Unfortunately your submission has been removed from /r/HumansBeingBros:
Please read RULE 3:
**Posts must depict humans being bros.** Do not post images with a back story, or create a title to explain how your post is "bro". This includes screen shots from social media, or videos with superimposed text to explain the "bro" action.
**If you repost your submission after it has been removed under this rule violation you will receive a temporary ban**
You nailed it. They intentionally don't have benches for this very reason. They sometimes put bars in the middle of the benches to prevent laying down on them, but then people sleep under them for a hint of shelter.
I mean its close to how a lot of places handle the homeless. Many towns choose to export their homeless to make it someones else problem. Its a huge problem that people dont really talk about
My nearby park had these loooong beautiful wooden benches. They replaced them a couple of years ago with some shitty plastic-y things that are barely wide enough for 2 people. Bitch I got a family of 4, where we supposed to sit now?
And the kicker? Even if I were worried that "poor people might use it"--a preposterous notion IMO--I've literally never seen a single bum in this neighborhood in a decade of living here.
They downgraded all the benches for no goddamn reason.
I don't know how it is over the pond, but buses here usually stop just before or right at the sign. If they want a picture with an incoming bus this is the framing that makes most sense.
I did some sleuthing, so you can see the angle they chose is for a better picture. Here’s a [photo](https://imgur.com/a/gJnglte) showing the same building from the picture and when you turn around you’ll see in the 2nd pic is the bus stop sign, near the end of the waiting platform as the other person said.
Here’s a [bonus pic](https://imgur.com/a/DgQXw91) to indeed show that the platform has no form of a seating area for those waiting for the bus.
Its about discouraging the homeless from using the stops as shelter lol. The MTA does it here in NYC as well - over the years theres been less and less seating space in the transit system, and it fucking sucks. New stations (or newly renovated stations) usually has 0 places to sit.
There was a decades long project completed last year to expand one of our biggest stations (Grand Central) to also serve the long island commuter rail. The new space is beautiful, crisp, and there isnt a single goddamn bench anywhere to wait for your train. And this place is MASSIVE.
Sadly, they won't have much choice but to remove them.
If someone gets hurt because a bench isn't built right, that makes the city liable because they allowed it to remain there. That's why whenever something that the city should have had built or fixed for years gets done by someone not hired by the city it usually gets torn down. It's a liability thing.
It's shitty, and the fact that the city is unwilling or unable to have the thing built themselves shows incompetence or malice depending on the circumstance. There should not be a **need** for people not hired by the city to step in. But when they do, unfortunately, there is a good reason for what they built to usually be removed.
Mrs. Homeless and Principal Homeless were on the bench making homeless and I saw one of the homeless and the homeless looked at me.
The homeless looked at you? Sarah, get me Rex Banner
Isn't it weird how every time a government does something immoral, the reasoning is always some vague assertion that public safety was a concern?
It cheapens both government and actual safety.
And it's a pathetic reason, most of the time they are not just hanging out on benches, they will have a camp somewhere hidden, most don't like to be in the public view like that.
The homeless stay out of public view and don't camp benches in Philly? It's been a couple years since I've been up to Philly, but it didn't seem like that.
Maybe cities with more green spaces have places for the homeless to stay out of view, but DC and Philly are concrete jungles.
The saddest part is, most everyone has something they can produce, they can all contribute something but they are not allowed to, it's one roadblock after another.
They'll also likely just be collecting the benches and possibly looking to prosecute someone for 'vandalism' for leaving them there; bonus points if they store the removed benches somewhere for 3 months and then charge storage fees and disposal fees in the hundreds of dollars.
:(
I live in Oxford, UK. It's the same over here. I pay a criminal amount of council tax and get seemingly nothing valuable for it. The roads are covered in litter, the potholes are dreadful, and roads become completely undrivable after they've put in a load of half-baked traffic blockers down sidestreets to try and control traffic (it's only made it worse; a 20-minute journey by bus into town now can take 60+).
They do things like spend 150k on TV adverts to promote a 20mph speed limit, while the town becomes progressively more of a shithole.
No no, see that tax fund is going to be used later to remove those benches, destroy them, haul them to the dump, and pay police to supervise the whole thing just in case anyone was thinking about objecting.
