- cross-posted to:
- aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
They will do anything OTHER than offer housing to the poor.
I live in NYC. I’ve seen plenty of folks sleeping on the ground, so getting rid of the benches doesn’t actually affect them that much.
It only makes life tough on the people who don’t habitually lie on the concrete.
It very much does in winter at least. Benches conduct significantly less heat away from your body than the ground, which can more easily cause death of hypothermia. Even with layers of insulation.
Getting rid of all the benches won’t make the homeless disappear, obviously. They’ll just sleep on the floor instead. So this trend is just the culling of homeless people, but with extra steps, and plausible deniability.
It took me about 15 seconds to find an uncensored version, and it has more pixels to boot. Fuck off with this this dumb censorship.
Okay and what was gained by revealing the users names?
I believe OP was referring to the word “fuck”, which for some reason was censored in the original screenshot.
Ooh, yeah didn’t see that, only that oc didn’t anonymize their submission like op did.
Why would they do that?
common courtesy?
Common courtesy for what, exactly?
These were publicly posted on a public website on a public forum. If they didn’t want people to see what they posted, they probably should have posted a private message on a private website on a private forum?
A snapshot of public discourse on a public forum is not doxing.
did I say that?
Why are the users entitled to privacy
It’s not about entitlement, it’s about decency. Knowing their usernames or identity contributes nothing here and nobody wants to be harassed when a screenshot of a conversation they casually participated in more than 5 years ago goes viral again for the umpteenth time. So the decent thing to do is to censor the usernames.
the decent thing to do is to censor
Nope
Well there’s dates now too
What was gained by censoring them? These are all public accounts, posting publicly on a public social network, what is the reason for censoring them?
It’s a screenshot from publicly posted social media. Why the fuck would you clutch pearls on this one?
Fresh, decentralised version for myself and others in the UK
Sorry. Is that still a thing? I wanted to avoid imgur, but I’m just so damn used to it =/
Not to worry, I just get it with a VPN and repost, that’s how it is in the UK for now aha The ‘Protect Children From Predators and All Forms of Human Nudity by Banning Everyone From Everything and Get a Generous Dose of Biometric Data Harvesting Normalised Act’, or ‘OSA’, is still in effect
I mean a subway station isn’t a homeless shelter and homeless people are unfortunately very often mentally ill or addicted, which can create danger for commuters.
Shit situation though
the solution should be housing the homeless not making everyone’s lives more miserable
Not just housing, but mental health services for everyone.
I would say we can probably link something like 80% of the bullshit going on in modern society to widespread mental health issues. Definitely a large part is constantly electing obvious sociopaths to political offices. And allowing psychopaths that obviously lack empathy entirely to run corporations and employ large parts of the populace while missing a fundamental part of what many would consider their humanity.
A big driver of mental health issues are economic pressures. When you have to work long hours for shit pay, it does a number on you. Addiction rates increase with poverty, and our current economy is stressful for all but the richest and most fortunate. Even high earners have to work themselves to the bone for their position, and their lack of work/life balance drives them to isolation.
So it all comes back to capitalism. Solving economic inequities is a prerequisite to addressing almost all of our problems.
You think the subway should house the homeless?
The subway should be suitable for disabled people to use. If that makes the subway a home for the homeless, that isn’t the fault of the choice to make the subway suitable for disabled people.
Homeless people will find some place to stay. If you make places more unpleasant until homeless people find somewhere else to stay, and then you make that place unpleasant until they move away from there, etc., then all you’re doing is spending massive amounts of money to make the entire city unpleasant and still end up with homeless people in the least unpleasant spots.
I agree with you almost completely. The issue is if the homeless prevents the space from being suitable for disabled people or other commuters, then this is the “less worse” option from the subway’s perspective. The subway is focused on creating a safe and clean commuter environment; it’s not within their power to solve homelessness so they have little choice but to make everything a bit worse for everyone to stop the problem they’re dealing with from making it even worse yet for everyone.
the subway’s perspective. The subway is focused on creating a safe and clean commuter environment
Well there’s your problem. Your subway organisation is myopically focused on making its own little corner as “well-functioning” as possible even at the cost of the rest of the city. It ignores the social harm it causes to whatever the next place is that homeless people decide to congregate instead (and the additional harm it causes to homeless people by forcing them to stay in less hospitable locations, and the additional harm it causes everyone in those homeless people’s vicinity because they are more desperate on account of staying in less hospitable environments and thus more likely to resort to crime).
i think that the millions of vacant homes should house the homeless, but since thats seemingly impossible then sure I’d rather they keep the benches for the homeless to lay on than this
