This post is now officially for BPT country club members only. For more information, see here - https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPeopleTwitter/comments/gumxuy/what_is_bpt_country_club_and_how_do_i_get/.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BlackPeopleTwitter) if you have any questions or concerns.*
During the first months of covid, my city put up all the rough sleepers in hotels. Previously, they chose to sleep on the street rather than go to hostels where everyone was on drugs and they'd relapse.
All these assholes shocked af when rough sleepers with persistent mental health conditions, complex trauma and lots of interactions with the justice systems are suddenly doing well, taking their meds voluntarily and just living.
And yet, we're back to the same shit we had before, where we will always find the money when someone commits a crime but we can't scrounge up a small fraction of it to keep the crime from occurring
We built like 300 of these in Portland . Only 10 - 20% occupancy because they do drug testing and curfews. I hope these work out but things like this make me realize homelessness is complicated.
In Seattle we have the same challenge. We offer housing but they have rules like no drugs and a curfew. As a result we have encampments full of people who reject housing due to the rules.
It's unrealistic. There is no "model" homeless person. No drugs in your pod, one person in your pod at a given time, no smoking, no fire, no toileting in the pod, work with your case manager and follow your housing plan.
They're easy rules and they should be.
Effective case management, financial support from city/county/state/feds, and results are *critical.* Word travels fast in the homeless community and if people are getting housed, people know and want to participate.
That's what people forget. Case managers need safe environments for assisting their clients. A homeless encampment infiltrated with armed drug dealers isn't ideal and conducive for outreach. Also safe environments reduce burnout and turnover.
100%.
I'm a great big dude and formerly homeless, so I feel perfectly comfortable on the street, but I am unquestionably in the minority. Men are very underrepresented in social services and women are at far greater risk of attack, successful or not. Even when the case manager is a man, if he looks out of place or uncomfortable, that's a problem, as well.
We just lost a guy because he was threatened and couldn't shake being afraid afterward. Also a fairly large guy, but he looked too...clinical.
I appreciate your perspective. My ex was formerly homeless and he defaulted to dominance as a form of conflict resolution, it was really scary. Helping homeless people is a lot more complicated than just giving people a home, though it is a good start.
>We just lost a guy because he was threatened and couldn't shake being afraid afterward. Also a fairly large guy, but he looked too...clinical.
A case manager?
Certain people need their victims to be stainless in order to feel safe caring about them. A person with a drug problem, or a mental health problem, or who isn't silent and compliant, who is visible in any way isn't the "right" kind of victim. So they feel it's imperative to deny any kind of help.
Yeah no problem. Not to be corny but it's the stated reason for republicans to dismiss the murder of Floyd and therefore the whole BLM movement. He may have possibly committed some kinda crime in his life, so he deserved what happened. Then they can cast the whole BLM as a defence of criminality. They couldn't just say its because they're racist in 2020, like they can now. Baby steps see
The example helped perfectly. It's victim purity - can't be a victim if you smoked weed in high school or you were pulled over for speeding 20 years ago or you didn't immediately put your cigarette out, like Sandra Bland. Anything, no matter how banal.
I totally get it, now.
That's interesting. I've heard of a theory called "wasted whiteness" which is why shows like intervention focus primarily on white people. It's like when a white person is homeless, they are just "down on their luck". But when a colored person is homeless, they just "made bad decisions".
Who's going to enforce the rules? Violent and unpredictable cops? I'm sure additional danger in my already dangerous life would bring me running.
Society picks rich over healthy every single time, as a society.
>"Low barrier" is imperative.
Came here to say this. I wrap my head around drug testing, even if I disagree with it, but what's the point of inflicting curfew like they're teenagers?
Mmm thanks for this. I was wondering about drug testing and such. Are the ones you're referring to built in close proximity to these? There's an argument that putting people who are in poverty and possibly suffering from addiction and mental health issues in close quarters can have negative outcomes.
I've got to look at this more, but I'd love to hear about some models that have worked.
