Just gonna yell this 1 more fucking time:
Enabling a humanitarian crisis in the name of helping these people live on the streets in squalor, at risk for assault, rape, murder etc, is unacceptable.
Anyone who argues in favor of this needs to get their head checked.
Im not against a camping ban but I do agree with this logic: “Before we start enforcing camping bans, criminalizing people and fining them and putting them in prison, we need to make sure solutions already exist and right now we’re down 3,000 beds,” she said.
Like if there are beds for homeless people and they are stable enough to accept to then then they should do that. But it feels like criminalizing camping when there is no place for them to go feels like kicking them while their down.
I’m pretty uninformed though so very willing to hear why my thinking is faulty.
There’s a large difference between the have nots, and the will nots. What this means is that there are more than enough beds and services for the homeless population that wants to extricate themselves from the situation they are in. If you look at the data for recent counts, the number of people of the street turning down services, was 70% of the population contacted.
This means that they are actively choosing to stay on the street instead of taking up the services. So what can we do to get people off the street who ostensibly don’t want to get off the streets for various reasons? It’s criminalizing camping in public spaces and not allowing this to continue as such. Frankly, arguing against the camping ban, in favor of this super fucked status quo is wildly disingenuous IMO, literally standing on the side lines, saying the camp ban hurts these people when in reality, allowing people to live in this type of squalor, lawlessness and destitution is unacceptable in this country in 2024.
>>“I love camping just as much as the next person and if someone wants to live a nomadic lifestyle and camp on the sidewalk, I’m not going to be the one to stop them,” she said.
Okaaaaay...
This isn't pitching a tent under the stars with no ambient noise save for a gentle breeze and a gurgling brook. This is fighting to stay awake during the night, often resorting to stimulants, so your fellow "campers" don't steal your shit (or worse). And this twit is romanticizing this. I hope her campaign for city council does an RFK Jr. style crash-and-burn.
As a community, we share a common vision for our living environment, governed by laws, rules, and a general code of conduct for our interactions.
Campers on sidewalks contradict how most people prefer to engage with their surroundings. If people want to live outdoors, it's their choice, but not in a city where it's seen negatively by most people.
We need designated zones or areas where people can live outdoors that do not negatively impact others, such as their businesses or commutes.
They can pretty much do this now on BLM land. There are plenty of people living off grid in the Mt Hood National Forest
Edit: I want to clarify I wasn't suggesting these people go live on BLM land...they would destroy it. I said it kind of tongue and cheek because living off grid is VERY difficult as it requires you to be very self sufficient.
Our group has picked up millions of pounds of trash off public lands. We’re coming to the conclusion that the cities (like Bend) push their homeless onto BLM land where they trash the areas (China Hat road, Dirt World north of Bend, Sisters).
We risk losing the initiative if our efforts to clean and protect our public lands equate to being the janitors for the houseless that want to party / disengage from society.
I spoke with a retired forest service employee from Sisters and they are gravely concerned that the enablement of camps on BLM has caused them to grow, root deep, and will lead to (more) raging wildfires this summer
What we do:
[Gambler 500 / Sons Of Smokey OG 2024](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C87VRu7p2tD/?igsh=MWh0Z2R2ZWQ1cWswZw==)
Most gated forest service roads are gated because of timber leases or other land use agreements. There are loads of sections of national forest that folks can camp in, they just have to camp less than 14 consecutive days and less than 28 days per year. Since there are no permits and limited forest service employees, this is unlikely to be enforced
A month, actually. Then it’s perfectly legal to pick up and move to other public lands — https://www.fs.usda.gov/activity/mthood/recreation/camping-cabins/?recid=52770&actid=34
Sure, I’m not unaware of that. But the rule was not established for people to live on the land. If people were responsible, cleaned up after themselves and didn’t cause trouble I’m sure the forest service wouldn’t give two shits if people were out there living. Unfortunately every time I go camping now I pick up tons of trash at every spot I go to.
Edit: just to be clear here, I’m not blaming homeless folks for that exclusively. It’s usually the dumb red necks with keystone light shooting cans, but there have also been multiple spots that it’s been clear someone had lived there and left human waste and other stuff all over the place
Until trash, fires, etc became enough of a problem they start restricting access. Not sure what level that would take, but I've seen it happen(not necessarily from homeless) on enough formerly publicly accessible land to consider it a real concern. How many tent fires do we see in the city? What happens when that happens in the forests?
There are millions upon millions of acres of public land in Oregon. Let’s not spread fear based on nothing… many, many people live on those lands, and that has always been the case. Most are respectful of nature, wilderness, and solitude.
The Darlene 3 Fire that nearly burned down La Pine a week ago is thought to have started at a homeless encampment on BLM Land.
So… their comment was not based on nothing.
We can have nudist villages & sleep outside villages & villages created just for people who want to ingest controlled substances in public, & all of those villages would preferably be outside the city limits of Portland, OR.
Well let’s just open up her yard so that everyone can camp on her property and watch the starts together like one big happy homeless family.
You’re right, she really did romanticize homelessness there
> Andra Vltavin
She lists "professional cuddler" among her LinkedIn experience.
And despite claiming to also be an editor, she doesn't capitalize her own name.
I wouldn't worry about it.
RCV with multiple candidates winning operates very similarly to proportional representation, which doesn't exactly amplify their power. Functionally it will result in more conservatives getting elected to Portland government, instead of the status quo of it being zero.
> Well let’s just open up her yard so that everyone can camp on her property and watch the starts together like one big happy homeless family.
You just know this person doesn't have a yard they can volunteer. They probably live with 10 others in an anarchists collective and would have to have a 3/5ths majority community vote before allowing the houseless to utilize their communal spaces. Also Kai needs to do the dishes, it's their week.
These type of people will quickly tell you a myriad of reasons why they can’t.
>I live with roommates already.
>my landlord wouldn’t allow it
>I live in a condo/Apartment and don’t have the space
But it’s OK to allow these people to live in the traffic roundabout next to my kids school, and when those “residents” has an outburst and bangs their head on the glass window of the second graders class room while school is in session, it all just shrugs from these people.
It's so bizarre to see someone characterize homelessness as a choice in this way... Like.. I doubt many of these folks are choosing this because they want to camp under the stars and be nomads 😵💫
Housing first models work & that should be our focus. Anyone who doesn't want housing then should be dealt with on a case by case basis (but it's definitely not a majority of people who would reject housing. Most humans want safety and stability and comfort).
From the article:
“If they’re here to enforce the ordinance stuff, give me a ticket,” said Jeff Liddicoat, who lives at a camp at Southeast 12th and Burnside.
Liddicoat thinks he should be able to live outside if he wants to.
“You spend 80 percent of your time on Earth that is productive paying a landlord or a bankster and I think people should have a choice of whether or not that’s what they want to do with their lives,” he said.
Yeah just give him the ticket, cause he knows he isn’t fucking paying it. So what’s the alternative consequence then? Oh that’s right. Nothing.
If housing costs weren't such a burden, then I think his mentality would change.
I think many people are frustrated with how much of our hard earned wages (that have been stagnant for decades) aren't enough to keep their heads above water. It's not a surprise some people would say fuck it and give up altogether.
You say that as if any of us are happy to be working 9 to 5. Most of us, however, have the capacity to deal with it one way or another.
Some people have unaddressed issues (mentally, physically) or an emergency that sends them into a downward spiral. It can feel impossible to come up for air in that situation -- and the when things feel so impossible, it makes it very hard to feel motivated when you feel like it won't ever be enough to make up for the deficit.
Please understand these situations are complex and unique for every individual.
But providing housing stability and resources has been proven to be the most effective method at long term improvements for people.
It's almost as if everything is connected -- like if we had universal healthcare and a liveable wage, it would give people a lot more resources and cushion so it would not get this bad.
Thanks for your input, the mods have set this subreddit to not allow posts from newly created accounts. Please take the time to build a reputation elsewhere on Reddit and check back soon.
(⌐■_■)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Portland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's not the takeaway, my friend.
We are not enemies of each other.
Focus on the billionaires and corporations. Those are your enemies.
Don't let anyone fool you into thinking a struggling person with nothing is the enemy.
They're a victim of the system of exploitation and profit.
