News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Desirable streets: where do people prefer to walk? by kortilla on Thursday February 04, 2021 @03:31PM (#26029434)
(From your now deleted first high-brow reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26029344)

> If you find this insulting, you may want to reconsider why.

I don’t consider it insulting. I consider it an attempt at an insult. If it’s not that, it’s just a lame attempt to construe a discussion participant’s level of cognition for no particular purpose.

> The reason some communities vote to entirely ban panhandling goes to the root of why people resort to panhandling. It's because there is no support structure to counteract the decades of systemic destruction of human dignity.

This ignores entire countries where it is not allowed despite having stronger social safety systems.

> There is a strong bias in the types of people who fall into this situation. If you do not consider that racism, you have missed approximately the last decade of discussion around the matter.

Well it’s not racism because many communities dominated by one race have a homeless population dominated by the same race and still choose to ban it.

Clutching at the crutch of racism accusations is just a method of dehumanizing people attempting to improve their community after countless failed attempts to solve homelessness.

Re:Desirable streets: where do people prefer to walk? by uoaei on Thursday February 04, 2021 @03:41PM (#26029546)
> a lame attempt to construe a discussion participant’s level of cognition

...only if you conflate "do not" with "cannot" in order to further your victimization narrative.

> many communities

Weasel words like "many" with no follow-up providing evidence are useless here.

Re:Desirable streets: where do people prefer to walk? by kortilla on Friday February 05, 2021 @07:32PM (#26042961)
> victimization narrative.

I don’t think you know what “victimization” means. I’m not claiming to be a victim. I’m claiming your attempts to dismiss comments with insults instead of logic is pretty lame.

“Clearly you don’t know what’s going on here so I’m not going to address anything.”

> Weasel words like "many" with no follow-up providing evidence are useless here.

Go to “legal restrictions” on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging if you would actually like to discuss these things you find so “curious”.