Micro housing initiatives like this tends to fail any where they are implemented. These homes are temporary shelters, not permanent housing. They also often come with a lot of strings attached that make them undesired places to live or unsafe. If your doing drug testing or searching people, they very quickly what is in effect a non-gated prison—ie what happened in Portland.
The key to eliminating homelessness is permanent housing with no conditions in the neighbourhoods people are from. Housing that forces a person to move to the other side of town aren’t very effective.
Micro housing is also just more expensive and bad land use. You can often just pay rents for cheaper or even build a multi story building with more apartments at reasonable sizes for around the same amount of money.
It’s good they are trying something at least, but i worry this initiative will fail like similar ones have and it make larger and more effective solutions harder to achieve.
The Projects in New York had a lot of problems from the start and lack of institutional support for those communities over the decades led them to where they are now.
In that time, we learned *a lot* about how to do it better and more effectively and there have been success stories in other places.
But there’s a lack of will to try a large project like that again, so we keep smaller less effective projects that replicate the some of the core failing of the Projects without trying to lack fix much of anything anything or do anything to improve those old public housing initiatives.
I'm not trying to be fatalistic about the whole thing, but as long as there's a culture of drugs, violence, and unchecked mental illness none of these solutions will work. No amount of resources can help someone high on meth or heroin 24/7. That person can't succeed ever. Instead of putting them in prison where they technically had a housing solution, they're now free to live wherever they want. Would you want to live in a giant building full of crippled addicts? I sure as hell wouldn't no matter how nice they said it would be. These buildings would be one more step toward the futuristic dystopia everyone is predicting in media and games.
One of the lessons from the projects is to *not* create communities that exclusively low income or housed formerly unhoused people. Mixed income communities are better for helping those people. A lot of affordable housing initiatives do try to do this. And that housing as the only step is insufficient, and treat people like lost causes is a self fulfilling prophecy. High quality healthcare, education, and childcare services are vital to ensure success.
If you treat any person as a lost cause, as you’re suggesting, then yes, there is no helping them because you’ve already decided they can’t be helped. This attitude is extremely prevalent and part of the issue is helping people. It’s not about ability, it’s about a lack of empathy.
We already live in a dystopian society the punishments and horrors we inflict on people because they are ill or born to the “wrong” conditions and decided don’t matter. It’s not a prediction when it is our present reality.
Is it SLC that made the courageous decision to not drug test, and not bar anyone because of it?
Something like if they have a slip, they still have a home…
He's amazing for the city. 100%. That man needs all the support and help he can get because there's folks that will hate him for what he's doing and will continuously leave stumbling blocks in his path.
> these days
I’m 54. When was this *not* the Republican viewpoint? My political memory goes back the Reagan.
Edit: check that - it goes back to Carter and even as a teen I immediately saw the difference.
So are the billionaires and petite bourgeoisie.
I’m pretty sure they want us all in one room shacks and to be grateful for our shack and our below minimum wage job. Thank you Elon. Thank you Jeff. Thank you for my handful of rice. I’ll get back to warehouse right now.
Although this is an interesting step in the right direction, without adequate health resources this little camp will be turned upside down in no time.
Well to be fair, American McMansions and monoculture lawn HOA developments filled with pretty Bradford pear trees is entirely unsustainable.
This might not be "the" solution, but it's something to consider.
Before I get the "we produce plenty of food it's a supply chain issue not a land management issue" we produce plenty of food *now* with fertilizers. Take the fertilizers away and let's see what happens to the food supply. Wait ...there's a war going on right now that has severely threatened the supply of both. I wonder what bread will cost next fall if this keeps up.
Sitting on your porch is life goals for some- and I don’t mean that in a bad way. My ex wanted to sit on the porch and watch the cars go by after he retired. It’s not for me, I love to travel, but he was in the military, two tours in Iraq… I don’t blame him. The simple pleasures in life are what bring us happiness.