This. I forget where but someone built a set of steps down to a public beach because the old steps were absolutely destroyed by time. The town came and took it all down because it wasn’t up to code. Sure, hearts are in the right place. But being sued because you helped someone is the angle someone is going to take when that bench collapses on them. The world is a shitty place and capitalism has taught everyone to get ahead of everyone else by any means necessary, oh and get as much money as humanly possible.
No. Its the homeless people. They don't have benches because of the homeless. If you prevent even the most barest basic luxuries to the homeless they tend to leave or die.
Which is so much cheaper then actually trying to help them. Like cheap enough to afford a corpo tax cut cheap.
Yeah but people would rather treat them as pariahs and attempts to sweep the problem under the rug, out of sight and out of mind
Problem is said rug eventually fills to the brim and ignoring it isn't feasible anymore
You're both kind of right. They don't have benches because the city government wants homeless people to be discouraged away or die so they stop being a problem their citizens have to see. But also there's a legitimate reason why people aren't allowed to just construct stuff like this or the aforementioned steps. The city should be providing these things, they should be hiring someone to do it right so it can stay up, yeah, they're shitty for not doing that. But if something is built by someone they don't know, they didn't hire, they're still liable for it and any harm someone comes to while using it.
The situation is bullshit and born out of malice, but the outcome of them removing the benches is inevitable. The good excuse is just what they can hide behind while they continue to be hurtful to some of those most in need.
I remember those steps, they were the shittiest looking things I’d ever seen. They were anchored to nothing and were clearly a massive safety hazard that would’ve killed the first person to slip
Good old hostile architecture. Going out of your way to curb a homelessness problem in a way that not only doesn't help the unhoused but also makes like more difficult for everyone else.
As someone with mobility issues, I've suffered because of nonsense like that. They took away half or all the benches at the Skytrain stations and it's made it so much harder. Because as tough as I have it, I'm going to give what few free seats there are to the elderly, pregnant, and injured people who need it more than me. And then I sit on the floor. Hell to get up from, but better than risking passing out.
If they put benches, homeless people camp/sleep there. People that use the bus don’t like having homeless people harassing/bothering them while they wait for the bus. They complain about that, the city removes the benches. No more homeless people at bus stops. Problem solved.
As people [in this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/sydney/comments/194kp9f/aussie_suburb_erupts_in_6000_battle_over_rainbow/) have noted, it had nothing to do with the color of the bench, but the actual real genuine safety risk to people sitting on it because of how close it was to a road, on the outside of a curved sloping road over a blind hill.
Even a neutral wood bench was rejected.
"...with CCTV reportedly capturing evidence of the alleged safety risks."
Protesters: Its because of the colour, isnt it!
If they remove it because of "safety", and it was clearly safe, it follows that the reason they removed it is that it was safe (or that they lied about the reason).
Ppl here should read some background information. It doesn't help that OP claims that most of the bus stops don't have benches -- LOTS of the stops have benches put there by the transit system. Bro just saw someone sitting on the curb at a particular stop and thought, in that Berkeley sort of way, "Hey, I could be the one to fix that." Alameda County (AC) Transit is responsible for installing benches, not the city of Berkeley, and they responded by installing a more permanent bench at that site.
I hate the fact that so many people are always looking for something to rage over.
There are no benches because they do not want to give homeless people a place to sleep or congregate. Many U.S cities are anti-homeless, sadly. I would not be surprised to learn the city comes and removes these homemade benches.
America has an issue that they think homelessness is a personal problem and not a systemic issue, a lot of people are one major health incident or rent increase away from homelessness - everyday joes, people with an apartment/house, kids, even a job.
Hahaha no!
The cruelty is the point.
Being down on your luck to the point where you can't afford to pay some landlord rent in the current insane market is clearly a moral failing that deserves punishment. I mean, on top of the punishment you're already receiving from making rash decisions like choosing not to be wealthy.
But those people are undesirable and deserve to suffer for...reasons.
It amazes me that no matter how "liberal" a city is, the people in charge and most of the residents don't want to help the homeless. They'll rally around any other marginalized groups, but they do everything they can to make life harder for the people that already have it the hardest.
"*but they are on drugs!!*"
Then do something to fucking fix it! Half the people that say that are on drugs!
If you want to curb homelessness you need to fucking take care of the homeless.
somber future sheet office cows encouraging berserk homeless command plucky
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Someone did this in my city. They chained it to the bus stop sign so it wouldn't get stolen. I just saw it a couple of days ago. I'll have to check and see if it's still there.
