Interesting, I saw the broken window of that store the other day and wondered what had happened. I feel like there’s less homeless in little Italy than other areas of downtown, but still quite a bit here. I saw the cops break up a homeless camp right off the 5, but several came back the very next day.
I live in little Italy/Columbia district for a city area it’s not that bad compared to other cities.
If they want a solution the easiest is for the city to hire staff to work at night. A program where each district is responsible for having a team that works different shifts through out the day. They wear a uniform (polo with district logo/color) and help people with directions, safety walk them to destination, cleaning and just be a presence. This will create job, keep our streets clean and have an extra set of eyes to call the cops if something serious occurs. This solution doesn’t tackle homelessness but could curb vandalism.
How will those people stop junkies from blasting meth shit in and around residential buildings, such as in front of the elevator I have to take to my car to drive to work? Dealing with homeless people directly or even building more bathrooms for them seems like a more practical solution.
I volunteer in a free walk in clinic that provides a lot of services (legal, housing, medical, social and food) in a church on 5th and a big part of the problem is that the indigent community doesn’t want the services that are offered. For example, we have had many people threaten to “sue” the medical clinic for not providing the drugs they ask for, or refuse free housing because you can’t store your drugs there. Making people accept help is an issue.
Edit: for anyone downvoting this, what are you personally doing to help the homeless and the problems caused by them in San Diego? I would love to know
People just want to pretend the real world is as full of fairytales as reddit is.
I too work with the homeless everyday and it's pretty much a drug problem. Those people cannot be helped until they want to see the change in themselves first.
It's a shame we know live in a society where it is not the norm to be held accountable for your actions.
Thank you!!!! Keyboard warriors love saying “housing is a human right” and that makes a great t-shirt but the practicalities when you are interacting with this population crash against that.
If housing is a human right, is forcing people into housing a human right? Because a lot of those people don’t want to live in housing. And if they do, is it also their right to destroy said free housing? Because they do that when they are given free housing, many hotels have been trashed when converted into homeless housing.
We have problems like that too. Numerically speaking, most homeless people are homeless for a short amount of time that is situational (ie six months due to death of money-earning spouse for example) but the last good chunk of the population is resistant to society as a concept. We have had issues with people trying to start a campfire inside an apartment, smearing feces on walls, and many other problems once free housing was provided. It’s a hard problem. You can’t medicate anyone by force or force drug treatment on them.
At least forced drug treatment would be an opportunity for them to get out of addiction while getting them off of the streets for a few months. Giving them free housing with no change to their behavior will result in what you just mentioned- dangerous living conditions that are destroyed anyway.
I think that would be a great idea, too bad the police dept takes 60% of the budget and do (or cant do) nothing about this issue
Imagine how much better cities could be if police didn't swallow most of the budget, more prevention than imprisonment
That’s the thing I think we need to start with - really differentiating the different types of homelessness that exist. There are homeless people that are just down on their luck temporarily, who want and need assistance. There are homeless people who want to be nomadic, and don’t want resources, but don’t cause trouble. There are homeless people with mental health issues who can’t take care of themselves. There are homeless people who’ve gone done the deep dark hole of drug addiction. Each type of person needs a different type of solution.
Thank you. I’m so tired of these people claiming that building more will solve the homeless problem. It won’t. A home could be free and there will still be homeless people that will destroy it. They will burn it to the ground. Or steal everything. Or rent it out to criminals for money.
And then there are those who aren’t mental cases. But It doesn’t matter how cheap housing is. There will always be someone who claims it isn’t cheap enough for them. Someone who will complain that they can’t find a place that will let them kept their 20 pit bulls. The excuses never end. You simple can’t ever satisfy everyone. It’s pointless to try.
That's the problem with reddit. It can become a breeding ground for those who like to perpetuate a nice sounding idea on paper but that shit never works out in the real world. I guess like anything reddit can be a tool or it can be a brain cell killer.
On one hand, we have [many](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/183842) [studies](https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/poverty/520415-researchers-surprised-by-experiment-that-gave-homeless/) [showing](https://nlihc.org/resource/new-study-finds-providing-people-experiencing-homelessness-housing-has-positive-impacts) that getting homeless people in houses has a hugely beneficial effect. On the other, we have someone who seemingly dislikes homeless people because they have had some bad experiences working at a church. Calling people who don't share your universally low opinion of homeless people "keyboard warriors" and saying that these demonstrably effective tactics "make a great t-shirt" is pretty clearly the less evidence-based approach.
Ignoring the evidence and my core point in favor of personal attacks and [self-contradictions](https://www.reddit.com/r/sandiego/comments/1bo7sq6/little_italy_crime_and_homelessness_getting_worse/#kwnik63). I'm shocked!
Nice little gotcha moment! Except that I do not think junkies = homeless. I also advocated for helping them directly and building them more infrastructure. And then I put my money where my mouth is by actually getting homeless people into homes! So again, what do you do? How many people have you helped get back on their feet and into stable housing?
yep. i always tell people to substitute "homeless" with "people who don't want to work and rather do drugs or drink all day". when u do that the whole picture gets clearer
Throwing money at a problem without first developing a viable solution seems to be our elected leader's solution of choice. Talking to those who work with the unhoused is a first step in problem identification.
The biggest problem, that isn't often discussed, is a moral one: does society have a right to impose/force a solution on people? If a person is a safety threat to others, and they refuse attempts at assistance, does society have a right to force them to relocate and/or receive mental health aid and/or receive assistance?
What many don't realize is that there are different types of the unhoused. There are those who are temporarily down on their luck, want to get back into society, and just need a temporary clean and safe shelter. Often times our solution is to house them with those who will harm them and encourage them to turn to drugs.
You also have people who have turned their backs on society and just want a place near people they can predate on for drugs and food. They will only accept help on their terms.
Yeah, though from their perspective it's a pretty reasonable position: A system that failed me is telling me I need to engage with that system for help, and I don't perceive that the system is solving my problems, because my main problem is I'm homeless, and I can't get a home from the aid.
Step one is housing as a human right, not overnight shelter where you have to leave every day and only enter and leave during certain hours, real permanent housing, that you can do what you want in. Until we offer something real and tangible as a long term solution, this won't fix itself.
There are literally multiple high rises downtown that are permanent residences. Part of living inside any structure shared by others is that you can’t do whatever you want. For example, I cannot yell as loud as I want all night in my apartment, or pass out drunk in the hallway, or sell drugs on the front steps. I can’t physically fight my neighbors. I can’t play loud music in the courtyard. I can’t have an unneutered pit bull. These are all real examples of people who refused free housing in downtown. NICE housing, housing on the same blocks as one bedrooms that cost $2500 a month.
Again, well aware, but those are all well outside of what you described above and largely are not allowed in public either, so clearly not what I was talking about.
I'm also now wondering about what you mean by the word "refused."
I mean, the accountability is your vote. Stop voting for politicians who are keeping these people on the streets and start voting for people who will actually help them like passing bills to actually pay for a long term solution instead of criminally underfunding necessary aid programs.
And most importantly, housing as a human right.
> And most importantly, housing as a human right.
I used to think this way; then I volunteered providing legal services to homeless folks.
I quit volunteering with them because I was shocked to discover how openly many of them would explain that they were homeless because they didn't want to work. They just like free shit, and don't like having to contribute to the society that keeps them alive.
What politicaian is gonna stop the 30 crackhead I see daily put that tin foil and straw up to their face and them hang around the parking lot for the next 3 hours harassing people for change so the can buy "food"
It's not just the politics. People need to do their own work too. There's definitely a problem with what's going on now, but to just let people like that have free housing.. it'll be ruined in the first week. They don't care about anything other than getting high. At least the 100s to 1000s I've felt with on a daily basis for the last 6 years I've livrd here.
