|
|
|
Mayor John Tory's Toronto
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
Rufus8
Active Member
Apparently the City's stepped up efforts to permanently house shelter residents paying some dividends.
About 1,500 since the beginning of Covid; and increase of ~500 over last year.
However, at that pace, if no one newly became homeless, we're still several years away from housing everyone, much longer if the number of homeless continues to increase.
/https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/gta/2020/08/13/toronto-says-its-moved-more-than-1500-people-from-shelters-into-permanent-housing-since-covid-19-hit-but-that-figure-doesnt-tell-the-whole-story/shelter.jpg)
Toronto says it’s moved more than 1,500 people from shelters into permanent housing since COVID-19 hit. But that figure doesn’t tell the whole story
Although 50 per cent more people were moved to permanent housing since mid-March compared to last year, many had applied before COVID hit.www.thestar.com
and it only cost tens of millions of dollars, most of which will go into the coffers of security companies and commercial landlords. What I have seen with the decision to take a commercial property (98 The Esplanade) and without any consultation or assessment (thanks to emergency orders) is a percipitous decline in the quality of life for local residents. Just this week for example - bride having her photo taken had to step around firemen dealing with man collapsed outside the shelter (we used to have a lot of brides come here for photos - not any more they go to distillery now)
20 bikers screeching down the carefully landscaped sidewalks of the Esplanade 11:30pm to the great entertainment of the 4 security guards who just stood there watching.
Theft of DOOR HANDLES from local buildings (scrap metal? Police did nothing).
Mentally ill man taken up residence next to the currently closed Daycare Centre - what will those kids be exposed to when it reopens (I've seen him napping, washing his clothes and going to the toilet)?
Residents no longer feel confident enough to walk in their front door because of the loitering masses on the Esplanade (Seniors Safety Zone? I think not).
So what price has been paid and who has paid it? Where an entire neighbourhood has been dragged into the gutter because city hall didn't challenge their hostel users to learn how to behave like normal human beings in the community - who pays the price?
And no one says anything, don't even bother calling the police anymore because the shelter staff manage to have the cops on their side (too much paperwork?)/
jje1000
Senior Member
Unfortunately the result of a system that treats all homeless/precariously houses as a monolithic group with a one-size-fits-all system- whereas in reality they’re actually several overlapping groups who have varying needs and abilities for self-care and self-control.
It’s also the effect of deinstitutionalization, the net loss of thousands of beds with the closing of mental health institutes, and a shift towards a blind belief that everyone has the skills or mental capability to make the right choices for themselves...many of the things homeless advocates have been pushing for the last 10-20 years (more shelters, more safe-injection sites, stopping policing, more street health) have been essentially bandaging the effects of this while incentivizing self-destructive lifestyles- allowing the vulnerable to swim among the sharks (dealers, pimps, thieves), so to say.
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
You're a piece of work, you know that?
I'm not going to engage in a flame-war.
I don't find your version of morality remotely acceptable or appealing. Please take it elsewhere.
Northern Light
Superstar
I certainly agree that deinstitutionalization plays a role.
I happen to agree with the idea though I think it likely went too far, particularly in lacking an intermediate level of support for some folks; who didn't require a 'prison' of sorts; but need greater assistance/support that merely living on their own.
I do believe the City is working towards supportive housing models now.
But in Covid, it found a need to create substantial new 'housing' quickly; the aim was more 'shelter replacement' than 'supportive housing'.
I have every sympathy for people facing some travails as as a result of a new shelter in their community.
That said, I expect that to be tempered by a realization that the shelter residents almost invariably have it far worse.
A bit of (mild) fear at change, irritation at real hassles, those are fine, if tempered by kindness and understanding.
They can motivate intervention to create better and more appropriate housing over time.
But reactions which are merely insensitive, hateful, invective have no place in well-reasoned discourse.
Johnny Au
Senior Member
GFL: Greed For Life
zang
Senior Member
Yeah, people don't want to be reminded of their wealth and massive privilege over others! C'mon Tory, jail them or something!
Last edited:
Rufus8
Active Member
Glad you can switch off an entire community being dragged down. It's not morality it the truth of what is happening in a real neighbourhood to real people, in my Toronto people care about their neighbours.
Rufus8
Active Member
"you're a piece of work you know that
take it elsewhere"
welcome to censorship engaged in by they that have no response to an evidence based argument.
take it elsewhere"
welcome to censorship engaged in by they that have no response to an evidence based argument.
Northern Light
Superstar
Unless they're homeless, mentally ill or have addictions, right?
Northern Light
Superstar
You in fact, presented very little evidence.
You presented anecdote, some observed fact, some total BS you made up; and then wove it together with terrible conclusions based on immorality and contempt for your fellow human being.
I don't retreat from a debate. and I: have the track record here to prove it.
But I have no desire to waste my time or the time of others here dealing w/you.
That's not cowardice, its self-restraint; and wise and efficient use of my time.
Rufus8
Active Member
How do you know it was "ancedotal"? Have you not seen the fences go up? The benches be removed? You claim to be wise but you insult and dismiss anyone who fails to fall in line with your veiwpoints. I don't know how anyone can say 20 bikes screeching along the street at 11:30 at night can be considered "ancedotal", how is a collapsed man being tended to by firemen and paramedics "alleged". I know what you are doing, I dare say you make a living doing it that doesn't mean you are right/noble/wise/intelligent - it just means you can't respect other people's opinions.
And FYI - I am not going anywhere I have as much right as you do to be here, trying bullying someone else.
Northern Light
Superstar
In point of fact, you (nor I) have any 'right' to be here. A right implies a legal right under the constitution or the law of the land. In fact, this forum is private property.
Both of us may be booted at will by its owner.
Such is life.
However, I find the owner to be a very reasonable fellow; and moderators, by and large defer to the judgements of the group, particularly longer-term members.
But..............lets leave that shall we.
****
Your bikes analogy has zero to do w/the topic at hand.
Which was affording permanent housing to those who are homeless.
Your complaint may well have legitimacy; but those to whom you assign blame does not.
Moreover, your discussion is not one about permanent housing at all, but temporary leasing of a commercial space.
Which is entirely off-topic to the post I made.
Do you have legitimate concerns about adverse affects on the community............to some degree, yes.
I don't disrespect your desire or anyone else's for a safe community.
I live in the very same city you do, I have no desire to have my property damaged or stolen by anyone.
The problem with your arguments which you seem to be incapable of realizing is that you :
a) are inaccurate in many things you say (fail to distinguish between permanent housing and respite or other facilities.
b) are utterly indifferent to the condition of the homeless or those w/mental illness or addition who could easily be your relations or your neighbours.......but you clearly view them as sub-human and unworthy......which only comes back on you.
c) you fail to offer constructive solutions to the issues you want resolved
d) you trivialize the issues in a way that makes most posters here sad, angry or worse by comparing trivial issues like a photo shoot w/death.
zang
Senior Member
Translation; “someone doesn’t agree with my opinions, so I’m going to cry censorship!”
kali
Active Member
Not hearing a counter argument.
I don't think you're really aware of what's going on in the real world where people are being censored for holding different (but totally reasonable) views.