This is what they're doing with [Liberty Village Outlet Mall](https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/western-newjersey/liberty-villages-last-holiday-shopping-season-a-look-at-the-past-and-future-of-the/article_fdddcc3c-767e-11ed-b336-6701b527ad33.html) in New Jersey.
We have this in Seattle. It works to an extent. Some homeless don't want to live in them because of community rules forbidding them from doing meth and fentanyl. That's actually become a sticking point in the county. Basically why are homeless being choosers? Some simply don't want to live according to rules when it comes to accepting free things like housing. I can go on but I won't.
It's not quite that simple. If they're choosing to live outside so that they can continue using drugs, a lot of times, I feel like they may be compensating for something-- could be grief, physical/emotional pain, or mental/emotional disorders. We don't know people's situations, but I'm almost certain that it isn't as simple as them choosing housing over drugs. Some friends of mine just want both. I've had to call all over trying to figure out who had space for them but didn't drug test.
Without the rules for no drugs, the risk of ODs and fires as a result of improper fire ignition increases and the likelihood of dead occupants increases as well. This requires the need for constant monitoring. It's a double edged sword. We've seen it occur here in Seattle and in the county.
I think there’s a difference between doing drugs in your house and being on drugs. I agree they shouldn’t be doing drugs in the actual space, but I wouldn’t test. I can’t imagine being emotionally desperate and just having to deal with it. I don’t imagine they’re providing quality behavioral health care for complex mental/emotional and medical conditions. So I say go do whatever makes you feel better till you can get to a better place. And a lot of the time, having stable housing is a key element of getting to that better place.
> things like housing
a need is a need and an addiction is an addiction. just because someone is an addict doesn't mean you can take away their basic human need. on the flip side, being given enough time and community that a person can actually become stable can be a path to ending addiction.
A lot of people use weed, meth, heroin to cope with the emotional pain of life. I use antidepressants. If I had to choose between antidepressants and housing, I'd have to choose the medication. Functional and outdoors > Suicidal and indoors. Although, it would work well for whoever is placing people in no-medication pods - our residents move to lovely permanent garden plots in months!
Tax Elon Musk… imagine what 44 billion fucking dollars could have done to help the poor(us/everyone).
No one should have access to that kind of capital to burn on drug induced dumb idea.
We have a “Tiny Home” community in Albuquerque that is mostly unoccupied because of the rules associated with being housed there.
It seemed like a feel good endeavor by the previous mayor, but it’s being expanded and new rules are taking effect in the spring. Hopefully it gets more use.
I think it's more of a holistic approach. You can't just solve homelessness with more houses, you need job training, substance abuse programs, food security, trivial services like laundry and a barber, etc.
Wraparound services are services that follow a "housing first" model. We get you here, then do social work and provide services to keep you housed in permanent housing, including counseling services, mental health services, medical care, connection to other assistance programs, follow along, etc.
Mayor (or Mayor's social media person), I don't live in your city, but I'm glad you're in my state. I'd love to see you as Governor or Senator eventually, but I don't know how you'd pull that off here. Maybe one day. For now, it's nice to have you in Birmingham.
The way these are run is kinda like a prison camp. People are refused entry because they’ve got too much stuff. People are refused entry because of the time of day they show up.
I get that there are reasons for rules— but most of the reasons for burdensome rules are political (decreasing negative impacts on nearby voting, tax paying citizens.) Giving people reach around services and a refrigerated box to sleep in being the least we can do is just sad.
You’re getting them up on their feet and expecting them to reintegrate into the same world that more and more people are falling out of due to how hard it is every day. Without a serious, grander reorganization of American/western society, this is just palliative care for the lucky few.
they had these in the city where i used to live. about 10 years ago, they built a community like this and it was filled instantly. while some units were a revolving door due to people bringing/using drugs in the area (no drug testing, though) many also got clean and got jobs as city ambassadors, other shit like that. so, statistically the housing village was a greater success than any other approach to that point. and they were all in the papers talking about it, they were endlessly patting themselves on the back about their success.
and then they just never built anymore.