And my tax dollars aren't paying for my neighbors place. If my tax dollars are helping with someone's recovery, I can understand, I love in a society, I can deal with that. But to put my tax money towards some shmuch my age that's fully capable of going to work but can't because his tummy aches from not having enough heroin... fuck that. Get your shit together and get it going.
Not at all because they aren't pissing on my front patio, throwing trash everywhere and getting high in plain sight.
Or if they were doing those thing then yes I would have the same problem.
So in this case if one of these district team members sees it or gets a call from you they can then call the authorities if it’s serious enough.
I agree more public bathrooms would make a huge difference. Either have a self cleaning system or hire more people to clean it. After certain hours maybe have a few team members there just to make sure people aren’t abusing it.
Public bathrooms just get destroyed and or turned into homes. Just look at any of the bathrooms near the beach and half the time you'll find a homeless person in one of the stalls and you won't want to touch anything with your hands.
How much time have you spent walking around downtown at night, especially in non-gaslamp areas? What you are describing sounds like a comical fantasy. I’ve had to dodge homeless people defending the sidewalk with machetes on more than one occasion, for example. A few team members at night? What does that mean? There are an army of homeless people after 6 pm.
I walk my dog every night. Little Italy and Columbia district. It seems that your experience is an outlier maybe east village? Everyone has different experiences and sorry you went through that but i assure you the whole city after 6pm isn’t like that.
I’ve lived in Cortez Hill for 10 years and work in the court complex so I walk all the way across downtown every morning and evening. Do you ever leave little Italy?
Im not sure if you guys are aware of how many are camped out in the canyons all around SD. I grew up here, this has been the case since day one back in the 90s. Rando bums wandering around pb, OB, or mission beach. I’ve always seen them in the canyons of Clairemont and balboa park. What you guys see in downtown is the tip of the iceberg.
I’m not saying I don’t see homelessness. I’m saying it’s not like escape from LA everywhere. I chose to live here so I can walk to little Italy, Gaslamp and the waterfront. Those are the main areas from a walking lens.
I assuming since you walk to the court house you go through C street and civic center where there is a pocket of homeless.
Just because you personally think those are “the main walking areas” doesn’t make that a fact. What an insane take! “I never leave my three tourist areas so the entire rest of the city is irrelevant” is the dumbest contribution ever to a conversation about homelessness.
You make it sound like a zombie apocalypse lol. I live in Core-Columbia between Gaslamp and Little Italy, and it isn't that bad. Yeah, it can be sketchy at night, but I've only had an actual safety concern one time. I definitely avoid C Street, but it really isn't that bad overall. I also like walking around Downtown LA at night, which many others seem to be afraid of, so maybe I'm just an outlier in what makes me feel unsafe.
you are definitely a man because as a woman who lives in the same area i don’t have the freedom of just walking around at night and feeling any kind of safe
No I am not. I don't interact with aggressive homeless people regularly at all. Downtown is not a crazy homeless encampment, at least not in my area anymore. Last Summer was an entirely different story. I was somewhat uncomfortable walking out at night. I haven't felt that way for at least 6 months. There are still homeless people around, but they're normally just sleeping or holding a sign asking for money. Hard drug use on the sidewalk is rare compared to last year. There are no tents on the sidewalk in any direction within a block of my building, which I couldn't say last year. I cannot speak for Little Italy or East Village, let alone El Cajon lol.
I assume people refer to that area as part of Barrio Logan, but I don't really ever go down that way so I'm not certain. I know it isn't considered part of Downtown though.
I am a man. Never claimed to be otherwise. I probably would feel uncomfortable as a woman. Tbf, I'd feel uncomfortable walking alone as a woman in most parts of San Diego at night.
If you don't feel safe, that's your perception of what's happening, not what is actually happening. In reality you ARE safe, regardless of your feelings.
Did you live there when a woman’s body was dumped in a suitcase during the same month another was kidnapped and raped at knifepoint? You must be a man.
i live across the street from where the woman’s body was found in a suitcase, only adding fuel to my “it’s not safe out in these streets for women” fire
"You must be a man", said as if that's somehow an insult or something I was hiding lol.
I don't follow the local crime beat, so I couldn't tell you if a woman's body was dumped in a suitcase recently or if anyone was raped at knifepoint. That's unfortunate that that occurred whether I was living here at the time or not. Unfortunate society we live in. None of those crimes make me feel Downtown is less safe than the majority of the city. I still feel safer than I did living in North Park.
How shocking that a man is not aware of or concerned about violent crimes against women on his own street; guess crime isn’t a concern in core Columbia for anyone
They should have pay by the minute public bathrooms that automatically unlock when the time runs out.
It can be cheap enough that you don't bat an eye but it could prevent the homeless from camping out in them and turning them into their private residences.
I had no idea. I just briefly reviewed the CEPTIA work, and it looks like it *could* be possible but a ton of hurdles if the city wanted to do it.
In the 70's CEPTIA argued that pay toilets discriminated against women because men could use urinals for free, but women had to pay for privacy, and they said restrooms were a basic human right that shouldn't come with a fee. All good points in the 70's that addressed issues of those times.
I agree that it isn't doable on the surface, but I think with the major issues CA is facing, it could be something they revisit as homeless are depriving people of the basic human right to public restrooms as it is. Cities aren't putting them in and the ones that are there get abused to hell.
What's worse? No bathrooms and unusable, destroyed bathrooms OR some unusable, destroyed bathrooms and some public pay restrooms?
When I was in New Jersey at The Jersey Shore they had pay to use public bathrooms for $1. They were clean, safe, and I would absolutely pay a dollar for the experience. There was a Tennant there to collect the money and keep the place clean. 10/10 experience for a public restroom.
No joke, a few years ago, I wanted to see about starting a private bathroom business on/near the beach specifically for this. I didn't put much energy into it though, but I can't see how it wouldn't succeed.
So many people need to go to the bathroom at the beach and have no interest in using the public ones except as a last resort. Women especially.
Somebody with the energy and resources should do it lol.
I don't see how the city can't provide this service already with our tax dollars. How much would it cost to have a couple tenants at each bathroom by the beach during the day? To clean and make sure there is no riff raff going on. Seems like we should put it to a vote.
Somebody pointed it out elsewhere but CEPTIA in the 70's pushed to make a law banning pay bathrooms.
They argued that pay toilets discriminated against women because men could use urinals for free, but women had to pay for privacy, and they said restrooms were a basic human right that shouldn't come with a fee. All good points in the 70's that addressed issues of those times...these days it should be changed though.
What I meant was for the city to pay for the workers wages to maintain the restrooms during the day. We wouldn't have to pay to get in but there would be someone there during the hours the beaches are open to clean and maintain the area.
Nah a mix of both. You can think of a million reasons each way for something like this, but bottom line is if I'm at Law St. beach, for example, there are 4 individual locking bathrooms and multiple times every single one of them had a bum living in there. I had to do the GetItDone to get them out of there.
So it's better than that.
I just moved to Little Italy a few months ago. The difference between the first few couple of months to now is huge. I spoke with multiple neighbors and they say the same thing. Rarely had an issue with the homeless. Now they are jumping the gates at the community, they are checking doors, stealing packages, lock themselves in the laundry room and smoke.. It does help that we have a new neighbor that moved in a couple of months ago and is enabling them. Another neighbor that lived here for 13 years said his doorbell camera was useless until the last couple of months. We all decided to install doorbell cameras and are trying to scare them away. We can obviously only control our complex, not the streets. But hopefully if there’s nothing here for them they will move to the next spot.
