As is malice. In this sort of class war hurting people is typically one of the central goals, not just a tactic. That’s why there’s not even at attempt to actually fix the problem, they don’t want to fix the problem; they want to hurt poor people as much as they think they can get away with. Punching down is fun and validating for a lot of people.
Bullshit.
Most people don’t want to hurt others, they just don’t want to deal with it. More apathy then animosity.
But you always take the worse view of people on everything anyway. So no surprise.
“Most people” don’t need to in order to cause plenty of suffering. And a large percentage of the population does want that and that’s more than enough. I’d say “most”, but even a minority would be enough.
This Australian council chose punishment to induce homeless to go away. They could have chosen a carrot, but they chose a stick. It’s that choice that indicates that punishment is one of their goals. Maybe the voters (still not clear if an Australian council is elected or appointed) are apathetic, but the council is can’t claim apathy when they instituted fines.
I never said the council did, I was following a different thread in this thread.
Tell it. The same thing happens here when the owners of factories that employ migrants are never prosecuted for breaking the law, even as migrant employees are being dragged out in handcuffs.
Local councils are elected, and same as Federal and State elections, voting is compulsory.
Once upon a time local councillors were not party affiliated (as such) but were instead business-people or folks involved in the local community as advocates for various causes.
Nowadays though, they tend to be aligned with either the major parties (Labor, Liberal, Greens) or with some of the more fringe parties.
I’m reminded of how, in the 1970s, after several years of crying Indians and Woodsy Owl doing softshoe in PSAs, the US discovered that the solution to the littering problem was (OMG!) public trashcans!
People wanted to throw away their trash, and were perfectly willing not to litter, they just needed somewhere to put the trash.
I also remember those few intermediate years that only people who lived them in a city seem to know about, when merchants put up signs in the windows that their trashcans were for customers only, because people kept stopping in asking to use the trashcan. They were trying not to litter, but could not find places for their trash other than their pockets-- OK if you had Jelly beans-- not so great if you had a ice cream sandwich, and impossible if you had a Coke.
The right wing these days sees the desperately poor as freeloaders, and thieves, choosing to take from people who work hard rather than support themselves. I don’t doubt for a second that at least some members of the Council who voted for this see the homeless as bad actors, people who are, by their own laziness, making the city of Gold Coast a worse place to live.
In that light, the homeless deserve punishment for the bad things they’re doing to the productive residents of the city. If someone made the city worse by throwing their trash on the street, we wouldn’t be buying up carrots to encourage them to be tidy, you pick up a stick and hit them with it.
Sounds like a good plan. Make it so people stop choosing to be homeless 
To be fair, some people do say when asked that they choose to be homeless, but that’s a statistically insignificant amount.
And honestly, when people say they want to be homeless, I don’t think they mean it literally. I believe that it’s because they’ve had bad experiences with shelters, or there are other problems that are associated with the struggle to maintain housing that they stop trying.
I was being sarcastic. In my experience some people do want to be homeless but they are usually dealing with mental illness so how much of a free choice is it really?
I always feel sorry for their dogs.
(I know the adults and kid humans need help too. As pet owners ourselves it can be tricky to keep a dog healthy in a homed and safe place, well fed and vetted. The amimals have no choice or voice)
I’m sure that happens. Or someone with an addiction who won’t stay at a shelter or low income housing because they will get kicked out if they’re caught using drugs. They “choose” to be homeless because their addiction is making those choices for them.
That always reminds me of this bit from the late Norm Macdonald.
(Just the opening part of that clip, it goes on to other jokes Norm made about homeless people. But I’m just referring to the first bit.)
There’s an old saying: Everybody’s got to be someplace. If your answer to where should they go is “Anywhere but here.” you’re not trying to solve the problem.