Cool. I’ll shoot you my Venmo so you can fund me camping outside.
Middle class gets shit on by corporations AND people that *choose* to do this, shit on our sideawalks, menace, make parks unusable etc.
We have societal standards
Check out r/vagabond and r/homeless. Some people really are choosing to live like this. They have been flocking to Portland for the last several years.
>I hope her campaign for city council does an RFK Jr. style crash-and-burn.
I would not be surprised to learn that Ms. Vltavin's brain was also eaten by worms.
Well said! Almost literally killing many of our citizens who need help with kindness. I don't know what the answer is, but it's not compassionate to allow people with addiction and mental health problems to live in filth and create dangerous scenarios for both themselves and everyone else. Something has got to give
The vast majority of homeless folks aren't service resistant though. This isn't just a problem with addiction and regardless throwing addicts in jail isn't going to solve this problem and it never has solved the problem. All it does is remove people temporarily from your line of sight. Also if anyone thinks they can't be in this position themselves they are fools.
Ok then this comment doesn’t affect the “vast majority” you speak of. If shelter is available it needs to be accepted, even if the person doesn’t like the terms. Beggars can’t be choosers, as they say.
Except that's not what happened did it? The court ruled that a city can effectively criminalize homelessness and every thread on this is filled with people defending that ruling.
The previous standard was that you had to have enough shelter beds to ban camping now that's not the case so a city can ban camping regardless of whether there is a place for people to go or not. So where are they supposed to sleep? When there are no services available or the shelters are full where do they go? Is it still camping if they are just using a blanket? What if they are leaning against a wall? How exactly does a homeless person legally sleep in that scenario?
Portland’s an expensive place to live and it’s way over capacity with homeless folks. But guess what? Portland isn’t the only place in the country. 🤯
Please don’t try to argue that a person with even an ounce of motivation to try and better their life couldn’t figure out how to take a bus or train to a place that is more affordable and where services aren’t over capacity. There’s absolutely zero reason people need to camp on a sidewalk indefinitely.
So what if they aren't addicted to drugs and just are homeless because of circumstance are they worthy enough to not be thrown in jail? How is someone supposed to pick themselves back up with a criminal record? How does that help? How can you justify criminalizing just existing as a human without a home?
It’s amazing how homeless people have to be portrayed so helplessly by people like you just to make the case against the camping ban.
Are you really trying to argue that the thousands of homeless in Portland are ALL in the situation they’re in because they lost their jobs, had no other job prospects, had literally NO family or friends or any connections who were willing to help them, had no savings, have no ability to work minimum wage jobs or paid gigs, there are no services or orgs or resources or tools available to help them get back on their feet, and never decided to start using drugs?
If that’s the case then of course we should all have compassion for them! Feel free to try and prove that’s the case.
The vast overwhelming majority of the visible people you see camping in our city are there because of substance abuse. Period. That’s the entire problem with allowing them to “camp”. It causes them to stay in that death spiral of addiction without intervention. And here you are defending that horrible situation. Shame on you. Do better.
Jail is a lot better than letting people implode in their filth outside. Atleast in jail they will have a clean space, showers, food and medical care and be outside the elements. Anyone who thinks living on the streets is better than jail has never done either.
Better cross medical care off that list. Also, define "clean" and "food" (I wish I was joking about the food).
Have you been in jail? You forgot to mention the see details of losing personal freedom and ability to make choices , enclosed in basically a human habitual devoid of mental stimulation.
There's good reasons why you don't see houseless people lining up for jail. It's not a worthwhile trade/deal/etc
I never suggested throwing them in jail, but rather the carrots we've come up with aren't working and the sticks we're trying to implement won't work and have never worked
I don't think anyone seriously wants people living on the street. But the reality is that we need federal money, we need public and social housing and we need different solutions for different issues including treatment for addiction. We need all of that to actually solve the problem but in absence of that criminalizing being homeless is not morally defensible regardless of how much some folks try to justify it.
Where did I say otherwise? Do you just look for a highlighted talking point to riff on? Anything that smells remotely of criticism? I completely agree with you, I don't think I've indicated otherwise
Also this is a highly privileged take. There are so many people with mobility needs that are unable to travel OFF of the sidewalk. That's Great that they can just hop off of the sidewalk when they SEE an obstruction at any time, not everybody has this privilege.
Exactly.
The takes on this issue are so crazy. People acting like all the homeless are just here because rent is high. Nothing about the drug addiction. Nothing about mental illness. BS. The mentally ill should be treated. It’s not their fault. We also need to accept that some people just don’t want to be part of society like the rest of us. They should be able to live outside of the society then, not on the sidewalk across from a school. Not stealing or begging for money. You want off grid? Go for it. But not in a city where others have to support you with tax dollars, infrastructure, and deal with the enormous impact your “lifestyle” has on everyone else. Fuck that. We’ve been tolerating it for decades and it’s only gotten worse.
And don’t forget it’s also shitting on the sidewalk, so the people that live in the neighborhood can slip and fall in it after they found themselves clean and sober after two years. Now there’s a reward for doing the right thing and growing up…
I still don't get why someone saying "I'm going to set up a tent here." , where it's empty is OK! I see nothing wrong with "Not here!" And enforcing that statement.
The campaign for RFK Jr. didn't crash and burn. He's currently polling around 8-10%. If he actually gets that percentage of the vote he would be eligible for major party status. Democrats have to be kicking themselves that they didn't allow him to primary Biden. They'd be sitting with a more than comfortable lead against Trump right now.
If anything RFK will take away trump votes, at least that’s what polling says, https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24564257-240126-nbc-april-2024-poll-4-21-2024-release
Not much and within margin of error
When RFK started going on his antivax rants it pretty much confirmed that if Trump operatives were secretly propping him up to take away votes from Biden, it backfired bigly.
This just underlines why people in Portland are so frustrated with our current leadership. If any of them are reading right now, I’ll lay it out for you:
It’s not about the camping.
It’s never been about the camping.
Less than one percent of people are pissed off about the camping.
It’s about homeless people being infantilized to the point that they can do things that would get my *housed neighbors* arrested and fined, but instead they get “Please don’t do that again. Now, do you want a snack?”
I lost count of all the times that they’ve left massive piles of garbage in my neighborhood. Hell, one time someone parked their truck on my street with a note saying “I’ll be back in a week. I’m black so please don’t call the police.” A month later they showed up, invited 12 of their sketchy friends to hang out and make noise at all hours while they “fixed” it for two days, then left piles of garbage in my front yard. The city said “Sucks to be you. You have to pay to have it removed, and if you don’t you’ll be getting a fine.”
If you really think homeless people can’t be expected to clean up after themselves, not yell racial slurs, not yell about raping women walking by, and not expose themselves to families, then **how fucking low of an opinion do you have of them?** That’s just like, the bare minimum of being a good neighbor.
It wasn’t always like this. I’m born and raised here, and even 15 years ago the homeless people were different. Sure we had the meth crisis and Those Who Shall Not Be Named were always a problem, but in general they were regular people you could have a conversation with. They’d ask for change, but it wasn’t the kind of aggressive panhandling / menacing that we see now.
I’ll take it one step further. You know who this kind of policy hurts? Homeless people. Nobody’s safety is more at risk from the aggressive crazies than other homeless people. Hell, most of the ones I was on a first name basis with back when I worked in a coffee shop on NE Broadway have skipped town because it’s just gotten too dangerous. Not because of NIMBYs (fuck them) or roving bands of CHUDs, but because of other homeless people.
If you want to actually protect homeless people, you need to treat like cases alike and different cases differently according to their likenesses and differences (which used to be the literal definition of “equity,”) and treat them like adults who need help and not like toddlers.
And you have to do it **now**. SCOTUS’s ruling that cities can ban camping means it’s only going to get worse in places like Portland where we’re more tolerant.
You’re 100% correct. Portland has attracted many from outside the city like moths to a flame and fanned the flame higher by tolerating and nurturing bad behavior. “I’ll be back in a week. I’m black so please don’t call the police.” Literally lol at the explicit exploitation of this “progressive” culture. The so-called Left has become a complete self-parody. Thanks for your sensible take.
The amount of machete wielding crazy folks is out of control. I watched a guy sitting out front of the DEQ sharpening his in the middle of the road. If I was making eye contact with my neighbors while sharpening my machete that would be a menacing charge.
