
Domestic Imperialism: How developers are forcing homeless out of Downtown LA - gruez
http://www.mrjkd.com/2015/09/domestic-imperialism-how-politically.html
======
sliverstorm
The amount of spin is making me dizzy

 _A recent report by City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana shows the
scale of police oppression, where the homeless, representing less than half a
percent of Los Angeles ' population, are subject to 14% of arrests_

Yes, how strange! They are after all no different from anyone else. Just as
with their over representation in fire calls[1], there is clearly a conspiracy
at work here. /s

 _In Utah, which has pioneered a Housing First strategy, homelessness has been
reduced 91% by simply giving the homeless housing. If 91% of people can be
convinced to accept services by the state of Utah, why do Schatz and others
keep insisting that these people are unreachable?_

Certainly sounds like at least 9% are rather unreachable. I've always
considered the Utah program an interesting failure in that regard- giving the
homeless free housing reduced but did not eliminate homelessness (!?!). Though
points about lower total state cost per homeless person are well taken.

The article probably has some good points to make, but how am I supposed to
find them under all the spin?

[1]: [http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/27/us/san-francisco-
firefi...](http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/27/us/san-francisco-firefighters-
become-unintended-safety-net-for-the-homeless.html?referrer=)

~~~
zyxley
> I've always considered the Utah program an interesting failure in that
> regard

How is it a failure? It's not a solution to literally everything, but it's
benefited many people _and_ saved the state a fair amount of money by reducing
emergency service and jail visits.

[http://www.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/ut-study-housing-
the-h...](http://www.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/ut-study-housing-the-homeless-
saves-taxpayers-money-20150826/)

~~~
sliverstorm
A failure in that one very specific sense, that it did not completely cure
homelessness, as one might hope giving them all free housing would. I don't
mean it was an overall failure.

Edit: if my exact word choice is that important to you, how about "qualified
success". Does that make you more comfortable? Hopefully we can agree that a
program which _gives the homeless homes_ and yet fascinatingly does not
eliminate all homelessness is not an _unqualified_ success.

~~~
ForHackernews
Clearly a failure. Can you imagine what a failure your startup would be if it
only controlled 91% of the market?

------
turbostyler
The last two paragraphs make me really question this guy's perception and
judgement. DTLA has been significantly revitalized, business has improved
considerably, and no one in their right mind would call an investment made
there 10 years ago a bad one.

Skid Row still exists, but it's shrinking every year, and Downtown is a
completely different place now.

------
mc32
Wow, maybe there is some truth to what the author claims and surely there are
concerns with regard to the homeless, but credibility gets thin after the
deluge of hyperbole and inflammatory language. In some circles this language
soul be classified as "triggers".

If they have a point to make, it's easier to understand when the other side
isn't so violently vilified.

I think it's also worth remembering that the opposite of gentrification is
what you get in places like Detroit --and I don't see people clamoring to go
to Detroit, physically or as a state of mind.

So we need a balance. We need policies which offer help to the homeless but
also allow for progress which can sustain programs which help the homeless.

------
lloydde
From the title, in the context of hacker news, I thought it was going to be
software developers not real estate / property developers. Phew, sorta.