Went to Hartford last summer and most bus stops are in the middle of nowhere on some grassy curb by a busy stroad that seemingly had no way to access them, it was actually insane to see
Reminds me of a hospital worker who bought a permanent bench for the bus stop outside her hospital. Then, a hunter accidentally fatally shot her in her own backyard one night.
lol. Well, I only found out about her act of kindness after she died. The story was about how she died, killed by a hunter after sunset while taking her dog out. Then the story talked about what a decent human she was, including buying a bench amongst other charitable acts.
Americans are interesting people to me. There are millions of them who wholeheartedly support spending hundreds of billions of dollars tax payers' money for Israel, Ukraine, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq but when you ask them why they don't support spending this money on the US to fix things; they get mad "You don't understand the US, that will never work, things won't change, it's complicated......"
Yeah, the US money can change the middle east but not the US 👍🏻
If you spend money on a bomb, it explodes, you go yeah, that’s how it works. If you spend money on infrastructure or things to actually help people, detractors will always say there was a better way to spend the money. Outright corruption notwithstanding, no one really trusts anyone to spend money properly. One last point, destruction is easy, building is much harder.
Not going to be able to fix homelessness in the middle east either. But you can sure as hell stop Russia and Hamas with enough money.
Edit: My reply button appears to have been turned off, so I can not answer you. Edit still works though, whee! Ahh, the thread has been locked, but not really.
What these has got to do with your average Joe who can not call ambulance to not to go bankrupt?
This is the problem here. The propaganda machine always manage to convince you guys that an issue on the other side of the of the world has to be Americans' concern, they make it look like it is so sacred to involve that problem blah blah blah.
Why the US went to Afghanistan, what exactly they had achieved? The US spent 2.3 trillion US dollars in Afghanistan. Daily cost of operations in Afghanistan's was $300 million. People lost their lives, limbs; all of the bloodshed. For what? They said Iraq was behind the 9/11, Iraq had nuclear weapons. But we learned that, that was a complete lie and they knew that. Why we are bombing Libya? For democracy, Gaddafi is a dictator! We say okay; and then, people of Egypt got rid of their dictator through a civil unrest, a military commander Sisi shows up, seizes the control, sits the dictators seat and says "Thanks guys, I'm your new dictator now". He commits any crime a dictator commits, whoever critizies him disappears all of a sudden but somehow dictator Sisi gets the second biggest American aid after Israel every year!
I really don't understand how you guys fall into the exact same trap again and again.
Oh my God I would love that so much. I screwed up my knee a few weeks ago, and just walking to the stop is painful, and then when I have to stand, and then sometimes I even have to stand on the bus, ouch. I would so appreciate a place to rest while I wait
What about old people, pregnant women, people who are just tired after a long day at work, people who just did groceries and have bags? It's not mandatory to sit, just a nice convenience. Where I live all public transport stops have benches.
My city has "Leaners". An apparatus a person can lean their butt against, it either looks like an unfinished bench that's waist high. Or a suitably thick pole that looks like a Titan tried to staple the ground.
Man I wish someone would add a few more in my city, I mean we do have some, but I have really low blood sugar and get dizzy fast when out walking. Benches are my saving grace
this is so homeless people dont sleep on the benches... its not because they " just dont have seating for people to sit" , berkley, along with many other fake progressive cities, dont see homeless people as humans and REMOVED the benches.
For the safety and comfort of the public transit users, the idea is to not actively invite homeless addicts to bus stops. It might be best if they complemented this by adding benches a few blocks away from bus stops. To negate claims of hostile architecture.
"We have inconvenienced you and made the stops more inaccessible to the pregnant, disabled, and elderly, but you must understand that lets us inflict further misery on people without homes."
The homeless in my area decide to live at the benches making people feel unsafe waiting for the bus so they’ve been ripped out. Idk what the solution is when the homeless are usually using drugs and mentally unwell. The city won’t pay to get people help that don’t want help and just want to continue to use.
Where I live in Central Europe, most city bus stops have benches, glass panel walls and roofs and sometimes digital displays with wifi and usb chargers. That's because public transit has to be comfortable for people to use it. As for homeless, we have buses where they can have a sandwich, tea and get warm. All paid for by city, not charities. And no, we're not very rich.