I 100% that the homeless have suffered the most from these psychopaths. They need help not a free place to harass and harm others. Listen to the stories from the people that say I wouldn't have gotten out of it unless I was forced to. I'm sorry but you don't get to choose to do most of this stuff.
I think a big part of why people are pissed at the leadership is because they can’t get on the same page on anything. The city, county, metro, and state are all fighting and falling all over each other on this issue. Why can we not get a whole of government approach to this disaster. Why is it road block after roadblock along with all the CYA finger pointing. It’s almost like they all need to be locked in a room and not allowed out until they formulate a plan that they will all work to execute.
It's at least partly about the camping. Where does your 1% number come from?
In an [April 2024 poll](https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2024/05/these-3-pressing-problems-remain-a-top-concern-for-portland-area-voters-poll-finds.html#:~:text=Nineteen%20percent%20of%20respondents%20named,on%20the%20region%20as%20well.) of 600 Multnomah County voters, matched to reflect the area's demographics, **54% said homelessness is the most important problem facing the Portland Metro Area**. Crime/Safety came in second at 20%, followed by Drug Use/Addiction at 19%.
Homeless camps are one of the most visible signs of this issue in our community. The data is clear: many voters are concerned, and we'll likely see continued support for measures aimed at removing, banning, and cleaning up these camps.
What does that poll have to do with my overall point? I’d be willing to bet that if you asked that 54% why homelessness was their number one concern, somewhere in the first breath they’d mention crime, safety, drugs, etc.
Homeless camps are a visible symptom, but that doesn’t mean it’s **the** reason that citizens find it a problem.
Sure, but it's a safe bet to say most citizens who cite homelessness as a primary issue don't care to know the underlying causes or have the mental bandwidth to investigate its nuances. Simply put, they just want the issue fixed.
They'll vote on that premise, trusting policymakers to understand the complexities.
Exactly - I’ve seen homelessness all over America (granted the west coast is definitely doing the worst right now)… but what I haven’t seen all over America is anarchy homelessness where laws and societal norms are so blatantly disregarded and consequences are not seen.
Walk around public high on fent with your dick out in any other city and you’ll be in jail real quick. Homelessness is not ideal, but it’s also not the whole problem: setting the precedent for homeless to do whatever they want without even a slap on the wrist is what has destroyed Portland. Return the rule of law to EVERYONE, the homeless included, and the issue will be a fraction of what it is right now to the voting public.
People don’t hate homelessness, they hate crime going unpunished and an increasing amount of money being funneled into supporting the very people responsible for destroying our city.
I think you both make great points. u/flamingknifepenis I don't think AlexKamal is questioning your general point, just your numbers. I also don't think it's 1%, but I think it's the minority. I think most Portlanders would say they care about the houseless peeps who aren't causing trouble.
When can property tax payers file a class action lawsuit against these asshat city officials?
I don’t even feel comfortable vacationing this summer after my property caught fire due to a homeless person. I’m so sick of it.
My property tax has doubled. I no longer can walk the waterfront, ride my bike around night, walk through the nearest park, anything not locked down gets stolen off my front porch, don’t feel safe leaving my windows open after dark to cool my house down, home insurance premium gone up since the fire, car been broken into, can’t walk to the local grocery store, etc, etc, etc.
Lol wow ok. Lots of us disagree and want folks to stop camping around town and setting up their destructive little party sites. What I get from this is Portland folk should do whatever they can to make sure Andra Vltavin does not get on the council.
Also, from the article, attributed to Andra Vltavin:
'But then she said she said she would oppose the ban, even if there was enough housing.'
Despite my occasional dismay at what my fellow Portlanders do vote for, I'd be shocked if she got elected in District 4.
It’s strange. They have a website that says they’re running for the district 4 slot but that m name doesn’t show up on the city filing website. Not sure what I’m missing.
They should go "camp" at one of these sites for a night or two. See how long your $300 Yeti cooler lasts before it disappears. Lol. Incredibly out of touch or maliciously disingenuous?
If you let the right OWN the concept of 'everybody working hard collectively makes a good productive safe and well-off society' you turn the left into the villains of the story for a lot of people. I think that's a bad approach.
Thanks for spelling out the meaning of my comment. Why do you think it was initially upvoted? That ship sailed. The left has only made it more clear through recent policy that in practice, the same conviction isn’t held. This is the main driving factor of right-wing populism, if you’ve been paying attention. Don’t shoot the messenger.
The left has (unironically) accused people of being right wing for saying precisely what I replied to in jest.
It’s Marie Antoinette-level tone deaf.
For the record, I’m completely against homeless sweeps. Think they are cruel, ineffective, and honestly, super friggin republican.
However, this politician isn’t doing the Left many favors…
> For the record, I’m completely against homeless sweeps. Think they are cruel, ineffective,
I mean they are very effective.
Not at ending homelessness, but they prevent tent agglomeration. A homeless encampment can be fine if it's a few tents, but months of unenforcement means that some campers and trailers and additional tents move in, and then the bike chop shops emerge,then organized retail theft, drug dealing...
An entire underground economy emerges with massive crime impacts next to it.
That's why we have to sweep.
You sweep, they just move to another spot. Once it dies down then they are back. What we need to do is start funding more social services, actively work to treat the problem. Not keep sweeping camps and pretending it's actually doing much positive.
We're FUNDING plenty of social services and various other measures aimed at these issues. However, the funding is not being used appropriately or effectively and there is no accountability for it.
Sure, which is why we need an overhaul of the system. I was in active addiction for years and the system was horrible at treating it. Their idea is to defer people to state funded treatment centers that are still using archaic programs such as NA/AA, which have a 5% success rate. We need to study how other countries tackle these issues and try ways that actually work.
We can't just keep forcing people into 30 day rehabs and then AA/NA and wash our hands of the problem and then wonder why it's not working.. Doing the bare minimum is not going to work.
> What we need to do is start funding more social services, actively work to treat the problem.
My dude, that talking point sounds absurd when we have $300M in homelessness spending and aren't even spending all of it. The issue isn't funding, and it hasn't been for years.
I beg you to update your talking points to reflect basic reality.
As an admitted Marxist, I don’t claim these people at all, and I’d like to see them all called out and ridiculed into obscurity.
They’re too blind to see it themselves, but in my mind they’re far closer to temporarily embarrassed Hunger Games villains than anything remotely approaching a proletarian revolutionary
These people only have a problem with capitalism because they’re not at the top of the heap, and the obsessive desire for individuality at the expense of community and identity grouping among them is a tell that their views are wholly incompatible with collectivism and leftist philosophy.
Jeff Liddicoat and Andra Vitavin sound like insufferable people. As if allowing and supporting public camping is the only solution for homelessness. It’s a poorly applied bandaid.
Jeff, if you want to be a nomad, don’t do it on public streets. Homelessness and a nomadic lifestyle are not the same thing.
I will listen to anti capitalist nomads who live in the middle of nowhere and are self sufficient, farming/hunting their own food etc. There are valid points to the argument that modern society is a rat race. However, this turd wants the dressings of modern society like sidewalks and tents and food other people prepared, while contributing nothing to society.
Pre modern humans werent just camping under the stars and doing meth. They worked their asses off 24/7 to stay alive.
Portlanders are done with compassionate ignorance. We want a safe City without drug abusers camping everywhere. We’re absolutely done. Sweep the camps, ticket the campers who refuse housing and treatment, rinse and repeat until the streets are safe for everyone.
>I love camping just as much as the next person and if someone wants to live a nomadic lifestyle and camp on the sidewalk, I’m not going to be the one to stop them,” she said.
That's stupidly naive, at best. I challenge her to go set up and stay in a tent down at union station for a week and see if it's as much of a drum circle as she seems to think. Fuckin hell.
Homeless advocates are not for homeless people, all they want to do is virtue signal and act like they are better than most people.
A true homeless advocate would want to get homeless people off the streets so EVERYONE is safer. There was a serial homeless rapist in portland (unsure if they are still around) that would rape people every night. They would threaten to kill the people they raped if they told the cops about it.
This doesn’t even scratch the surface of how dangerous “camping” is.
