeless facilities into local economic and social opportunities outside of the homeless community.

Right now, the DIC dominates the east end of downtown, and I see no benefit.

[HotHotHeat]

What we really need are some designated slum areas, like third world countries have.


Should I have made this post green?

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by strombad

Everyone knows they're just people without homes right? Who cares where they hang out?

Fix the fact that they're homeless, not where they're hanging out or where high police presence happens to be.

Some choose this as a lifestyle choice though and that is unfortunate if some will not help themselves.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by peter12

Central Memorial Park, for a brief time, was one of the most beautiful public spaces in the city. It is now rife with homeless gangs, and a drug dealers. The public building by the library is routinely broken into for use by prostitutes, and evidence of their liaisons strewn about the pavement afterwards. I do not like living with these people.

Then move? You don't HAVE to live with "these people," but unfortunately they has just as much right to be there as you do. I don't very much people care about your delicate sensibilities on the matter.

Ever talked to the homeless in your community? Asked if they needed extra clothes, food, anything you can provide for them? Perhaps integrate yourself into THEIR community as a positive presence, rather than one who simply skulks by, cursing their very existence? It could honestly help your demeanour immensely.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by strombad

Then move? You don't HAVE to live with "these people," but unfortunately they has just as much right to be there as you do. I don't very much people care about your delicate sensibilities on the matter.

Ever talked to the homeless in your community? Asked if they needed extra clothes, food, anything you can provide for them? Perhaps integrate yourself into THEIR community as a positive presence, rather than one who simply skulks by, cursing their very existence? It could honestly help your demeanour immensely.

This is unbelievably ridiculous and sentimental.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by peter12

Central Memorial Park, for a brief time, was one of the most beautiful public spaces in the city. It is now rife with homeless gangs, and a drug dealers. The public building by the library is routinely broken into for use by prostitutes, and evidence of their liaisons strewn about the pavement afterwards. I do not like living with these people.

Is this a decent development? It was beautiful last year with the colored fountains and the new restaurant owned by the River Cafe folks.