224
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by teft@lemmy.world to c/tenforward@lemmy.world

The Bell Riots start on Sunday. Stay safe out there!

<Anyone coming from /c/all please note this is a joke post for an in universe Star Trek event. Remain Calm.>

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 74 points 2 months ago

Meanwhile, in the real 2024, a lot of homeless people would probably prefer being put into a sanctuary district than having their very existence made illegal and cops either clearing them out or arresting them wherever they went.

[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 57 points 2 months ago

When the actual future dystopia is worse than the one that writers came up with.

[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Kevin Spacey is a monster and I hate him like Weinstein, but he has one of the most salient moments on Colbert’s Late Show from eight years ago (after the Trump joke):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VawmR6ZGxM0

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 6 points 2 months ago

In reality, getting them to accept services and help is the #1 obstacle to getting them services and help.

[-] spidertrolled 15 points 2 months ago

Most homeless shelters in San Francisco dont allow people to take their belongings in with them.

Attitudes towards the homeless are highly backwards - demanding sobriety as a condition for aid, when in reality drugs are used as a way to escape the pain of trauma and homelessness. SF residents voted and passed Proposition F, cementing the idea that feeling smugness over the homeless is more important than actually trying to help them escape poverty.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago

Most shelters do in fact allow people to bring their belongings with them (within reason). Some even provide storage space, and the city provides a free self-storage facility.

Prop F addresses CAAP (cash welfare), not housing. You don't have to be receiving CAAP to qualify for housing assistance, and you don't have to be homeless to qualify for CAAP.

SF has been struggling with a chronic homelessness problem for decades. Offering voluntary services does not work. To put in in Trek terms, the problem isn't the gimmes, it's the ghosts and dims. Gimmes are easy to help because they can act on their own behalf and in their own best interests. They accept services and don't end up being chronically homeless. The ghosts and the dims, on the other hand, are a different story.

Is sweeping their encampments an ideal solution? No, far from it. But what else is there for us to do? Let them languish on the streets? Honestly, what would you have us do?

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Housing First is the correct way to reduce homelessness. The main cause of homelessness is being priced out of the housing market, because the vast majority of housing in America is entirely privatized. Plus most public housing in America is not done nor funded well, until our European counterparts.

Drug addiction is a symptom of late-stage homelessness, not a cause. The cause is almost always the private housing market pricing people out of affording even rent. In the US, housing is first and foremost an investment, not a necessity.

Numerous studies show that housing first participants experience higher levels of housing retention and use fewer emergency and criminal justice services, which produces cost savings in emergency department use, inpatient hospitalizations, and criminal justice system use.

https://www.pdx.edu/homelessness/housing-first

This has worked famously in Finland

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

And that is because a large amount of time, those services and help come with conditions they can't accept.

Take shelters for example. If you're a homeless woman, you could stay in a shelter (until they kicked you out) but you probably have a dog to protect you since you're a woman on the streets. The shelter would make you abandon the dog.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago

I actually work in the SF housing industry, and worked at a housing site in SF that was converted to permanent supportive housing during COVID. In that case, barely 30% of the people even showed up to their intake appointments.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

What were the conditions in order to get an appointment? Who was offered appointments? Who was informed about them?

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 3 points 2 months ago

Certification of homeless status from the city (already acquired if they were referred to us) and proof of income (if any).

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

I think we both can come up with a great many reasons why someone wouldn't want such a certification.

[-] charonn0@startrek.website 4 points 2 months ago

I can't think of any.

[-] GuyFleegman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 months ago

Shit man they had universal healthcare in Star Trek's 2024. In Star Trek's 2024 the tech billionaire decided to help the homeless. We're doing worse in the real world than what Star Trek depicted as being near the absolute nadir of human society.

[-] socialpankakemix 3 points 2 months ago

this is exactly like saying homeless people would rather go to prison than be homeless.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Not even close to saying that. I think you need to look at what SCOTUS recently ruled about what cities can do with homeless people. Because sanctuary districts would be kinder.

[-] socialpankakemix 7 points 2 months ago

you cant leave a sanctuary district, thats a prison, why would anybody want to go there? theres three main ways you end up there, you are too poor, your caught sleeping on the streets, or you have mental problems and cant afford the healthcare.

inside the sanctuarys you have no guarantee for housing, no way to get a job, increased gang activity, more mentally unstable people, food shortages, how is that any better than living on the streets in our world?

the rulings from the scotus is the first step to sanctuary districts my friend, and if you think that locking poor people in cages is kind, then you have a funny definition of kindness.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

I don't think you understand the difference between "kinder" and "kindness."