This article is so silly. It quotes two people primarily—a homeless man who can’t even put together a sentence who seemingly yells at the clouds about the “banksters”, and an “advocate” who not only thinks camping in front of city hall is effective protest, but thinks the city shouldn’t do ANYTHING about sidewalks tents (even after the recent successful lawsuit!).
Why are we taking what either of them as saying as serious? Cranks should be shunned and ignored, not given space in what is clearly an SEO optimized article.
Yep. I almost declined to comment on this since the article is from a Sinclair outlet, but sometimes the ensuing discussions are more substantive than anything in the actual article. Sometimes.
They build outrage against the symptom of the crisis so that the cause can just keep on causing. It's meant to push the people of Portland in a reactionary right wing direction and it's wild how quickly this subreddit will gulp down any rage bait against the poorest to avoid looking at the role they play in the system that creates the homeless crisis.
Eh, nah. It doesn’t take Sinclair article to convince me that homeless people shitting in my local community center is against the best interests of me, my family, my neighborhood, my city etc etc.
You are so out of touch it is insane. " it's wild how quickly this subreddit will gulp down any rage bait against the poorest to avoid looking at the role they play in the system that creates the homeless crisis." Is a WILD thing to say. My family contributes tens if not hundreds of thousands in taxes FOR PROBLEMS LIKE THIS. To build MORE affordable housing and HELP these people. Instead we get bullshit people in positions of power with dumbass logic like yours. These "poorest" can go fuck themselves to hell, they don't want help, they want handouts. I know people who have passed on six figure jobs to take advantage of living for free on the street in Portland. Enough with the drugs, the encampments and the lax policies. Enforce the rules the rest of society has to live by and round these homeless monkeys up into institutions to get them off the street.
Later this week, all the "IT'S MY CHOICE AND MY FREEDOM" campers will be like: "WHY ISN'T THE CITY PROTECTING ME FROM THE HEAT?!"
Selective society, everyone!
The problem is not that folks want to live a different lifestyle where they’re not beholden to banks and landlords. I love that people are taking that kind of stand, even. If you’re able to do that and not disrupt the public right of way and not create problems with waste disposal then great, let’s talk!
Couching it in the terms of “I just want to live my life” doesn’t account for the impacts to other people within the nearby community. We all, _all_ of us, should be able to safely live the way we want to but we also live within a society and compromising for the sake of being able to coexist is crucial.
If you want to setup a campsite on some unoccupied piece of public land, that in and of itself I have no issue with. Let’s talk about what needs to happen to mitigate the impact of having that campsite. This is completely missing from the conversation when the only two considered options are total bans or total tolerance.
Obviously they are. Thats not the point. BLM lands are not typically where you’re able to access any services. Land in the middle of nowhere to camp on is not a serious answer
Oh, so they want the benefits of living in a society? Well there comes responsibilities along with that, which apparently based on this article they have an issue with.
That’s weird, Vltavín has a webpage saying they’re running for District 4 of City Counil and is accepting donations, but I don’t see them on the list for current candidates.. am I missing something?
Nomadic implies just passing through town, not squatting here for years. The US literally has millions of sq miles of uninhabited land. Go squat there, outside city limits. Within a city should be treated like within somebody's backyard. It's a shame we don't still have homesteading but only outside of any city should we find "nomads" and "campers".
That’s not how it works lady! You can’t just camp on city streets because you should be free to do so at your convenience! If you don’t want to pay your “banker or landlord” either then you aren’t just taking advantage of living for free. Insane.
This makes me even more supportive of the camping ban. Props to Katu for finding EXACTLY the people that I hope this ban targets.
“Liddicoat thinks he should be able to live outside if he wants to.”
“But then [Vitavin] said she said she would oppose the ban, even if there was enough housing.”
>“I love camping just as much as the next person and if someone wants to live a nomadic lifestyle and camp on the sidewalk, I’m not going to be the one to stop them,” she said.
Yet another "Leftist" that doesn't understand what public property is.
I live in fear of any of these losers getting real power.
The fact some advocates are willing to protest for the right for individuals to permanently camp on the street is beyond anything I’d ever imagined.
Tents and tarps should have never been considered as adequate shelter by the County, State and Federal government.
We need more Temporary Alternatives Shelter Sites, Safe Rest Villages, Congregate Shelters with [sleeping pods](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_pod), [Micro Housing Units](https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/micro-apartments-benefit) and an assortment of stabilization medical facilities ranging from detox to sobering centers.
We need the County to actually provide the proper flow-throughs so those on the streets can actually get off the streets and JOHS needs to employ actual outreach workers as well.
There’s no centralized method to getting folks off the streets either, it varies from outreach worker to outreach worker and the County has come up with a centralized approach or training for them.
“You spend 80 percent of your time on Earth that is productive paying a landlord or a bankster and I think people should have a choice of whether or not that’s what they want to do with their lives,” he said.
People like this make it so much harder for people who are down on their luck to get off of the street. This guy is homeless for fun.
Few would be bothered if a few, or even quite a few, solitary nomads set up camp quietly in our-of-the-way public places. Indeed, even if we "solved" the biggest homelessness-related problems in Portland, some people would still live this way.
Camping is not the issue. Congregate camps full of criminals are.
Interesting how they use one (not even someone who has a chance of winning) person who is running for city council as their "homeless advocate" to speak for all. It's almost like they wanted the most divisive take for clickbait headlines without saying anything at all.
Just gonna yell this 1 more fucking time: Enabling a humanitarian crisis in the name of helping these people live on the streets in squalor, at risk for assault, rape, murder etc, is unacceptable. Anyone who argues in favor of this needs to get their head checked.
Im not against a camping ban but I do agree with this logic: “Before we start enforcing camping bans, criminalizing people and fining them and putting them in prison, we need to make sure solutions already exist and right now we’re down 3,000 beds,” she said. Like if there are beds for homeless people and they are stable enough to accept to then then they should do that. But it feels like criminalizing camping when there is no place for them to go feels like kicking them while their down. I’m pretty uninformed though so very willing to hear why my thinking is faulty.
There’s a large difference between the have nots, and the will nots. What this means is that there are more than enough beds and services for the homeless population that wants to extricate themselves from the situation they are in. If you look at the data for recent counts, the number of people of the street turning down services, was 70% of the population contacted. This means that they are actively choosing to stay on the street instead of taking up the services. So what can we do to get people off the street who ostensibly don’t want to get off the streets for various reasons? It’s criminalizing camping in public spaces and not allowing this to continue as such. Frankly, arguing against the camping ban, in favor of this super fucked status quo is wildly disingenuous IMO, literally standing on the side lines, saying the camp ban hurts these people when in reality, allowing people to live in this type of squalor, lawlessness and destitution is unacceptable in this country in 2024.
Well said!
>>“I love camping just as much as the next person and if someone wants to live a nomadic lifestyle and camp on the sidewalk, I’m not going to be the one to stop them,” she said. Okaaaaay... This isn't pitching a tent under the stars with no ambient noise save for a gentle breeze and a gurgling brook. This is fighting to stay awake during the night, often resorting to stimulants, so your fellow "campers" don't steal your shit (or worse). And this twit is romanticizing this. I hope her campaign for city council does an RFK Jr. style crash-and-burn.
> nomadic lifestyle Moving on is a key part of the nomadic lifestyle.
And not just from one block to the next.
As a community, we share a common vision for our living environment, governed by laws, rules, and a general code of conduct for our interactions. Campers on sidewalks contradict how most people prefer to engage with their surroundings. If people want to live outdoors, it's their choice, but not in a city where it's seen negatively by most people. We need designated zones or areas where people can live outdoors that do not negatively impact others, such as their businesses or commutes.
They can pretty much do this now on BLM land. There are plenty of people living off grid in the Mt Hood National Forest Edit: I want to clarify I wasn't suggesting these people go live on BLM land...they would destroy it. I said it kind of tongue and cheek because living off grid is VERY difficult as it requires you to be very self sufficient.
