Downtown Eastside - DTES Issues

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

You can camp overnight at a park (way better than a Hastings St sidewalk) and pack up in the morning. This is what the courts ruled.

The lower your ability to live within the laws of a civil society, the less care I have for what happens to you.

And we've seen how effective that rule is. Sympathy or lack of it doesn't really matter - if City Hall ends up having to waste time/money/resources patrolling half of downtown until the next election (or longer), they've simply replaced one problem with another.

Originally Posted by Vin

I would love them keep handing out free tents and see how long they can last with their "unlimited resources". It is safe to say that this cleanup has the backing of most people in the City. Go ABC, and let's keep it up!

I'd love to see how long ABC can keep up monitoring Hastings if they can't even afford the new cops and nurses from the election platform. Overpromising and underdelivering, just as expected.

Also, from your favourite news site:

Vancouver homeless shelters overwhelmed amid Downtown Eastside decampment and rainfall event

... Nicole Mucci with Union Gospel Mission told Daily Hive Urbanized that the organization’s shelter has been consistently full for the past 15 months, but it was under even more stress this weekend.

“Friday night into Saturday morning we had people sleeping in our hallway. Like we were so full and we found as many extra mats as we could to accommodate as many extra people … and then we still ended up having to turn away some folks,” she explained...

... “We’ve seen that a lot of the places that we were calling around to we’re also full in terms of just like the other regular shelters that operate every day of the year,” she explained...

So no, there isn't enough room in the shelters; we can expect the people turned away to move back onto Hastings or another street/park, and then City Hall will have to cover those areas too. Have fun watching taxes go up again (which IIRC you think only happens under a useless council).

[Vin]

With all the billions going into all these organizations dealing with healthcare, drug addiction, etc, the City is finally making people work for the investments. If the organizations are sincere about helping these people, stop bi*ching and just work harder. This shall all pass.

Keep the pressure up, ABC!

B.C.'s largest health care union joins calls to stop East Hastings forced displacement
https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/0...gs-decampment/

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

And we've seen how effective that rule is. Sympathy or lack of it doesn't really matter - if City Hall ends up having to waste time/money/resources patrolling half of downtown until the next election (or longer), they've simply replaced one problem with another.



I'd love to see how long ABC can keep up monitoring Hastings if they can't even afford the new cops and nurses from the election platform. Overpromising and underdelivering, just as expected.

Also, from your favourite news site:


So no, there isn't enough room in the shelters; we can expect the people turned away to move back onto Hastings or another street/park, and then City Hall will have to cover those areas too. Have fun watching taxes go up again (which IIRC you think only happens under a useless council).

That's only one organization and does not represent all the shelters in the Lower Mainland. This is sensationalism to trigger certain people at best.

Most important thing is, are many of these homeless people sincere or serious about getting into a shelter and eventually getting rid of the addictions plaguing them, turning over a new leaf and becoming contributing members of the society? Or are they just toying with the loopholes and taking advantage of the the compassion of our society, draining our valuable resources till eternity? If they can't live up to their own basic human responsibilities, pray tell why contributing citizens should continue to suffer and have our government extract so much from us in order to build them good decent housing. when many of us can't even afford to rent in one?

[Migrant_Coconut]

It would help if there were enough detox/mental health facilities and shelters for everybody who actually wants them. Then we could actually filter out the needy from the problem cases instead of lumping them together.

Originally Posted by Vin

That's only one organization and does not represent all the shelters in the Lower Mainland. This is sensationalism to trigger certain people at best.

It's funny how all of a sudden tabloids are sensationalism when they don't agree with your narrative (I personally try to avoid them altogether). Feel free to find one counter-example of a shelter that disagrees with the article.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

It would help if there were enough detox/mental health facilities and shelters for everybody who actually wants them. Then we could actually filter out the needy from the problem cases instead of lumping them together.



It's funny how all of a sudden tabloids are sensationalism when they don't agree with your argument. Feel free to find one counter-example of a shelter that disagrees with the article.

Same can be said for yourself too. Also, I don't need to believe everything I read about, especially when what's said in certain rubbish articles totally contradicts itself, or topics or examples given that don't seem to add up.

Notice how this article only interviews someone from one single organization: Union Gospel, then claiming "homeless shelterS (plural)" are having a difficult time housing people??? Come on who are they tryin to fool!

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

Same can be said for yourself too. Also, I don't need to believe everything I read about, especially when what's said contradicts each other. Notice how this article only interviews someone from one single organization Union Gospel, then claiming "homeless shelterS (plural)" are having a difficult time housing people??? Come on!

Like I said above, I try to avoid citing tabloids altogether; OTOH, you rely on them as if they were encyclopedias. Read it again:

... “We’ve seen that a lot of the places that we were calling around to we’re also full in terms of just like the other regular shelters that operate every day of the year,” she explained...

Shelters and other nonprofits don't exist in a bubble - they ask other ones to see if they might have room for their clients. There wasn't any.

[Vin]

Finally the shelters seem to be housing more people than before, but there are certainly still beds available. if you disagree, then try proving the following wrong:

Shelter List, Updated April 10, 2023
https://shelters.bc211.ca/bc211shelters

*Note to MigrantCoco: tis ain't "tabloid".

[Migrant_Coconut]

Zero, zero, N/A, zero, N/A, one, two, zero, N/A, zero... oh look, there's twenty, which is not eighty (i.e. the number of tents in the Hastings encampment). And people can hardly keep sleeping in the hallways indefinitely.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Zero, zero, N/A, zero, N/A, one, two, zero, N/A, zero... oh look, there's twenty. Twenty is not eighty (i.e. the number of tents in the Hastings encampment). Nor can people keep sleeping in the hallways indefinitely.

