|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:This further confirms my creeping suspicion that my personal experiences are a completely suitable replacement for suitable data. The map also helps me appreciate how BART went with cloth seats.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Muni also has 2x the number of people boarding per mile compared to other similar metro services, so its understandable that it would be slower. If this number is based on fares then it is most likely inaccurate as gently caress. Any of the buses going through the busy areas, especially chinatown, are so overcrowded you can't even get to the fare machine to pay for your drat ride. Squeeze in at the door. If people getting on and off happen to jostle you towards the machine, you pay, otherwise you get off at your stop and go about your day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
AYC posted:Oh, and weed. We really like weed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Also hopefully it rains for another 3 months straight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
UCI student checking in: holy gently caress so many people were clad in scarves and heavy jackets today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
 that's everywhere with a public transit system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:UCI student checking in: holy gently caress so many people were clad in scarves and heavy jackets today. It was kinda cold, what you thought the whole place was sunshine and "brah"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 09:48
|
|
|
Boot and Rally posted:It was kinda cold, what you thought the whole place was sunshine and "brah"? I live in the bay area and I'm sad to find out that sunshine and "brah" is not the reality  Anyway: so apparently san jose's biggest homeless camp is getting shut down this week: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/12/jungle-homeless-camp-san-jose-silicon-valley-video I told a colleague, who said 'good'. I wonder where they'll go now? Can't this have happened in summer at least?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
My wife works with homeless people and right now everybody is bracing for what will be a huge loving poo poo-storm. The system is already really over capacity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
redreader posted:I wonder where they'll go now? "Somewhere else". Or die. Which is OK because apparently they aren't real people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 19:37
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:"Somewhere else". Or die. Living in San Jose, it really sucks that there are so many homeless people. There are crazy people on the dash (someone was shouting "n****r, white people are satan...incorporated" on Monday), the walking trails along the river are camps, in summer people sit outside liquor stores downtown drinking, and shout at you as you walk past, etc. The last time I went to San Francisco I got out of the bart at 16th and mission and there were tons of homeless people everywhere. But why the gently caress are they even homeless? They need to be cared for! I'm from South Africa. I lived in London for a few years and the lack of homeless people was amazing compared to Cape Town. Everyone is cared for by the state in the UK, although the process might take a little time. San Jose is way more like Cape Town when it comes to homeless, than it is like London. South Africa's a fairly wealthy nation in Africa (#1 or #2) but it still has lots of problems. The USA is the wealthiest country in the world though so this makes little sense to me. Does this come down to Ayn Rand again? What would the world be like if someone could invent a time machine and assassinate her instead of hitler?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
redreader posted:Living in San Jose, it really sucks that there are so many homeless people. There are crazy people on the dash (someone was shouting "n****r, white people are satan...incorporated" on Monday), the walking trails along the river are camps, in summer people sit outside liquor stores downtown drinking, and shout at you as you walk past, etc. The last time I went to San Francisco I got out of the bart at 16th and mission and there were tons of homeless people everywhere. But why the gently caress are they even homeless? They need to be cared for! I'm from South Africa. I lived in London for a few years and the lack of homeless people was amazing compared to Cape Town. Everyone is cared for by the state in the UK, although the process might take a little time. San Jose is way more like Cape Town when it comes to homeless, than it is like London. South Africa's a fairly wealthy nation in Africa (#1 or #2) but it still has lots of problems. The USA is the wealthiest country in the world though so this makes little sense to me. Does this come down to Ayn Rand again? What would the world be like if someone could invent a time machine and assassinate her instead of hitler? America for a long, long time was a country of many resources and relatively few people. Our nation and our identity is kinda built on the idea that for generations, if poo poo sucked we'd move west. America still to this day has homestead laws, which allow you free land if you go live on it (note: only awful land is left). There is a part of our culture that is about the "rugged individual", surviving against all odds to build something great, which means that socially people don't necessarily buy into the idea that America would be better off with more social safety nets. America also has strong puritanical traits that lead towards the "just world" concept, that if bad things happen to someone it is because they deserve it somehow (e.g. The single mother should have kept her legs together or the homeless vet should just get a job). Our labor parties lost out in the 1890s & 1930s and because we're a much more rural nation than the UK, our unions never had the same amount of strength. The weakness of our federal government also factors into it. Harder to convince California to fund a massive homeless program if Californians know that Oklahomans will spill into the state seeking benefits. But less culturally the 80s-90s was a large period of deregulation and removal of public safety nets. We shut down most of our mental hospitals and basically kicked most patients onto the street. We massively reduced the amount of public welfare available and put strings on its access (e.g. must be looking for work). A lot of people here in the US also think we have a UK style "dole" that people can live on, but they're wrong. Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Dec 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