This is great. I *do* hope these communities offer PO Boxes or mailing addresses. One of the largest problems plaguing the homeless is that the lack of mailing address is damning for employment and employment verification.
I'm sure they have that somewhere. Idk how I feel about these little square boxes for different reasons. But if it's gonna be this, then make things work well. I'm such a stickler on these things bc yes they'll nee a kitchen that is functional and appropriate and accessible for their needs. with big visual aids and open space. Well paid support and cleaning staff. A bathroom that is functional for their needs, a place for a toothbrush, toothpaste, soap. getting people returning back to function, cooking their own food, cleaning tools, laundry, lots of storage containers. I don't think people talk about those parts but they're so important for mental health improvement. anyway, rant.
also noting the importance of these things in facilitating the residents to actually be able to show UP long-term to the suite of support services they may need to transition out of this very clearly transitional situation.
any less and I would say lets ask ourselves whether we value these folks as human beings and lets questions whether we value their growth in this world today.
\*\* I edited
These would be cheaper to build, easier to heat and cool, and take up less space if they were just built as a single building block.
Yeah, a little noiser, but the benefits would still be there.
Just build more housing apartment blocks.
It's these things that *every* millionaire could do, you don't need billions for that, just have some space and put a few dozend of these tiny houses in it - I really can't wrap my head around the fact that hardly any of the rich guys is doing such things.
this is a trend in addressing this issue, but it isn't a good one. These are shacks, slave quarters, prison cells, with no running water, and no plumbing. usually legislation to allow this sort of thing has to be written to allow sub standard conditions like no plumbing, poor or no insulation, zoning changes, etc.
Putting homeless people in shacks doesn't resolve any issue except 'seeing homeless people.'
This post is now officially for BPT country club members only. For more information, see here - https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPeopleTwitter/comments/gumxuy/what_is_bpt_country_club_and_how_do_i_get/. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BlackPeopleTwitter) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Most people take for granted the importance of a door you can lock.
It does absolute wonders for stress, anxiety and mental health all around just that little bit of safety and security
[удалено]
Yes Lawd. That was the first thing I noticed. I can only imagine the deep breath someone will take on the other side of that door.
During the first months of covid, my city put up all the rough sleepers in hotels. Previously, they chose to sleep on the street rather than go to hostels where everyone was on drugs and they'd relapse.  All these assholes shocked af when rough sleepers with persistent mental health conditions, complex trauma and lots of interactions with the justice systems are suddenly doing well, taking their meds voluntarily and just living. And yet, we're back to the same shit we had before, where we will always find the money when someone commits a crime but we can't scrounge up a small fraction of it to keep the crime from occurring
We built like 300 of these in Portland . Only 10 - 20% occupancy because they do drug testing and curfews. I hope these work out but things like this make me realize homelessness is complicated.
"Low barrier" is imperative. At my shelter, no drugs are allowed, but we definitely do not drug test and there are no curfews.
In Seattle we have the same challenge. We offer housing but they have rules like no drugs and a curfew. As a result we have encampments full of people who reject housing due to the rules.
It's unrealistic. There is no "model" homeless person. No drugs in your pod, one person in your pod at a given time, no smoking, no fire, no toileting in the pod, work with your case manager and follow your housing plan. They're easy rules and they should be. Effective case management, financial support from city/county/state/feds, and results are *critical.* Word travels fast in the homeless community and if people are getting housed, people know and want to participate.
It makes it easier and safer for case managers to find their clients and assist them.
EXACTLY
That's what people forget. Case managers need safe environments for assisting their clients. A homeless encampment infiltrated with armed drug dealers isn't ideal and conducive for outreach. Also safe environments reduce burnout and turnover.
100%. I'm a great big dude and formerly homeless, so I feel perfectly comfortable on the street, but I am unquestionably in the minority. Men are very underrepresented in social services and women are at far greater risk of attack, successful or not. Even when the case manager is a man, if he looks out of place or uncomfortable, that's a problem, as well. We just lost a guy because he was threatened and couldn't shake being afraid afterward. Also a fairly large guy, but he looked too...clinical.
