[flagged]
Maybe the moral depravity of SF breeds truly irredeemable addicts, but as someone whos met a lot of troubled people and ridden a lot of public transit your statement seems alarmingly and unhelpfully critical
In your opinion, what is that solution? If we take a survey of the highest ranked transit systems, it seems like most solutions involve not allowing drug users to use transit systems, whether it's the unthinkable in Asian countries or peppering the system with officers and cameras in Berlin and London. Is that really treating them with love?
Considering how much often I smell alcohol and weed in Waymos, maybe it's actually the most tolerant solution.
They are not hotels, homes, rehab clinics, or personal drug use pods.
Cigarette smokers manage to ride trains and buses without lighting up. We should expect the same of everyone.
Use the veil of ignorance to answer that.
Suppose your loved one was one of these afflicted individuals literally killing themselves on the street. Would you want to force them to get clean or would you want to make their lives "easier" by giving them some "harm-reduction" that will allow them to persist in their zombie state?
Or what if you were in the grips of this lifestyle. Would you want someone to force you to get help or facilitate you killing yourself?
I know my answer
That's generally the point I am trying to make. By letting these people suffer from addiction and homelessness, not offering good medical and social care, you are not caring or loving them, which is a kind of cruelty.
It's a big internet, sometimes people will mention neighborhoods or customs you're unfamiliar with. In my experience, the polite thing is usually to take 3s to make the Google.
SF and CA have a very liberal tax policy, maybe dedicate some of the funds to get them treatment.
We could move the entire population of San Francisco into full time care for very little compared to what we're spending on AI.