Public Disorder & the Decline of Vancouver's Livability

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by rofina

The central ask of Shellenberger, and folks like myself is; the relationship needs to be reciprocal. There are boundaries to both empathy and generosity. I think progressive models need to take these constrains more seriously as pivotal points in determination of approach, on an individual to individual basis.

I agree with Shellenberger that there are plenty of "progressives" who advocate for a hands-off approach that propagates victimhood. This does not encourage people to get help or improve their station in life, because victims suffer from external forces and not because of personal decisions. That is not helpful.

What I disagree with is in the headline: "Progressives ruin cities".

What many progressives advocate for, such as funds re-distributed from corrections to mental health services, a housing-first approach, and decriminalization plus a safe supply has not been implemented. Instead, Vancouver has proceeded with decriminalization and the safe supply, has not invested enough in mental health services, and crowded shelters are still the main housing option. This comes back to the ability of governments to actually implement radical changes. Too often we have a piece-meal approach that does not give alternatives a fair shake.

The headline paints all progressives with a broad brush. That would be like putting all conservatives in the anti-vax, pro-life, gun rights bucket, even though "conservative" covers a broad range of people with wide variations in religion, gender, vocation, etc.

The social contract is a great arrangement if people have the ability to fulfill their part, but when conservatives (which I assume are the opposite of progressives?) propose solutions to homelessness and mental health and addition, it often includes increased punishments for crimes that are a call for help. Incarceration has been proven to make most "criminals" far worse offenders. So you either incarcerate people forever, or you must try a different model for rehabilitation.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

I agree with Shellenberger that there are plenty of "progressives" who advocate for a hands-off approach that propagates victimhood. This does not encourage people to get help or improve their station in life, because victims suffer from external forces and not because of personal decisions. That is not helpful.

What I disagree with is in the headline: "Progressives ruin cities".

I agree, the headline is an exaggeration, but I do think that progressives are not exactly creating a strong case for being successful;
Vancouver
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
LA

All suffering the same issues, all lead by progressives for years and years.

The common thread is governance.

And also; to be clear. This is not an indictment of the whole ideology. Clearly there is much positive from progressive ideas; those all remain highly desirable Cities.
But like any thing else, they get corrupted and off track once in a while. I think that time is now.

What many progressives advocate for, such as funds re-distributed from corrections to mental health services, a housing-first approach, and decriminalization plus a safe supply has not been implemented. Instead, Vancouver has proceeded with decriminalization and the safe supply, has not invested enough in mental health services, and crowded shelters are still the main housing option. This comes back to the ability of governments to actually implement radical changes. Too often we have a piece-meal approach that does not give alternatives a fair shake.

I agree, but that's the point; its in progressive hands to make these changes. Using BC as an example, look at our governments in power. Were about as progressive as governments can lean. From provincial NDP to Federal Liberals. There isn't a Harper here to say no.

Yet where is the will from the progressives to make changes?

This is from down south, but I think it makes the same point for a place like BC.

• Video Link

The headline paints all progressives with a broad brush. That would be like putting all conservatives in the anti-vax, pro-life, gun rights bucket, even though "conservative" covers a broad range of people with wide variations in religion, gender, vocation, etc.

Fully agree. The media obsession with putting people in camps is a real problem.

The social contract is a great arrangement if people have the ability to fulfill their part, but when conservatives (which I assume are the opposite of progressives?) propose solutions to homelessness and mental health and addition, it often includes increased punishments for crimes that are a call for help.

Conservatives are accurately identifying a specific problem, while using their own blind spot to ignore the broader reality. Both extremes are guilty here.

What C's are correctly identifying, but is beings ignored by P's is that there is what is likely a low single digit percentage of chronic offenders; criminals mixed in to the homeless population.

I specifically used the phrase "individual case by case basis" precisely because I think a non zero portion of the population does need to be incarcerated.

Case in point; LuluLemon theft on Robson by a man with 103 arrests, 33 for theft, and 6 failures to appear for court summons. 2 arrests back to in 24hours, with theft over $5,000.00.

That specific individual is not a victim, he's a perpetrator. Do not extrapolate his situation to the broad homeless population. But do identify him and others, and lock them away.

Incarceration has been proven to make most "criminals" far worse offenders. So you either incarcerate people forever, or you must try a different model for rehabilitation.

Fair - I'm not a "throw away" the key type. But I am a "remove from society type as the inclusion of said individual does more damage to others."

[s211]

Originally Posted by whatnext

This isn't surprising. Talking to people who work at Holts and the Bay and the theft is brazen with clothes even being stolen off mannequins:

"Results are alarming": VPD details 195 arrests during pre-Christmas shoplifting blitz
Amanda Wawryk
Dec 6 2021

One hundred and ninety-five arrests, 300+ charges, and $75,oo0 worth of merchandise recovered.

There are some alarming numbers from a pre-Christmas shoplifting enforcement blitz by Vancouver Police.

