Can we talk about the hypocrisy of the left on homelessness and infrastructure?

[Leviticus]

You may or may not have heard of the Not in My Back Yard Movement or NIMBYism. This is community based opposition to the construction things such as free clinics, affordable housing for low income/homeless people, and infrastructure such as solar and wind powerplants.

The left are, typically, the most vocal about the need for these things, but they are also the most vocal in opposition to them being built in their areas. If you try to build affordable housing in heavily liberal cities like LA or San Francisco you will find that the same people who would praise you normally would be attacking you. They will give various reasons why it would hurt their community, such as drugs, crime, etc (I guess Generalizing people as junkies and criminals is fine when its the liberals do it).

But its really about protect the property value. Banks tend to undervalue properties that are near low income or free housing or other services aimed at help homeless people, and the left is not above using the exact same argument and generalizations that they label as bigotry when someone on the right uses it in order to protect the home equity. Their all for helping people, as long as it doesn't effect them or their communities.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You may or may not have heard of the Not in My Back Yard Movement or NIMBYism. This is community based opposition to the construction things such as free clinics, affordable housing for low income/homeless people, and infrastructure such as solar and wind powerplants.

The left are, typically, the most vocal about the need for these things, but they are also the most vocal in opposition to them being built in their areas. If you try to build affordable housing in heavily liberal cities like LA or San Francisco you will find that the same people who would praise you normally would be attacking you. They will give various reasons why it would hurt their community, such as drugs, crime, etc (I guess Generalizing people as junkies and criminals is fine when its the liberals do it).

But its really about protect the property value. Banks tend to undervalue properties that are near low income or free housing or other services aimed at help homeless people, and the left is not above using the exact same argument and generalizations that they label as bigotry when someone on the right uses it in order to protect the home equity. Their all for helping people, as long as it doesn't effect them or their communities.

We could talk hypocrisy on both sides.

It's like two fat bastards each with a wet fish in their hands slapping the other around the face. And enjoying it.

Or we could talk about how to change it, so there's less hypocrisy.

It'd be a conversation about Proportional Representation.

 

[Leviticus]

We could talk hypocrisy on both sides.

It's like two fat bastards each with a wet fish in their hands slapping the other around the face. And enjoying it.

Or we could talk about how to change it, so there's less hypocrisy.

It'd be a conversation about Proportional Representation.

The hypocrisy on the left is far more blatant. You dont see many on the right who come out in favor on an issue, then turn around and oppose in their own community. The are pretty straight forward with their BS.

 

[Moonglow]

The hypocrisy on the left is far more blatant. You dont see many on the right who come out in favor on an issue, then turn around and oppose in their own community. The are pretty straight forward with their BS.

Who exactly is opposing it?

You offer nothing but opinion and zero fact.

 

[surada]

The hypocrisy on the left is far more blatant. You dont see many on the right who come out in favor on an issue, then turn around and oppose in their own community. The are pretty straight forward with their BS.

Are you kidding? Do you actually think Republicans want public housing or homeless shelters in or adjacent to their property?

 

[Leviticus]

Are you kidding? Do you actually think Republicans want public housing or homeless shelters in or adjacent to their property?

No but they typically oppose from the start. They are usually against public housing to begin with, while liberals wholly support it, but dont want it in their communities

 

[Crepitus]

You may or may not have heard of the Not in My Back Yard Movement or NIMBYism. This is community based opposition to the construction things such as free clinics, affordable housing for low income/homeless people, and infrastructure such as solar and wind powerplants.

The left are, typically, the most vocal about the need for these things, but they are also the most vocal in opposition to them being built in their areas. If you try to build affordable housing in heavily liberal cities like LA or San Francisco you will find that the same people who would praise you normally would be attacking you. They will give various reasons why it would hurt their community, such as drugs, crime, etc (I guess Generalizing people as junkies and criminals is fine when its the liberals do it).

But its really about protect the property value. Banks tend to undervalue properties that are near low income or free housing or other services aimed at help homeless people, and the left is not above using the exact same argument and generalizations that they label as bigotry when someone on the right uses it in order to protect the home equity. Their all for helping people, as long as it doesn't effect them or their communities.

NIMBY is a fact on both sides of the aisle.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The hypocrisy on the left is far more blatant. You dont see many on the right who come out in favor on an issue, then turn around and oppose in their own community. The are pretty straight forward with their BS.

Yes, it's far more blatant if you're on the right and you want to believe it's more on the right.

As someone who sees both sides doing it, I'm going to say you're wrong and probably biased. I see plenty of people on the right who come out in favor of an issue. I see it daily on here.

 

[surada]

No but they typically oppose from the start. They are usually against public housing to begin with, while liberals wholly support it, but dont want it in their communities

What do YOU want?

 

[Leviticus]

NIMBY is a fact on both sides of the aisle.

Yes,but the left does it for things they wholly support, while right tends to oppose a lot of it oveeall, not just in their own communiy. When someone who opposes all public housing opposes it in their community, its npt a surprise, but when someone who supports it, and calls helping the homeless a national priority, blocks s public housing in their own community to protect their home value, I say thats far worse.

 

[wamose]

And on top of all the uppity resistance to poorer people, we have to house the 3 million illegal aliens that Biden invited here.

 

[Leviticus]

And on top of all the uppity resistance to poorer people, we have to house the 3 million illegal aliens that Biden invited here.

Actually, illegals dont typically apply for housing assistance, it makes it too easy for ICE to track them down. Now if you are talking about people coing in as refugees and asylum seekers, then yes they do need housing, but are often not eligible for asistance.

 

[Moonglow]

No but they typically oppose from the start. They are usually against public housing to begin with, while liberals wholly support it, but dont want it in their communities

The zoning ordinances don't allow it.

 

[Crepitus]

Yes,but the left does it for things they wholly support, while right tends to oppose a lot of it oveeall, not just in their own communiy. When someone who opposes all public housing opposes it in their community, its npt a surprise, but when someone who supports it, and calls helping the homeless a national priority, blocks s public housing in their own community to protect their home value, I say thats far worse.

Afghan refugees, anyone?