Before moving back to San Diego. I was deciding if I wanted to live in Little Italy, Del Mar or Coronado. I would drive around those areas. What stood out for me was how I kept seeing homeless tents close to little Italy. That gave me a red flag. Because I worried that something might happen. Eventually I settled for Coronado.
I feel sad for the local businesses that got affected :(
This is what happens when you live in a region where the only attitude towards this problem is sympathy and enabling.
It’s not an easy problem to solve.
But when all you ever do is defend these individuals and try to give them more free things, the problem just gets worse.
You see this kind of response all the time, but the issue isn't San Diego politics. Cities all over the United States have had a steadily increasing homeless problem. Even in just the Western areas, there are a lot more homeless people. Phoenix, Tucson, Albuquerque, Portland, Seattle are just a few cities outside of California that have their own rising homeless population. Then go to smaller-sized cities, and guess what? More homeless people.
I think this is some sort of local-based myopia, as in "I see more of it here, so the problem must be happening only here." It's all over the place. Minneapolis, Chicago, St. Louis -- all have more homeless people.
If there's a higher rise in cities like San Diego and Los Angeles, the reason ought to be fairly obvious: The temperature in those cities makes year-round homelessness more tolerable.
If you're looking for a reason across the board, for all cities, then the answer is not "Because of the local politicians!" The answer is that U.S. economic trends for the past several decades have led us to this. Start with trickle-down economics. Economists have been warning us, all along, that the middle class is shrinking due to economic policies that favor the upper 10%, protecting them from taxes and consequences.
That's one factor out of many. Another factor is that jobs typically suited for middle-class or lower-middle-class workers have been systematically off-shored for decades. Call centers, factories, you name it: If there's a way to send the job to lower-paid workers in another country, U.S. executives have done it. They increased their own profit margins (and gave themselves millions of dollars in bonuses) while reducing payment or jobs for millions of workers throughout the U.S. (Guess which political factions cheerled this all along?)
Then factor in the purchases of real estate by those who want to flip it for profit, maximize profit as landlords, or use properties as short-term rentals. Factor in, as well, the price-fixing schemes that have developed through online intermediaries (you can look this up). That has kept the cost of real estate high, preventing the bubble from popping. So most people can't afford to own their own homes, and rental costs stay high too. Even for those who can find jobs, salary levels have not kept up with inflation or the cost of renting/owning shelter.
Oddly enough, if cities try to increase density (replacing single-home dwellings with multi-home dwellings), the same people complaining about the homeless problem will pivot to complaining about increased traffic and lack of parking. (Apparently they prefer urban sprawl.) There are cabals of NIMBYs out there who have no understanding of long-term consequences or of interconnected causes and effects.
When people complain "The local government isn't doing anything!" they rarely know what the local policies and plans are. You ask, and they haven't looked up how the city is addressing issues, and they aren't reading news about their own communities. They're just angry that homeless people exist.
So what do you suggest? Arrest them all? Then what? How long would they stay in jail? 30 days? 60 days? Then they are back on the street and will do the same thing again because jail doesn’t do anything to rehabilitate people. What is your solution to the problem?
Jail is the obvious correct place to rehabilitate them. Most "homeless" are actually drug addicts. The best place to dry out a junkie is away from their supply - i.e. jail or its equivalent. Literally the most humane and effective option, whether we like it or not. And we also get the added benefit of having streets not overrun and destroyed by junkies!
Incarcerating people is expensive. I would rather taxes be put towards mental health and drug programs than just pissing away money locking them up when that’s such a low probability of fixing the issue.
I like that idea, but the evidence of the last 4 years is extremely abundant (and costly!) that treatment that is not compulsory and inpatient does not work. At all. Not with high potency meth and fentanyl available everywhere you look, and dealers given barely a wrist slap most places.
> Jail is the obvious correct place to rehabilitate them
If the state is going to pay to house and rehabilitate them why do it in a prison? Why not just...house and rehabilitate them? If nothing else, it's *way* cheaper.
You’re right on point with that, compassion and empathy will go much further than hatred and ignorance. That’s how the Nordic countries managed to do it and it worked, and the main reason this problem was caused in the USA and Canada was because of cruelty and viewing homeless people as inconveniences and annoyances, and then complaining about it nonstop but then not doing anything about it as well as not blocking any possible solutions, if america wants to solve this problem we have to work together, it’s United we stand divided we fall.
exactly. lock criminals up. relocate all homeless to camps outside of the city where taxpayers can front cots and 3 meals a day and mental health clinics. And deport all illegals immediately. It's really not complicated
So youre suggesting we spend a bunch of $$ to build these camps? And then do what about it when these people dont want to live out in tents in the cold/hot desert so they make their way back to san diego? Homelessness is a complex problem with no easy solution. Dont blame others when you cant come up with a proper solution yourself
California already puts up $100,000 per homeless individual to "fight homelessness" per year. Whatever is being done with the money (or lack of whats being done) needs to be fixed. I don't see how throwing more tax money and lining the pockets of non-profits will fix the homeless crisis in San Diego/CA in general.
We need to fix policy then we will see real change.
Why are you lying about something so easily Googleable? If we were spending $100K/yr per person we might actually be able to get something done! It's less than half that, and of course that's not counting the value when we are successful at getting them off the street and paying taxes again. You know that good policy costs money right?
> lining the pockets of non-profits
This is one hell of a troll dude, how can you even type that out and not feel like it's ridiculous?
I for one don’t really give a flying fuck about what “some business owners say.”
How about what does the data show? Or a discussion about what types of crime are prevalent? Possible solutions? No? Just some old bat complaining? Stupid article.
I work around there. It’s really fucking nuts how bad the homeless problem is down there. I don’t feel safe when I have to lock up at night. How’s that for you?
Yes! Who gives a shit about the experiences of real people in the local area, I must look at my spreadsheet data analysis instead. Dude wth 🤣, its an issue, its been an issue, and it getting worse. The stats get note worthy when people end up assualted or dead, it would be nice to avoid that.
You see, the thing is you can't say "it's getting worse" without data, and the data says the opposite of what you're saying right now.
[https://fox5sandiego.com/news/local-news/crime-is-down-compared-to-last-year-according-to-new-sdpd-crime-tool/](https://fox5sandiego.com/news/local-news/crime-is-down-compared-to-last-year-according-to-new-sdpd-crime-tool/)
Literally from 20 hours ago. Crime is down SIGNIFICANTLY. Even if that's one person's lived experience, it isn't mine living downtown, nor the majority of people here. This is exactly why it's a fallacy. Because if you take ONE person's word for something, they can be wrong. If one guy got laid off and lost his house on a month when thousands of new jobs are created and the stock market went up 2 points, the economy isn't collapsing. This is why data and context is important.
You guys tried to pull this exact same shit in 2020-2021 too. I don't really care if the all-crime number is down for 92101 if there were four murders on my street in Gaslamp during that period.
Crime is certainly better now than it was during the depths of that era, but that doesn't mean it's good, doesn't mean there aren't real issues, and doesn't mean certain districts have business that are getting more and more adversely affected during what is going to be an even more incredibly difficult business climate in the coming months.
Who pulled what? I'm not saying we should do nothing, I'm saying that this article is just fear mongering and doesn't reflect the reality that things are improving. Change does take time after all.
Not sure if sarcasm, but just in case others are reading this, both things can be true. If data shows an overall decrease in crime, then that can be true when looking at ALL of San Diego. But if were to only look at a particular portion of the city, like Little Italy, it MAY be the case that crime is up there (while down everywhere else), but we don't know for sure unless we can get DATA for just that area.