“Business owners and their staff continue to struggle with prolific and often violent thieves, who seem to think they can steal with impunity,” says Sergeant Steve Addison.

“Since November 4, a dedicated group of VPD officers has worked directly with retail staff in the downtown core to identify and apprehend shoplifters. The results are alarming.”.....

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/alarming-vancouver-police-195-arrests-pre-christmas-enforcement

A week ago, early Sunday, I watched a street criminal walk into Save-On, and from a display right next to the entrance stole as many boxes of chocolates as he could carry. Security staff were elsewhere dealing with another perp. I tried confronting the thief but as one would expect, stopping him would have been at the risk of my personal safety.

[GenWhy?]

I haven't lived in BC too long but wasn't the last "leftist" mayor of Vancouver back in 2005 and a "leftist" provincial government back in 2001?

Or are centrists leftists now?

[SpongeG]

I was in Seattle on Saturday, we didn't get around too much but where we went, pine, pike place, Westlake center and pacific place in the downtown core. Compared to Vancouver there were fewer visible homeless people loitering and no people lying under blankets in doorways as you see here.

Every Starbucks we passed had a door guy and most stores either had security or a door person, I don't think I've seen that here so much, but I don't get downtown much these days.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by FarmerHaight

Here is a quote from earlier in the interview:


Statement A: All addicts should go to prison or rehab
Statement B: Using drugs in your home goes unpunished
Statement C: Using drugs in public sends you to prison

A and B are inherently contradictory. Unless the argument is that someone who has a home could not possibly be an addict and must be a recreational user, while homelessness is a symptom of addiction.

The only way to make all three statements agree, is to change statement A to "all homeless addicts". If we do this, are we actually punishing drug use, or are we criminalizing homelessness?

As for your question, I don't think you need to have rules in quotations. There are many restrictions in place at shelters that would be scoffed at by members of the housed public. For someone like Shellenberger who is such a staunch defender of personal autonomy, I assume shelters with such stringent rules are the last thing he wants.

A & B do not contradict each other at all. If crime or an act of self-harm is not seen or known, then who is to stop the perpetrator?

Again you are equating drug use in public to be the same as homelessness. That's not always so. Plus, we need to start somewhere, and why not start with the streets? Besides, it is for the addicts' own good: the rate of those dying on the streets would probably plunge compared to those using drugs at home. So who's the ones to benefit after all?

[Vin]

Originally Posted by SpongeG

I was in Seattle on Saturday, we didn't get around too much but where we went, pine, pike place, Westlake center and pacific place in the downtown core. Compared to Vancouver there were fewer visible homeless people loitering and no people lying under blankets in doorways as you see here.

Every Starbucks we passed had a door guy and most stores either had security or a door person, I don't think I've seen that here so much, but I don't get downtown much these days.

Need to attribute that to better governance and by-law enforcements in Seattle lately then. We really need that here. Vancouver's mayor, including the previous ones, are pretty much lame ducks pandering to "progressive" groups that never come up with any good solutions. There have been knee-jerk reactions now and then without any long term plans to tackle the core problems.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by GenWhy?

I haven't lived in BC too long but wasn't the last "leftist" mayor of Vancouver back in 2005 and a "leftist" provincial government back in 2001?

Or are centrists leftists now?

That's a loaded question in 2021.

I suppose the first question would be; is the provincial NDP centrist?

At the least what we can say is we have the most realistically possible alignment of left leaning governments at this moment.

If meaningful action cannot happen now...

[GenWhy?]

Right, sorry was responding to "progressives are ruining cities" (I assume "progressive" in the US translates to "left" in Canada?) when I don't see BC and Vancouver having had left-leaning governments in the last almost, say, 17 years. I'm just a little confused by that.

[FarmerHaight]

Originally Posted by rofina

At the least what we can say is we have the most realistically possible alignment of left leaning governments at this moment.

If meaningful action cannot happen now...

I am reading Mark Jaccard's (a prof at UBC) book and he talks about advising the BC Liberals on the provincial carbon tax last decade. A carbon tax was pretty revolutionary not that long ago, and even the NDP tore into the Liberals for the carbon tax. Jaccard hypothesizes that the Liberals would have lost the next election over the carbon tax if the financial recovery from the great recession and low oil prices hadn't boosted their popularity.

My point is that any radical change is bound to bring criticism, even if it fits within a party's ethos or was explicitly stated in an election platform. "Progressive" parties know that they need to convince a number of voters who lie on the middle of the political spectrum to vote for them, so they will not risk their re-election chances by implementing revolutionary policies unless:

A) Their support is absolutely rock-solid and that will not realistically change
B) Their radical policy has broad support, in which case it is not radical at all

The Federal government's climate and social policies fall into the later category.

[Vin]

That's why you don't see mass homelessness and blazen/open drug abuse in London and other UK cities.

They enforce their laws, and have tough long-term plans.

• Video Link

If you harm others and yourself on your own will, your rights to any freedom should be taken away from you.

