The more the city builds subsided housing, shelters, needle exchanges, addiction friendly tiny house villages, diversion programs, etc, the worse it gets. When will we begin making data driven decisions about the effectiveness of these programs?
What do you suggest they do then?
Zero tolerance. Arrest them for possession, put them in detention long enough that they detox, and send them to treatment as part of sentencing. Shut down subsidized housing, aggressively take down tent cities, make it miserable to be homeless. Stop giving them handouts.
Not in Seattle, they are coddled here. We spend $8500 per year per homeless person of city money making them comfy. That's in addition to State and Federal welfare.
What about human rights? You do realize that people mess up in teens and it’s really hard to beat addiction. How about helping them get out of their condition so they don’t need to commit any crime? Ever thought of that? If it were that simple to throw them in a detention center till they detox then so many people wouldn’t die off of withdrawal.
You don't have a human right to commit crime. Look, the data proves your ideas failed.
The idea is that we have to help our fellow human beings including the homeless and/or drug addicts. I agree the data proves current implementations are not so effective. But that doesn’t change the fact that they need help, and we have to help them. The original solution is still education, health care and jobs to get these people off of the streets, but spending tax payers money on helping the poor and needy is often not the best strategy to win an election. I don’t claim to know what is the right solution here, but I believe the people here on blind are the most intelligent minds of the society and together we might be able to find a solution.
Make Seattle Great Again 2020!!!!
Painting with a broad brush, then asking for data driven decisions, ok. Needle exchanges aren’t about reducing homelessness or addiction. Their intent is to reduce the transmission of infectious diseases. Perhaps if you were looking at the correct metrics, you wouldn’t be so confused.
But you didn't provide any data to back up your claims of ineffectiveness? Disclosure: I have zero stake in this. I don't even live on the west coast
There are tons of statistics. Those of us who have been here for 10+ years have witnessed a stark and rapid decline. The debate is not whether the conditions have worsened. The debate is whether the progressive policies are to blame.
So many statistics that you can’t cite any, nor show a causation?
Seattle should start providing free heroin like the Netherlands. All the junkies stopped doing crime, or really much of anything, and the dealers lost all their business.
They used to have a table set up on the sidewalk where you could come an exchange needles for free. Recently seven people were shot at that very location.
That's not the same thing, because the drug market is what's violent, not the needle market. If heroin is free, there will only be zonked out junkies who are too high to be violent. Gangs won't be able to make money from drugs and will go elsewhere
Is there a city liberals haven't destroyed? Disgraceful.
Which city got destroyed? Hinkley, Paradise, and San Bernardino were destroyed by PG&E, not liberals.
Seattle, SF, LA, are all worse than they were say 10+ years ago. NYC is getting bad again under DeBlasio, with the crime rate ticking up.
It's the people on the margin who make that choice. Do they keep working hard even though they can barely make ends meet? Or give up? Do they resist addiction and hang on to their life? Or give in and go get the free drugs? It's not my situation but you are naive if you think making the wrong choice more tolerable doesn't influence people on the edge of giving up. Cut that 100 million subsidy of addiction and make life $100 million easier for the people working two jobs and holding everything together with sheer grit and you will reduce homelessness. In other words, subsidize those who hang on rather than those who give up.
Choice? Where’s your data for that?
Where’s the data to back up any claims in the OP? The data driven solution is public housing programs. This is because the homeless are not a set quantity, but a rate at which people fall into homelessness. Currently people become homeless faster than they recover from it due to the rise in housing costs and rent. Creating more stability for low income or no income housing will create more stability for people to rebuild more quickly.
Wrong. The public housing program basically incentivizes the homeless *not* to get responsible and get a job and fix their lives - why would they choose do that, lose that free house to make a hard earned living? If you increase welfare, you disincentivize that choice further. Learn: You want to reward constructive choices not put incentives in the opposite direction.
Yes yes stable public housing disincentivizes people from doing low wage precarious work... which would mean jobs would have to offer better pay... which you are against. Social engineering through poverty and threat of mistreatment on the streets, got it.
Nah
The city says that crime reduced by 2%, but the reality is the city's progressive chief and DA simply decided to stop charging and prosecuting people. Meanwhile my coworkers got shot on the street by drug addicts, while just walking to and from work.
Can’t believe this. Used to think Seattle was relatively safer than other cities like Houston or New York. Getting shot for no reason 😓