this post was submitted on 12 May 2025
39 points (88.2% liked)

politics

23594 readers
3102 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Here is the model ordinance he’s asking cities to consider adopting.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Encampment-Ordinance-formatted.pdf

The big thing that gets left out of these discussions is shelters. Newsom’s stance is that encampments should only be illegal if indoor shelter is unavailable.

At face value, that doesn’t sound entirely unreasonable, but if you dig deeper, you’ll learn that a lot of indoor shelters endanger the wellbeing and belongings of unhoused people.

IMHO, for any of this to work, shelters need to be evaluated for their ability to provide a safe and caring environment, and if those shelters don’t hold up, a county shouldn’t be able to count those places as beds.

TL;DR: Newsom is arguing that people will be offered a bed first, but a lot of those beds are more dangerous than the street. And people need to start calling that out.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 14 points 1 week ago

And notably, if the beds are better than literally sleeping on a sidewalk, you don't need a law to criminalize the latter. The law only becomes useful if you need to make living on the street worse because you don't want to make living in a shelter better.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why don't the homeless just simply befriend the children of oil tycoons and have them gift them a vineyard? Then they too could one day fail upwards to become the governor of California.

If Gavin wasn't the friend of a billionaire he would be an illiterate moron who couldn't hold down a job.

[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)