Comments

1
Good for Sally Clark. Homelessness is to avoided, not encouraged!
2
Wait... I thought Slog didn't care about homeless people. Good thing the Seattle Times has been covering this issue so closely.

Most intriguing to me is what Harrell will do. He'll have to weigh his juvenile impulse to deny McGinn a policy win against his disingenuous attempt to sell himself as "The Social Justice Candidate."

3
Wait, unemployment in Seattle is 4.1 percent and 4.4 percent in King County and we have homeless?

Good thing we're not building affordable places like aPodments, right?
4
A bum-lot on every block? Won't that make Seattle a world class city!
5
One way tickets outta here NYC style.
6
1,

Wow, I thought you were a better person than that, Phoebe.

I guess the poor make great political targets, huh? They can't afford to donate to a campaign, so they don't have a voice. I suppose you kick puppies too.
7
What a shock. At large-elected (aka elected by the rich) developer owned Sally Clark doesnt support housing for the poor! Who could guess the closet 1%er, anti-poor, anti-diversity, faux liberal Seattle City Council actually feels the best way to deal with the homeless is to either ship them south (or north) out of the city, ask the SPD to beat and arrest them until they leave voluntarily, or just hope the next winter or flood season up and kills them all!

#GO AT LARGE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL!
8
I thought poverty all moved to the suburbs?

(Or does SLOG not read its own posts?)

Why is it concentrated in a place with some of the most expensive real estate on earth?

9
@6: Please, there are outreach programs to help the homeless find work and find homes. If you institutionalize homelessness as a viable option with permanent encampments, I regret to say that a sizable percentage will have no motivation and will increase its capacity to the maximum. Then what, more and more encampments?
Treat the mentally ill and help people to get to a better place so that they fee empowered with pride and not a become permanent ward of the State.
Just look at San Francisco, and you'll know what I'm talking about.

10
" I suppose you kick puppies too."

If they're drunk, lazy, refuse to work and are shitting on my lawn, yes.

How come shelters in Seattle are only "near capacity" according to the city, ie. they have open beds every night.
11
@1 You're right, that tent city looks so awesome that I'm going to quit my job and move there!
12
The voice of the American Enterprise Institute is alive and well in Wallingford. Welfare Queen much?
13
The notion that making poverty tolerable makes it more attractive is so stubborn. The Malthusians and laissez-faire political economists of the 19th century said the same thing. "Punish the poor!" went the cry, "For their own good!" They were discredited in their time. Surely the conservative instinct to put the boot to the unfortunate will meet the same end someday soon?

It's nauseating in its banal meanness.
14
9,

By that logic, hospital construction only encourages illness. Why, if we just closed all the clinics and hospitals, people wouldn't get sick anymore!

While we're at it, food just institutionalizes overeating as a viable option, and oxygen institutionalizes hyperventilation. The only way to truly empower people to lose weight and stop panicking is to ban food and air. I mean, look at all the fatties panting for breath in San Francisco!

Brilliant, Phoebe! You've solved the age old problem of homelessness, which has plagued every unequal society ever since capitalism began, with your simplistic logic. You even managed to solve binge eating and hotbreathing in the same stroke.
15
Okay, I admit my comment in @1 was callous. But I don't understand the sentiment of not wanting to integrate the homelessness into society (save the chronic alcoholics and mentally ill for special facilities) so that they can hope for a better life. That is the essence of humanitarianism, not the condescending warehousing advocated by @13.
16
Good article, Anna.

There will be no other options because it appears to be enough to say "People shouldn't have to live in tents." That's only slightly better than saying "Giving them tents will just encourage them." Very, very slightly.

17
Phoebe, the only way to integrate homeless people into society is to provide homes so they are no longer homeless. That takes money. Since this state doesn't have the tax foundation to build low-income housing and for-profit developers won't do so, will you? You could really help with that integration by contributing a few million. Thanks.
18
While deployed, I lived in a tent for 1.5yrs. It is humbling. It isn't normal. Moving back into my apartment was mind bending. The military does a poor job at helping you adjust to civilian life. I ,at least, knew there was an end insight. Imagine having to adjust to what we call normal after living on the streets or in a tent. It's soul breaking for people that have to live indefinitely in a tent. How do you think they feel knowing they once lived in a home. It doesn't matter how their life lead them into the tent. They are living it. They need help. All of you should be grateful for indoor plumbing and heat! We can do better. I think reducing people to $4 a bed per night is a destructive way to view human beings. What is the real price? No healthcare, education, or real police protection would put a higher price on that human beings effect on my tax burden. Really, I hate the term burden. Can't we just do this right. They need hard shelters with bathrooms and kitchens and community. Churches are tax exempt. It should be mandatory that they house the homeless. Right now, I'm not a fan of most Seattle City Council. If all they can muster is tent with porta potty's, then by all means show us how kind we are to the homeless. You must be living with blinders on to believe that churches do enough and are willing to house the homeless. You aren't in touch with reality. Maybe railroading them to South Seattle is good enough, with less services in those industrial areas, making the homeless invisible in Wallingford to support council re elections. I would bet the life of my only child that none of the City Council could survive a month in a tent in any church parking lot around Seattle or an industrial area of their choosing. Invest in apodments and hard shelters not tents. Force more public housing, instead of bending to developers that have the ability to weasel out of providing low rent housing so they can profit on the most vulnerable in our society.The Council's lack of determination is showing. None of you deserve to be re elected to council or mayor.
19
15,
It wasn't nearly as condescending as "your "Let them eat cake" comment.

Homeless? Go die of exposure for all I care! I'm not going to encourage poverty by helping you! I got mine, Jack, now go get yours! I only regret having to step over your corpse on the sidewalk while I walk to my gold Lexus!

Phoebe, I really am shocked y your outrageous comment. Callous isn't the word.
20
" provide homes so they are no longer homeless. "

Wow, you'd think there were at LEAST 2700 odd bleeding heart liberals in Seattle with couches.

What gives bleeding hearts?
21
Has anyone making these comments ever been or close to losing everything they have and the only option would be the street?
No everyone knows why or how many people got there. It was stated somewhere "you will always have the poor among you" what will you do about it?
22
"Has anyone making these comments ever been or close to losing everything they have and the only option would be the street?"

Nope, because you have to be a total asshole to have zero friends left to turn to.

"what will you do about it?"

Give me your address, I'll send them over to sleep at your place.
23
I would bet the life of my only child that none of the City Council could survive a month in a tent in any church parking lot around Seattle or an industrial area of their choosing. Invest in apodments and hard shelters not tents. Force more public housing, instead of bending to developers that have the ability to weasel out of providing low rent housing so they can profit on the most vulnerable in our society.The Council's lack of determination is showing. None of you deserve to be re elected to council or mayor.

How many homeless people have you taken into your apartment, you sanctimonious phony? So you know, I have done it. The usual fuckwits are great with the grand statement, but when it comes down to saying "Yes" to someone in need? Your type turns its back with the best of 'em.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.