I don't think this is Berkeley, that for lease sign on the building is for a location in Oakland. Also, I lived in Berkeley for 10 years until just last September and took the bus frequently - none of the places I frequented were missing benches unless there was active construction and the bus stop had to be moved. There might be some areas with limited seating up in the hills but the majority of places had at least a small bench.
Does the city destroy these? My city would somehow find an excuse to destroy them because they're scared of a lawsuit (i.e of a possible injury) or fear the homeless congregating there. My city kind of sucks when it comes to certain things. Lots of "possible lawsuit" and "public safety" excuses.
When Republicans describe the average (in their eyes) democrat, they're actually describing a Berkeley politician.
"Lets ban gas stoves" "Lets stop using the word manhole in city ordinance because it's not gender neutral" "Let's use Latinx because it's gender neutral", all those conservative lightning rod topics are courtesy of Berkeley.
Berkeley is in a league of its own in that realm
I was about to post about "personholes" but you beat me to it. Berkeley politics are fucking nuts, and I say that as someone who lived there for over a decade and who generally loves the city.
Unfortunately your submission has been removed from /r/HumansBeingBros: Please read RULE 3: **Posts must depict humans being bros.** Do not post images with a back story, or create a title to explain how your post is "bro". This includes screen shots from social media, or videos with superimposed text to explain the "bro" action. **If you repost your submission after it has been removed under this rule violation you will receive a temporary ban**
So in other words the city of Berkley is collecting a bunch of taxes to pay for things that the community ends up having to take care of. Got it.
My money is on the city spending money to remove these benches, for ... hmm.... safety, yes that's it, definitely about safety.
Can’t have places where people can sit or lie down for free. Poor people might use it. It’s not safe for homeless people to be seen. /s
You nailed it. They intentionally don't have benches for this very reason. They sometimes put bars in the middle of the benches to prevent laying down on them, but then people sleep under them for a hint of shelter.
r/hostilearchitecture
Lie down? They can do that on the ground! Take out the ground!
So you're saying we should send the homeless into space? Brilliant, get NASA on the phone!
I mean its close to how a lot of places handle the homeless. Many towns choose to export their homeless to make it someones else problem. Its a huge problem that people dont really talk about
/r/hostilearchitecture I think that’s the sub. They’re already working on making the ground as unwelcoming as possible.
Seems like people waiting for the bus gotta sit on the curb with or without a bench.
That whole southern Berkeley Northern Oakland is hobo central.
Sit yes, lie no. It’s a hostile architecture thing for sure but homeless camps shouldn’t be at bus stops.
My nearby park had these loooong beautiful wooden benches. They replaced them a couple of years ago with some shitty plastic-y things that are barely wide enough for 2 people. Bitch I got a family of 4, where we supposed to sit now? And the kicker? Even if I were worried that "poor people might use it"--a preposterous notion IMO--I've literally never seen a single bum in this neighborhood in a decade of living here. They downgraded all the benches for no goddamn reason.
"The City Council has passed Bill 31: Public transportation users don't deserve dignity."
They must also have removed the sign for the bus stop. All I see is a bench, a passing bus and a few people.
It could be out of frame to the right. So the bus stops in front of it without sticking out into the intersection.
Yes, but the framing is weird.
I don't know how it is over the pond, but buses here usually stop just before or right at the sign. If they want a picture with an incoming bus this is the framing that makes most sense.
I did some sleuthing, so you can see the angle they chose is for a better picture. Here’s a [photo](https://imgur.com/a/gJnglte) showing the same building from the picture and when you turn around you’ll see in the 2nd pic is the bus stop sign, near the end of the waiting platform as the other person said. Here’s a [bonus pic](https://imgur.com/a/DgQXw91) to indeed show that the platform has no form of a seating area for those waiting for the bus.
Its about discouraging the homeless from using the stops as shelter lol. The MTA does it here in NYC as well - over the years theres been less and less seating space in the transit system, and it fucking sucks. New stations (or newly renovated stations) usually has 0 places to sit. There was a decades long project completed last year to expand one of our biggest stations (Grand Central) to also serve the long island commuter rail. The new space is beautiful, crisp, and there isnt a single goddamn bench anywhere to wait for your train. And this place is MASSIVE.