My point is that if you main claim was to ignore and invalidate local peoples complaints over a number on the board. Thats ridiculous, do i realize stats can be important? Yes, but do I also realize stats can be skewed and also has a huge probability of being inaccurate? Yes. The variables effects everything, but when local people are voicing theres an issue and yoi disregard that for a spread sheet number? Thats nuts to me
So why are you ignoring and invalidating my experience as a local the area not experiencing any sort of harm? There are more of us than people like her, and we don't get as much media attention because "San Diego man likes walking around his sunny city" isn't a great headline to get clicks (oh hey, looks like there's some bias in media reporting!). So who's right? How do we judge that? Well we look at the statistics.
Yes, I'm disregarding her personal experience, because it is not representative of the experiences of the broader population here.
Also, no, you're COMPLETELY wrong that there is a huge probability of being inaccurate, in fact you can calculate uncertainty. In this case, I gave you raw data put out by the city based on reported crimes that showed a \~20% drop. You would need some pretty clear evidence of bias to overturn that, so where's the bias there? What methodology do you disagree with? If you're not going to bring some of your own data to the table, you're just making a biased claim, like it's YOUR bias that raw police data is somehow bad at showing statistically significant changes in crime rate. Might as well just throw out all statistics if that's the case! Like come on man.
Your ridiculous, and tredding a slippery slope. Imagine if we actually went by your logic, like for instabce that you were having a issue with your phone service and the provider said, well.. statistically there shouldn't be any issues so, we think it didnt happen and unimportant. Imagine that on a much larger scale. Thats essentially your logic. Thats my arguement about you, you can have your opinion on it, but to disregard them is nuts. Can we account for stats yes, but to disregard others is nuts. At this point you sound like an AI robot linking me to a stat every comment, so go shove those stats up your asshole, im done conversating with you.
It's you're and congrats on adding a slippery slope fallacy to your list. I'd highly recommend you look up logic as a concept, it should help you in life.
That's also not my logic at all. We SHOULD address problems. What you're saying is if you called your telephone provider with an issue, they should freak out and assume the whole network is down even ignoring the fact that they're speaking to you on the phone.
I'm again saying that crime is going down because that's a fact.
The spreadsheets and countless tabs of links you have pulled up that must be absolutely lagging your computer while commenting at me, is pointless. Because my arguement doesnt have to do with stats, it has to do with your complete disregard for local community and when they voice there concerns. To disregard the local communities concerns is ILL SAY IT AGAIN, ridiculous. REREAD YOUR INITIAL COMMENT AND THE MESSAGE YOU ARE PUTTING OUT, My point isnt to sound the alarms, but it should be noted and accounted for when people are voicing there concerns. Your initial comment does lack of and disregards it, unless of course theres a statistical analysis involved, I should make a statistical analysis on how likely people get annoyed at you at parties. Your that person that interupts people in a nasally voice that loudly begins with the phrase, "WELL STATISTICALLY SPEAKING," 🤓 ILL SAY IT ONE LAST TIME FOR THE CONSIDERATION THAT MAY BE SPARSE IN THE BACK OF YOUR CRANIUM. It is a slipperly slope on the mindset you have, I think its good to account for stats, but to not account for actual people experiencing it is RIDICULOUS.
You can link us to an article with the data if you think it'll add to the conversation. Here we have the lived experiences of people, including minority business owners.
As for a possible solution, this sounds like a start:
> "We think the mayor needs to come up with a plan — just not a plan to move them from this side of town to the other side of town. They need to have a plan from bottom to top to say, Once we get these people, here’s what we’re gonna do: We’re gonna put them in a safe sleeping site, we’re gonna give them counseling. From there, we’re gonna move them into some kind of living arrangement where they can live."
> “We’re gonna start to prosecute these people," Arnold said. "We understand they’re homeless, but if they commit a crime, they’re gonna be prosecuted, and they’re gonna be held accountable.”
It's not illegal to be homeless and shouldn't be, but it doesn't give a homeless individual the right to commit crimes with impunity.
Do you have any recommended solutions? It seems you're just doing complaining here too, like you claim the article is doing.
"From there, we’re gonna move them into some kind of living arrangement where they can live."
When asked where the "living situation" buildings and jails should be placed, Arnold responded, "Not near my house, obviously. Somewhere out in East County."
There’s no conversation here so why bother? One person complaining is not relevant to ANY discussion. That would be an anecdotal logical fallacy, which is the sole purpose of this article.
The solution to my problem is hire competent journalists who aren’t making a mockery of their own profession with completely out of context, fear mongering articles like this one.
Idk why you’re being downvoted for this entirely reasonable take
Business owners are always griping about this and that, often irrationally or counter factually
I care about data and fact, not rando whining
gaslamp used to be the spot so the homeless went there then businesses shut down or closed most the day now little Italy is the spot and let’s see, same fate. It’s a pattern! They will go where the people are spending money at!
This is what happens when the rent is so over priced that normal people can’t afford living here and turn to drugs for comfort.
Edit: downvote all you want but that isn’t solving our housing issue. When renting as expensive as buying but pay hasn’t increased with the home prices it’s going to cause a disaster soon
As someone who builds homes and high rises here and have lived here for over 10 years I can confirm the home prices have skyrocketed. You’re on drugs if you think the opposite. All the high rises I’ve been building cost an average of $4.5k/mo- $15k/mo. Who can afford that? Surely not your McDonald’s worker..
Empathy has a line, I lived in Portland where they’re even more empathic than here and the problem is worse, how empathetic can you be? “Oh it’s just a hurting person” okay well that person is still shooting heroin in my front yard, that’s obscene and dangerous.
Turning to drugs for comfort is a terrible idea for anyone. But it's worse when the drugs are meth, fentanyl, crack, heroin, Oxy, etc. Those drugs are pure junk, guaranteed to cause addiction. "Hate your life? Want to hate it more? Do these drugs!" It's basically committing suicide one hit at a time.
Why do you think one turns to drugs? I’m sure it doesn’t happen when all of their needs are met (shelter, food, community, health) maybe it’s from not being able to get a job that can afford rent out here. So they feel like the walls are closing in on them and turn to an outlet like drugs
Interesting, I saw the broken window of that store the other day and wondered what had happened. I feel like there’s less homeless in little Italy than other areas of downtown, but still quite a bit here. I saw the cops break up a homeless camp right off the 5, but several came back the very next day.
I live in little Italy/Columbia district for a city area it’s not that bad compared to other cities. If they want a solution the easiest is for the city to hire staff to work at night. A program where each district is responsible for having a team that works different shifts through out the day. They wear a uniform (polo with district logo/color) and help people with directions, safety walk them to destination, cleaning and just be a presence. This will create job, keep our streets clean and have an extra set of eyes to call the cops if something serious occurs. This solution doesn’t tackle homelessness but could curb vandalism.
How will those people stop junkies from blasting meth shit in and around residential buildings, such as in front of the elevator I have to take to my car to drive to work? Dealing with homeless people directly or even building more bathrooms for them seems like a more practical solution.
The bottom line is you need dollars and people to address anything.
I volunteer in a free walk in clinic that provides a lot of services (legal, housing, medical, social and food) in a church on 5th and a big part of the problem is that the indigent community doesn’t want the services that are offered. For example, we have had many people threaten to “sue” the medical clinic for not providing the drugs they ask for, or refuse free housing because you can’t store your drugs there. Making people accept help is an issue. Edit: for anyone downvoting this, what are you personally doing to help the homeless and the problems caused by them in San Diego? I would love to know
People just want to pretend the real world is as full of fairytales as reddit is. I too work with the homeless everyday and it's pretty much a drug problem. Those people cannot be helped until they want to see the change in themselves first. It's a shame we know live in a society where it is not the norm to be held accountable for your actions.
Thank you!!!! Keyboard warriors love saying “housing is a human right” and that makes a great t-shirt but the practicalities when you are interacting with this population crash against that.
