http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-drunk01.html
So, apparently, there’s a rumpus room for the Thunderbird set. Those who feel the need to move from Steel Reserve to their very own Padded Reserve.
I’m dumbfounded by this. Granted, it’s a good idea: if alcoholism is such a problem that it’s scaring away the customers, then putting the guys in a room to puke on each other is a good idea (I’m assuming that they’re probably un/deremployed, so maybe sending them to college where 1) no one will notice and 2) they might learn some skillz would be a worth a shot).
This does leave the question of it being specifically for drunks: is it like a bar, or does one have to provide some sort of drool-covered ID to prove that you’re a drunk?
This reminds me of Russian History class where our instructor told a group of frat guys taking this for their historical perspective GER credit that after Peter the Great took over, he had taken control of the vodka industry and in the state-owned distilleries/bars they would serve only vodka and once one entered, they were not allowed to leave until they spent all the money they had on them. Don’t think they had padded floors though.
Anyway, I submit this for your consideration. Thought you might get a kick out of it.
Well, here’s a picture of the ‘Tolerance Shelter’. It seems like quite possibly the worst plan I have ever heard, treating the symptom rather than addressing the cause. You say that you assume most of these people will be un/deremployed, I think that most of them will be homeless, whether they are alcoholics or drunks or not is fairly irrelevant (although a large proportion of the homeless population do suffer from alcoholism, along with othe substance abuse problems) since they obviously need more help than a sodding tin shelter in which to pass out. We live in a society that seems to work such that once a person has no permanent address they become a nobody as far as getting any help for the situation they are in is concerned. Fact is that once a person has dropped below a certain level they need a hell of a lot of assistance to get their life back on track.
This seems like an attempt by local government to sweep the problem under the carpet, so that it is out of sight, out of mind of their precious middle class voter.
Yes, a proper solution is more expensive, but for f**ks sake these are people we are talking about, give them the help they deserve as human beings, don’t shove them to where you can’t see the problem.
It isn’t, (either a good idea or such a problem that it is scaring away customers) the concern is that it will scare away customers when the council gathers all the alcoholics in one place.
Considered. Sorry though, I just don’t find either human suffering, or the contempt with which the council in question is treating the problem anything that I could ‘get a kick out of’, YMMV.
To me it sounds like “enabling.” Offer the drunks a shelter in which to dry out, sure. Offer them a place to keep on drinking … huh? Isn’t drinking actually one of the major problems for these folks in the first place?