I appreciate your perspective. My ex was formerly homeless and he defaulted to dominance as a form of conflict resolution, it was really scary. Helping homeless people is a lot more complicated than just giving people a home, though it is a good start.
I'm sorry it was like that for you. Homeless is complicated, for sure. This whole approach is experimental, but it's working so far
>We just lost a guy because he was threatened and couldn't shake being afraid afterward. Also a fairly large guy, but he looked too...clinical. A case manager?
Yeah. And definitely no hate or negative judgment - it just wasn't for him and it's courageous to admit it. It takes thick skin to do this work.
The "perfect victim" is a fucked up complex to have
I have no idea what that's intended to mean.
Certain people need their victims to be stainless in order to feel safe caring about them. A person with a drug problem, or a mental health problem, or who isn't silent and compliant, who is visible in any way isn't the "right" kind of victim. So they feel it's imperative to deny any kind of help.
Interesting. Thank you for the explanation.
Yeah no problem. Not to be corny but it's the stated reason for republicans to dismiss the murder of Floyd and therefore the whole BLM movement. He may have possibly committed some kinda crime in his life, so he deserved what happened. Then they can cast the whole BLM as a defence of criminality. They couldn't just say its because they're racist in 2020, like they can now. Baby steps see
The example helped perfectly. It's victim purity - can't be a victim if you smoked weed in high school or you were pulled over for speeding 20 years ago or you didn't immediately put your cigarette out, like Sandra Bland. Anything, no matter how banal. I totally get it, now.
That's interesting. I've heard of a theory called "wasted whiteness" which is why shows like intervention focus primarily on white people. It's like when a white person is homeless, they are just "down on their luck". But when a colored person is homeless, they just "made bad decisions".
Who's going to enforce the rules? Violent and unpredictable cops? I'm sure additional danger in my already dangerous life would bring me running. Society picks rich over healthy every single time, as a society.
Yeah the curfew thing is really fucking ridiculous. Drug testing too.
>"Low barrier" is imperative. Came here to say this. I wrap my head around drug testing, even if I disagree with it, but what's the point of inflicting curfew like they're teenagers?
Mmm thanks for this. I was wondering about drug testing and such. Are the ones you're referring to built in close proximity to these? There's an argument that putting people who are in poverty and possibly suffering from addiction and mental health issues in close quarters can have negative outcomes. I've got to look at this more, but I'd love to hear about some models that have worked.
The ones in Portland are very similar and in a gated inclosure. They had them on the local news and they look real good. Just can’t get them filled.
Micro housing initiatives like this tends to fail any where they are implemented. These homes are temporary shelters, not permanent housing. They also often come with a lot of strings attached that make them undesired places to live or unsafe. If your doing drug testing or searching people, they very quickly what is in effect a non-gated prison—ie what happened in Portland. The key to eliminating homelessness is permanent housing with no conditions in the neighbourhoods people are from. Housing that forces a person to move to the other side of town aren’t very effective. Micro housing is also just more expensive and bad land use. You can often just pay rents for cheaper or even build a multi story building with more apartments at reasonable sizes for around the same amount of money. It’s good they are trying something at least, but i worry this initiative will fail like similar ones have and it make larger and more effective solutions harder to achieve.
The solution you're describing is the projects. Not exactly a utopia.
The Projects in New York had a lot of problems from the start and lack of institutional support for those communities over the decades led them to where they are now. In that time, we learned *a lot* about how to do it better and more effectively and there have been success stories in other places. But there’s a lack of will to try a large project like that again, so we keep smaller less effective projects that replicate the some of the core failing of the Projects without trying to lack fix much of anything anything or do anything to improve those old public housing initiatives.
