False dichotomies

Nov 09, 2014 21:44

Which is more important ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 12

gwendally November 10 2014, 03:30:48 UTC
There is some righteous indignation going around Facebook right now about a guy being arrested for feeding the homeless.

The location is Fort Lauderdale, a city known as a tourist destination. As a tourist do you want to know how I feel about being besieged by beggers? It makes me want to not come back. And if that happens, what happens to all the people who work in the tourism industry? Oh, look, they become homeless.

I cook and serve - and then sit down to eat with the patrons - at a soup kitchen. I am not being heartless when I approve of zoning laws.

Just as we have rules about not feeding bears at campsites, we can't feed homeless in tourist attractions.

It is another false dichotomy. No one is saying don't have soup kitchens. But don't have them in places that are terribly inappropriate for homeless people to congregate.

Reply

ford_prefect42 November 10 2014, 04:43:51 UTC
You're aware that zoning regulation is consistently correlated with more expensive housing, lower job growth, and greater homelessness, right ( ... )

Reply

prester_scott November 10 2014, 11:49:07 UTC
There was a similar showdown in Orlando. The homeless population is densest in the downtown area. There are several soup kitchens and shelters in that area. Yet some leftie group wanted to start doing an open-air chow line in the public park around Lake Eola, which is one of the city's signature sights (outside of theme parks and such). It is obvious that their purpose is to make a statement by being an eyesore.

Reply

coercedbynutmeg November 11 2014, 03:45:09 UTC
LOL. Have you ever been to an oceanside city that isn't totally besieged by homeless guys? I haven't, and that's after living in three different temperate coastal areas (not places that freeze during winter) with a high tourism load. The place we live in currently is unbelievable. (But with a $3000 monthly rent for a duplex, what do you expect?)

I think it might be a fallacy that most homeless people don't want to be homeless. Or, you know, would be willing to work to improve their plight. They seem pretty happy around here, and not motivated to improve their situations.
“The only thing we don’t like is that cities keep making laws that target homeless people,”

http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/archives/2013/0801/article_baa77c58-fa21-11e2-85b1-001a4bcf6878.html?mode=jqm

business impacts of local homeless on tourism

when the Occupy movement tried to join in with the local ... )

Reply


galadrion November 10 2014, 17:35:00 UTC
The State guarantees no one is in need.

Erm, the State can't back up that guarantee. One, they - obviously, from the historical record - have no idea how to implement it. Two, even if they had a clue, they don't have either the tools or the authority.

As for "Freedom to Pursue life goals without state interference", that's easy. Simply issue me an axe. Every time a state (dis)functionary tries to stick his nose in my business, I'll cut it off. Very shortly, they'll either all have learned better, or they'll be busy duct-taping their glasses to the middle of their forehead...

Reply


mauser November 11 2014, 09:13:05 UTC
As I posted on Twitter: When the only tool you have is a hammer, all your problems look like thumbs.

Reply

prester_scott November 11 2014, 12:51:50 UTC
snerk

Reply


Leave a comment

Up