• Seattle created its homelessness crisis -- Now it's trying to make it w

    From Leroy N. Soetoro@1:229/2 to All on Sunday, May 27, 2018 19:00:16
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, sac.politics
    XPost: alt.politics.socialism.democratic, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc
    From: leroysoetoro@hrc-rejected.com

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/05/22/seattle-created-its- homelessness-crisis-now-its-trying-to-make-it- worse.html?intcmp=ob_article_sidebar_video&intcmp=obnetwork

    Seattle never learns. The city says it has a homelessness problem that is getting out of control and something needs to be done about it. But
    Seattle’s ultra-liberal politicians are making things worse by insisting
    on more bloated government to solve a problem bloated government created.

    The housing crisis in Seattle is the fault of its government. The city has
    been on a nonstop rampage to declare itself the most progressive society
    in the world for the last few years. During its crusade that is killing
    jobs and making life miserable, city elected officials have enacted rules
    and regulations that make it almost impossible to build housing there.

    John Stossel (formerly of Fox Business) and Maxim Lott recently wrote in
    Reason Magazine that Seattle’s building code is 745 pages long. The
    residential building code is another 685 pages.

    Jeff Pelletier, of Board and Vellum Architects, points to the permits as
    one of the main drivers in the rise of housing costs in Seattle stating,
    “while there is a lot of benefit to a thorough review of your project, we
    are seeing tremendous cost and schedule increases from local building departments.”

    One way to help solve the housing problem would be to build mid- and high-
    rise condominiums. On a plot of land that usually accommodates three to
    four single family homes, the city could allow developers to build
    projects that house more than 100 people, getting much more bang for the
    buck in land use.

    But no, this is Seattle. Strict zoning laws have only given multi-family
    and commercial and mixed-use areas one-third of the land designated for residential use, driving up the price of single-family homes.

    The city’s recently enacted minimum wage law is also having an impact on
    the housing problem. In 2014, Seattle’s extremely progressive City Council attempted to regulate prosperity by instituting a $15 minimum wage, to be gradually phased in.

    Business owners warned about the economic impact the move would have, but
    not one person on the City Council listened. All voted for the job-killing regulation, showing no one on the Council has a basic understanding of economics.

    This year the full $15 per hour minimum wage went into effect, but the
    impact was felt much earlier. A University of Washington team completed a
    study of worker pay, hours and benefits in Seattle last and found the law
    was a net loss for workers.

    The study concluded: “Our preferred estimates suggest that the Seattle
    Minimum Wage Ordinance caused hours worked by low-skilled workers (i.e.,
    those earning under $19 per hour) to fall by 9.4% during the three
    quarters when the minimum wage was $13 per hour, resulting in a loss of
    3.5 million hours worked per calendar quarter. Alternative estimates show
    the number of low-wage jobs declined by 6.8%, which represents a loss of
    more than 5,000 jobs.”

    Keep in mind this was before the full impact of the $15 per hour minimum
    wage could be felt, as the law only became fully implemented this year.
    The situation is going to get worse in Seattle.

    So now that we know Seattle’s own laws created a shortage of housing in
    the city while at the same time reducing the amount of take-home pay for lower-income residents, what is the City Council’s solution? More
    government.

    In 2017, King County and Seattle spent over $195 million to combat homelessness, which included city, county, state, federal and charity
    spending. Surely the massive amount of spending had an impact on the
    problem? No, homelessness actually increased last year.

    But don’t worry, the City Council has a plan. It had the great idea to institute another tax, known as a “head tax.” The city is going to tax its largest business $500 for every employee. This money would then be used to build “affordable housing.” It is hard to see how that could be done with
    the current zoning laws, which helped start the crisis in the first place, still in place.

    After the City Council voted 9-0 for the ordinance, business leaders spoke
    out, and Amazon paused construction on a project, pitting hard-working construction workers against do-nothing, full-time protesters. After some negotiating between the City Council and Mayor Jenny Durkan, the head tax
    was reduced to $275 for every employee.

    This may seem like a win, but like everything in Seattle, all is not as it seems. Along with the lower rate, so far the allocation of the funds is non-binding. Meaning there is no plan to spend the money. It could easily
    be spent on non-homeless issues.