redreader posted:The USA is the wealthiest country in the world though so this makes little sense to me. Does this come down to Ayn Rand again? What would the world be like if someone could invent a time machine and assassinate her instead of hitler? We do lack of lot of public policy & institutionalized infrastructure for helping the poor & homeless. One of the driving reasons behind that is our own attitudes & perceptions in this country. I apologize for not being able to find the graph at the moment, but I remember seeing a statistic a while back that - compared to other countries - there is a larger perception within the USA that homelessness & poverty are caused by laziness or an unwillingness to work/take care of oneself. Obviously it's a view more shared amongst the older and more conservative of us, but I have some self-professed liberal friends who have argued quote: "the homeless wasting their money on things like drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes is proof they don't have an interest in being responsible for themselves."  It's an unfortunate side effect of being the so-called "land of opportunity." Your average Joe on the street honestly believes he could become the next Warren Buffet with enough hard work and dedication, and so they see the poor & homeless as people who obviously didn't/aren't trying hard enough. It's an awful and wrong opinion to have, but too many people have it for us to affect any real change at this point in time. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
What fraction of the long term homeless are mentally ill?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
There isn't a simple answer for why America shits on the poors so hard. There's easy answers but they are incomplete. You can make arguments for racism, classism, Just World, capitalism, objectivism, libertarianism, Protestant Work Ethic, low population density(don't have to see homeless unless you live in cities), and all sorts of other things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:What fraction of the long term homeless are mentally ill? Looks like 25% of homeless are mentally ill versus 6% of the population at large. To bring this around to California again, a classic from earlier this year: http://www.sacbee.com/news/investigations/nevada-patient-busing/article2577189.html quote:Over the past five years, Nevada's primary state psychiatric hospital has put hundreds of mentally ill patients on Greyhound buses and sent them to cities and towns across America.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Spazzle posted:What fraction of the long term homeless are mentally ill? Huge. Not all of them are pants on the head crazy, but it still is a serious issue. Many of them self-medicate with drugs or alcohol, which can make the MH issues worse. Lots of people argue that a fair number of homeless chose to be homeless. Most that actually do are mentally ill and whatever service offered doesn't mesh with the help offered. For example, I had a client who had been homeless for years. Vet. Drinking himself into an early grave. We lined up a spot at Salvation Army. He had been in jail, sober and was loving ready. Excited. We found his sister, who hadn't seen him in years to drive him to Oakland (we were in the burbs). She did and she dropped him off. Apparently, he had been diagnoised with anxiety at sometime, told them, and was rejected. His ride had already left, they didn't call anyone, and he was 50mi from home. I never saw him again, I hope he is still alive. I will never give salvation army a loving dime again. nm fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Dec 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Thank you for both of your replies. They explain a lot! (edit: more people posted while I wrote this, thanks everyone)Trabisnikof posted:America for a long, long time was a country of many resources and relatively few people. Our nation and our identity is kinda built on the idea that for generations, if poo poo sucked we'd move west. America still to this day has homestead laws, which allow you free land if you go live on it (note: only awful land is left). There is a part of our culture that is about the "rugged individual", surviving against all odds to build something great, which means that socially people don't necessarily buy into the idea that America would be better off with more social safety nets. America also has strong puritanical traits that lead towards the "just world" concept, that if bad things happen to someone it is because they deserve it somehow (e.g. The single mother should have kept her legs together or the homeless vet should just get a job). Right, of course. It has to be federal if it is ever going to work. I keep on forgetting about the whole state vs federal thing. It has some benefits but results in a country that runs like no other country does and always surprises me. I mean of course California can't fund the best homeless program in the USA unless they're willing to pay for all the homeless in the USA. Didn't Nevada or Vegas bus all their homeless to California at some point? That whole idea makes me really mad, what kind of awful piece of poo poo human being thinks it's ok to just pass a problem on to someone else? Someone told me a