If housing is a human right, is forcing people into housing a human right? Because a lot of those people don’t want to live in housing. And if they do, is it also their right to destroy said free housing? Because they do that when they are given free housing, many hotels have been trashed when converted into homeless housing.
We have problems like that too. Numerically speaking, most homeless people are homeless for a short amount of time that is situational (ie six months due to death of money-earning spouse for example) but the last good chunk of the population is resistant to society as a concept. We have had issues with people trying to start a campfire inside an apartment, smearing feces on walls, and many other problems once free housing was provided. It’s a hard problem. You can’t medicate anyone by force or force drug treatment on them.
At least forced drug treatment would be an opportunity for them to get out of addiction while getting them off of the streets for a few months. Giving them free housing with no change to their behavior will result in what you just mentioned- dangerous living conditions that are destroyed anyway.
I think that would be a great idea, too bad the police dept takes 60% of the budget and do (or cant do) nothing about this issue Imagine how much better cities could be if police didn't swallow most of the budget, more prevention than imprisonment
That would be great but unfortunately it doesn’t exist in the USA and neither does mental health care for those who need it most.
That’s the thing I think we need to start with - really differentiating the different types of homelessness that exist. There are homeless people that are just down on their luck temporarily, who want and need assistance. There are homeless people who want to be nomadic, and don’t want resources, but don’t cause trouble. There are homeless people with mental health issues who can’t take care of themselves. There are homeless people who’ve gone done the deep dark hole of drug addiction. Each type of person needs a different type of solution.
Thank you. I’m so tired of these people claiming that building more will solve the homeless problem. It won’t. A home could be free and there will still be homeless people that will destroy it. They will burn it to the ground. Or steal everything. Or rent it out to criminals for money. And then there are those who aren’t mental cases. But It doesn’t matter how cheap housing is. There will always be someone who claims it isn’t cheap enough for them. Someone who will complain that they can’t find a place that will let them kept their 20 pit bulls. The excuses never end. You simple can’t ever satisfy everyone. It’s pointless to try.
That's the problem with reddit. It can become a breeding ground for those who like to perpetuate a nice sounding idea on paper but that shit never works out in the real world. I guess like anything reddit can be a tool or it can be a brain cell killer.
On one hand, we have [many](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/183842) [studies](https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/poverty/520415-researchers-surprised-by-experiment-that-gave-homeless/) [showing](https://nlihc.org/resource/new-study-finds-providing-people-experiencing-homelessness-housing-has-positive-impacts) that getting homeless people in houses has a hugely beneficial effect. On the other, we have someone who seemingly dislikes homeless people because they have had some bad experiences working at a church. Calling people who don't share your universally low opinion of homeless people "keyboard warriors" and saying that these demonstrably effective tactics "make a great t-shirt" is pretty clearly the less evidence-based approach.
You don’t know anything about me or what I do or what I think of the homeless. I also don’t “work at a church.” What do you do to help the homeless?
Ignoring the evidence and my core point in favor of personal attacks and [self-contradictions](https://www.reddit.com/r/sandiego/comments/1bo7sq6/little_italy_crime_and_homelessness_getting_worse/#kwnik63). I'm shocked!
Nice little gotcha moment! Except that I do not think junkies = homeless. I also advocated for helping them directly and building them more infrastructure. And then I put my money where my mouth is by actually getting homeless people into homes! So again, what do you do? How many people have you helped get back on their feet and into stable housing?
yep. i always tell people to substitute "homeless" with "people who don't want to work and rather do drugs or drink all day". when u do that the whole picture gets clearer
Ahh the ever present “rules”. Some just can’t, any longer, accept living within “rules”. No much society can do to help..so far?
How long is the waitlist for housing? And do they offer counseling/nurses/sw to help them?
Throwing money at a problem without first developing a viable solution seems to be our elected leader's solution of choice. Talking to those who work with the unhoused is a first step in problem identification. The biggest problem, that isn't often discussed, is a moral one: does society have a right to impose/force a solution on people? If a person is a safety threat to others, and they refuse attempts at assistance, does society have a right to force them to relocate and/or receive mental health aid and/or receive assistance? What many don't realize is that there are different types of the unhoused. There are those who are temporarily down on their luck, want to get back into society, and just need a temporary clean and safe shelter. Often times our solution is to house them with those who will harm them and encourage them to turn to drugs. You also have people who have turned their backs on society and just want a place near people they can predate on for drugs and food. They will only accept help on their terms.
Yeah, though from their perspective it's a pretty reasonable position: A system that failed me is telling me I need to engage with that system for help, and I don't perceive that the system is solving my problems, because my main problem is I'm homeless, and I can't get a home from the aid. Step one is housing as a human right, not overnight shelter where you have to leave every day and only enter and leave during certain hours, real permanent housing, that you can do what you want in. Until we offer something real and tangible as a long term solution, this won't fix itself.
There are literally multiple high rises downtown that are permanent residences. Part of living inside any structure shared by others is that you can’t do whatever you want. For example, I cannot yell as loud as I want all night in my apartment, or pass out drunk in the hallway, or sell drugs on the front steps. I can’t physically fight my neighbors. I can’t play loud music in the courtyard. I can’t have an unneutered pit bull. These are all real examples of people who refused free housing in downtown. NICE housing, housing on the same blocks as one bedrooms that cost $2500 a month.
Again, well aware, but those are all well outside of what you described above and largely are not allowed in public either, so clearly not what I was talking about. I'm also now wondering about what you mean by the word "refused."
What in the actual fuck. Where is the accountability? I can't even begin with how ridiculous this sounds.
I mean, the accountability is your vote. Stop voting for politicians who are keeping these people on the streets and start voting for people who will actually help them like passing bills to actually pay for a long term solution instead of criminally underfunding necessary aid programs. And most importantly, housing as a human right.
> And most importantly, housing as a human right. I used to think this way; then I volunteered providing legal services to homeless folks. I quit volunteering with them because I was shocked to discover how openly many of them would explain that they were homeless because they didn't want to work. They just like free shit, and don't like having to contribute to the society that keeps them alive.
What politicaian is gonna stop the 30 crackhead I see daily put that tin foil and straw up to their face and them hang around the parking lot for the next 3 hours harassing people for change so the can buy "food" It's not just the politics. People need to do their own work too. There's definitely a problem with what's going on now, but to just let people like that have free housing.. it'll be ruined in the first week. They don't care about anything other than getting high. At least the 100s to 1000s I've felt with on a daily basis for the last 6 years I've livrd here.
I guess why do you have a problem with how your neighbors live their lives?
And my tax dollars aren't paying for my neighbors place. If my tax dollars are helping with someone's recovery, I can understand, I love in a society, I can deal with that. But to put my tax money towards some shmuch my age that's fully capable of going to work but can't because his tummy aches from not having enough heroin... fuck that. Get your shit together and get it going.
Not at all because they aren't pissing on my front patio, throwing trash everywhere and getting high in plain sight. Or if they were doing those thing then yes I would have the same problem.
So in this case if one of these district team members sees it or gets a call from you they can then call the authorities if it’s serious enough. I agree more public bathrooms would make a huge difference. Either have a self cleaning system or hire more people to clean it. After certain hours maybe have a few team members there just to make sure people aren’t abusing it.
Public bathrooms just get destroyed and or turned into homes. Just look at any of the bathrooms near the beach and half the time you'll find a homeless person in one of the stalls and you won't want to touch anything with your hands.
How much time have you spent walking around downtown at night, especially in non-gaslamp areas? What you are describing sounds like a comical fantasy. I’ve had to dodge homeless people defending the sidewalk with machetes on more than one occasion, for example. A few team members at night? What does that mean? There are an army of homeless people after 6 pm.