    What Seattle has done is so poorly planned, even some of the homeless are calling out the city for its excessive spending.

    Geno Minetti, currently living in his car, stated: "They're wasting the taxpayer’s money. If they get more; they'll waste more." It is a shame
    this man can see the problem and knows government spending is not the
    answer, but the people in charge only see taxation and spending as an
    answer to every problem.

    Businesses in Seattle must now ask themselves some important questions. Is
    it worth expanding if the business will get taxed for succeeding? If
    Seattle doesn’t want my business to grow and expand, why should I move it
    or start it there?

    The lunacy of Seattle never ceases to amaze. Only the left would watch its taxation, zoning, and employment laws create a crisis, then advocate for
    more of the same. Every city should pay close attention to what Seattle is doing, and do the opposite. If a city wants to increase its tax base,
    decrease poverty, and increase the quality of living, don’t be like
    Seattle.


    --
    Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
    denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
    parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
    truck.

    Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
    of the Obama presidency.

    Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
    The World According To Garp.

    ObamaCare is a total 100% failure and no lie that can be put forth by its supporters can dispute that.

    Obama jobs, the result of ObamaCare. 12-15 working hours a week at minimum wage, no benefits and the primary revenue stream for ObamaCare. It can't
    be funded with money people don't have, yet liberals lie about how great
    it is.

    Obama increased total debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight
    years he was in office, and sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer
    liberal democrat donors.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Mr. B1ack@1:229/2 to All on Sunday, May 27, 2018 17:47:23
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc
    From: nowhere@nada.net

    Seattle seems to be on the short road to
    social/fiscal implosion. It'll be their own
    fault for being such idiots. However they
    will demand EVERYONE ELSE pay for it.

    Let's get ahead of the curve and prepare a good
    legal/ethical case for telling them to fuck off ....

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From #BeamMeUpScotty@1:229/2 to None of the Above on Monday, May 28, 2018 11:17:14
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump
    XPost: soc.culture.usa, misc.survivalism, talk.politics.guns
    XPost: alt.atheism, alt.law-enforcement, alt.conspiracy
    XPost: alt.politics.economics, alt.philosophy, alt.politics.usa.constitution XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality, alt.psychology
    From: Not-Sure@ideocracy.gov

    On 05/28/2018 02:48 AM, None of the Above wrote:
    On Sun, 27 May 2018 17:47:23 -0400, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net>
    wrote:

    Seattle seems to be on the short road to
    social/fiscal implosion. It'll be their own
    fault for being such idiots. However they
    will demand EVERYONE ELSE pay for it.

    Let's get ahead of the curve and prepare a good
    legal/ethical case for telling them to fuck off ....

    https://www.facebook.com/SeattleLooksLikeShit/

    Seattle is obviously over stepping their legal authority if they can
    restrict commerce and tax enough to bankrupt the city, and that means
    they're engaged in illegal activity and we can't allow the Federal tax
    dollars to be used in the aid of illegal activity or to be used to
    support the outcome of illegal activity, the city would have to agree to restrict it's own power of taxing and regulating commerce to get any
    bail out. Otherwise the U.S. Congress and the State could NOT legally
    support a Liberal fiefdom that is controlled by Liberal-Democrats that
    run the city for it to produced Democrat voters at a net loss for them
    to maintain power and rely on periodic bailouts. That would be using tax dollars to bail out and support a PONZI scheme for voters, voting to get welfare and city tax subsidized life styles.

    --
    That's Karma


    A homeless person can never be lost.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From None of the Above@1:229/2 to All on Sunday, May 27, 2018 23:48:07
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc
    From: Eep@erg.oy

    On Sun, 27 May 2018 17:47:23 -0400, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net>
    wrote:

    Seattle seems to be on the short road to
    social/fiscal implosion. It'll be their own
    fault for being such idiots. However they
    will demand EVERYONE ELSE pay for it.