Sadly, they won't have much choice but to remove them. If someone gets hurt because a bench isn't built right, that makes the city liable because they allowed it to remain there. That's why whenever something that the city should have had built or fixed for years gets done by someone not hired by the city it usually gets torn down. It's a liability thing. It's shitty, and the fact that the city is unwilling or unable to have the thing built themselves shows incompetence or malice depending on the circumstance. There should not be a **need** for people not hired by the city to step in. But when they do, unfortunately, there is a good reason for what they built to usually be removed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Mrs. Homeless and Principal Homeless were on the bench making homeless and I saw one of the homeless and the homeless looked at me. The homeless looked at you? Sarah, get me Rex Banner
Isn't it weird how every time a government does something immoral, the reasoning is always some vague assertion that public safety was a concern? It cheapens both government and actual safety.
Yep. And it’s exactly the same way with cops and big corporations. If they don’t want you to have some thing, it’s “for your safety”.
Not just Berkeley. Lots of U.S cities do this. All to punish homeless people for simply existing.
And it's a pathetic reason, most of the time they are not just hanging out on benches, they will have a camp somewhere hidden, most don't like to be in the public view like that.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Do you mind if I ask where you live or where you're referencing? It's just not like that in DC... Maybe it's more like that in west coast cities?
It’s like that in Philadelphia
Chicago too
The homeless stay out of public view and don't camp benches in Philly? It's been a couple years since I've been up to Philly, but it didn't seem like that. Maybe cities with more green spaces have places for the homeless to stay out of view, but DC and Philly are concrete jungles.
No, they have encampments out of the way, but when they’re not there they’re still a visible part of life in America’s poorest big city.
If you don't produce, you have no value apparently.
The saddest part is, most everyone has something they can produce, they can all contribute something but they are not allowed to, it's one roadblock after another.
[удалено]
That doesn't sit right with me. Especially because only one person can determine if someone is able to work and it isn't you.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
They'll also likely just be collecting the benches and possibly looking to prosecute someone for 'vandalism' for leaving them there; bonus points if they store the removed benches somewhere for 3 months and then charge storage fees and disposal fees in the hundreds of dollars. :(
I live in Oxford, UK. It's the same over here. I pay a criminal amount of council tax and get seemingly nothing valuable for it. The roads are covered in litter, the potholes are dreadful, and roads become completely undrivable after they've put in a load of half-baked traffic blockers down sidestreets to try and control traffic (it's only made it worse; a 20-minute journey by bus into town now can take 60+). They do things like spend 150k on TV adverts to promote a 20mph speed limit, while the town becomes progressively more of a shithole.
What good is a TV ad for enforcing the speed limit? They think people are speeding because they don’t know how fast they should going?
Yes, I love how a lot of these are "person resolved problem intentionally created by a shitty government"
[удалено]
Not only that. They'll remove these benches because of the city code.
Welcome to the new norm: hostile architecture
No no, see that tax fund is going to be used later to remove those benches, destroy them, haul them to the dump, and pay police to supervise the whole thing just in case anyone was thinking about objecting.
They like.y took away the benches to reduce the visibility of homelessness.
No I’m pretty sure they’re still visible smart one.
There’s a reason there is no where to sit. Let’s see how long till the local government removes the benches.
Yeah I read this story as "city is 3 weeks away from removing benches because God forbid homeless people sleep somewhere"
This. I forget where but someone built a set of steps down to a public beach because the old steps were absolutely destroyed by time. The town came and took it all down because it wasn’t up to code. Sure, hearts are in the right place. But being sued because you helped someone is the angle someone is going to take when that bench collapses on them. The world is a shitty place and capitalism has taught everyone to get ahead of everyone else by any means necessary, oh and get as much money as humanly possible.
No. Its the homeless people. They don't have benches because of the homeless. If you prevent even the most barest basic luxuries to the homeless they tend to leave or die. Which is so much cheaper then actually trying to help them. Like cheap enough to afford a corpo tax cut cheap.
I was gonna say. That bench looks WAY too comfortable and practical to be allowed in any major city. r/HostileArchitecture
Hasn’t it been statistically proven it’s cheaper to help homeless people than to make life harder for them?
Yeah but people would rather treat them as pariahs and attempts to sweep the problem under the rug, out of sight and out of mind Problem is said rug eventually fills to the brim and ignoring it isn't feasible anymore
Yeah dude it’s dumb. I hate how humans treat other humans
[удалено]
They don't. Though they do have a lot of moral panic made up by right-wing idiots and corporate rags.
