ssiguy2
Senior Member
I agree that in smaller cities due to their smaller downtowns, the homeless and drug addicts seem more noticeable.
Part of the issue I think is also that people don't "expect" to see them in smaller cities so they notice them more. This is particularly true in city's like London with it's leafy, old wealth reputation. Victoria, even though smaller than London, is MUCH worse and seems shocking because you don't expect to see it in pristine Victoria. This as opposed to Vancouver where you can't move for the homeless and drug addicts but because the city has a reputation for it, it doesn't shock and often isn't even noticed.
It's the same inside all cities. If there are homeless in St.James or Regent Park, they are barely noticed but if they were to all of a sudden move to Rosedale or High Park, it would horrify the citizens.
Part of the issue I think is also that people don't "expect" to see them in smaller cities so they notice them more. This is particularly true in city's like London with it's leafy, old wealth reputation. Victoria, even though smaller than London, is MUCH worse and seems shocking because you don't expect to see it in pristine Victoria. This as opposed to Vancouver where you can't move for the homeless and drug addicts but because the city has a reputation for it, it doesn't shock and often isn't even noticed.
It's the same inside all cities. If there are homeless in St.James or Regent Park, they are barely noticed but if they were to all of a sudden move to Rosedale or High Park, it would horrify the citizens.