    Let's get ahead of the curve and prepare a good
    legal/ethical case for telling them to fuck off ....

    https://www.facebook.com/SeattleLooksLikeShit/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From #BeamMeUpScotty@1:229/2 to None of the Above on Monday, May 28, 2018 10:06:30
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc
    From: Not-Sure@ideocracy.gov

    On 05/28/2018 02:48 AM, None of the Above wrote:
    On Sun, 27 May 2018 17:47:23 -0400, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net>
    wrote:

    Seattle seems to be on the short road to
    social/fiscal implosion. It'll be their own
    fault for being such idiots. However they
    will demand EVERYONE ELSE pay for it.

    Let's get ahead of the curve and prepare a good
    legal/ethical case for telling them to fuck off ....

    https://www.facebook.com/SeattleLooksLikeShit/

    Seattle is obviously over stepping their legal authority if they can
    restrict commerce and tax enough to bankrupt the city, and that means
    they're engaged in illegal activity and we can't allow the Federal tax
    dollars to be used in the aid of illegal activity or to be used to
    support the outcome of illegal activity, the city would have to agree to restrict it's own power of taxing and regulating commerce to get any
    bail out. Otherwise the U.S. Congress and the State could NOT legally
    support a Liberal fiefdom that is controlled by Liberal-Democrats that
    run the city for it to produced Democrat voters at a net loss for them
    to maintain power and rely on periodic bailouts. That would be using tax dollars to bail out and support a PONZI scheme for voters, vote to get
    welfare and city tax subsidized life styles.

    --
    That's Karma


    A homeless person can never be lost.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Byker@1:229/2 to All on Tuesday, May 29, 2018 13:28:29
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc
    From: byker@do~rag.net

    "Mr. B1ack" wrote in message news:3l9mgdtvsu9q12mg5hm45csg3ucf3f1u4t@4ax.com...

    Seattle seems to be on the short road to social/fiscal implosion.

    The Kingdome is/was an apt metaphor: https://tinyurl.com/ybcjpak2

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Mr. B1ack@1:229/2 to Not-Sure@ideocracy.gov on Tuesday, May 29, 2018 07:54:20
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc
    From: nowhere@nada.net

    On Mon, 28 May 2018 10:06:30 -0400, #BeamMeUpScotty
    <Not-Sure@ideocracy.gov> wrote:

    On 05/28/2018 02:48 AM, None of the Above wrote:
    On Sun, 27 May 2018 17:47:23 -0400, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net>
    wrote:

    Seattle seems to be on the short road to
    social/fiscal implosion. It'll be their own
    fault for being such idiots. However they
    will demand EVERYONE ELSE pay for it.

    Let's get ahead of the curve and prepare a good
    legal/ethical case for telling them to fuck off ....

    https://www.facebook.com/SeattleLooksLikeShit/

    Seattle is obviously over stepping their legal authority if they can
    restrict commerce and tax enough to bankrupt the city, and that means
    they're engaged in illegal activity and we can't allow the Federal tax >dollars to be used in the aid of illegal activity or to be used to
    support the outcome of illegal activity, the city would have to agree to >restrict it's own power of taxing and regulating commerce to get any
    bail out. Otherwise the U.S. Congress and the State could NOT legally
    support a Liberal fiefdom that is controlled by Liberal-Democrats that
    run the city for it to produced Democrat voters at a net loss for them
    to maintain power and rely on periodic bailouts. That would be using tax >dollars to bail out and support a PONZI scheme for voters, vote to get >welfare and city tax subsidized life styles.

    What I don't understand is why all the seriously-affected
    commercial interests don't put some money down to do
    a sort of decapitation assault on the commies in govt there.
    Shove 'em ALL out and make sure their ilk can never get
    authority there again.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Byker@1:229/2 to Leroy N. Soetoro on Tuesday, May 29, 2018 13:42:02
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, sac.politics
    XPost: alt.california
    From: byker@do~rag.net

    "Leroy N. Soetoro" wrote in message
    news:XnsA8EF7A1D492A16F089P2473@0.0.0.1...

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/05/22/seattle-created-its-homelessness-crisis-now-its-trying-to-make-it-worse.html

    Seattle never learns. The city says it has a homelessness problem that is getting out of control and something needs to be done about it. But Seattle’s ultra-liberal politicians are making things worse by insisting
    on more bloated government to solve a problem bloated government created.