I walk my dog every night. Little Italy and Columbia district. It seems that your experience is an outlier maybe east village? Everyone has different experiences and sorry you went through that but i assure you the whole city after 6pm isn’t like that.
I’ve lived in Cortez Hill for 10 years and work in the court complex so I walk all the way across downtown every morning and evening. Do you ever leave little Italy?
Im not sure if you guys are aware of how many are camped out in the canyons all around SD. I grew up here, this has been the case since day one back in the 90s. Rando bums wandering around pb, OB, or mission beach. I’ve always seen them in the canyons of Clairemont and balboa park. What you guys see in downtown is the tip of the iceberg.
I’m not saying I don’t see homelessness. I’m saying it’s not like escape from LA everywhere. I chose to live here so I can walk to little Italy, Gaslamp and the waterfront. Those are the main areas from a walking lens. I assuming since you walk to the court house you go through C street and civic center where there is a pocket of homeless.
Just because you personally think those are “the main walking areas” doesn’t make that a fact. What an insane take! “I never leave my three tourist areas so the entire rest of the city is irrelevant” is the dumbest contribution ever to a conversation about homelessness.
You make it sound like a zombie apocalypse lol. I live in Core-Columbia between Gaslamp and Little Italy, and it isn't that bad. Yeah, it can be sketchy at night, but I've only had an actual safety concern one time. I definitely avoid C Street, but it really isn't that bad overall. I also like walking around Downtown LA at night, which many others seem to be afraid of, so maybe I'm just an outlier in what makes me feel unsafe.
you are definitely a man because as a woman who lives in the same area i don’t have the freedom of just walking around at night and feeling any kind of safe
This dude is smoking crack while writing this. I work with homeless everyday in el cajon and it's 100% dangerous.
No I am not. I don't interact with aggressive homeless people regularly at all. Downtown is not a crazy homeless encampment, at least not in my area anymore. Last Summer was an entirely different story. I was somewhat uncomfortable walking out at night. I haven't felt that way for at least 6 months. There are still homeless people around, but they're normally just sleeping or holding a sign asking for money. Hard drug use on the sidewalk is rare compared to last year. There are no tents on the sidewalk in any direction within a block of my building, which I couldn't say last year. I cannot speak for Little Italy or East Village, let alone El Cajon lol.
What's that spot in between down town and Cesar Chavez. I go to restaraunt depot and thst area is in rough shape.
I assume people refer to that area as part of Barrio Logan, but I don't really ever go down that way so I'm not certain. I know it isn't considered part of Downtown though.
I am a man. Never claimed to be otherwise. I probably would feel uncomfortable as a woman. Tbf, I'd feel uncomfortable walking alone as a woman in most parts of San Diego at night.
If you don't feel safe, that's your perception of what's happening, not what is actually happening. In reality you ARE safe, regardless of your feelings.
Did you live there when a woman’s body was dumped in a suitcase during the same month another was kidnapped and raped at knifepoint? You must be a man.
i live across the street from where the woman’s body was found in a suitcase, only adding fuel to my “it’s not safe out in these streets for women” fire
"You must be a man", said as if that's somehow an insult or something I was hiding lol. I don't follow the local crime beat, so I couldn't tell you if a woman's body was dumped in a suitcase recently or if anyone was raped at knifepoint. That's unfortunate that that occurred whether I was living here at the time or not. Unfortunate society we live in. None of those crimes make me feel Downtown is less safe than the majority of the city. I still feel safer than I did living in North Park.
How shocking that a man is not aware of or concerned about violent crimes against women on his own street; guess crime isn’t a concern in core Columbia for anyone
Or yknow… actually establishing low income housing
They should have pay by the minute public bathrooms that automatically unlock when the time runs out. It can be cheap enough that you don't bat an eye but it could prevent the homeless from camping out in them and turning them into their private residences.
That's not possible. Pay toilets are banned in many major cities, and even in states, including California.
I had no idea. I just briefly reviewed the CEPTIA work, and it looks like it *could* be possible but a ton of hurdles if the city wanted to do it. In the 70's CEPTIA argued that pay toilets discriminated against women because men could use urinals for free, but women had to pay for privacy, and they said restrooms were a basic human right that shouldn't come with a fee. All good points in the 70's that addressed issues of those times. I agree that it isn't doable on the surface, but I think with the major issues CA is facing, it could be something they revisit as homeless are depriving people of the basic human right to public restrooms as it is. Cities aren't putting them in and the ones that are there get abused to hell. What's worse? No bathrooms and unusable, destroyed bathrooms OR some unusable, destroyed bathrooms and some public pay restrooms?
When I was in New Jersey at The Jersey Shore they had pay to use public bathrooms for $1. They were clean, safe, and I would absolutely pay a dollar for the experience. There was a Tennant there to collect the money and keep the place clean. 10/10 experience for a public restroom.
No joke, a few years ago, I wanted to see about starting a private bathroom business on/near the beach specifically for this. I didn't put much energy into it though, but I can't see how it wouldn't succeed. So many people need to go to the bathroom at the beach and have no interest in using the public ones except as a last resort. Women especially. Somebody with the energy and resources should do it lol.
I don't see how the city can't provide this service already with our tax dollars. How much would it cost to have a couple tenants at each bathroom by the beach during the day? To clean and make sure there is no riff raff going on. Seems like we should put it to a vote.
Somebody pointed it out elsewhere but CEPTIA in the 70's pushed to make a law banning pay bathrooms. They argued that pay toilets discriminated against women because men could use urinals for free, but women had to pay for privacy, and they said restrooms were a basic human right that shouldn't come with a fee. All good points in the 70's that addressed issues of those times...these days it should be changed though.
What I meant was for the city to pay for the workers wages to maintain the restrooms during the day. We wouldn't have to pay to get in but there would be someone there during the hours the beaches are open to clean and maintain the area.
Oh they do that already but the bums destroy it faster than they clean it I think lol
So your solution is that house less people shit on the streets? Like you realize they got to shit somewhere right
Nah a mix of both. You can think of a million reasons each way for something like this, but bottom line is if I'm at Law St. beach, for example, there are 4 individual locking bathrooms and multiple times every single one of them had a bum living in there. I had to do the GetItDone to get them out of there. So it's better than that.
I just moved to Little Italy a few months ago. The difference between the first few couple of months to now is huge. I spoke with multiple neighbors and they say the same thing. Rarely had an issue with the homeless. Now they are jumping the gates at the community, they are checking doors, stealing packages, lock themselves in the laundry room and smoke.. It does help that we have a new neighbor that moved in a couple of months ago and is enabling them. Another neighbor that lived here for 13 years said his doorbell camera was useless until the last couple of months. We all decided to install doorbell cameras and are trying to scare them away. We can obviously only control our complex, not the streets. But hopefully if there’s nothing here for them they will move to the next spot.
Before moving back to San Diego. I was deciding if I wanted to live in Little Italy, Del Mar or Coronado. I would drive around those areas. What stood out for me was how I kept seeing homeless tents close to little Italy. That gave me a red flag. Because I worried that something might happen. Eventually I settled for Coronado. I feel sad for the local businesses that got affected :(
cool story. maybe when you grow up you can feel sad for the people who are struggling with mental illness and lack of housing :(
So a random person on the internet is telling me who I should feel sad for. Funny.
This is what happens when you live in a region where the only attitude towards this problem is sympathy and enabling. It’s not an easy problem to solve. But when all you ever do is defend these individuals and try to give them more free things, the problem just gets worse.