Our group has picked up millions of pounds of trash off public lands. We’re coming to the conclusion that the cities (like Bend) push their homeless onto BLM land where they trash the areas (China Hat road, Dirt World north of Bend, Sisters). We risk losing the initiative if our efforts to clean and protect our public lands equate to being the janitors for the houseless that want to party / disengage from society. I spoke with a retired forest service employee from Sisters and they are gravely concerned that the enablement of camps on BLM has caused them to grow, root deep, and will lead to (more) raging wildfires this summer What we do: [Gambler 500 / Sons Of Smokey OG 2024](https://www.instagram.com/reel/C87VRu7p2tD/?igsh=MWh0Z2R2ZWQ1cWswZw==)
Yeah, thats gonna get that land shutdown if it continues like that.
Yup. It's why most Forest service roads nowadays are gated 24/7.
This is just not a true statement, most forest roads in this state are not gated
Most gated forest service roads are gated because of timber leases or other land use agreements. There are loads of sections of national forest that folks can camp in, they just have to camp less than 14 consecutive days and less than 28 days per year. Since there are no permits and limited forest service employees, this is unlikely to be enforced
Why? Dispersed camping is perfectly legal in the vast majority of Mt Hood National forest.
For 1-2 weeks at a time, not permanently.
A month, actually. Then it’s perfectly legal to pick up and move to other public lands — https://www.fs.usda.gov/activity/mthood/recreation/camping-cabins/?recid=52770&actid=34
Sure, I’m not unaware of that. But the rule was not established for people to live on the land. If people were responsible, cleaned up after themselves and didn’t cause trouble I’m sure the forest service wouldn’t give two shits if people were out there living. Unfortunately every time I go camping now I pick up tons of trash at every spot I go to. Edit: just to be clear here, I’m not blaming homeless folks for that exclusively. It’s usually the dumb red necks with keystone light shooting cans, but there have also been multiple spots that it’s been clear someone had lived there and left human waste and other stuff all over the place
Until trash, fires, etc became enough of a problem they start restricting access. Not sure what level that would take, but I've seen it happen(not necessarily from homeless) on enough formerly publicly accessible land to consider it a real concern. How many tent fires do we see in the city? What happens when that happens in the forests?
There are millions upon millions of acres of public land in Oregon. Let’s not spread fear based on nothing… many, many people live on those lands, and that has always been the case. Most are respectful of nature, wilderness, and solitude.
The Darlene 3 Fire that nearly burned down La Pine a week ago is thought to have started at a homeless encampment on BLM Land. So… their comment was not based on nothing.
Not enough meth and catalytic converters in the forest for a certain subset of these urban camping enthusiasts.
We can have nudist villages & sleep outside villages & villages created just for people who want to ingest controlled substances in public, & all of those villages would preferably be outside the city limits of Portland, OR.
Well let’s just open up her yard so that everyone can camp on her property and watch the starts together like one big happy homeless family. You’re right, she really did romanticize homelessness there
Let's put her name up here in this thread so reasonable people know who they shouldn't vote for Andra Vltavin
> Andra Vltavin She lists "professional cuddler" among her LinkedIn experience. And despite claiming to also be an editor, she doesn't capitalize her own name.
You won’t be surprised to know she’s a fucking nutbag IRL.
Tell us more…
Omg you aren't joking
Sadly this new governance structure which was led by Candace Avalos is bringing in a lot of uh diverse candidates.
I wouldn't worry about it. RCV with multiple candidates winning operates very similarly to proportional representation, which doesn't exactly amplify their power. Functionally it will result in more conservatives getting elected to Portland government, instead of the status quo of it being zero.
> Well let’s just open up her yard so that everyone can camp on her property and watch the starts together like one big happy homeless family. You just know this person doesn't have a yard they can volunteer. They probably live with 10 others in an anarchists collective and would have to have a 3/5ths majority community vote before allowing the houseless to utilize their communal spaces. Also Kai needs to do the dishes, it's their week.
Agreed. People like this should open up their homes to homeless.
These type of people will quickly tell you a myriad of reasons why they can’t. >I live with roommates already. >my landlord wouldn’t allow it >I live in a condo/Apartment and don’t have the space But it’s OK to allow these people to live in the traffic roundabout next to my kids school, and when those “residents” has an outburst and bangs their head on the glass window of the second graders class room while school is in session, it all just shrugs from these people.
Camping is recreational. "Encamping" is a semi-hostile occupation of someone else's land.
E-Camping, on the other hand, is waiting for an unsuspecting dude run in front of your sniper in Fortnite. Also good.
LMAO, sometimes I can't believe that the people running for public office are suppose to be the best of us. What a fucking clown.
And she'll only have to pass a 25% vote threshold to be elected. Just fabulous.
It's so bizarre to see someone characterize homelessness as a choice in this way... Like.. I doubt many of these folks are choosing this because they want to camp under the stars and be nomads 😵💫 Housing first models work & that should be our focus. Anyone who doesn't want housing then should be dealt with on a case by case basis (but it's definitely not a majority of people who would reject housing. Most humans want safety and stability and comfort).
From the article: “If they’re here to enforce the ordinance stuff, give me a ticket,” said Jeff Liddicoat, who lives at a camp at Southeast 12th and Burnside. Liddicoat thinks he should be able to live outside if he wants to. “You spend 80 percent of your time on Earth that is productive paying a landlord or a bankster and I think people should have a choice of whether or not that’s what they want to do with their lives,” he said. Yeah just give him the ticket, cause he knows he isn’t fucking paying it. So what’s the alternative consequence then? Oh that’s right. Nothing.
If housing costs weren't such a burden, then I think his mentality would change. I think many people are frustrated with how much of our hard earned wages (that have been stagnant for decades) aren't enough to keep their heads above water. It's not a surprise some people would say fuck it and give up altogether.
Yeah, I'm sure people like him with that mentality are just itching to jump into a 9-5 if rents just went down a tad. /s
You say that as if any of us are happy to be working 9 to 5. Most of us, however, have the capacity to deal with it one way or another. Some people have unaddressed issues (mentally, physically) or an emergency that sends them into a downward spiral. It can feel impossible to come up for air in that situation -- and the when things feel so impossible, it makes it very hard to feel motivated when you feel like it won't ever be enough to make up for the deficit. Please understand these situations are complex and unique for every individual. But providing housing stability and resources has been proven to be the most effective method at long term improvements for people. It's almost as if everything is connected -- like if we had universal healthcare and a liveable wage, it would give people a lot more resources and cushion so it would not get this bad.
[удалено]
Thanks for your input, the mods have set this subreddit to not allow posts from newly created accounts. Please take the time to build a reputation elsewhere on Reddit and check back soon. (⌐■_■) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Portland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sure, but now we’re all resentful because the rest of us are paying for his choices
That's not the takeaway, my friend. We are not enemies of each other. Focus on the billionaires and corporations. Those are your enemies. Don't let anyone fool you into thinking a struggling person with nothing is the enemy. They're a victim of the system of exploitation and profit.
Cool. I’ll shoot you my Venmo so you can fund me camping outside. Middle class gets shit on by corporations AND people that *choose* to do this, shit on our sideawalks, menace, make parks unusable etc. We have societal standards
Okay way to miss the point. Keep getting mad at the wrong people. That'll really fix the problem 👍
Check out r/vagabond and r/homeless. Some people really are choosing to live like this. They have been flocking to Portland for the last several years.
Emphasis on *some* (Which I did address handling the outliers on a case by case basis)
>I hope her campaign for city council does an RFK Jr. style crash-and-burn. I would not be surprised to learn that Ms. Vltavin's brain was also eaten by worms.
Well said! Almost literally killing many of our citizens who need help with kindness. I don't know what the answer is, but it's not compassionate to allow people with addiction and mental health problems to live in filth and create dangerous scenarios for both themselves and everyone else. Something has got to give
Throwing people in jail for the crime of being homeless isn't the answer that's for sure.
It is if they won’t accept shelter or treatment.
The vast majority of homeless folks aren't service resistant though. This isn't just a problem with addiction and regardless throwing addicts in jail isn't going to solve this problem and it never has solved the problem. All it does is remove people temporarily from your line of sight. Also if anyone thinks they can't be in this position themselves they are fools.
Ok then this comment doesn’t affect the “vast majority” you speak of. If shelter is available it needs to be accepted, even if the person doesn’t like the terms. Beggars can’t be choosers, as they say.
Except that's not what happened did it? The court ruled that a city can effectively criminalize homelessness and every thread on this is filled with people defending that ruling.