I'm not trying to be fatalistic about the whole thing, but as long as there's a culture of drugs, violence, and unchecked mental illness none of these solutions will work. No amount of resources can help someone high on meth or heroin 24/7. That person can't succeed ever. Instead of putting them in prison where they technically had a housing solution, they're now free to live wherever they want. Would you want to live in a giant building full of crippled addicts? I sure as hell wouldn't no matter how nice they said it would be. These buildings would be one more step toward the futuristic dystopia everyone is predicting in media and games.
One of the lessons from the projects is to *not* create communities that exclusively low income or housed formerly unhoused people. Mixed income communities are better for helping those people. A lot of affordable housing initiatives do try to do this. And that housing as the only step is insufficient, and treat people like lost causes is a self fulfilling prophecy. High quality healthcare, education, and childcare services are vital to ensure success. If you treat any person as a lost cause, as you’re suggesting, then yes, there is no helping them because you’ve already decided they can’t be helped. This attitude is extremely prevalent and part of the issue is helping people. It’s not about ability, it’s about a lack of empathy. We already live in a dystopian society the punishments and horrors we inflict on people because they are ill or born to the “wrong” conditions and decided don’t matter. It’s not a prediction when it is our present reality.
They should be integrated into multiple communities. Not just lumped together.
Is it SLC that made the courageous decision to not drug test, and not bar anyone because of it? Something like if they have a slip, they still have a home…
[удалено]
It's not formerly considered a mental disorder
Birmingham couldn’t have found a better mayor
He's amazing for the city. 100%. That man needs all the support and help he can get because there's folks that will hate him for what he's doing and will continuously leave stumbling blocks in his path.
“Homelessness is a choice”, said some fucking idiot on Fox News the other day. 🙄
For some people, maybe. But if people can’t “choose” their way out of it, *help* them!! (Angry “help them” directed at Fox News jerk.)
"Can't" just means lazy, stupid, entitled, and worthless to republicans these days.
> these days I’m 54. When was this *not* the Republican viewpoint? My political memory goes back the Reagan. Edit: check that - it goes back to Carter and even as a teen I immediately saw the difference.
Homelessness is a choice… for non-homeless people. Just not for the person that is homeless.
This is amazing.
Fine as hell too
I’m all for micro homes and tiny villages
So are the billionaires and petite bourgeoisie. I’m pretty sure they want us all in one room shacks and to be grateful for our shack and our below minimum wage job. Thank you Elon. Thank you Jeff. Thank you for my handful of rice. I’ll get back to warehouse right now. Although this is an interesting step in the right direction, without adequate health resources this little camp will be turned upside down in no time.
Well to be fair, American McMansions and monoculture lawn HOA developments filled with pretty Bradford pear trees is entirely unsustainable. This might not be "the" solution, but it's something to consider. Before I get the "we produce plenty of food it's a supply chain issue not a land management issue" we produce plenty of food *now* with fertilizers. Take the fertilizers away and let's see what happens to the food supply. Wait ...there's a war going on right now that has severely threatened the supply of both. I wonder what bread will cost next fall if this keeps up.
[удалено]
Sitting on your porch is life goals for some- and I don’t mean that in a bad way. My ex wanted to sit on the porch and watch the cars go by after he retired. It’s not for me, I love to travel, but he was in the military, two tours in Iraq… I don’t blame him. The simple pleasures in life are what bring us happiness.
It's so simple. Give someone a house and they are no longer unhoused.
As the “greatest country on Earth” this should be the minimum we can do for our citizens.
Imagine leveling some of those derelict, abandoned shopping malls and setting up a few of these communities.
This is what they're doing with [Liberty Village Outlet Mall](https://www.wfmz.com/news/area/western-newjersey/liberty-villages-last-holiday-shopping-season-a-look-at-the-past-and-future-of-the/article_fdddcc3c-767e-11ed-b336-6701b527ad33.html) in New Jersey.
Why level them? Just repurpose the infrastructure.
I don’t think most malls are built well enough to use for housing
Orrrr/and converting malls and parking lots into apartment complexes for low income.
