• HumanBehaviorByBjork [any, undecided]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    it’s better (or warmer at least) than under a bridge but worse than anything anyone deserves. then of course once there’s “sufficient” housing, vagrancy laws will be enforced much more strictly, forcing people into these tenements where they have no power and are under constant scrutiny (presumably like current low-income housing but more so), and then whoops, we just built more prisons.

    • HumanBehaviorByBjork [any, undecided]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      like it should be emphasized that your idea is just an intensification of our current non-solution to homelessness, whereby companies are given government subsidies to meet the barest minimum standard of housing and then treat their tenants like shit under the guise of “public safety,” and then anyone who can’t even afford that is unpersoned into a cell maintained by the state directly.

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Whoops we built more prisons” except specifically the type of prisons with 2-3x the space that are entirely voluntary to enter and leave. The 'not being allowed to leave part is a big part of why people don’t like being in prison.