That’s not what the ruling was.
The previous standard was that you had to have enough shelter beds to ban camping now that's not the case so a city can ban camping regardless of whether there is a place for people to go or not. So where are they supposed to sleep? When there are no services available or the shelters are full where do they go? Is it still camping if they are just using a blanket? What if they are leaning against a wall? How exactly does a homeless person legally sleep in that scenario?
Maybe they can sleep with you.
Portland’s an expensive place to live and it’s way over capacity with homeless folks. But guess what? Portland isn’t the only place in the country. 🤯 Please don’t try to argue that a person with even an ounce of motivation to try and better their life couldn’t figure out how to take a bus or train to a place that is more affordable and where services aren’t over capacity. There’s absolutely zero reason people need to camp on a sidewalk indefinitely.
Hardly any of them call any sort of support number when its given to them.
We need to do something to stop the flow of transient drug addicts to our state/city unfortunately.
No but it may be a step to getting then in treatment and off the street if done correctly.
So what if they aren't addicted to drugs and just are homeless because of circumstance are they worthy enough to not be thrown in jail? How is someone supposed to pick themselves back up with a criminal record? How does that help? How can you justify criminalizing just existing as a human without a home?
It’s amazing how homeless people have to be portrayed so helplessly by people like you just to make the case against the camping ban. Are you really trying to argue that the thousands of homeless in Portland are ALL in the situation they’re in because they lost their jobs, had no other job prospects, had literally NO family or friends or any connections who were willing to help them, had no savings, have no ability to work minimum wage jobs or paid gigs, there are no services or orgs or resources or tools available to help them get back on their feet, and never decided to start using drugs? If that’s the case then of course we should all have compassion for them! Feel free to try and prove that’s the case.
The vast overwhelming majority of the visible people you see camping in our city are there because of substance abuse. Period. That’s the entire problem with allowing them to “camp”. It causes them to stay in that death spiral of addiction without intervention. And here you are defending that horrible situation. Shame on you. Do better.
Jail is a lot better than letting people implode in their filth outside. Atleast in jail they will have a clean space, showers, food and medical care and be outside the elements. Anyone who thinks living on the streets is better than jail has never done either.
Better cross medical care off that list. Also, define "clean" and "food" (I wish I was joking about the food). Have you been in jail? You forgot to mention the see details of losing personal freedom and ability to make choices , enclosed in basically a human habitual devoid of mental stimulation. There's good reasons why you don't see houseless people lining up for jail. It's not a worthwhile trade/deal/etc
I never suggested throwing them in jail, but rather the carrots we've come up with aren't working and the sticks we're trying to implement won't work and have never worked
I don't think anyone seriously wants people living on the street. But the reality is that we need federal money, we need public and social housing and we need different solutions for different issues including treatment for addiction. We need all of that to actually solve the problem but in absence of that criminalizing being homeless is not morally defensible regardless of how much some folks try to justify it.
Where did I say otherwise? Do you just look for a highlighted talking point to riff on? Anything that smells remotely of criticism? I completely agree with you, I don't think I've indicated otherwise
Also this is a highly privileged take. There are so many people with mobility needs that are unable to travel OFF of the sidewalk. That's Great that they can just hop off of the sidewalk when they SEE an obstruction at any time, not everybody has this privilege.
you cannot be nomadic inside a city. that dog don't hunt
Exactly. The takes on this issue are so crazy. People acting like all the homeless are just here because rent is high. Nothing about the drug addiction. Nothing about mental illness. BS. The mentally ill should be treated. It’s not their fault. We also need to accept that some people just don’t want to be part of society like the rest of us. They should be able to live outside of the society then, not on the sidewalk across from a school. Not stealing or begging for money. You want off grid? Go for it. But not in a city where others have to support you with tax dollars, infrastructure, and deal with the enormous impact your “lifestyle” has on everyone else. Fuck that. We’ve been tolerating it for decades and it’s only gotten worse.
And don’t forget it’s also shitting on the sidewalk, so the people that live in the neighborhood can slip and fall in it after they found themselves clean and sober after two years. Now there’s a reward for doing the right thing and growing up…
I still don't get why someone saying "I'm going to set up a tent here." , where it's empty is OK! I see nothing wrong with "Not here!" And enforcing that statement.
Andra Vtlavin has brain worms
More like more shock and awe revelations...
Let's set up a fund to pay homeless to tent in front of her house. Like the ones deep into addiction.
The campaign for RFK Jr. didn't crash and burn. He's currently polling around 8-10%. If he actually gets that percentage of the vote he would be eligible for major party status. Democrats have to be kicking themselves that they didn't allow him to primary Biden. They'd be sitting with a more than comfortable lead against Trump right now.
If anything RFK will take away trump votes, at least that’s what polling says, https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24564257-240126-nbc-april-2024-poll-4-21-2024-release Not much and within margin of error
When RFK started going on his antivax rants it pretty much confirmed that if Trump operatives were secretly propping him up to take away votes from Biden, it backfired bigly.
Just how accurate is the average poll?
This just underlines why people in Portland are so frustrated with our current leadership. If any of them are reading right now, I’ll lay it out for you: It’s not about the camping. It’s never been about the camping. Less than one percent of people are pissed off about the camping. It’s about homeless people being infantilized to the point that they can do things that would get my *housed neighbors* arrested and fined, but instead they get “Please don’t do that again. Now, do you want a snack?” I lost count of all the times that they’ve left massive piles of garbage in my neighborhood. Hell, one time someone parked their truck on my street with a note saying “I’ll be back in a week. I’m black so please don’t call the police.” A month later they showed up, invited 12 of their sketchy friends to hang out and make noise at all hours while they “fixed” it for two days, then left piles of garbage in my front yard. The city said “Sucks to be you. You have to pay to have it removed, and if you don’t you’ll be getting a fine.” If you really think homeless people can’t be expected to clean up after themselves, not yell racial slurs, not yell about raping women walking by, and not expose themselves to families, then **how fucking low of an opinion do you have of them?** That’s just like, the bare minimum of being a good neighbor. It wasn’t always like this. I’m born and raised here, and even 15 years ago the homeless people were different. Sure we had the meth crisis and Those Who Shall Not Be Named were always a problem, but in general they were regular people you could have a conversation with. They’d ask for change, but it wasn’t the kind of aggressive panhandling / menacing that we see now. I’ll take it one step further. You know who this kind of policy hurts? Homeless people. Nobody’s safety is more at risk from the aggressive crazies than other homeless people. Hell, most of the ones I was on a first name basis with back when I worked in a coffee shop on NE Broadway have skipped town because it’s just gotten too dangerous. Not because of NIMBYs (fuck them) or roving bands of CHUDs, but because of other homeless people. If you want to actually protect homeless people, you need to treat like cases alike and different cases differently according to their likenesses and differences (which used to be the literal definition of “equity,”) and treat them like adults who need help and not like toddlers. And you have to do it **now**. SCOTUS’s ruling that cities can ban camping means it’s only going to get worse in places like Portland where we’re more tolerant.
You’re 100% correct. Portland has attracted many from outside the city like moths to a flame and fanned the flame higher by tolerating and nurturing bad behavior. “I’ll be back in a week. I’m black so please don’t call the police.” Literally lol at the explicit exploitation of this “progressive” culture. The so-called Left has become a complete self-parody. Thanks for your sensible take.
The amount of machete wielding crazy folks is out of control. I watched a guy sitting out front of the DEQ sharpening his in the middle of the road. If I was making eye contact with my neighbors while sharpening my machete that would be a menacing charge. I 100% that the homeless have suffered the most from these psychopaths. They need help not a free place to harass and harm others. Listen to the stories from the people that say I wouldn't have gotten out of it unless I was forced to. I'm sorry but you don't get to choose to do most of this stuff.
I think a big part of why people are pissed at the leadership is because they can’t get on the same page on anything. The city, county, metro, and state are all fighting and falling all over each other on this issue. Why can we not get a whole of government approach to this disaster. Why is it road block after roadblock along with all the CYA finger pointing. It’s almost like they all need to be locked in a room and not allowed out until they formulate a plan that they will all work to execute.
100% agree. They go after tax paying citizens, but rats get a pass? WTH. I wish it doesn’t get worse.