    "Just about everybody who works on homelessness—from Secretary Carson to liberal advocates in Seattle—supports a policy known as 'housing first.' The idea is that you immediately move people off the streets into housing, then
    get to work on other issues, like drug addiction. But in a market as
    expensive as Seattle, that would be an immensely difficult and costly undertaking. There simply is not a lot of vacant property to house the homeless. What does seem clear is that Seattle, a quintessential
    21st-century boomtown, offers a stark warning about what our society could
    look like as it is increasingly dominated by the tech economy. It also shows what happens when social support organizations and local governments decide
    not to try to end homelessness, but rather attempt sympathetically to
    'contain' it. Ultimately, Daniel Malone says, we need to decide whether
    we're okay 'living in this third-world society where there's a whole lot of affluence, and there's a lot of visible, Mumbai-like slums right in our midst.'" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homeless in Seattle

    ETHAN EPSTEIN
    April 8, 2018 8:47 PM

    The northern wall at the office of the Licton Springs Village on North Seattle's gritty Aurora Avenue features a poster containing a stark notice: "BOTULISM WARNING."

    "A suspected WOUND BOTULISM case has been reported in King County. Health officials believe the case may be related injecting [sic] black tar heroin,"
    it reads. "Injecting heroin that contains the bacteria that causes botulism
    can cause serious infection and even death."

    Of course, one might think that the flyer could simply warn that black tar heroin contains...black tar heroin. Heroin is an unusually dangerous drug—wickedly addictive and far more lethal to its abusers than cocaine or alcohol. But Licton Springs Village, a microcommunity of 30 tiny houses and
    a couple of large dormitory tents—one that is officially sanctioned by the City of Seattle—takes a permissive view of drug abuse. It's a "low-barrier" community, meaning that people can use drugs freely here. Most homeless shelters and encampments demand residents live drug and alcohol free. But
    here, clean needles are distributed to the residents to prevent the spread
    of disease, and Narcan is available to resuscitate people who overdose.

    Open since April 2017, on a formerly vacant lot squeezed between fast-food joints and low-budget motels, Licton Springs Village is home to nearly 70 homeless people who were "sleeping rough" until they moved in. The residents include several married couples who live together in simple, tiny homes—basically, wooden boxes 12 feet by 8 feet—donated by local groups. Children aren't allowed because of the open drug use. The village is
    operated by local nonprofit SHARE/WHEEL, and the on-the-ground support staff are all formerly homeless themselves. Conditions are makeshift: There's a shower, but the toilets are all of the port-a-potty variety; there are no individual kitchens, but residents are eligible to eat once each day in the communal dining area.

    Licton Springs Village, unique in many ways, exists to address a common and once again growing problem: American homelessness. The problem is
    particularly acute on the West Coast. Here in Seattle, the homeless
    population skyrocketed by 44 percent between 2015 and the end of 2017, mirroring the experience of other Pacific coast cities, notably those in the Bay Area, which is also experiencing a homelessness crisis of mammoth proportions. King County, home of Seattle, now boasts the third-largest homeless population in the country.

    "We're in kind of a perverse competition with San Francisco," says Daniel Malone, the executive director of Downtown Emergency Service Center, an advocacy group in downtown Seattle, noting the extraordinary surge in
    visible homelessness throughout his city. Tents abound, even downtown. It's hard to find a bridge that doesn't have people sleeping under it. Because of the growing number of people sleeping in cars, city leaders are moving to scuttle long-established parking restrictions.

    The growth in the homeless population comes from all kinds of people experiencing homelessness; not just the chronically homeless, who are
    usually severely mentally ill, but also people who not that long ago were gainfully employed and had fixed accommodations.

    Nationwide, the homeless population is ticking up at about 1 percent a year. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development's most recent point-in-time count, 554,000 Americans were homeless, and the vast majority were sleeping outside. (The HUD census tries to assess how many Americans
    are homeless on one given day.) The American homeless population is larger
    than the populations of Miami, Pittsburgh, or Atlanta.