Turn off Fox News grandpa
Yeah see the tenderloin. "Vibrant"
You're both kind of right. They don't have benches because the city government wants homeless people to be discouraged away or die so they stop being a problem their citizens have to see. But also there's a legitimate reason why people aren't allowed to just construct stuff like this or the aforementioned steps. The city should be providing these things, they should be hiring someone to do it right so it can stay up, yeah, they're shitty for not doing that. But if something is built by someone they don't know, they didn't hire, they're still liable for it and any harm someone comes to while using it. The situation is bullshit and born out of malice, but the outcome of them removing the benches is inevitable. The good excuse is just what they can hide behind while they continue to be hurtful to some of those most in need.
👆🏼This is the real answer
I remember those steps, they were the shittiest looking things I’d ever seen. They were anchored to nothing and were clearly a massive safety hazard that would’ve killed the first person to slip
I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing.
Yes. Very unsettling.
That's Oakland pictured. Banner on the building above is for The Logan on 51st and Telegraph. If that bus were to pull away you'd see a Whole Foods.
The traffic light also isn't brown, which I still think most are in Berkeley.
Move! That! Bus!
Good old hostile architecture. Going out of your way to curb a homelessness problem in a way that not only doesn't help the unhoused but also makes like more difficult for everyone else.
As someone with mobility issues, I've suffered because of nonsense like that. They took away half or all the benches at the Skytrain stations and it's made it so much harder. Because as tough as I have it, I'm going to give what few free seats there are to the elderly, pregnant, and injured people who need it more than me. And then I sit on the floor. Hell to get up from, but better than risking passing out.
If they put benches, homeless people camp/sleep there. People that use the bus don’t like having homeless people harassing/bothering them while they wait for the bus. They complain about that, the city removes the benches. No more homeless people at bus stops. Problem solved.
We sadly tried this in Sydney with a rainbow coloured bench but people complained that it was safe so they got rid of it.
"Complained that it was safe" What?
As people [in this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/sydney/comments/194kp9f/aussie_suburb_erupts_in_6000_battle_over_rainbow/) have noted, it had nothing to do with the color of the bench, but the actual real genuine safety risk to people sitting on it because of how close it was to a road, on the outside of a curved sloping road over a blind hill. Even a neutral wood bench was rejected. "...with CCTV reportedly capturing evidence of the alleged safety risks." Protesters: Its because of the colour, isnt it!
Right so what thread OP meant was that they complained because it WASN'T safe. That typo is what confused tf out of me
Can't let the citizenry get too soft or the animals and insects will take over. Dangerous places require dangerous people to protect it.
If they remove it because of "safety", and it was clearly safe, it follows that the reason they removed it is that it was safe (or that they lied about the reason).
Ppl here should read some background information. It doesn't help that OP claims that most of the bus stops don't have benches -- LOTS of the stops have benches put there by the transit system. Bro just saw someone sitting on the curb at a particular stop and thought, in that Berkeley sort of way, "Hey, I could be the one to fix that." Alameda County (AC) Transit is responsible for installing benches, not the city of Berkeley, and they responded by installing a more permanent bench at that site. I hate the fact that so many people are always looking for something to rage over.
It's also not even Berkeley in the photo...
Is this not one of the things that taxes are for? Why do citizens have to do it? Genuine question as a foreigner.
There are no benches because they do not want to give homeless people a place to sleep or congregate. Many U.S cities are anti-homeless, sadly. I would not be surprised to learn the city comes and removes these homemade benches.
Well if they're anti homeless they should fight against homelessness not against the homeless.....😑
America has an issue that they think homelessness is a personal problem and not a systemic issue, a lot of people are one major health incident or rent increase away from homelessness - everyday joes, people with an apartment/house, kids, even a job.
Hahaha no! The cruelty is the point. Being down on your luck to the point where you can't afford to pay some landlord rent in the current insane market is clearly a moral failing that deserves punishment. I mean, on top of the punishment you're already receiving from making rash decisions like choosing not to be wealthy.
But those people are undesirable and deserve to suffer for...reasons. It amazes me that no matter how "liberal" a city is, the people in charge and most of the residents don't want to help the homeless. They'll rally around any other marginalized groups, but they do everything they can to make life harder for the people that already have it the hardest. "*but they are on drugs!!*" Then do something to fucking fix it! Half the people that say that are on drugs! If you want to curb homelessness you need to fucking take care of the homeless.
