A billionaire philanthropist purchases 100 acres of fertile land to create a self-sustaining haven for a chronically homeless and displaced population. Instead of merely abandoning them on raw soil, the philanthropist constructs a flawless infrastructural framework: modern housing, medical facilities, rehabilitation centers, and clean supply lines.Crucially, the government of this colony is not a top-down bureaucratic prison or an oppressive administrative state; it is a perfect, uncorrupted, direct democracy where the tenants themselves possess total sovereignty, equal voting rights, and absolute control over their own laws, resource allocation, and civic life.Despite having every material resource, perfect institutional scaffolding, and uncorrupted political freedom, the colony slowly fractures from within. Trust erodes into paranoia, factional gridlock stalls production, the civic maintenance is neglected due to collective exhaustion, and the community ultimately collapses into a state of destitution. In a system where material scarcity, institutional corruption, and political oppression have been entirely eliminated, who is to blame for the collapse? Is the landlord/philanthropist to blame for naively engineering a shallow spatial and political fix, expecting an instantaneous blueprint to overwrite deep-seated, multi-generational psychological trauma? Or are the tenants themselves to blame, proving the tragic classical truth that perfect external freedom is completely meaningless if the individuals lack the internal, habituated moral and psychological architecture required for self-governance?
>>18535020Yes, that sounds like a real thing that totally happened. As usual, the filthy, ungrateful useless eaters ruin everything the righteous billionaire philantropists do for them. Sterilize the poor!
There are two types of homeless people which I never see anybody talk about when discussing this issue, yet when people argue about what to do for homeless people, usually one side will think of episodic homeless, and the other chronic, and will never agree on anything because they are thinking of two different groups of people.People who want to help the homeless tend to think of episodic homeless people, that is, people who are not continuously homeless for long periods of time, but are so insecure in their financial and/or housing situation that they might occasionally be homeless, usually for a period of some weeks or a couple months until they find a new place to live. Episodic homeless people tend to have unstable financial situations, and become homeless whenever they lose a job, or incur some cost that makes their current living situation unaffordable. They will usually make finding a new home their top priority, whether that is a shelter, or staying with family or a friend, they don't want to be living in on the street, or out of a car, and will eagerly take opportunities given to them for housing.Note that episodic homeless people are not always faultless for their situation, sometimes they are just very irresponsible with their money or engage in activities which violate the terms of their lease when renting, or otherwise cause themselves to be evicted from where they are living. Some of them are victims of circumstance, though, and it is those people, the episodic homeless people who are routinely evicted through no fault of their own, that are frequently used as the poster children of homeless support groups.However, the other type, chronically homeless people, tend to be homeless by choice. Even if they were unwillingly evicted originally, they tend to remain on the street because they turned down the opportunities presented to them to get off the street. They tend to be drug addicts or suffer mental disorders.
>>18535031Its a thought experiment
>>18535041>Its a thought experimentWell, I gave you my thoughts. Since the filthy poors are eternally useless, ungrateful and irredeemable (in my thoughts) they should be sterilized.
>>18535039To continue:Chronically homeless people tend to be the most visible type, because they're unashamed of their homelessness and will not even make an attempt at maintaining their hygiene or appearance. By contrast, the episodic homeless will do their best to look "normal" so that they can find work or continue working the job they have. Chronically homeless people do not work as a general rule, and have no interest in holding down a job. Wherever they do not beg, they scavenge, or even steal for sustenance. For people who see the homeless as a menace to be dealt with harshly, it is the chronically homeless they think of, since it is these homeless people who make up the vast majority of homeless arrests and emergency room visits, both things that taxpayers end up footing the bill for. It is the chronically homeless who dirty public places with their feces and other waste, who harass people on the street or make them uncomfortable with their strange behavior, who pitch their camps in public spaces and ruin them for the rest of the public.While it is true the chronically homeless are a societal burden, some of them suffer from mental disorders and could be treated and rehabilitated, if not for the fact that they do not wish to be helped, which makes it difficult to treat them. After all, it is difficult to commit a person to asylum against their will, if they are only guilty of minor offenses and are lucid enough to get by most of the time. But the vast majority of these chronically homeless tend to be either a kind of shiftless bum or burned out drug addict that, even if offered a scenario like the one OP suggested, would never be able to adapt to it. It is simply not in their nature to put in work for anything.
>>18535020Your premise isn't really credible because 100 acres isn't an amount of land that can provide things like "total sovereignty", "every material resource", "perfect institutional scaffolding", "uncorrupted political freedom". "Political oppression" is also an inherent feature of government and "equal voting rights" just means they vote on who gets oppressed. The reality is that being homeless in a major city is probably often experientially better than a life of hard labor. Ultimately its God's fault for creating an evil world and forcing people to live in it. You're basically trying to frame an unwillingness to perform hard manual labor to live in a house or apartment instead of a tent as a moral failing. Yes living in a tent would suck, so would working in a factory or on a farm.
