Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwayyy479087 | Hacker News Reader

This is because Portland's homeless (like SF and Seattle), are not like Houston or NYCs homeless. They are much happier being homeless than housed, on meth instead of opiates (like the rest of the US), and generally reject the system and have no interest in being a part of it.

Baltimore was just able to significantly reduce their homeless population by giving them housing. Portland needs the Portuguese "rehab or jail" mentality. What they're doing now is NOT working.

View on HN

One-third of those swept accepted offers of shelter. Half of those couldn't find a path to even temporary housing.

Without even considering the point of jailing or rehabbing 1,100 homeless people in a city that has neither the jail nor rehab capacity for its housed population,[1] the city is failing to help even the half of the fraction of homeless people who want and accept help.

1: https://www.mailtribune.com/top-stories/2022/01/29/oregon-is...

1/3rd is pathetic. That means that 2/3rd prefer the way they live now over reintegration.

Maybe because they’ve already had the other third’s experience. Or do you think it’s a moral failure on their part?

I think at the very least it casts doubt on the validity of classifying their situation as "homelessness", which strongly suggests that all they require to be ok again is shelter.

There is widespread violence and sexual abuse in homeless shelters. They may be acting on past or shared experience.

more importantly, you're not allowed to use your drugs in the shelters

Correct. They’re drug addicts, who need rehab. In Portland they’re seen as saintly figures who reject capitalism.

If even 1/3 cannot find proper housing why would anyone want to accept the offer of temporary shelter?

Isn’t it much better to setup a tent somewhere where you may be able to live for weeks, months, or even years without being kicked out, as opposed to the temporary housing where you will be kicked out in 14 days max.

The homeless don’t make decisions in a vacuum. A large part of the reason they declined is because they knew that if they accepted they were only delaying the inevitable.

> They are much happier being homeless than housed

Having been chronically homeless and still having strong ties to the community in my area, big fucking citation needed boss.

People don't generally like to be homeless or want to be. If they're choosing it over the options you're offering them, that's a good opportunity for some serious introspection about what exactly you're offering, and on what terms.

Unstable shelter based housing can be godawful. People need housing that lets them work (even if they are evening or night shift), store their possessions safely, have privacy, dignity and separation to prevent the spread of colds and such.

Seattle and Portland don't offer much shelter like this, the Union Gospel Mission is a hot mess and so are many of the other shelters.

The capacity in Portland isn't there regardless of quality: 615 shelter units available for adults at 98.7% daily utilization, up from 84.8% in August and 90.1% in October.[1]

1: https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/johs/viz/ShelterUtili...

The most abused substance in Portland is fentanyl. Absolutely no comparison by volume. They are referred to as "blues" and readily available for $0.50 a pill

Rehab and jail won't teach them to pay bills and prepare dinner, will it? There's a basic nurturing element missing in all this.

Rehab is nurturimg, moving those afflicted with substance use disorder into inpatient treatment for a month or two, then onto a sober house (with government subsidy for 3 to 5 months) with outpatient treatment during that time.

Everett, WA has good inpatient treatment services like what I describe available to everyone. King County (containing Seattle, Bellevue, Redmond, etc) & Pierce County (Tacoma, etc) have no equivalent, just terrible programs like Seadrunnar.

Thanks for sharing this.

Rehab only works for those willing to do the work. For those that cannot or are unwilling, they should be offered the choice of jail or a work camp (keep on abusing but you're spending 4 hours a day picking up garbage).

We need to have compassion but it doesn't mean these people get a free pass to literally trash our commons and steal to sustain their habits.

It would be a good idea to stop the prohibition. It’s a lie to say ”we need to have compassion” when we are actively suppressing the same people with state-sanctioned violence just for trying to exist in a profoundly anti-human corposcape.

Wouldn't that make for a great incentive to make a chemically dependant slave class? If the fines are less than the profits it's be great business.

Many star trek episodes were written about this.

Most rehab places hire people who have gone through the experience and been homeless to teach and support just these sorts of things. Many places make people take turns cooking/serving/cleaning so they learn those skills. I feel like you are discrediting some amazing people who are barely out of homelessness themselves, who make minimum income, and are already treated very poorly by the clients they try so hard to help. There are some amazing people that truly do care. It's not all soulless. And this is from someone who forcibly went through and hates most of the system.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com