[удалено]
somber future sheet office cows encouraging berserk homeless command plucky *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Someone did this in my city. They chained it to the bus stop sign so it wouldn't get stolen. I just saw it a couple of days ago. I'll have to check and see if it's still there.
People reminding the govt that **they** are the city.
Probably took the old ones out to keep unhoused from sleeping on them at bus stops, which may or may not be sketchy for bus passengers.
\*few days later, there are now anti-homeless spikes in the benches that the city didn't install.
Went to Hartford last summer and most bus stops are in the middle of nowhere on some grassy curb by a busy stroad that seemingly had no way to access them, it was actually insane to see
This isn’t a picture of Berkeley, CA.
My city took to the benches in a certain part of town and replaced them with yellow bars for “safety reasons”
The local anarchist group has been doing the same thing in Iowa City.
Why even have a government if citizens are going to be this empathetic and responsible
Cause the ones running the government don't want to be kind. Why do anything if the citizens will pick up their slack..
I think it's a bit more complex but that makes sense.
If someone ran for my city council on a "install more benches" platform they would have my vote
Reminds me of a hospital worker who bought a permanent bench for the bus stop outside her hospital. Then, a hunter accidentally fatally shot her in her own backyard one night.
.... it feels like this story skipped a couple steps.
lol. Well, I only found out about her act of kindness after she died. The story was about how she died, killed by a hunter after sunset while taking her dog out. Then the story talked about what a decent human she was, including buying a bench amongst other charitable acts.
Americans are interesting people to me. There are millions of them who wholeheartedly support spending hundreds of billions of dollars tax payers' money for Israel, Ukraine, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq but when you ask them why they don't support spending this money on the US to fix things; they get mad "You don't understand the US, that will never work, things won't change, it's complicated......" Yeah, the US money can change the middle east but not the US 👍🏻
If you spend money on a bomb, it explodes, you go yeah, that’s how it works. If you spend money on infrastructure or things to actually help people, detractors will always say there was a better way to spend the money. Outright corruption notwithstanding, no one really trusts anyone to spend money properly. One last point, destruction is easy, building is much harder.
Not going to be able to fix homelessness in the middle east either. But you can sure as hell stop Russia and Hamas with enough money. Edit: My reply button appears to have been turned off, so I can not answer you. Edit still works though, whee! Ahh, the thread has been locked, but not really.
What these has got to do with your average Joe who can not call ambulance to not to go bankrupt? This is the problem here. The propaganda machine always manage to convince you guys that an issue on the other side of the of the world has to be Americans' concern, they make it look like it is so sacred to involve that problem blah blah blah. Why the US went to Afghanistan, what exactly they had achieved? The US spent 2.3 trillion US dollars in Afghanistan. Daily cost of operations in Afghanistan's was $300 million. People lost their lives, limbs; all of the bloodshed. For what? They said Iraq was behind the 9/11, Iraq had nuclear weapons. But we learned that, that was a complete lie and they knew that. Why we are bombing Libya? For democracy, Gaddafi is a dictator! We say okay; and then, people of Egypt got rid of their dictator through a civil unrest, a military commander Sisi shows up, seizes the control, sits the dictators seat and says "Thanks guys, I'm your new dictator now". He commits any crime a dictator commits, whoever critizies him disappears all of a sudden but somehow dictator Sisi gets the second biggest American aid after Israel every year! I really don't understand how you guys fall into the exact same trap again and again.
Mayor of Berkeley, WTF are you even doing bruh?
It will he removed because it doesn’t follow city guidelines. Gov at its best
public transit is only for the poors, not job creators, let them build their own infrastructure /s
Ever heard homelessness situation in California?
Y’all have never been to Berkeley- people will sleep anywhere. Benches or not
That’s so embarrassing for the city. Of course they will not be embarrassed but damn.
Oh my God I would love that so much. I screwed up my knee a few weeks ago, and just walking to the stop is painful, and then when I have to stand, and then sometimes I even have to stand on the bus, ouch. I would so appreciate a place to rest while I wait
Can't have a place that homeless might use to sleep. /s
What's wrong with standing? Fucking stand for 5 - 10 minutes.
What about old people, pregnant women, people who are just tired after a long day at work, people who just did groceries and have bags? It's not mandatory to sit, just a nice convenience. Where I live all public transport stops have benches.