while back though that San Francisco treats homeless better than a lot of other cities which is why it has such a large homeless population. Is that true at all? Sydin posted:We do lack of lot of public policy & institutionalized infrastructure for helping the poor & homeless. One of the driving reasons behind that is our own attitudes & perceptions in this country. I apologize for not being able to find the graph at the moment, but I remember seeing a statistic a while back that - compared to other countries - there is a larger perception within the USA that homelessness & poverty are caused by laziness or an unwillingness to work/take care of oneself. Obviously it's a view more shared amongst the older and more conservative of us, but I have some self-professed liberal friends who have argued quote: "the homeless wasting their money on things like drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes is proof they don't have an interest in being responsible for themselves." Yeah, it seems that the problem comes down to the fact that basically, everyone lives in a reality constructed from the information they're given and things they want/decide to believe, including dumb movies in which people say LAND OF OPPORTOONIDY a lot. We're also told how awful poor people are a lot in the news. People also have fundamentally different ideas even of what is 'good' or 'right' and 'wrong', so to some people it's a good outcome for homeless people to be displaced (I mean they have to go somewhere right? they'll just go somewhere else close by, it's not like they can zoom around in cars or anything). So if can't even agree on what a good outcome is then we'll never get any policy in place to get a good outcome. I'd say a good outcome would be something like, free therapy/counselling, some mental health asylums/institutions, proper welfare for the poor, free healthcare (isn't that a main homelessness cause?), good addiction treatments.... maybe one day we'll live in the star trek universe but I doubt it!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
redreader posted:Someone told me a while back though that San Francisco treats homeless better than a lot of other cities which is why it has such a large homeless population. Is that true at all? It's complicated. Our good weather has just as much to do with our homeless problems as our above-average services. There's still plenty of NIMBYists who want to ban homeless from setting foot on the waterfront or in Golden Gate Park and just want them to go away. I've said this before, but besides not giving a gently caress if you're gay and understanding that city services cost money to run, this city is hardly leftist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
redreader posted:I live in the bay area and I'm sad to find out that sunshine and "brah" is not the reality
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
Don't forget that 40% of the US's homeless youth population is queer, too, and many of them were kicked out of or ran away from their original home. If you've just been kicked out for being gay, San Francisco is a pretty good place to go to. I'm not sure how much of the homeless population comprises of youths, though. http://www.rollingstone.com/culture...milies-20140903 is a pretty decent article about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:UCI student checking in: holy gently caress so many people were clad in scarves and heavy jackets today. All of these people are colossal morons because it's not even in the 40s yet. Jesus christ. Put on a rain jacket and use an umbrella.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
SporkOfTruth posted:All of these people are colossal morons because it's not even in the 40s yet. Jesus christ. Put on a rain jacket and use an umbrella. I was doing that and wearing a t-shirt shorts. Seriously though at this rate I probably won't see anything in the 40s until I go back north for winter break.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
SporkOfTruth posted:All of these people are colossal morons because it's not even in the 40s yet. Jesus christ. Put on a rain jacket and use an umbrella. Lol you are super aspie. Wearing scarves is not a crime against humanity, SoCal residents can play winter if they want.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
SporkOfTruth posted:All of these people are colossal morons because it's not even in the 40s yet. Jesus christ. Put on a rain jacket and use an umbrella. 40's? This is Southern California, we put on a hoodie if it's below 70. We consider it cloudy if you can see clouds at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 11:13
|
|
|
My system used to be that if I felt cold I'd put on a jacket, but I guess from now on I have to consult strangers on the internet to see if it's actually an appropriate temperature.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 11:18
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:My system used to be that if I felt cold I'd put on a jacket, but I guess from now on I have to consult strangers on the internet to see if it's actually an appropriate temperature. LA has insanely good weather, haters gonna hate. You simply must shake it off, shake it off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 11:42
|
|
|
I'm a cali kid born and raised and I see people overdressing for some of the most minor of "inclimate" weather and I seriously don't get it. Okay, yeah its slightly chilly but you don't need to act like you're stranded up in Big Bear during a blizzard when it starts drizzling near the coast  Just buy a hot coffee or something, jeez. Also local news any time it rains at all  STORM WATCH 2014 You'd think a hurricane just made landfall or something because the roads got wet. What's wrong with us and why can't we handle a little precipitation without going bonkers?e: despite all that I'm glad its raining, we really need it here plus it's the Poor Man's Car Wash 
Minarchist fucked around with this message at 12:10 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 12:07