[jollyburger]

2021

Nezamoddin Jelali, 60, of Surrey, has been charged with three counts of possession of stolen property and one count of trafficking stolen property for incidents that allegedly occurred between April 20 and June 23.

Jelali was arrested by police on June 24. He has been released from custody pending his next court appearance, and is prohibited from entering the Downtown Eastside as part of his release conditions.

Aaron Castillo-Anguiano, 43, of Vancouver, has been charged with three counts of drug possession and two counts of possession of the proceeds of crime for incidents that allegedly occurred between April 20 and June 15.

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...rs-75000-in-month-long-shoplifting-blitz

2019

One hundred and forty one computers, 43 Apple Watches and 65 cameras were among a long list of allegedly stolen items the B.C. government is seeking from a well-known Downtown Eastside broker as part of a civil forfeiture claim.

According to the claim filed in B.C. Supreme Court, Aaron Castillo-Anguiano was caught in a sting set up by Vancouver police and sprung on March 1, 2019, when they raided an apartment on Taylor St. that he occupied.

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...ic-downtown-eastside-stolen-goods-trader

[djmk]

Originally Posted by Vin

Need to attribute that to better governance and by-law enforcements in Seattle lately then. We really need that here. Vancouver's mayor, including the previous ones, are pretty much lame ducks pandering to "progressive" groups that never come up with any good solutions. There have been knee-jerk reactions now and then without any long term plans to tackle the core problems.

you know, you could of easily googled and then compared Seattles homeless situation to vancouver

they have serious problems as well.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Vin

That's why you don't see mass homelessness and blazen/open drug abuse in London and other UK cities

Blazen drug use?

The reason you don't see mass homelessness in London and other UK cities is because there's a law that says Councils (municipalities) 'have a duty to provide interim accommodation' so there are a lot more shelters and temporary accommodation. They can also pay to put people into private rental accommodation.

There has been a huge increase in people in 'temporary accommodation' in the UK as a result - over 250,000 people, but it's true there aren't as many visible on the streets as there once were. The numbers still 'rough sleeping' have nevertheless continued to rise in the past few years.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by djmk

you know, you could of easily googled and then compared Seattles homeless situation to vancouver

they have serious problems as well.

Facts spoil Vin's narrative. Seattle has much higher numbers. Last year Seattle counted over 5,500 street homeless, and over 6,000 sheltered homeless. In comparison the Vancouver count found just over 1,000 unsheltered, and just over 2,600 sheltered.

The numbers are however not getting worse. The 2020 total homeless count in Vancouver of 3,634, was almost the same as the previous count in 2017, and the 11,751 in Seattle was about the same as in 2017 as well.

[Migrant_Coconut]

People like to think the grass is greener on the other side. What else is new?

[WarrenC12]

Saw a guy getting busted today on Broadway outside London Drugs by 2 undercover cops. They must be reading this thread.

[SpongeG]

I will add that I have been seen worse parts of Seattle in the past and yes there are lots of homeless, but in the prime touristy area of downtown, there were none to be seen unlike here on Granville, Robson, Burrard etc. I was expecting it to be worse considering the stories one hears. And their two prime malls equal to Pacific Centre were completely dead and most of all the stores were gone, Nordstorm was busy though. Downtown Seattle is not the downtown we used to visit 10 years ago, overall it was very quiet and full of empty shops.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Facts spoil Vin's narrative. Seattle has much higher numbers. Last year Seattle counted over 5,500 street homeless, and over 6,000 sheltered homeless. In comparison the Vancouver count found just over 1,000 unsheltered, and just over 2,600 sheltered.

The numbers are however not getting worse. The 2020 total homeless count in Vancouver of 3,634, was almost the same as the previous count in 2017, and the 11,751 in Seattle was about the same as in 2017 as well.

I knew deniers like yourself, someone who's blind to your own backyard, but love highlighting the faults of other places, would be triggered. I never said Seattle is free of disorderliness, and instead have always maintained that loose policies have ruined lots of Anerican cities, including Seattle. The recent visit by SpongeG saw an improvement there and I was merely commenting that Vancouver also needs a stark improvement. Was expecting you to nit pick on my comments and so you truly did not let me down.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Blazen drug use?

The reason you don't see mass homelessness in London and other UK cities is because there's a law that says Councils (municipalities) 'have a duty to provide interim accommodation' so there are a lot more shelters and temporary accommodation. They can also pay to put people into private rental accommodation.

There has been a huge increase in people in 'temporary accommodation' in the UK as a result - over 250,000 people, but it's true there aren't as many visible on the streets as there once were. The numbers still 'rough sleeping' have nevertheless continued to rise in the past few years.

It's not like there are not enough shelters here, right? We have bozos who refuse to get into shelters but instead opt to ruin public places by sleeping and defecating all over. Whatever it is, the UK is not perfect but is at least doing something right, unlike Vancouver: a city constantly grabbing at straws.