Do you know how to count, or are you just unable to add up numbers?

Also, where did you get "eighty"? And are you very positive that none of these people who pitched up tents already have shelter space or SRO? Show some sources to be more convincing will ya.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Shelters and other nonprofits don't exist in a bubble - they ask other ones to see if they might have room for their clients. There wasn't any.

Your quote didn’t say there wasn’t any available. It said that “a lot” of them were full.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Hardly plenty of additional space either - otherwise they wouldn't've had to shelter people in the hallways.

Originally Posted by Vin

Do you know how to count, or are you just unable to add up numbers?

Also, where did you get "eighty"? And are you very positive that none of these people who pitched up tents already have shelter space or SRO? Show some sources to be more convincing will ya.

Back atcha - whatever's available does NOT add up to eighty total beds.

That was the tent count from the last time the tent city was evicted and moved back in. But true, that's an old number... as of last week, it was seventy-four tents holding 117 people.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Hardly plenty of additional space either - otherwise they wouldn't have had to shelter people in the hallways.



Back atcha - whatever's available does NOT add up to eighty total beds.

Funny, but I counted up to 108 beds in total. Shame on you.

[dreambrother808]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Back atcha - whatever's available does NOT add up to eighty total beds.

But if there are still beds available then those 80 people did not all want to stay in a shelter, at least the ones available.

I say this as someone who was homeless for part of my youth, sleeping in parks, and in shelters.

I would like to see a fair assessment of how many people are housable, able to abide by basic rules, and what percentage are honestly, not. I don’t think that rules should be draconian, but I have visited friends in SROs and social housing of various kinds, and their biggest problems are usually the behaviour of neighbours.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Vin

Funny, but I counted up to 108 beds in total. Shame on you.

Now count them again without the EWR shelters because those are only available when Extreme Weather Response is needed - which it wasn't this week, so they are closed.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Vin

Funny, but I counted up to 108 beds in total. Shame on you.

Fun fact: EWR means "Extreme Weather Response," or non-shelter spaces (e.g. community centres) converted to shelters. They kick you out once the storm is over.

That excludes 86 of those 108 beds - including the 16 in North Van which you lumped into Vancouver's count for some reason - leaving 22 permanent beds for 117 Hastings campers. Shame on you.

Originally Posted by dreambrother808

But if there are still beds available then those 80 people did not all want to stay in a shelter, at least the ones available.

I say this as someone who was homeless for part of my youth, sleeping in parks, and in shelters.

I would like to see a fair assessment of how many people are housable, able to abide by basic rules, and what percentage are honestly, not. I don’t think that rules should be draconian, but I have visited friends in SROs and social housing of various kinds, and their biggest problems are usually the behaviour of neighbours.

True, and congrats on getting back to society. Like I said: we should aim for enough shelter/treatment/detainment space for everybody, in order to sort the genuinely housable from the problem cases; getting rid of the latter would likely improve quality of life in existing shelters too. Simply tearing down the tents and acting like that solves the problem just because ABC came up with it? Hardly effective.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Like I said: we should aim for enough shelter/treatment/detainment space for everybody, in order to sort the genuinely housable from the problem cases; getting rid of the latter would likely improve quality of life in existing shelters too. Simply tearing down the tents and acting like that solves the problem is hardly effective.

I'd argue that we should be trying to have enough housing that the shelters are mostly not needed. They're not going to provide any sort of stability for anyone, and many of them are only available in the evening which is why so many people end up on the streets during the day.

I'd also like to see all the SROs gone. I'd be happy to see the poor quality old wooden buildings demolished, and the bigger ex-hotels either reopened as hotels or tourist hostels, or converted to decent rental units. I don't care if they're market units - the Balmoral Lofts would have been great 20 years ago with a seismic refit. Now the building is too far gone to reuse. Obviously there would have had to be enough of the SRO replacement buildings completed like the ones Downtown or in the DTES in the past few years so that nobody ended up homeless, or expected to pay more than they could afford (so the majority at welfare rate). Once tenants in an SRO could move to a new building, the SRO could be converted or demolished, leaving space for a new SRO replacement.

[Zepfancouver]

I'm obsessing over this de/re-encampment showdown on Hastings. Of course they're back tonight but something is going on here,
I think there is an outside antagonizer supplying a $300 3-Season, 10-Person Camping Cabin Tent. Advocates for the poor might win the war

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Zepfancouver

I'm obsessing over this de/re-encampment showdown on Hastings. Of course they're back tonight but something is going on here,
I think there is an outside antagonizer supplying a $300 3-Season, 10-Person Camping Cabin Tent. Advocates for the poor might win the war

There are apparently many people supporting the camp - there's apparently a Go Fund Me page.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

And we've seen how effective that rule is. Sympathy or lack of it doesn't really matter - if City Hall ends up having to waste time/money/resources patrolling half of downtown until the next election (or longer), they've simply replaced one problem with another.

It hasn't "worked" because there has been zero enforcement. Like any rule, you need the carrot and the stick.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I'd love to see how long ABC can keep up monitoring Hastings if they can't even afford the new cops and nurses from the election platform. Overpromising and underdelivering, just as expected.

LOL your bias is clear.

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

So no, there isn't enough room in the shelters; we can expect the people turned away to move back onto Hastings or another street/park, and then City Hall will have to cover those areas too. Have fun watching taxes go up again (which IIRC you think only happens under a useless council).

I'd love a ton more information and data on spaces available, who is occupying them, and who is requesting more space. All the way through the system until they are into permanent housing.

The opaque nature of these numbers serves some interests.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Changing City

There are apparently many people supporting the camp - there's apparently a Go Fund Me page.

Why aren't they putting money towards hotels and AirBNBs then?