Houston is one of the most progressive cities when it comes to homelessness. Can't comment on this specifically but the goal is to get people into actual homes instead of maintaining the dependency on panhandling. It's actually worked and other cities should follow its lead: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/14/headway/houston-homeless-people.html
Starving them out doesn't magically get them shelter.
Did you read the article? Not sure how you get "starving them out" from that...
They're preventing people from feeding them. Which article are you referencing? The one you provided or the one in the OP?
That doesn't mean they aren't getting fed at all. I'm referring to the one I linked.
I don't know who you think you're kidding. Are you really suggesting that there's more than enough food for the homeless population in Houston? Does that seem like even a plausible scenario?
I applaud their efforts to get homeless people into homes-- that is the only way to combat homelessness, but there doesn't seem to be any defense in preventing organizations from donating food to the homeless that aren't in homes yet.
I'm not necessarily saying you shouldn't, just look at the bigger picture before you disregard all of the city's effective efforts...
I feel like you forgot to keep track of usernames, my friend. Glad to see I'm not the only one that does that, haha.
I'm talking in general, not to anybody specifically other than the first response
Oh, well, in that case, I'd flip it around. Don't defend the indefensible just because the city does good elsewhere.
Funeral homes, presumably.
Would it really be Texas if they weren't constantly being shitty? Texas and being shit goes together like PB&J. And most Texans seem proud of that. They care more about "owning the libs" than being a quality place to live.
The oddity here is that Houston is pretty liberal, I think. If it were a state law I'd be saying the same thing as you.
Texas really is a shit-heap isn't it?
Houston is one of the most progressive cities when it comes to homelessness. Can't comment on this specifically but the goal is to get people into actual homes instead of maintaining the dependency on panhandling. It's actually worked and other cities should follow its lead: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/14/headway/houston-homeless-people.html
Starving them out doesn't magically get them shelter.
Did you read the article? Not sure how you get "starving them out" from that...
They're preventing people from feeding them. Which article are you referencing? The one you provided or the one in the OP?
That doesn't mean they aren't getting fed at all. I'm referring to the one I linked.
I don't know who you think you're kidding. Are you really suggesting that there's more than enough food for the homeless population in Houston? Does that seem like even a plausible scenario?
I applaud their efforts to get homeless people into homes-- that is the only way to combat homelessness, but there doesn't seem to be any defense in preventing organizations from donating food to the homeless that aren't in homes yet.
I'm not necessarily saying you shouldn't, just look at the bigger picture before you disregard all of the city's effective efforts...
I feel like you forgot to keep track of usernames, my friend. Glad to see I'm not the only one that does that, haha.
I'm talking in general, not to anybody specifically other than the first response
Oh, well, in that case, I'd flip it around. Don't defend the indefensible just because the city does good elsewhere.
Funeral homes, presumably.
Would it really be Texas if they weren't constantly being shitty? Texas and being shit goes together like PB&J. And most Texans seem proud of that. They care more about "owning the libs" than being a quality place to live.
The oddity here is that Houston is pretty liberal, I think. If it were a state law I'd be saying the same thing as you.