>>18535069100 acres is hypothetical, we can expand it to 1000.
>>18535020>who is to blame for the collapse?dark skinned persons being inherently incapable of participating in the systems productively
>>18535063When it comes to "civic virtue" people are often unwilling to accept that some homeless people have been genuinely wronged by society also. If you're unwilling to even acknowledge structural evils that lead people to become homeless then you can't really have a serious discussion about homeless. Just look at the bricks and minifigs controversy right now in utah for example, sometimes its way worse than that even, some people get robbed by the government and they just say "why bother trying if the government can just steal from and brutalize me", if you're already a victim of the police, already being gangstalked, if you have your bank account drained, accounts stolen, career prospects destroyed why would you care about society and there are limits to how much you can even care about your own life, some people pretend that homeless people should assess their situation like "if I become homeless then I might become a victim of the government whereas if I don't become homeless then I won't be a victim of the government" when the reality is some people already "played by the rules" and became a victim of the government anyway so its more like "be homeless and be a victim of the government" or "put extreme effort into trying not to be homeless while also being a victim of the government/socety".
>>18535103I guess I don't understand because if the government took everything from me I'd devote my life to destroying the people who wronged me. If I truly had nothing to lose, I'd try to assassinate at least one person. But I am the type of person to hold a grudge and to seek vengeance, and have in fact taken vengeance twice in my life, proportionate to the harm done to me. The proportionate response to having my entire life destroyed would be to destroy at least one life in retribution. Preferably more, because I value my own life above others.
>>18535039People really don't understand homelessness if they think the homeless can be divided neatly into episodic and chronic. The truth is a large portion, maybe even the majority, are "homeless" because a homeless shelter is actually a free apartment (NYC gives a wholeass apartment to "homeless" people if they are a family), and being "homeless" is a lifestyle rather than a predicament.This is what happens in NYC, and I have to think it happens in other blue cities as well.
In the west most homeless people are either drug abusers or mentally ill people who don't want to work or be members of society.If you could solve homelessness by giving them homes then the problem would have already been solved long ago.
>>18535198A large percentage, probably the largest percentage, are homeless *because* the government gives shelter to the homeless.
>>18535182>NYC gives a wholeass apartment to "homeless" people if they are a familyAre those the gigantic projects all over the city?
>>18535213No, NYC's "homeless shelter" is literally city-subsidized apartments. The city rents apartments for over-market prices and gives them to the homeless. At least that's how "shelter" for families works. The homeless also get thousands per month in daycare so they can "work." There is no incentive for fat black women with 4 kids to work.
>>18535260Any pics? I want to see how nice they are compared to projects
>>18535020THE BLAME FALLS UPON THE ONE WHO INSTITUTED THE DEMOCRATICAL SYSTEM: THE BILLIONAIRE.DEMOCRACY IS A BODY WITHOUT HEAD; A HEADLESS BODY IS DIRECTIONLESS, DYSFUNCTIONAL, AND, EVENTUALLY, ALWAYS, ENDS UP DISMEMBERED BY THE CENTRIGUFAL FORCES OF ITS DIVERSE ORGANS.
>>18535088Checked. 100 acres is the exact size of the Hundred Acre Wood in Winnie the Pooh. Coincidence? I think not.
Business Idea: Gladiator fights for the chronically homeless, with the winner being awarded a lifetime supply of fentanyl (in one go)
>>18535151God is a completely delusional retard for thinking its possible to frame the wrongs he does to me as "vengeance" in any way whatsoever.
>>18535020How can they earn money? Whatever infrastructure and democratic system they set up is useless if they cannot pay for it. Also, the way they earn money has major implications on how the system will work.
>>18535041In that case the guy who came up with the thought experiment is to blame. They decided the utopia would definitely fail but did not specify why, ergo there is actually no reason for failure but the spite of their heart.Here’s another thought experiment; OP can’t stop sucking dicks. Just can’t stop slobbering on that man meat and gobbling up their nut butter. Why is OP such a heroically flaming homosexual?
>>18535041Being poor means that they are not in the lord's grace, which in turn means that they're the type of Satanists that aren't invited to our island getaways.
>>18535886>How can they earn money?>canThere are some people who are poor because they can't earn money, but a great many are poor because being poor is their full time job.
>>18535899/thread
>>18535899You think spelling it out for him is gonna help?
>>18535020>>18535041>Thought experimentIs this why chuda love ai so much? You don't even need to have deranged hallucinations yourself, simply order a computer to tell you a story about why you are correct in hating whoever you were told to hate and never have to go outside.Go generate an ai video of the evil homeless people raping your mother or something while you are at it.
>>18535103>gangstalkedDoesn't exist. Sorry anon; you're a schizo.
