Harm reduction doesn't work. Neither does throwing up your hands and doing nothing.
-
-
Replying to @ShermDisel @stuz5000 and
Harm Reduction saves lives, but it doesn’t reduce addiction. I think that helps but you might differ.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @the_watcher @ShermDisel and
What do you propose? Prohibition doesn’t work. Arresting drug dealers doesn’t work.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @the_watcher @stuz5000 and
2/2 Then make a mental health and drug and alcohol facility out in the Bayview with all that land and put the people who are a harm to themselves and the public in them. Then make tiny homes in the area for people to transition into. While giving them jobs in the facility.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ShermDisel @stuz5000 and
It is not clear to me why the residents of the Bayview should have to bear the burden of dealing with a bunch of addicts. There is no reason except tradition that the TL should have to deal with them either though.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @the_watcher @stuz5000 and
If it's a medical facility to treat people if this is the goal, how is that a burden? Also, you can build it anywhere just freaking build it. If all these so called programs work, we should have less crime, less homeless. But...we don't, results speak for themselves.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ShermDisel @stuz5000 and
There is limited amounts of public money that we have to spend. I would personally rather see most of it go to people down on their luck and the mentally ill homeless first. If we can get a big bang for our buck, treating addicts might be worth it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @the_watcher @stuz5000 and
If you call over 500 million dollars limited...then you are part of the problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ShermDisel @the_watcher and
*$500M with no transparency, outcome measures, public accountability.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @stuz5000 @ShermDisel and
Where do you get these figures? Are you talking about the entire budget for homelessness? Most of that is actually spent on housing formerly homeless. And it wasn't $500M last year or the year before, it was more like $240M.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Stop it. The city's 2020–21 budget for the Department of Homeless and Supportive Housing is about $852 million. To put that in perspective, Sacramento's city budget is about $650 million, which covers all public services for their population of over 500,000
-
-
Replying to @ShermDisel @stuz5000 and
The budget for the Department of Homeless and Supportive Housing in 2019 was $300M. Either you are being disingenuous or simply misinformed.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @the_watcher @ShermDisel and
But I sure hope that big surge in money makes a big difference!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.