On May 12, California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, demanded that cities throughout the state adopt anti-camping ordinances that would effectively ban public homelessness by requiring unhoused individuals to relocate every 72 hours.
While presented as a humanitarian effort to reduce homelessness, the new policy victimizes California’s growing unhoused population—approximately 187,000 people—by tying funding in Proposition 1 to local laws banning sleeping or camping on public land.
In his announcement, Newsom pushed local governments to adopt the draconian ordinances “without delay.”
A regularly scheduled massive waste of time and resources just to be cruel to homeless people is quintessential California.
I demand that every 72 hours another joint attached to this man’s body be inserted into a blender until he feels differently about the value of human life
Some real Grapes of Wrath and Parable of the Sower hours
Two books I’m glad to have read in the past year, showing California as the hellhole it truly is
The Dust Bowls are back too! really is grapes of wrath time
I fucking hate this guy.
And that’s why he will become the democrat nominee
What the fuck is the point of this compared to say buying vacant land for the purposes of allowing people to camp there? You could then have outside support networks set up some basic infrastructure for the people living there through grant funding/philanthropy. I don’t think this a great idea, but at least the money spent would have a tangible benefit. As opposed to this stupid homeless people shell game/shuffle state and local governments insist on playing??
One of the points is to try to get homeless people to move north or east, out of the state. Another point is to not deal with the housing crisis on the whole. There’s a lot of money that property owners stand to lose. If property values across the state go down to where they should be.
In my opinion, property should be cheap enough where anyone who works a full-time job can afford it. In other words, minimum wage should be enough to buy an apartment. Ideally. But you know the landlords will never let that happen. You know the real estate speculators will block that from becoming reality. At least that’s the situation right now.
The cruelty is the point
Because the point isn’t to benefit people, it’s to scare them so much that they engage in extractive forms of capitalism even if it kills them, and to threaten the rest of us to shape up or prepare to be put through the same process.
if you take the problem and shove it over there, problem solved
Ah the Patrick Star method, I see. High level planning happening in California.
While presented as a humanitarian effort to reduce homelessness
How does this reduce homelessness?
The most coherent argument I’ve heard from
is that the whole point of this policy is to ping-pong the homeless around till they naturally congregate in areas far enough out of site that nobody will bother reporting them anymore. So basically forcing them into massive isolated encampments so you don’t have homeless people in public parks and shit.Honestly if that’s the fucking goal why not just be honest and have the state buy some vacant lots and make sanctioned “camping sites”. At least then NGOs and shit could set up like showers and clinics and stuff nearby them. But knowing Amerikkka they’d probably just become concentration camps.
God forbid some just build some fucking public housing.
Honestly if that’s the fucking goal why not just be honest and have the state buy some vacant lots and make sanctioned “camping sites”.
“I’M NOT HAVING MY TAX DOLLARS PAY FOR SOME slur TO LIVE COMFORTABLY WITHOUT WORKING”It would literally just be a lot of land
Even that is too much, no politician in this wasteland is going to vote for a measure to establish land solely for the homeless.
None of those people would want to be known as the person who voted to establish what would doubtlessly become smeared as a ‘homeless encampment’ in their district/state.
Liberals would legalize murdering the homeless if they thought they could get away with it. But since they can’t do that, they pretend like homeless people disappear if no one is looking at them. They think the problem goes away if you throw away all their stuff and tell them they can’t stay there.
“It’s a lifestyle choice. They choose to be homeless. There are unused shelters, empty beds, and piles of cash, resources and housing but they just can’t stop doing drugs. We need to open padded room straight jacket torture asylums again.”
I have literally seen all these statements posted in earnest.
I hear them all repeated by professionals and academics constantly. It’s so exhausting.
I’ve heard all of these opinions expressed by people in person.
Reduces homelessnes via number shuffling, i.e. moving homeless across county lines makes it harder for them to be officially recorded. Like all things neoliberal it is the appearance of wellness but nothing true or substantial. Instead of money going into housing, shelters, rehabilitation, and job programs we spend more money into a police force well drilled into treating human beings like the way one herds cattle.
He is probably just
lyingusing PR nonsense speak. But I wouldn’t be surprised if they used some tortured definition of homelessness that meant if they can’t track a person for X consecutive nights they won’t be included in the statistica.If you’re trying to move everything you own you are not at that moment homeless.
The point is to make it easier for cops to brutalize unhoused people.
Navin Gewsom, a fictional character I just made up with whom any similarities to real people are entirely coincidental, should be hunted for sport every 72 hours in the context of my fiction, which is again totally unrelated to any real events.
Hey wait a second,I know this kid!
Bit white, but what can you do
all so he can get like 5% in the primary.
Spending millions a day to shuffle around people instead of actually saving money by putting them in unoccupied homes (landowners and real estate speculators would get big sad so we’re gonna kill 'em all instead!)
No money will be spent to move people. If the homeless do not move they will be arrested and have their belongings thrown out. San Francisco has been doing this already.
Paying people to patrol and enforce this costs money, probably more than solving the problem
Terrorizing people is cheap. They’ve already committed to paying for tons of cops, this is just utilizing them for this purpose.
Besides even if it was more expensive it doesn’t matter. This is not a find the cheapest solution machine where cheapest one wins. This has a very real and practical benefit which is terrorizing those at the bottom and scaring those at risk of hitting that bottom into allowing harsher forms of exploitation of themselves, of disciplining them with the fear of seeing that oppression into keeping their heads down. It’s impossible for capital to put a price on subjugating and intimidating the proles into compliance and submission. Certainly not when the costs are not born directly by the bourgeoisie anyways but by the state financed off the back of imperialism.
Yes having homeless people to herd around helps to remind all the homeowners why they always vote for the higher police budget
Copagandra at its finest.
You have no idea how police budgets work then. Millions are spent annually per municipality on police activities to disrupt homeless encampments.
I’ll stick with my original statement.
No money will be used to move people.
Of course lots of money will be spent to increase Police budgets.
right tens of thousands of cops cost 0$ a day, they all work on a volunteer basis just to help the community!!!
Gruesome Gavin needs to be purged.
I’ll leave “from what” up to the reader.
When our turn comes there will be no excuses for the terror
Fuck this douche.
I feel as if Gavin should be forced to relocate every 72 hours
I didn’t click the article, but iirc:
Year X a federal judge in Idaho rules authorities cannot displace a person sleeping outside unless there is a bed waiting for them at a homeless shelter. City cops and governments use this ruling as an excuse to allow encampments anywhere while not working to improve access to shelters. Public perception and media coverage of homelessness goes extremely negative.
Year 2024 - grants pass vs johnson Supreme Court case reverses the decision above, any perceived protections for the homeless are eradicated. The city of grants pass had been arresting/fining it’s homeless population in an attempt to drive them away; a disabled widow sued, which went to the SC, and she lost.
Year 2025 - Democrats enact policies to harass, dispossess, and criminalize the homeless.
The purpose of a system is what it does and this system is evil
Goddamn American democracy, just a contest to see who can inflict the most suffering on people.