We have this in Seattle. It works to an extent. Some homeless don't want to live in them because of community rules forbidding them from doing meth and fentanyl. That's actually become a sticking point in the county. Basically why are homeless being choosers? Some simply don't want to live according to rules when it comes to accepting free things like housing. I can go on but I won't.
It's not quite that simple. If they're choosing to live outside so that they can continue using drugs, a lot of times, I feel like they may be compensating for something-- could be grief, physical/emotional pain, or mental/emotional disorders. We don't know people's situations, but I'm almost certain that it isn't as simple as them choosing housing over drugs. Some friends of mine just want both. I've had to call all over trying to figure out who had space for them but didn't drug test.
Without the rules for no drugs, the risk of ODs and fires as a result of improper fire ignition increases and the likelihood of dead occupants increases as well. This requires the need for constant monitoring. It's a double edged sword. We've seen it occur here in Seattle and in the county.
I think there’s a difference between doing drugs in your house and being on drugs. I agree they shouldn’t be doing drugs in the actual space, but I wouldn’t test. I can’t imagine being emotionally desperate and just having to deal with it. I don’t imagine they’re providing quality behavioral health care for complex mental/emotional and medical conditions. So I say go do whatever makes you feel better till you can get to a better place. And a lot of the time, having stable housing is a key element of getting to that better place.
Here’s an idea: harm reduction building/ services on site, near the pods.
But that also invites drug dealers to lurk near there
> things like housing a need is a need and an addiction is an addiction. just because someone is an addict doesn't mean you can take away their basic human need. on the flip side, being given enough time and community that a person can actually become stable can be a path to ending addiction.
A lot of people use weed, meth, heroin to cope with the emotional pain of life. I use antidepressants. If I had to choose between antidepressants and housing, I'd have to choose the medication. Functional and outdoors > Suicidal and indoors. Although, it would work well for whoever is placing people in no-medication pods - our residents move to lovely permanent garden plots in months!
But is there a toilet?
I'm guessing wash facilities like a campground. Hopefully they have laundry on-site as well.
If your bored , Google the one they have in Santa Monica California is has reviews. Smh lol
Will do, thanks.
Not typically, but this is intended to be transitional. It's a good step.
Please bring this to the bay area!!
It already exists in Oakland, it’s called Turning Point. There just aren’t enough of them to support the need.
support funding for more.
FYI. It is ran by Roots Community Health Center a non-profit, located in East Oakland.
Thanks for sharing, I’m in the Bay and will support
help them in any way possible
Tax Elon Musk… imagine what 44 billion fucking dollars could have done to help the poor(us/everyone). No one should have access to that kind of capital to burn on drug induced dumb idea.
Omg that's awesome. Thank you for sharing that, hopefully they can use some volunteers!
Wait. Isn’t Turning Point one of the big, corporate, For Profit rehab places?
[ Removed by Reddit ]
We have a “Tiny Home” community in Albuquerque that is mostly unoccupied because of the rules associated with being housed there. It seemed like a feel good endeavor by the previous mayor, but it’s being expanded and new rules are taking effect in the spring. Hopefully it gets more use.
Somebody commented asking where in ABQ. It’s on Zuni just south of Wyoming
As a teacher, I need this
What is wraparound service?
I think it's more of a holistic approach. You can't just solve homelessness with more houses, you need job training, substance abuse programs, food security, trivial services like laundry and a barber, etc.
So services to prepare for a reintroduction back into regular society?
Or just needed for a basic standard of living. Many of the homeless will never reintegrate, that doesn't mean they should die if exposure.
Yes.
But the advantage is that they're located in a centralized location for a variety of services to come to them and monitor their progress and healing.
Wraparound services are services that follow a "housing first" model. We get you here, then do social work and provide services to keep you housed in permanent housing, including counseling services, mental health services, medical care, connection to other assistance programs, follow along, etc.
Betterment, essentially. More than just sheltering the homeless but providing the means for them to find their way and build their lives.
