This is not a SFW instance. NSFW communities will be tagged, and efforts will be made to keep SFW communities clean, but proceed at your own comfort level.
I mean a subway station isn’t a homeless shelter and homeless people are unfortunately very often mentally ill or addicted, which can create danger for commuters.
The subway should be suitable for disabled people to use. If that makes the subway a home for the homeless, that isn’t the fault of the choice to make the subway suitable for disabled people.
Homeless people will find some place to stay. If you make places more unpleasant until homeless people find somewhere else to stay, and then you make that place unpleasant until they move away from there, etc., then all you’re doing is spending massive amounts of money to make the entire city unpleasant and still end up with homeless people in the least unpleasant spots.
I agree with you almost completely. The issue is if the homeless prevents the space from being suitable for disabled people or other commuters, then this is the “less worse” option from the subway’s perspective. The subway is focused on creating a safe and clean commuter environment; it’s not within their power to solve homelessness so they have little choice but to make everything a bit worse for everyone to stop the problem they’re dealing with from making it even worse yet for everyone.
No, I was being a bit facetious in my response to the comment that the solution is housing the homeless, not making things less hospitable. It’s of course not within the Subway’s powers to actually solve homelessness so giving them flack for picking the less worse option with their limited options instead of magically solving the root of the problem is silly.
Get mad at the people who are actually responsible for dealing with the root cause, not the ones needing to make tough choices dealing with the reality of it.
Definitely agreed, but the subway station is for the commuters, not for solving the housing issue. It shouldn’t be that commuters are having a less safe commute because the city, state, whatever isn’t willing to deal with the housing/homeless issue.
I mean removing the benches is a poor solution to that anyway. Should keep the benches but just make sure the station is actually serving the commuters
Getting rid of benches doesn’t get rid of the homeless. They’ll still be homeless with no where else to go without them. It just makes things worse for everyone.
Sorry you got downvoted for speaking the truth. I bet every one of these virtue signaling commenters also distance themselves when they come across a bum on a bench.
I mean a subway station isn’t a homeless shelter and homeless people are unfortunately very often mentally ill or addicted, which can create danger for commuters.
Shit situation though
why are they addicted???
who sold them the thing they are addicted to???
🪿
Alcohol is sold in most stores from what I know. If drugs, I dunno, drug dealers?
Pharmaceutical companies and Alcohol Brands are both run by the 🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁 bourgeoise 🥁🥁🥁🥁🥁
you think drug dealers give out free samples?
it usually starts with a prescription
Do you mean like owned by? Because the actual people running those places are just regular clerks and shit
Some do yeah. Often the dealer isn’t some random guy but a person you know or even a friend of yours. They might give you a hit
They do fent or alcohol prescriptions 👀
Not sure what this has to do with the subway benches though
the solution should be housing the homeless not making everyone’s lives more miserable
You think the subway should house the homeless?
The subway should be suitable for disabled people to use. If that makes the subway a home for the homeless, that isn’t the fault of the choice to make the subway suitable for disabled people.
Homeless people will find some place to stay. If you make places more unpleasant until homeless people find somewhere else to stay, and then you make that place unpleasant until they move away from there, etc., then all you’re doing is spending massive amounts of money to make the entire city unpleasant and still end up with homeless people in the least unpleasant spots.
I agree with you almost completely. The issue is if the homeless prevents the space from being suitable for disabled people or other commuters, then this is the “less worse” option from the subway’s perspective. The subway is focused on creating a safe and clean commuter environment; it’s not within their power to solve homelessness so they have little choice but to make everything a bit worse for everyone to stop the problem they’re dealing with from making it even worse yet for everyone.
You think offering benches to sit on qualifies as housing the homeless?
No, I was being a bit facetious in my response to the comment that the solution is housing the homeless, not making things less hospitable. It’s of course not within the Subway’s powers to actually solve homelessness so giving them flack for picking the less worse option with their limited options instead of magically solving the root of the problem is silly.
Get mad at the people who are actually responsible for dealing with the root cause, not the ones needing to make tough choices dealing with the reality of it.
Definitely agreed, but the subway station is for the commuters, not for solving the housing issue. It shouldn’t be that commuters are having a less safe commute because the city, state, whatever isn’t willing to deal with the housing/homeless issue.
I mean removing the benches is a poor solution to that anyway. Should keep the benches but just make sure the station is actually serving the commuters
Getting rid of benches doesn’t get rid of the homeless. They’ll still be homeless with no where else to go without them. It just makes things worse for everyone.
I mean for the transit authority it’s one tool, but I agree it’s not the best one. Preferably keep the benches but hire more security people.
Sorry you got downvoted for speaking the truth. I bet every one of these virtue signaling commenters also distance themselves when they come across a bum on a bench.