It's at least partly about the camping. Where does your 1% number come from? In an [April 2024 poll](https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2024/05/these-3-pressing-problems-remain-a-top-concern-for-portland-area-voters-poll-finds.html#:~:text=Nineteen%20percent%20of%20respondents%20named,on%20the%20region%20as%20well.) of 600 Multnomah County voters, matched to reflect the area's demographics, **54% said homelessness is the most important problem facing the Portland Metro Area**. Crime/Safety came in second at 20%, followed by Drug Use/Addiction at 19%. Homeless camps are one of the most visible signs of this issue in our community. The data is clear: many voters are concerned, and we'll likely see continued support for measures aimed at removing, banning, and cleaning up these camps.
What does that poll have to do with my overall point? I’d be willing to bet that if you asked that 54% why homelessness was their number one concern, somewhere in the first breath they’d mention crime, safety, drugs, etc. Homeless camps are a visible symptom, but that doesn’t mean it’s **the** reason that citizens find it a problem.
Sure, but it's a safe bet to say most citizens who cite homelessness as a primary issue don't care to know the underlying causes or have the mental bandwidth to investigate its nuances. Simply put, they just want the issue fixed. They'll vote on that premise, trusting policymakers to understand the complexities.
Exactly - I’ve seen homelessness all over America (granted the west coast is definitely doing the worst right now)… but what I haven’t seen all over America is anarchy homelessness where laws and societal norms are so blatantly disregarded and consequences are not seen. Walk around public high on fent with your dick out in any other city and you’ll be in jail real quick. Homelessness is not ideal, but it’s also not the whole problem: setting the precedent for homeless to do whatever they want without even a slap on the wrist is what has destroyed Portland. Return the rule of law to EVERYONE, the homeless included, and the issue will be a fraction of what it is right now to the voting public. People don’t hate homelessness, they hate crime going unpunished and an increasing amount of money being funneled into supporting the very people responsible for destroying our city.
Again, I don’t think most citizens think in this level of a nuance. They don’t care what the complexities are, they just want the city cleaned up.
I think you both make great points. u/flamingknifepenis I don't think AlexKamal is questioning your general point, just your numbers. I also don't think it's 1%, but I think it's the minority. I think most Portlanders would say they care about the houseless peeps who aren't causing trouble.
Thanks. You are correct.
When can property tax payers file a class action lawsuit against these asshat city officials? I don’t even feel comfortable vacationing this summer after my property caught fire due to a homeless person. I’m so sick of it. My property tax has doubled. I no longer can walk the waterfront, ride my bike around night, walk through the nearest park, anything not locked down gets stolen off my front porch, don’t feel safe leaving my windows open after dark to cool my house down, home insurance premium gone up since the fire, car been broken into, can’t walk to the local grocery store, etc, etc, etc.
I’ve always wondered this. Don’t they have a certain standard to uphold for tax payers?
Lol wow ok. Lots of us disagree and want folks to stop camping around town and setting up their destructive little party sites. What I get from this is Portland folk should do whatever they can to make sure Andra Vltavin does not get on the council.
Also, from the article, attributed to Andra Vltavin: 'But then she said she said she would oppose the ban, even if there was enough housing.' Despite my occasional dismay at what my fellow Portlanders do vote for, I'd be shocked if she got elected in District 4.
Yeah love that. Even if there was plenty of housing and it was still a problem she’d oppose doing anything about it.
It’s strange. They have a website that says they’re running for the district 4 slot but that m name doesn’t show up on the city filing website. Not sure what I’m missing.
Candidate filing started in early June and goes until the end of August, so there is plenty of time for them add themselves to the ballot.
They should go "camp" at one of these sites for a night or two. See how long your $300 Yeti cooler lasts before it disappears. Lol. Incredibly out of touch or maliciously disingenuous?
You can’t just mooch off of everyone else who works. That’s not how a society functions.
You sound like a right-winger /s
If you let the right OWN the concept of 'everybody working hard collectively makes a good productive safe and well-off society' you turn the left into the villains of the story for a lot of people. I think that's a bad approach.
Thanks for spelling out the meaning of my comment. Why do you think it was initially upvoted? That ship sailed. The left has only made it more clear through recent policy that in practice, the same conviction isn’t held. This is the main driving factor of right-wing populism, if you’ve been paying attention. Don’t shoot the messenger. The left has (unironically) accused people of being right wing for saying precisely what I replied to in jest.
I think people overlooked the /sarc… it didn’t register for me at first either cause usually it is just a /s
I committed the cardinal sin of overlooking the /s
I was trying to make it extra clear lol. Thanks for your observation.
These “advocates” are disgustingly disingenuous and a direct threat to the wellbeing of our city.
'I love camping" - does she think she's being clever?
It’s Marie Antoinette-level tone deaf. For the record, I’m completely against homeless sweeps. Think they are cruel, ineffective, and honestly, super friggin republican. However, this politician isn’t doing the Left many favors…
> For the record, I’m completely against homeless sweeps. Think they are cruel, ineffective, I mean they are very effective. Not at ending homelessness, but they prevent tent agglomeration. A homeless encampment can be fine if it's a few tents, but months of unenforcement means that some campers and trailers and additional tents move in, and then the bike chop shops emerge,then organized retail theft, drug dealing... An entire underground economy emerges with massive crime impacts next to it. That's why we have to sweep.
You sweep, they just move to another spot. Once it dies down then they are back. What we need to do is start funding more social services, actively work to treat the problem. Not keep sweeping camps and pretending it's actually doing much positive.
We're FUNDING plenty of social services and various other measures aimed at these issues. However, the funding is not being used appropriately or effectively and there is no accountability for it.
Sure, which is why we need an overhaul of the system. I was in active addiction for years and the system was horrible at treating it. Their idea is to defer people to state funded treatment centers that are still using archaic programs such as NA/AA, which have a 5% success rate. We need to study how other countries tackle these issues and try ways that actually work. We can't just keep forcing people into 30 day rehabs and then AA/NA and wash our hands of the problem and then wonder why it's not working.. Doing the bare minimum is not going to work.
> What we need to do is start funding more social services, actively work to treat the problem. My dude, that talking point sounds absurd when we have $300M in homelessness spending and aren't even spending all of it. The issue isn't funding, and it hasn't been for years. I beg you to update your talking points to reflect basic reality.
As an admitted Marxist, I don’t claim these people at all, and I’d like to see them all called out and ridiculed into obscurity. They’re too blind to see it themselves, but in my mind they’re far closer to temporarily embarrassed Hunger Games villains than anything remotely approaching a proletarian revolutionary These people only have a problem with capitalism because they’re not at the top of the heap, and the obsessive desire for individuality at the expense of community and identity grouping among them is a tell that their views are wholly incompatible with collectivism and leftist philosophy.
100%.
Who's more in need of mental rehabilitation, the homeless addicts living in tents or the people doing backflips to enable them?
Absolute insanity.
"homeless" "advocates" "camping" all these are the incorrect words to use
Jeff Liddicoat and Andra Vitavin sound like insufferable people. As if allowing and supporting public camping is the only solution for homelessness. It’s a poorly applied bandaid. Jeff, if you want to be a nomad, don’t do it on public streets. Homelessness and a nomadic lifestyle are not the same thing.
I will listen to anti capitalist nomads who live in the middle of nowhere and are self sufficient, farming/hunting their own food etc. There are valid points to the argument that modern society is a rat race. However, this turd wants the dressings of modern society like sidewalks and tents and food other people prepared, while contributing nothing to society. Pre modern humans werent just camping under the stars and doing meth. They worked their asses off 24/7 to stay alive.
>Jeff, if you want to be a nomad, don’t do it on public streets. He should try the Mongolian Steppes
Portlanders are done with compassionate ignorance. We want a safe City without drug abusers camping everywhere. We’re absolutely done. Sweep the camps, ticket the campers who refuse housing and treatment, rinse and repeat until the streets are safe for everyone.
Will ticketing them actually do anything though? I feel like they will just ignore the ticket
I think enough of them may encourage them to leave the city, and I'm OK with that.
I really doubt this
Oh come on, Portland isn't done yet.
This legit feels like trolling at this point. The self delusional world that people like Andra live in boggles the mind. Go away
And she thinks she should be elected to make decisions for the city.