|
|
|
The storm watch stuff honestly makes a bit of sense these days, with all the burn areas we have now a little bit of rain has a good chance of bringing a hillside down on top of a community somewhere. Hell, I haven't been able to use PCH as an alternate route in my commute up to Oxnard in the last few days because a huge stretch of it is completely shut down and they're digging it out now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 12:12
|
|
|
Minarchist posted:I'm a cali kid born and raised... Then how come you use the word "Cali"? 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
redreader posted:But why the gently caress are they even homeless? They need to be cared for! Amen. The specific issue in California boils down to this time sequence. 1. In the 1960s and 1970s there are multiple exposes as to exactly what hellholes "insane asylums" are, how little treatment goes on, and how much abuse. Research says that what mentally ill people need is small-group care, not large-scale asylums. 2. In 1967, in response to these abuses, California passes the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act, which makes it very, VERY difficult to hospitalize mentally ill people against their will. Meant well, didn't work out well. 3. Lots of for-profit "board-and-care homes" open in the community to care for mentally-ill people. They provide generally bad care because for-profit. People who live near them deeply resent having mentally ill people wandering the streets for lack of occupation. 4. Everybody gets used to there being mentally ill people wandering around the streets; mentally ill people are solidified as "them" rather than "people like us who need help". 5. California cuts and cuts and cuts its state mental-health care budget, meaning that even when mentally ill people want treatment, they can't get it. 6. Homelessness is entrenched as a permanent "no, of course we can't do anything about that" problem. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/04/map-states-cut-treatment-for-mentally-ill for documentation of the mental-health cuts in California just from the period 2009-2012. http://www.salon.com/2013/09/29/ronald_reagans_shameful_legacy_violence_the_homeless_mental_illness/ e: Re weather, it's not so much that it rained (yea rain!) as that it rained a whole fuckton in a period of two days. When we get more rain in two days than we've seen in a two-day period since 2008, and when we've been in a drought for three (is it?) years, a whole bunch of infrastructure is severely tested. Why look, that sewer line that's been dry since 2012 just took on three times its capacity. Will it explode? Watch this space! Arsenic Lupin fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
CPColin posted:Then how come you use the word "Cali"? Because it's a perfectly cromulent abbreviation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
Minarchist posted:Also local news any time <insert anything here> This is the actual problem. Local news is universally shrill, hyperbolic, and awful, as every local TV news station desperately battles for a slice of the ever-shrinking, aging, apathetic audience for TV news. They're all aware that the only way to grab viewers is by inserting teasers into the few network TV shows that people still watch, describing with as much bright flashing colors and as few words as possible the likely-deadly impact the viewer will suffer if they skip the leading news segment that is coming up at 5/7/10pm. Weather is a fantastic thing to grab on to because you can put breathless reporters onto the scene well in advance, and probably be assured of at least a dangerous-looking puddle or some rushing water in a culvert somewhere to add to the drama. But "oh my god it's going to rain" isn't really qualitatively different from "oh my god x thing you like might be killing you" or "oh my god a crime happened" or "oh my god a law was passed that could have an impact on your life in some way."
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
CPColin posted:Then how come you use the word "Cali"? "Don't call it Cali, and don't call it Frisco, and don't call it Nor Cal because that's farther north where i am, you're actually in central California, and far northern CA is actually not even Nor Cal it's really upstate CA and/or Jefferson, and  "Suck it, you name-elitists. Are there assholes in LA or San Diego who get upset if you call the city by a certain name, the same way there are some assholes in SF who get upset when the city gets called "Frisco"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
No one gets upset over "Frisco", it is just a sign that the person has no idea what they are talking about.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
Rah! posted:"Don't call it Cali, and don't call it Frisco, and don't call it Nor Cal because that's farther north where i am, you're actually in central California, and far northern CA is actually not even Nor Cal it's really upstate CA and/or Jefferson, and I imagine people give you the same look if you say "I was just in Frisco" versus "I was just in Angeles". Cool cats call LA the "City of Angels" in casual conversation anyway. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I imagine people give you the same look if you say "I was just in Frisco" versus "I was just in Angeles". Cool cats call LA the "City of Angels" in casual conversation anyway. Becaue its already abbreviated to LA
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Becaue its already abbreviated to LA People call San Francisco "SF" all the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
"Headed for the Frisco Bay" is an excellent Otis Redding lyric, thus all uses of Frisco are acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:59 |
|
|
When I was growing up "SF" and "San Fran" were acceptable, but I never heard "Frisco". I've never met anyone from Orange County who likes the name OC, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 20:06
|
|