Re: I'm Suspended from NextDoor Again

On Mar 9, 2025 at 6:41:44 AM PDT, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

 On Mar 8, 2025 at 4:49:18 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:
 

 BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
 

 This time it was 30 days on the bench for 'cultural shaming'. I responded
 in a
 thread about L.A.'s vagrants to someone who posted the city's official
 stats.
 I said this:
 
 And how much of that alleged decrease is because
 of deceptive numbers games by embarrassed
 government officials?
 
 For example, Karen Bass’s "Inside Safe" program
 provides hotel rooms (at taxpayer expense, naturally)
 for vagrants. Every vagrant who takes a hotel room is
 counted in the official stats as 'housed' (no longer
 homeless). Even if the vagrant only stays there for
 24 hours and then goes back to the streets,

 
 Serious question. Can they just stay in the hotel room for free forever?

 
Until the city runs out of money, apparently.
 
And they're pulling money from the budgets of all the other city
departments--
like the fire department-- to pay to house the vagrants and the illegals.
 
So your house might burn down in, say, a wildfire because the city doesn't
have the manpower or the equipment to fight the fire (which has a 50% chance
of having been started by a vagrant in the first place) because it's too busy
prioritizing vagrants and illegals over you, the mere taxpayer.
 

 If they decide they’d rather live on the street than in a free hotel room
 forever can’t we just commit them?

 
Last summer the Supreme Court cleared the way for cities to tell vagrants
they
can't camp on public property or block rights-of-way and make arrests for
violators, but the Los Angeles government refuses to use that power.
 

So are these otherwise functional hotels and they’re just giving over say
10% of the rooms to the unhoused or are these closed scary abandoned vacant
hotels?
 
If the former do they get maid and linen service?

They're mostly low-end motels that welcome the city-paid vagrants because they
can charge the city more money than they'd get for the rooms otherwise, then
bilk the city again for damages when the meth-addicted brain-blasted vagrants
trash the rooms.

There was a proposed ordinance that would have required every hotel in the
city to report its number of empty rooms to the city at the end of each
business day and then make those rooms available for vagrant placement. So
even 5-star elite hotels like the Ritz-Carlton would have to house vagrants.
They wouldn't legally be allowed to say no. A group of high-end hotels
mobilized an army of lawyers to fight the ordinance because who wants to stay
in hotel where the guy in the room next door is floridly mentally ill,
screaming in the hallways at invisible demons, and lighting fires in his room
to cook his meth. The hotels argued that in addition to the damage and safety
issues the vagrants themselves would bring to the property, they'd lose a huge
amount of business from customers who wouldn't want to stay in a hotel with
vagrants. The city caved and dropped the issue.

Once again, the government creates a problem by allowing vagrants to
proliferate out of control across the city, then turns to private citizens and
businesses and says "we all have a responsibility to help solve the problem"
and starts imposing crap like this on people. No, fuckos, I don't have any
responsibility to help you dig yourselves out of a mess of your own making.
That's a 'you' problem, not a 'me' problem.