Comments by "dixon pinfold" (@dixonpinfold2582) on "ABC News" channel.

What do you think these mini-favelas are going to be like after a few months or years? And besides that, either this is on such a small scale that it amounts to nothing, or it'll be massively scaled up and then it's not a mini-favela but a large favela. It's not sensible at all, it's a failure. If big, nice apartments like the one we see here were actually available, they could just hand them out. What need would there be for an air-conditioned tool-shed first? You were tricked. The woman shown is 100% not like typical homeless people. This was a staged segment. Fast forward five years: hundreds of thousands of these things are all over California, many with more than one person in them. They frequently catch fire. There's more violence in and around them than in shelters or on sidewalks today. Rape, drugs, murder, disease, stench, you name it. And it's partly thanks to this report. The same MSM campaigned intensively and tirelessly in the 90s for more opioid prescriptions. Horrified doctors said 'No, addictions will skyrocket and it'll be a disaster.' 'Doctors are heartless', the MSM said, and kept up their campaign until it succeeded. Now look at your country. Stop listening to the MSM.
5
Thanks, US. Without you this would have ended with Ukraine disappearing off the map six months ago.
3
@Krush4you There's a good deal of truth in there (although I admit I couldn't follow every word of it). But I stand by my view that nothing but real housing can help much. That and medical and addictions assistance. With those three things, unemployment will fix itself in most cases, and a reasonable life will have been snatched back out of chaos. Thanks for your interesting reply.
3
@Krush4you Such shantytowns will simply prevent real solutions from being sought, funded and implemented. They will do this by leading to a 'mission accomplished' mindset among voters who might otherwise push politicians for them, and by soaking up funding. They would be an 'improvement' that prevents improvement. They will encourage even more addicts to flock to California, because actual privacy behind an actual locked door is part of the dream for homeless people. But here it will enable and hence cement addiction behaviour in ways that the privacy of real housing wouldn't, because real housing affords real dignity. (If you're living in one of these toolsheds, you're still homeless.) I could go on all day here. This plan is a mistake. The need is for small subsidized apartments in buildings not dedicated to them alone, and dispersed everywhere (and in every state). Also, prescription drug coverage. Such a plan would in fact be a big money saver (if I assume correctly that shelters and other homeless services in California are publicly funded). But more importantly, it would deal a direct blow to the problem. Thanks for your reply.
2
I believe Moses.
2
@stevenperdue996 Have you ever been homeless?
2
"Looked after well" And it will be, won't it? Yep. For sure. No running water, low-functioning tenant, maximum odds of chaos, but yeah.
2
@ButterfatFarms These comments are mind-blowing. There may be one or two of these things that's intensely well-funded and babysat that works out not too horribly, but overall it's going to be a disaster. And the authorities in charge of them will defend them to the hilt and claim with a straight face that they're a success. And who am I to say so? Someone who, alas, knows everything there is to know about homelessness.
2
America's reputation with the rest of humanity takes yet another blow. Where was the booing? Where was security to escort him off the premises before he even sat back down? Why wasn't he arrested?
1
$2.3 billion for "infrastructure resilience." One penny out of every $100 in GDP. Well, it's too little to really bolster infrastructure, so it can only be about a few political favors, perhaps including a warm personal gesture to the Democrats or even himself.
1
Glad you like it so much. If the reaction here is representative of Americans you'll have several million of them within five years. Shantytowns everywhere with no plumbing, like in Brazil or Bangladesh.
1
Ever been homeless yourself?
1
Their lawyer was Jussie Smollett, back when he used to pretend to be an attorney.
1
It's weird how the cops don't just arrest lawbreakers when they see them doing something. What to they do when they see an arsonist walking away from a burning building? Ask the building what it wants? I wonder if it's like that in every state or it's just a California thing.
1
No, the machine that's pumping them out is just the United States of America, gone off the rails. Cf. Sigmund Freud: "America is a mistake. A great mistake!" It'd be marvellous if he was wrong. But I don't think we'll have to wait that much longer to find out. It either gets a lot better over the next 20 years or it's gone.
1
Now you're talking. These shantytowns will quickly become cesspools (including literally, for they have no sewage). Babies will be born into them. They're not built to proper code and are crowded together, so what happens when they catch fire? That size shantytown with all homeless people will likely have one or more arsonists in it, or ones who come simply to target it.
1
@saratemp790 Yeah, some of them, although I wouldn't generalize strictly. Of those, a lot could lose that preference under the right conditions. By that I mean if some of their bad experiences could retreat into the farther past. Time does heal a lot of wounds.
1
Sometimes grim approximation borders on hilarious accuracy: This came up when I searched for "Nuremberg rallies."
1
@stevenperdue996 I read your reply to Anthony. How are these little shacks better than tents? They are not. Their purpose is to make YOU and other non-homeless people feel better. They are highly effective for that, to judge by your comments and those of other sentimentalists like you here. You know nothing about homelessness or being homeless, I can tell. I can also tell your mind: you live solely to luxuriate in your emotions and you don't care if you earn those emotions either. You are a very dangerous person. You're what's wrong with the United States. Nearly all its worst problems were caused or worsened by people of precisely your character. As your numbers grow, your country flounders. And you tell someone who disagrees with you to go away, like you own this space! Now that's arrogance with a capital A. (I also notice you didn't even check your comment before posting it. No surprise there.)
1
@dpelpal Yes, that could be. We've seen that airstrikes were part of it. The planes were not F-16s, but having some in the air quite a few miles back, fully loaded with advanced air-to-air missiles, could provide a considerable deterrent to Russia attempting to approach the zone of the attack with its own aircraft. It's like chess: every piece on the board adds something.
1