politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I truly struggle with what is the right way to think about the homeless debate. My partner and I debated it a few weeks back after listening to an episode of The Daily on the subject. We were both undecided.
On one hand, we should be humane to those in need.
On the other hand, some peoples situations are a result of their own making, and they are content living without. Regardless of how homeless people come to be that way, they often litter the streets with piss, trash, and drugs, making an otherwise fine area feel dirty and dangerous. Will expanded homeless housing help them get back up on their feet or enable them to continue their current lifestyle?
I don't know what the right answer is.
You have a link or episode number for the podcast? I've heard this line before about some of them being homeless by choice but I don't think I buy that excuse. Sometimes the shelters are more dangerous than the streets. Instead of sleeping 2 blocks away from the crazies they're in the next bunk. And while I'm sure a few are claustrophobic I'm willing to bet a vast majority want a solid roof over their heads.
I believe this is the episode HERE
Maybe I didn't state it well, but homeless by choice is maybe slightly different than how I imagine it. I imagine it might be more like complacency like how some people lever leave entry level jobs.