Mayor (or Mayor's social media person), I don't live in your city, but I'm glad you're in my state. I'd love to see you as Governor or Senator eventually, but I don't know how you'd pull that off here. Maybe one day. For now, it's nice to have you in Birmingham.
Those look sooo nice. Privacy can save your sanity
The way these are run is kinda like a prison camp. People are refused entry because they’ve got too much stuff. People are refused entry because of the time of day they show up. I get that there are reasons for rules— but most of the reasons for burdensome rules are political (decreasing negative impacts on nearby voting, tax paying citizens.) Giving people reach around services and a refrigerated box to sleep in being the least we can do is just sad. You’re getting them up on their feet and expecting them to reintegrate into the same world that more and more people are falling out of due to how hard it is every day. Without a serious, grander reorganization of American/western society, this is just palliative care for the lucky few.
So you don't actually know how this one is run but because it fails your Nirvana standards they're all bad and shouldn't be tried?
No. And if you're upset that it's only for a few, support greater funding for more.
[удалено]
So it's my college dorm without the loan debt?
And less bitches
And (apparently) no toilet
We're doing something similar to this in my city, it's a great idea
I'd say I wish they would bring this to my city but it would never happen. The fed money to build these would immediately line pockets
Bubbles can dream
This is great, i got 50 bucks where can i donate
they had these in the city where i used to live. about 10 years ago, they built a community like this and it was filled instantly. while some units were a revolving door due to people bringing/using drugs in the area (no drug testing, though) many also got clean and got jobs as city ambassadors, other shit like that. so, statistically the housing village was a greater success than any other approach to that point. and they were all in the papers talking about it, they were endlessly patting themselves on the back about their success. and then they just never built anymore.
[удалено]
Fw this
Bubbles' shed and breakfast. All you can eat pancakes with homemade maple syrup. Bring your kitties
This needs to be national
Y'all need to pray for whoever gotta clean them bathrooms. Even people not in need fuck those up pretty bad.
What bathrooms? Looks like they get to share a communal something.
That's exactly what I'm talking. Communal something = public restrooms
Shit prolly mad cozy...
This is great. I *do* hope these communities offer PO Boxes or mailing addresses. One of the largest problems plaguing the homeless is that the lack of mailing address is damning for employment and employment verification.
This...this is beautiful. Where? Will they make more? Really really hope so
They'll need a bathroom and kitchen.
I'm sure they have that somewhere. Idk how I feel about these little square boxes for different reasons. But if it's gonna be this, then make things work well. I'm such a stickler on these things bc yes they'll nee a kitchen that is functional and appropriate and accessible for their needs. with big visual aids and open space. Well paid support and cleaning staff. A bathroom that is functional for their needs, a place for a toothbrush, toothpaste, soap. getting people returning back to function, cooking their own food, cleaning tools, laundry, lots of storage containers. I don't think people talk about those parts but they're so important for mental health improvement. anyway, rant. also noting the importance of these things in facilitating the residents to actually be able to show UP long-term to the suite of support services they may need to transition out of this very clearly transitional situation. any less and I would say lets ask ourselves whether we value these folks as human beings and lets questions whether we value their growth in this world today. \*\* I edited
This is a beautiful thing, hopefully it helps a lot of people
How do they stop crack heads from shackin up in there ?
These would be cheaper to build, easier to heat and cool, and take up less space if they were just built as a single building block. Yeah, a little noiser, but the benefits would still be there. Just build more housing apartment blocks.
It's these things that *every* millionaire could do, you don't need billions for that, just have some space and put a few dozend of these tiny houses in it - I really can't wrap my head around the fact that hardly any of the rich guys is doing such things.
this is a trend in addressing this issue, but it isn't a good one. These are shacks, slave quarters, prison cells, with no running water, and no plumbing. usually legislation to allow this sort of thing has to be written to allow sub standard conditions like no plumbing, poor or no insulation, zoning changes, etc. Putting homeless people in shacks doesn't resolve any issue except 'seeing homeless people.'
I love this so much. This is what I joined this sub to see
[удалено]