the subway’s perspective. The subway is focused on creating a safe and clean commuter environment
Well there’s your problem. Your subway organisation is myopically focused on making its own little corner as “well-functioning” as possible even at the cost of the rest of the city. It ignores the social harm it causes to whatever the next place is that homeless people decide to congregate instead (and the additional harm it causes to homeless people by forcing them to stay in less hospitable locations, and the additional harm it causes everyone in those homeless people’s vicinity because they are more desperate on account of staying in less hospitable environments and thus more likely to resort to crime).
Sorry, I’m bumping up against Poe’s Law with this comment so I think I’m misunderstanding your point.
I don’t own a subway, it’s not my organisation. I was just using my imagination to put myself in the shoes of others to understand their decisions.
Now then: You’re literally stating that having homeless people in a space causes social harm, and that making a place less hospitable for the homeless, even if it improves that place for its main function, is also a societal bad. Let’s accept that for the sake of argument. Why are the homeless camping in the subway? Doesn’t that mean they’ve already passed down from further up this displacement chain and the subway is also a victim of the same thing?
The subway and the homeless are both just dealing with their situations in the best ways they can. Asking the subway to house the homeless in their corridors is about as helpful as just telling those homeless people to stop being homeless.
Why are the homeless camping in the subway? Doesn’t that mean they’ve already passed down from further up this displacement chain and the subway is also a victim of the same thing?
The subway is an inanimate location, it can not be a victim. The people of the city that may use the subway are a victim, but less so than if the subway was made less hospitable for everyone without improving the situation of the homeless in the city.
Asking the subway to house the homeless in their corridors is about as helpful as just telling those homeless people to stop being homeless.
All it would take for the homeless to stop being homeless is for the cops to stop throwing homeless people out of buildings that haven’t been used for a year. Homeless people are constantly doing their best to stop being homeless, and the state and other people keep violently attacking them to make them homeless again.
Meanwhile all it would take for the subway organisation is to do its job of making the subway a nice place to be. If that makes it the nicest place homeless don’t get attacked by cops, that’s not the subway organisation’s fault.
Well there’s your problem. Your subway organisation is myopically focused on making its own little corner as “well-functioning” as possible even at the cost of the rest of the city. It ignores the social harm it causes to whatever the next place is that homeless people decide to congregate instead (and the additional harm it causes to homeless people by forcing them to stay in less hospitable locations, and the additional harm it causes everyone in those homeless people’s vicinity because they are more desperate on account of staying in less hospitable environments and thus more likely to resort to crime).
Sorry, I’m bumping up against Poe’s Law with this comment so I think I’m misunderstanding your point.
I don’t own a subway, it’s not my organisation. I was just using my imagination to put myself in the shoes of others to understand their decisions.
Now then: You’re literally stating that having homeless people in a space causes social harm, and that making a place less hospitable for the homeless, even if it improves that place for its main function, is also a societal bad. Let’s accept that for the sake of argument. Why are the homeless camping in the subway? Doesn’t that mean they’ve already passed down from further up this displacement chain and the subway is also a victim of the same thing?
The subway and the homeless are both just dealing with their situations in the best ways they can. Asking the subway to house the homeless in their corridors is about as helpful as just telling those homeless people to stop being homeless.
The subway is an inanimate location, it can not be a victim. The people of the city that may use the subway are a victim, but less so than if the subway was made less hospitable for everyone without improving the situation of the homeless in the city.
All it would take for the homeless to stop being homeless is for the cops to stop throwing homeless people out of buildings that haven’t been used for a year. Homeless people are constantly doing their best to stop being homeless, and the state and other people keep violently attacking them to make them homeless again.
Meanwhile all it would take for the subway organisation is to do its job of making the subway a nice place to be. If that makes it the nicest place homeless don’t get attacked by cops, that’s not the subway organisation’s fault.