    But growth is being driven by a surge in just a few areas, chiefly Seattle, Portland, the Bay Area, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C. Dennis Culhane, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania and a leading authority on homelessness, points out that because those areas are experiencing such
    rapid gains and the total population has increased by only 1 percent, other areas of the country are actually reducing their homeless populations.
    Culhane says further that certain populations have been dealt with
    effectively: Veteran homelessness has declined by about half in recent
    years, he tells me, as HUD and Veterans Affairs have made addressing that particular population a priority.

    But the broader numbers—and the simple experience of visiting San Francisco or Seattle these days—raise a couple of questions. Why are some of the country's most prominent cities seeing such a surge in homelessness? And why now, when the economy is booming, nowhere more so than in the Emerald City, which is drowning in Amazonian riches? The answer may provide a cautionary
    tale about the perverse impacts of a hypercharged tech economy.

    Tent cities in Seattle

    There wasn't a job Bebe wouldn't do. Throughout the 1990s, the Seattleite worked as a bartender and a house cleaner. She worked in retail and in
    delis. But in 2001, she was struck with a degenerative bone disease in her
    leg and slowly lost her ability to work. The pain became unbearable and,
    after years of taking pain­killers, she turned to heroin. With her sole
    source of income her disability check, not nearly generous enough to cover Seattle's sky-high rents, Bebe eventually became homeless.

    Today, she tells me, sitting in the tiny home in Licton Springs Village that she shares with her husband Mike, she's a "heroin addict." She's not a happy person—she wishes she could work, she says, and she hates being an addict—but the tiny house is a marked improvement. Before the Village opened she and Mike "were sleeping under the freeway," she says. Now, at least, she has shelter.

    Duane, a middle-aged Native American man originally from Arizona, agrees. "Being homeless sucks," he says. "It's not a fun life." Licton Springs
    Village is a huge improvement. A gregarious man who worked on horse farms in Louisiana, Duane invited me into his small, extremely messy, tiny home,
    which Duane's large frame dominates. I find a seat on the edge of the
    cluttered bed. Before moving in here, he spent four months on the streets.

    What went wrong? "I've been a drunk all my life," he tells me. "And I can't read or write." Duane is clear-eyed about the effect that homelessness could have on Seattle. "It's destroying the tourism industry," he tells me. "You think tourists want to visit downtown Seattle and see a bunch of homeless people?"

    While tourism numbers have yet to fall in this picturesque city nestled on Puget Sound, it indeed was partially due to concerns like Duane's that
    Licton Springs Village came to exist in the first place. For years, as Seattle's homeless population grew, unsanctioned tent cities began to pop
    up. In a way, they demonstrated man's impressive capacity to impose order.
    They were self-governing, and many did not allow drug or alcohol users. The local governments often assigned residents important tasks, like working security.

    Charlie Johnson, who lived in a tent city shortly after becoming homeless a
    few years back, said the tent city's governance model was a plus for him. Within a few weeks of moving in he was "in leadership, which was super
    helpful for me, because [when I became homeless] I was despondent... Just
    the fact that I had to be social, that there were people around" was beneficial. Johnson, a well-spoken middle-aged man, speaks to the diversity
    of Seattle's homeless: A graduate of the University of Washington who has
    lived abroad, he says simply that his own dysfunctions led him to "blow up
    his life."

    Greg Nickels, Seattle's mayor from 2002 to 2010, regularly cleared the unsanctioned encampments. (In a cheeky protest, one roving tent community dubbed itself "Nickelsville.") But Nickels lost reelection in a primary, and
    as the homeless population continued to grow, the city began to rethink its approach to the problem.

    In 2015, the city council voted to create Seattle's first three legally sanctioned encampments. The logic, according to a city press release, was
    that "authorized encampments offer a safer alternative that can help
    stabilize the person before transitioning indoors." They could be on either city or privately owned land. Three more were legalized in 2016. Each encampment is allowed to stay for 12 months, with the option to re-up for another 12. After two years, however, they must be dismantled or moved.
    People found by the city of Seattle's "Navigation Team," which actively searches for homeless people to offer them services, would be funneled into
    one of the encampments so long as there was room.