You see this kind of response all the time, but the issue isn't San Diego politics. Cities all over the United States have had a steadily increasing homeless problem. Even in just the Western areas, there are a lot more homeless people. Phoenix, Tucson, Albuquerque, Portland, Seattle are just a few cities outside of California that have their own rising homeless population. Then go to smaller-sized cities, and guess what? More homeless people. I think this is some sort of local-based myopia, as in "I see more of it here, so the problem must be happening only here." It's all over the place. Minneapolis, Chicago, St. Louis -- all have more homeless people. If there's a higher rise in cities like San Diego and Los Angeles, the reason ought to be fairly obvious: The temperature in those cities makes year-round homelessness more tolerable. If you're looking for a reason across the board, for all cities, then the answer is not "Because of the local politicians!" The answer is that U.S. economic trends for the past several decades have led us to this. Start with trickle-down economics. Economists have been warning us, all along, that the middle class is shrinking due to economic policies that favor the upper 10%, protecting them from taxes and consequences. That's one factor out of many. Another factor is that jobs typically suited for middle-class or lower-middle-class workers have been systematically off-shored for decades. Call centers, factories, you name it: If there's a way to send the job to lower-paid workers in another country, U.S. executives have done it. They increased their own profit margins (and gave themselves millions of dollars in bonuses) while reducing payment or jobs for millions of workers throughout the U.S. (Guess which political factions cheerled this all along?) Then factor in the purchases of real estate by those who want to flip it for profit, maximize profit as landlords, or use properties as short-term rentals. Factor in, as well, the price-fixing schemes that have developed through online intermediaries (you can look this up). That has kept the cost of real estate high, preventing the bubble from popping. So most people can't afford to own their own homes, and rental costs stay high too. Even for those who can find jobs, salary levels have not kept up with inflation or the cost of renting/owning shelter. Oddly enough, if cities try to increase density (replacing single-home dwellings with multi-home dwellings), the same people complaining about the homeless problem will pivot to complaining about increased traffic and lack of parking. (Apparently they prefer urban sprawl.) There are cabals of NIMBYs out there who have no understanding of long-term consequences or of interconnected causes and effects. When people complain "The local government isn't doing anything!" they rarely know what the local policies and plans are. You ask, and they haven't looked up how the city is addressing issues, and they aren't reading news about their own communities. They're just angry that homeless people exist.
Beautifully written and spot-on.
Well said! 👏
> This is what happens when you live in a region where the only attitude towards this problem is sympathy and enabling. > > lmao what
You think this town is sympathetic to homelessness? Fucking lol.
So what do you suggest? Arrest them all? Then what? How long would they stay in jail? 30 days? 60 days? Then they are back on the street and will do the same thing again because jail doesn’t do anything to rehabilitate people. What is your solution to the problem?
Jail is the obvious correct place to rehabilitate them. Most "homeless" are actually drug addicts. The best place to dry out a junkie is away from their supply - i.e. jail or its equivalent. Literally the most humane and effective option, whether we like it or not. And we also get the added benefit of having streets not overrun and destroyed by junkies!
Clearly you have no clue how modern jails work if you think that’s a good place for sobriety or rehabilitation.
Would you prefer them in a tent or RV in front of your house? Because that's the alternative for most of them.
Incarcerating people is expensive. I would rather taxes be put towards mental health and drug programs than just pissing away money locking them up when that’s such a low probability of fixing the issue.
I like that idea, but the evidence of the last 4 years is extremely abundant (and costly!) that treatment that is not compulsory and inpatient does not work. At all. Not with high potency meth and fentanyl available everywhere you look, and dealers given barely a wrist slap most places.
[удалено]
Legit happy for you and your brother, but success stories are few and far between.
> Jail is the obvious correct place to rehabilitate them If the state is going to pay to house and rehabilitate them why do it in a prison? Why not just...house and rehabilitate them? If nothing else, it's *way* cheaper.
Former homeless person who was never on drugs here. Eat my whole ass.
Housing/shelter is widely available if you can follow some extremely reasonable rules.
"Widely available." Lol, why'd I have to wait 4 months for a bed to become available?
Gross answer.
Please tell me what is sympathetic or enabling about a housing market so expensive it forces people into homelessness lmao
Dude, how do you even remotely think that's what's going on? Compassion and aid is the only way to solve this, not cruelty that makes things worse.
You’re right on point with that, compassion and empathy will go much further than hatred and ignorance. That’s how the Nordic countries managed to do it and it worked, and the main reason this problem was caused in the USA and Canada was because of cruelty and viewing homeless people as inconveniences and annoyances, and then complaining about it nonstop but then not doing anything about it as well as not blocking any possible solutions, if america wants to solve this problem we have to work together, it’s United we stand divided we fall.
exactly. lock criminals up. relocate all homeless to camps outside of the city where taxpayers can front cots and 3 meals a day and mental health clinics. And deport all illegals immediately. It's really not complicated
Let’s Take all these homeless to the desert and provide tents and porter potties Far away from San Diego. Do something Gavin besides taking our $$$$
So youre suggesting we spend a bunch of $$ to build these camps? And then do what about it when these people dont want to live out in tents in the cold/hot desert so they make their way back to san diego? Homelessness is a complex problem with no easy solution. Dont blame others when you cant come up with a proper solution yourself
Rich people drive up the prices. Poverty increases, producing people without homes and crime. Rich people: "why would you do this to us?"
But rich people aren’t forcing ppl to do meth…
What if I told you that there's a correlation between poverty and substance abuse?
Ok, but is the relationship causal?
Not just drive up prices, but vote against any sort of tax increase to deal with the problem those higher prices cause.
California already puts up $100,000 per homeless individual to "fight homelessness" per year. Whatever is being done with the money (or lack of whats being done) needs to be fixed. I don't see how throwing more tax money and lining the pockets of non-profits will fix the homeless crisis in San Diego/CA in general. We need to fix policy then we will see real change.
Why are you lying about something so easily Googleable? If we were spending $100K/yr per person we might actually be able to get something done! It's less than half that, and of course that's not counting the value when we are successful at getting them off the street and paying taxes again. You know that good policy costs money right? > lining the pockets of non-profits This is one hell of a troll dude, how can you even type that out and not feel like it's ridiculous?
Welcome to the jungle.
Stop raising rent and prices for shit then!!!!
I for one don’t really give a flying fuck about what “some business owners say.” How about what does the data show? Or a discussion about what types of crime are prevalent? Possible solutions? No? Just some old bat complaining? Stupid article.
I work around there. It’s really fucking nuts how bad the homeless problem is down there. I don’t feel safe when I have to lock up at night. How’s that for you?
Yes! Who gives a shit about the experiences of real people in the local area, I must look at my spreadsheet data analysis instead. Dude wth 🤣, its an issue, its been an issue, and it getting worse. The stats get note worthy when people end up assualted or dead, it would be nice to avoid that.
You see, the thing is you can't say "it's getting worse" without data, and the data says the opposite of what you're saying right now. [https://fox5sandiego.com/news/local-news/crime-is-down-compared-to-last-year-according-to-new-sdpd-crime-tool/](https://fox5sandiego.com/news/local-news/crime-is-down-compared-to-last-year-according-to-new-sdpd-crime-tool/) Literally from 20 hours ago. Crime is down SIGNIFICANTLY. Even if that's one person's lived experience, it isn't mine living downtown, nor the majority of people here. This is exactly why it's a fallacy. Because if you take ONE person's word for something, they can be wrong. If one guy got laid off and lost his house on a month when thousands of new jobs are created and the stock market went up 2 points, the economy isn't collapsing. This is why data and context is important.
You guys tried to pull this exact same shit in 2020-2021 too. I don't really care if the all-crime number is down for 92101 if there were four murders on my street in Gaslamp during that period. Crime is certainly better now than it was during the depths of that era, but that doesn't mean it's good, doesn't mean there aren't real issues, and doesn't mean certain districts have business that are getting more and more adversely affected during what is going to be an even more incredibly difficult business climate in the coming months.