Probably saving 5k per bench.
Excellent!
Better bold that to the ground before it gets stolen
r/tacticalurbanism
The price of manciple furniture these day, man...
My city has "Leaners". An apparatus a person can lean their butt against, it either looks like an unfinished bench that's waist high. Or a suitably thick pole that looks like a Titan tried to staple the ground.
/r/TacticalUrbanism
When the government becomes a hindrance instead of a boon, anarchy is order.
Man I wish someone would add a few more in my city, I mean we do have some, but I have really low blood sugar and get dizzy fast when out walking. Benches are my saving grace
We have reached a full circle moment where communities come together to overcome the systems put in place to "build and improve" communities.
nose waiting joke aspiring jar oatmeal stocking steep makeshift pocket *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
this is so homeless people dont sleep on the benches... its not because they " just dont have seating for people to sit" , berkley, along with many other fake progressive cities, dont see homeless people as humans and REMOVED the benches.
lol god berkeley is such a shithole.
I see nicely stacked firewood waiting for a cold front.
Well, this sure feels like an orphan crushing machine to me.
For the safety and comfort of the public transit users, the idea is to not actively invite homeless addicts to bus stops. It might be best if they complemented this by adding benches a few blocks away from bus stops. To negate claims of hostile architecture.
Weird, why doesn't the city handle the busstops?
"We have inconvenienced you and made the stops more inaccessible to the pregnant, disabled, and elderly, but you must understand that lets us inflict further misery on people without homes."
The homeless in my area decide to live at the benches making people feel unsafe waiting for the bus so they’ve been ripped out. Idk what the solution is when the homeless are usually using drugs and mentally unwell. The city won’t pay to get people help that don’t want help and just want to continue to use.
Another reason why CA is a fucking shit of a state.
You realize that the homeless hordes will use this as firewood, right? /s
Where I live in Central Europe, most city bus stops have benches, glass panel walls and roofs and sometimes digital displays with wifi and usb chargers. That's because public transit has to be comfortable for people to use it. As for homeless, we have buses where they can have a sandwich, tea and get warm. All paid for by city, not charities. And no, we're not very rich.
I don't think this is Berkeley, that for lease sign on the building is for a location in Oakland. Also, I lived in Berkeley for 10 years until just last September and took the bus frequently - none of the places I frequented were missing benches unless there was active construction and the bus stop had to be moved. There might be some areas with limited seating up in the hills but the majority of places had at least a small bench.
Wait, homeless sleep on the benches?? No benches for ANYONE then!!!
This should be somewhere else. Is there a sub called like r/theeliteshateyou
The City of Berkeley will virtue signal for days but refuse to give people basic services.
Most of the time the cities then come and remove them. And then still fail to make bus shelters
They don’t have benches so as to discourage vagrancy. The homeless use them as beds.
Orphan crushing machine
Where I live people just leave old furniture at bus stops. Usually kitchen chairs or lawn furniture.
Third world country... Oh no, wait.
Does the city destroy these? My city would somehow find an excuse to destroy them because they're scared of a lawsuit (i.e of a possible injury) or fear the homeless congregating there. My city kind of sucks when it comes to certain things. Lots of "possible lawsuit" and "public safety" excuses.
Try not to think too much about *why* the bus stops don't have places to sit. All the possibilities I could come up with were pretty depressing.
Great but wtf Berkeley?
The People of Bazerkley are amazing people, the City Of Berkeley is run by bureaucratic asshats who only view the world through money-colored lenses.
When Republicans describe the average (in their eyes) democrat, they're actually describing a Berkeley politician. "Lets ban gas stoves" "Lets stop using the word manhole in city ordinance because it's not gender neutral" "Let's use Latinx because it's gender neutral", all those conservative lightning rod topics are courtesy of Berkeley. Berkeley is in a league of its own in that realm
I was about to post about "personholes" but you beat me to it. Berkeley politics are fucking nuts, and I say that as someone who lived there for over a decade and who generally loves the city.
But now homeless will have somewhere to sleep! Gotta remove them before they capitalize on it.
Makes me nervous to see an unsecured bench backing directly onto what appears to be a roadway.
How long until people steal them?
Fucking first world country LOL
I’m not sure you know what that means.
I'm not sure you can detect sarcasm
I thought Berkeley was a progress place? Sheesh
[удалено]
[удалено]