    Barbara Poppe, who served as executive director of the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness under Barack Obama from 2009 to 2014, initially opposed the move to legalize the encampments. They "were not providing basic human needs," she tells me, like electricity and plumbing.
    In other words, they were barely superior to sleeping rough. Poppe also
    feared that the setup of the encampments—the chain-link fences that surround them, in particular—was inherently "stigmatizing." Today, the fears over utilities have been allayed at least, as the tent cities all have
    electricity hookups. But the chain-link fences remain.

    Particularly controversial was the notion of legalizing a "low-barrier" community like Licton Springs Village. After all, homeless shelters and encampments are almost always contentious among their neighbors. One of the selling points shelters make to the broader community is that they will
    insist that their residents be clean and sober. But Licton Springs Village turned this model on its head: "Our main goal is to be nonjudgmental and
    just be cool as we can," says Charlie Johnson, the former tent city resident who now helps manage Licton Springs. "We just want to let people accept themselves, accept us. That's our main goal: to provide a safe, stable, relatively harmonious place." To that end, only violence or theft can get somebody evicted. The leadership does not attempt to push residents into treatment or, for that matter, encourage them to enter the labor force. Originally billed as a way station before people could transition into real housing, Licton Springs Village looks increasingly like a final destination.

    Speak Out Seattle! (SOS), which bills itself as a "grassroots coalition of residents, business owners and neighborhood groups with members living and working in every district of Seattle," led the charge against the
    controversial settlement. Last year, the group sent a fiery letter to then-mayor Ed Murray, who had backed Licton Springs Village's establishment. SOS said it had "hoped to hear that the city would be extending extra
    services to the area to protect it from any adverse consequences of moving 50-70 people with active addiction, mental illness, behavior problems and criminal histories into an approximately 5,000-square-foot lot adjacent to a family neighborhood." This was not the case, however: "This 'make it up as
    we go' approach is a recipe for disaster and a significantly modified
    proposal is required," the group charged.

    Barbara Poppe, on the other hand, says there might be a use for such places. For one, if you insist on sobriety, "you keep out the neediest people," she says. Also, a lot of people: According to HUD data, a third of the homeless population are serious substances abusers. (When I asked experts whether the opioid epidemic was having an appreciable effect on homelessness, they said yes—but only anecdotally. Little academic research has been done on the topic.)

    Moreover, if you don't allow addicts, you "eject people back into the neighborhood," Poppe points out. In a way, places like Licton Springs
    Village, therefore, reduce neighborhood annoyances. Think of it as a form of containment. Charlie Johnson, for his part, says the success of the
    settlement has allayed many concerns that neighbors had beforehand.

    The Paradox of Prosperity

    Marty Hartman, executive director of Mary's Place, a nonprofit that helps families and children facing homelessness, mostly by operating its own shelters, has been fighting homelessness for 18 years.

    She says something has gone terribly wrong in Seattle. "For the first decade [at] Mary's Place, we never saw children. We were open to having children,
    but very rarely did we see a mom and a baby. Whereas in 2009, we saw a huge surge in the numbers of moms with children seeking services and a place to stay," she says. That, perhaps, is intuitive: The United States was hit by a

    [continued in next message]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)
  • From Byker@1:229/2 to All on Wednesday, May 30, 2018 16:52:55
    XPost: seattle.politics, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc
    From: byker@do~rag.net

    "None of the Above" wrote in message news:sg9ngd1udg2laj5beg3mmq7qh6e0uaccg2@4ax.com...

    On Sun, 27 May 2018 17:47:23 -0400, Mr. B1ack <nowhere@nada.net>
    wrote:

    Seattle seems to be on the short road to
    social/fiscal implosion. It'll be their own
    fault for being such idiots. However they
    will demand EVERYONE ELSE pay for it.

    Let's get ahead of the curve and prepare a good
    legal/ethical case for telling them to fuck off ....

    https://www.facebook.com/SeattleLooksLikeShit/

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqQEoFJeIOM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBVouKNnKMs

    Cities that wait to die: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5hssNL_AhQ
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4l7tHGLgA4

    Soon, a cleansing: https://tinyurl.com/y8l7g6g5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: www.darkrealms.ca (1:229/2)