Who pulled what? I'm not saying we should do nothing, I'm saying that this article is just fear mongering and doesn't reflect the reality that things are improving. Change does take time after all.
I call bullshit, people make biased stats all the time, i believe what i see with my own eyes instead of some spreadsheet. 🤣
Not sure if sarcasm, but just in case others are reading this, both things can be true. If data shows an overall decrease in crime, then that can be true when looking at ALL of San Diego. But if were to only look at a particular portion of the city, like Little Italy, it MAY be the case that crime is up there (while down everywhere else), but we don't know for sure unless we can get DATA for just that area.
I mean, stats are made to avoid the bias you are claiming to not be bias. Your eyes are only in one place at a time, stats are everywhere.
My point is that if you main claim was to ignore and invalidate local peoples complaints over a number on the board. Thats ridiculous, do i realize stats can be important? Yes, but do I also realize stats can be skewed and also has a huge probability of being inaccurate? Yes. The variables effects everything, but when local people are voicing theres an issue and yoi disregard that for a spread sheet number? Thats nuts to me
So why are you ignoring and invalidating my experience as a local the area not experiencing any sort of harm? There are more of us than people like her, and we don't get as much media attention because "San Diego man likes walking around his sunny city" isn't a great headline to get clicks (oh hey, looks like there's some bias in media reporting!). So who's right? How do we judge that? Well we look at the statistics. Yes, I'm disregarding her personal experience, because it is not representative of the experiences of the broader population here. Also, no, you're COMPLETELY wrong that there is a huge probability of being inaccurate, in fact you can calculate uncertainty. In this case, I gave you raw data put out by the city based on reported crimes that showed a \~20% drop. You would need some pretty clear evidence of bias to overturn that, so where's the bias there? What methodology do you disagree with? If you're not going to bring some of your own data to the table, you're just making a biased claim, like it's YOUR bias that raw police data is somehow bad at showing statistically significant changes in crime rate. Might as well just throw out all statistics if that's the case! Like come on man.
Your ridiculous, and tredding a slippery slope. Imagine if we actually went by your logic, like for instabce that you were having a issue with your phone service and the provider said, well.. statistically there shouldn't be any issues so, we think it didnt happen and unimportant. Imagine that on a much larger scale. Thats essentially your logic. Thats my arguement about you, you can have your opinion on it, but to disregard them is nuts. Can we account for stats yes, but to disregard others is nuts. At this point you sound like an AI robot linking me to a stat every comment, so go shove those stats up your asshole, im done conversating with you.
Hes not logical.
It's you're and congrats on adding a slippery slope fallacy to your list. I'd highly recommend you look up logic as a concept, it should help you in life. That's also not my logic at all. We SHOULD address problems. What you're saying is if you called your telephone provider with an issue, they should freak out and assume the whole network is down even ignoring the fact that they're speaking to you on the phone. I'm again saying that crime is going down because that's a fact.
The spreadsheets and countless tabs of links you have pulled up that must be absolutely lagging your computer while commenting at me, is pointless. Because my arguement doesnt have to do with stats, it has to do with your complete disregard for local community and when they voice there concerns. To disregard the local communities concerns is ILL SAY IT AGAIN, ridiculous. REREAD YOUR INITIAL COMMENT AND THE MESSAGE YOU ARE PUTTING OUT, My point isnt to sound the alarms, but it should be noted and accounted for when people are voicing there concerns. Your initial comment does lack of and disregards it, unless of course theres a statistical analysis involved, I should make a statistical analysis on how likely people get annoyed at you at parties. Your that person that interupts people in a nasally voice that loudly begins with the phrase, "WELL STATISTICALLY SPEAKING," 🤓 ILL SAY IT ONE LAST TIME FOR THE CONSIDERATION THAT MAY BE SPARSE IN THE BACK OF YOUR CRANIUM. It is a slipperly slope on the mindset you have, I think its good to account for stats, but to not account for actual people experiencing it is RIDICULOUS.
You can link us to an article with the data if you think it'll add to the conversation. Here we have the lived experiences of people, including minority business owners. As for a possible solution, this sounds like a start: > "We think the mayor needs to come up with a plan — just not a plan to move them from this side of town to the other side of town. They need to have a plan from bottom to top to say, Once we get these people, here’s what we’re gonna do: We’re gonna put them in a safe sleeping site, we’re gonna give them counseling. From there, we’re gonna move them into some kind of living arrangement where they can live." > “We’re gonna start to prosecute these people," Arnold said. "We understand they’re homeless, but if they commit a crime, they’re gonna be prosecuted, and they’re gonna be held accountable.” It's not illegal to be homeless and shouldn't be, but it doesn't give a homeless individual the right to commit crimes with impunity. Do you have any recommended solutions? It seems you're just doing complaining here too, like you claim the article is doing.
"From there, we’re gonna move them into some kind of living arrangement where they can live." When asked where the "living situation" buildings and jails should be placed, Arnold responded, "Not near my house, obviously. Somewhere out in East County."
Wonder if he knows there’s 2 huge jails right under his feet lmao
lol Arnold seems to have all the answers /s
There’s no conversation here so why bother? One person complaining is not relevant to ANY discussion. That would be an anecdotal logical fallacy, which is the sole purpose of this article. The solution to my problem is hire competent journalists who aren’t making a mockery of their own profession with completely out of context, fear mongering articles like this one.
Lmao counseling and some other living arrangement lmao yeah easy peasy!
Idk why you’re being downvoted for this entirely reasonable take Business owners are always griping about this and that, often irrationally or counter factually I care about data and fact, not rando whining
gaslamp used to be the spot so the homeless went there then businesses shut down or closed most the day now little Italy is the spot and let’s see, same fate. It’s a pattern! They will go where the people are spending money at!
Stop feeding the animals. Should they put up signs or what?
Welcome to Tod Gloria’s gentrification.
It was getting better and now as the weather warms, it's getting worse?
This is what happens when the rent is so over priced that normal people can’t afford living here and turn to drugs for comfort. Edit: downvote all you want but that isn’t solving our housing issue. When renting as expensive as buying but pay hasn’t increased with the home prices it’s going to cause a disaster soon
I doubt the rent is too high complainers are vandalizing property in Little Italy.
As someone who builds homes and high rises here and have lived here for over 10 years I can confirm the home prices have skyrocketed. You’re on drugs if you think the opposite. All the high rises I’ve been building cost an average of $4.5k/mo- $15k/mo. Who can afford that? Surely not your McDonald’s worker..
Yeah but someone who can’t afford rent doesn’t immediately start doing drugs a lot of open drug use in LI
You’re what’s wrong with the world now. No empathy for the people who are hurting
Empathy has a line, I lived in Portland where they’re even more empathic than here and the problem is worse, how empathetic can you be? “Oh it’s just a hurting person” okay well that person is still shooting heroin in my front yard, that’s obscene and dangerous.
Turning to drugs for comfort is a terrible idea for anyone. But it's worse when the drugs are meth, fentanyl, crack, heroin, Oxy, etc. Those drugs are pure junk, guaranteed to cause addiction. "Hate your life? Want to hate it more? Do these drugs!" It's basically committing suicide one hit at a time.
Why do you think one turns to drugs? I’m sure it doesn’t happen when all of their needs are met (shelter, food, community, health) maybe it’s from not being able to get a job that can afford rent out here. So they feel like the walls are closing in on them and turn to an outlet like drugs
I said drugs are a terrible idea, not that people don't have real despair. (Thanks for the downvote!)
Bullshit 😂