In an epiphany, the Gold Coast Council (there’s Federal, State and Local Councils in Australia) has come up with the best solution ever for people sleeping rough. FINE THEM.
These are people who, for whatever reason, are unable to secure permanent or even temporary housing. These are people who are financially marginalised anyway. So, you want to FINE them??
Fucking stupid fuckers. I’m just without words at the moment.
It sounds like the standard idea that “if we punish homeless people they will no longer exist”. Homelessness is the sort of issue that the authorities are willing to put more money and effort into punishing than they are into solving it.
Is mandatory voting in Australia still a thing? I can see these folks also being fined for not voting in the elections even though they won’t have the ability or opportunity for various reasons to actually vote in those elections.
Not the only country where someone came up with this idea.
Both the OP and @Der_Trihs missed the point of this decision.
“Solving” homelessness in any modern country is substantially impossible even given nearly infinite money. Certainly more than the public is willing to allocate to the problem. Comprehensive universal free mental health care, comprehensive universal free drug addiction rehabilitation, comprehensive housing reform, and comprehensive wage reform are sorta the ante in that game. The table stakes are steep.
The goal is not to cause homelessness to disappear or to be punished. It’s to cause homeless individuals to voluntarily relocate themselves to a different jurisdiction where there are not such fines.
Problem solved. In this jurisdiction. If you define “problem” not as the sad circumstances of the homeless individuals, but rather as their inconvenient up through nasty side effects on all the rest of us. That problem is readily solved … at least locally. Just force entice them elsewhere. Done and dusted.
I’m reminded of how San Fransisco tried to drive out the homeless by making public restrooms inaccessible, which just resulted in human waste all over since surprise; biology is biology and people don’t stop producing waste just because you ban them from the proper disposal facilities.
Doing so would cost money, which has just been taken from them. And assumes such places exist, and that the homeless in question know where they are.
Word gets around. SF as an example is rather flooded with homeless. Who come from far away to settle there, since it’s an especially homeless-friendly location. Or at least was until it had collected a whole bunch of them. SF is rethinking the wisdom of being so attractive.
The same process can be used in reverse. And is sub rosa all over this country. And from the looks of the OP, the technique is spreading to Oz.
Fining homeless people is a masterwork of genius, and now that the idea is out there, it’s only a matter of time until Trump catches on.
They haven’t been “attractive” for the homeless for decades, that hasn’t made the homeless go away.
Amazingly enough when you make it hard to get a home, you end up with homeless people. Almost as if there was a cause and effect relationship.
The stupid: Aus local council fines ‘rough sleepers’
I thought this was going to be about a crackdown on people who toss and turn excessively. It’s not easy staying in one position all night, y’know.
[One for the Misconstrued Titles Files] I thought it referred to loud snorers, like my late father.
What is a council in Australia? Is it legislative, like an elected city council in the U.S.? Or is it regulatory, like an appointed commission in the U.S.?
Your statements are confusing. The fines are punishing homelessness so that they disappear (from the area punishing them).
That’s what the shackles are for.
Stupid is as stupid does. I’d refuse to pay the fine. What are they going to do, arrest, jail (house) and feed me? Sounds pretty good if I’m homeless.
If the homeless stay and somehow pay the fines from their takings as beggars, or stay and ignore the fines until arrested, then the fines are not accomplishing the government’s goal. The government doesn’t need or want the pittance of cash, nor does it need or want the waste of police effort and jail expense citing, arresting, and housing these folks.
If the homeless leave, they are accomplishing the government’s goal.
The only goal is make them leave. The threat of punishment is the stick to elicit that behavior. If they actually have to hit them with the stick, the threat wasn’t working well enough.
Seems clear enough. There’'s certainly no contradiction.
That sounds like paying rent . . . hmm, just what is the state of tenant rights in Australia?
Note that making the homeless leave is equivalent to making the homeless disappear.
And it’s not the only goal. The government chose to use punishment (by fine) instead of another inducement. That choice means punishment is also a goal.
Disagree, the punishment part is the ignored consequence of their goal of making the homeless leave. They just want them to be someone else’s problem. That is a pretty common view for home/property owners vs. the homeless.
Actually fixing the problem? That comes down to things like the Feds should be doing this or it is hopeless, let them go to some other place.
I thought it was fining manufacturers of substandard pillows, and was going to say that Mike Lindell doesn’t seem to have anything left to take.
Fining homeless people, though, is just the next example of what is a never-ending NIMBY mindset that has probably existed for all of human history.
QFT. Quoted for Truth
Hey, 150 years about, heck probably 100 years ago, the police/local concerned citizen posse would just beat the “bums” to drive them out of the area.