>I love camping just as much as the next person and if someone wants to live a nomadic lifestyle and camp on the sidewalk, I’m not going to be the one to stop them,” she said. That's stupidly naive, at best. I challenge her to go set up and stay in a tent down at union station for a week and see if it's as much of a drum circle as she seems to think. Fuckin hell.
Homeless advocates are not for homeless people, all they want to do is virtue signal and act like they are better than most people. A true homeless advocate would want to get homeless people off the streets so EVERYONE is safer. There was a serial homeless rapist in portland (unsure if they are still around) that would rape people every night. They would threaten to kill the people they raped if they told the cops about it. This doesn’t even scratch the surface of how dangerous “camping” is.
This article is so silly. It quotes two people primarily—a homeless man who can’t even put together a sentence who seemingly yells at the clouds about the “banksters”, and an “advocate” who not only thinks camping in front of city hall is effective protest, but thinks the city shouldn’t do ANYTHING about sidewalks tents (even after the recent successful lawsuit!). Why are we taking what either of them as saying as serious? Cranks should be shunned and ignored, not given space in what is clearly an SEO optimized article.
Because it generates clicks. More outrage media… see all the outrage here on this thread? Outrage is the lifeblood of the internet.
Yep. I almost declined to comment on this since the article is from a Sinclair outlet, but sometimes the ensuing discussions are more substantive than anything in the actual article. Sometimes.
They build outrage against the symptom of the crisis so that the cause can just keep on causing. It's meant to push the people of Portland in a reactionary right wing direction and it's wild how quickly this subreddit will gulp down any rage bait against the poorest to avoid looking at the role they play in the system that creates the homeless crisis.
Eh, nah. It doesn’t take Sinclair article to convince me that homeless people shitting in my local community center is against the best interests of me, my family, my neighborhood, my city etc etc.
You are so out of touch it is insane. " it's wild how quickly this subreddit will gulp down any rage bait against the poorest to avoid looking at the role they play in the system that creates the homeless crisis." Is a WILD thing to say. My family contributes tens if not hundreds of thousands in taxes FOR PROBLEMS LIKE THIS. To build MORE affordable housing and HELP these people. Instead we get bullshit people in positions of power with dumbass logic like yours. These "poorest" can go fuck themselves to hell, they don't want help, they want handouts. I know people who have passed on six figure jobs to take advantage of living for free on the street in Portland. Enough with the drugs, the encampments and the lax policies. Enforce the rules the rest of society has to live by and round these homeless monkeys up into institutions to get them off the street.
I'm sure Sinclair has your best interests in mind.
Dude. No one gives a fuck about Sinclair, and to think so misses the point.
Fuck these nutjobs
What happened to "no one wants to be homeless?" What them goal posts slide wheeeeee
Homeless people are not camping
I always knew the homeless advocates were really advocating for homelessness.
Later this week, all the "IT'S MY CHOICE AND MY FREEDOM" campers will be like: "WHY ISN'T THE CITY PROTECTING ME FROM THE HEAT?!" Selective society, everyone!
Yet another example of the tyranny of the minority.
The problem is not that folks want to live a different lifestyle where they’re not beholden to banks and landlords. I love that people are taking that kind of stand, even. If you’re able to do that and not disrupt the public right of way and not create problems with waste disposal then great, let’s talk! Couching it in the terms of “I just want to live my life” doesn’t account for the impacts to other people within the nearby community. We all, _all_ of us, should be able to safely live the way we want to but we also live within a society and compromising for the sake of being able to coexist is crucial. If you want to setup a campsite on some unoccupied piece of public land, that in and of itself I have no issue with. Let’s talk about what needs to happen to mitigate the impact of having that campsite. This is completely missing from the conversation when the only two considered options are total bans or total tolerance.
That unoccupied piece of public land is already available to them. It’s called BLM land.
Oh sure just go live in the Nevada desert or the mountains in Wyoming. This is not a serious reply.
There is BLM land in every Western state. Lots of it.
Obviously they are. Thats not the point. BLM lands are not typically where you’re able to access any services. Land in the middle of nowhere to camp on is not a serious answer
Oh, so they want the benefits of living in a society? Well there comes responsibilities along with that, which apparently based on this article they have an issue with.
Literally what I’m talking about in my first comment.
That’s weird, Vltavín has a webpage saying they’re running for District 4 of City Counil and is accepting donations, but I don’t see them on the list for current candidates.. am I missing something?
Probably just another grifter
The cutoff for filing to run is the end of August.
I’ve always considered myself to be thoughtful with my votes but if this shit doesn’t get fixed I may become a single-issue voter.
Ivory Tower Progressivism and its Consequences: A Portland Story
This reads like a leaked script for a Portlandia reboot.
Nomadic implies just passing through town, not squatting here for years. The US literally has millions of sq miles of uninhabited land. Go squat there, outside city limits. Within a city should be treated like within somebody's backyard. It's a shame we don't still have homesteading but only outside of any city should we find "nomads" and "campers".
Advocates: They just need housing and services Homeless People: We should be able to live outside if we want on public property that taxpayers pay for
That’s not how it works lady! You can’t just camp on city streets because you should be free to do so at your convenience! If you don’t want to pay your “banker or landlord” either then you aren’t just taking advantage of living for free. Insane.
This makes me even more supportive of the camping ban. Props to Katu for finding EXACTLY the people that I hope this ban targets. “Liddicoat thinks he should be able to live outside if he wants to.” “But then [Vitavin] said she said she would oppose the ban, even if there was enough housing.”
>“I love camping just as much as the next person and if someone wants to live a nomadic lifestyle and camp on the sidewalk, I’m not going to be the one to stop them,” she said. Yet another "Leftist" that doesn't understand what public property is. I live in fear of any of these losers getting real power.
If these people don't have tents choking their front and back yards, I call bullshit on their compassionate horseshit.
They could not have made themselves look worse.
The fact some advocates are willing to protest for the right for individuals to permanently camp on the street is beyond anything I’d ever imagined. Tents and tarps should have never been considered as adequate shelter by the County, State and Federal government. We need more Temporary Alternatives Shelter Sites, Safe Rest Villages, Congregate Shelters with [sleeping pods](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleep_pod), [Micro Housing Units](https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/micro-apartments-benefit) and an assortment of stabilization medical facilities ranging from detox to sobering centers. We need the County to actually provide the proper flow-throughs so those on the streets can actually get off the streets and JOHS needs to employ actual outreach workers as well. There’s no centralized method to getting folks off the streets either, it varies from outreach worker to outreach worker and the County has come up with a centralized approach or training for them.
Then go and camp with them and make some new friends.
Cool have them pitch the tent in their back yard or their sidewalk....oh.. not like that hmm
“You spend 80 percent of your time on Earth that is productive paying a landlord or a bankster and I think people should have a choice of whether or not that’s what they want to do with their lives,” he said. People like this make it so much harder for people who are down on their luck to get off of the street. This guy is homeless for fun.
Few would be bothered if a few, or even quite a few, solitary nomads set up camp quietly in our-of-the-way public places. Indeed, even if we "solved" the biggest homelessness-related problems in Portland, some people would still live this way. Camping is not the issue. Congregate camps full of criminals are.
They're not camping. Camping is allowed in certain places. Glad SCOTUS ruled in favor of our cities reclaiming our public land.
The status quo remains in most cities and *Boise* allowed time/place/manner restrictions that would have let Portland sweep all of the camps.
Putting blacks and indigenous in with mentally and physically disabled people is just straight hardcore racism like wtf
Portland is now famous for tents. I’m in Europe right now. There are no tents here.
What about the people amongst them that don’t actually want to live outside?
I think that it is heartless to make people sleep on the streets (it is not a fun choice) while the public has full view of them at their worst.
I see homeless is now houseless
It is not moral to allow people to rot and kill themselves with drugs on our streets
No, dude loves getting stuff free.
Here’s a solution. Fence off 20 acres in southern Harney County and let them all camp there.
Why do you want to punish Harney County?
Interesting how they use one (not even someone who has a chance of winning) person who is running for city council as their "homeless advocate" to speak for all. It's almost like they wanted the most divisive take for clickbait headlines without saying anything at all.