Spitting in someone's face is kinder than stabbing them in the throat. Does that mean spitting in their face is kindness?

[-] socialpankakemix 1 points 2 months ago

if you say something is kinder, then it must pass the bar of being kind first. I would say none of the things being described, (spitting , stabbing, and locking people away) counts as kind in the first place

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

No, that's not how language works.

You can say that flies are smarter than bacteria despite neither being smart.

You can say that Bob is uglier than Dave when neither Bob nor Dave are ugly.

And I've already made it clear to you that I was not suggesting either was kind, so I'm not sure why you're arguing this with me as if I were.

[-] socialpankakemix 1 points 2 months ago

you can say bob is uglier than Dave sure, but if it's not true then it means nothing, similarly if you call something unkind kind, then that also means nothing. you said that sanctuary districts would be kinder, in order to be kinder they must first be kind, so yes you did say sanctuary districts are kind.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Again- I made it clear what I meant. You're just harassing me at this point because you have decided I meant something I didn't mean due to the way I said it even when you've been told otherwise. Maybe stop doing that.

[-] socialpankakemix 1 points 2 months ago

my intent is not to harrass you, if you agree that prison for homeless people is bad, then my only point of contention was the use of the language, and i hope you can see why i interpreted what you said the way i did.

i spent like 6 years homeless myself, i dont particularly like the idea that anybody could be put into a sanctuary district for being homeless. most homeless people i personally know would be very opposed to the idea of being placed in a sanctuary district, because they have interacted with social welfare programs before and know that they are ineffective at best, and actively harmful at worst, and the sanctuary district we see in the show is a prime example of that

the people who get placed there did nothing wrong, and are now prisoners in some fucked up fend for yourself cage. there were promises of being placed in a job, that the sanctuary disctricts are there to help the people in them. that is the exact opposite of what they do, its only a way to sweep the problem under the rug

you say some may prefer to be put into a sanctuary district than be arrested for being homeless, i dont see a difference between the two whatsoever.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Varyk@sh.itjust.works 63 points 2 months ago

I'll riot a bit just to be safe.

[-] SidewaysHighways@lemmy.world 39 points 2 months ago
[-] 7U5K3N@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 months ago

PnRTreatYoSelf.gif

since I can't insert a gif from my keyboard.

[-] teft@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[-] SARGE@startrek.website 29 points 2 months ago

The fact that even when trying to be dystopian as fuck, depressingly bad, showcasing the worst decisions that the more aggressive (and let's be honest, savage by comparison) people of the past, they give humanity WAY too much credit.

Not a chance in hell anyone would create special areas for homeless people unless there were some ulterior motive. Because even though the cost of housing and programs to educate, therapy to help with any issues stemming from homelessness or mental disorders (including many that you will likely get just from being homeless that never showed up before) and substance abuse problems (that again, likely were not present pre-homelessness) is WAY lower than what we pay to "deal with it" the way we do, everyone just kind of seems okay with how the homeless get treated.

And when you are watching 27 different angles of a bunch of people filming cops going around beating homeless people and dragging out of tents by their hair in order to burn them down with all the possessions inside, and nobody fucking lifts a finger to help those being opressed, it really winks in that maybe we don't deserve to make it past the bell riots.

Because even the shitty oppressive government of a fictional universe where most governments are completely changed, gone or barely dangling by a thread is a hell of a lot better than the shit we're stuck with.

[-] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

I feel like DS9 imagined a 2024 where liberals had morphed into champagne socialists, providing a social safety net to assuage guilt for their treatment of the people disadvantaged by society but keeping them out of sight. In reality the liberal parties stymie the left and work to keep government moving to the right so that the basic safety net never gets implemented. Instead we have neoliberals and party liners still obsessed with reaching across the aisle and shaking hands with those who would advocate for a 'final solution' to homelessness before voting to feed them. Thats not just America, look at Macron too.

[-] trolololol@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

There's assuming the percentage of homeless people is not threatening to create a rebellion. Increase the number to tipping point like 30% of all people and it will make sense.

By the way that's the goal of capitalism in a round about way - accumulate more money by fewer people. And it's getting it's way.

[-] negativenull@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

I'm heading up to the mountains for camping this weekend, just to be safe.

[-] teft@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago

Remember to bring your emergency comms system. The mountains can be treacherous.

[-] thessnake03@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

I thought it was super easy in the future

[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Just rip it out of the bulkhead and push it up the mountain.

[-] Kintarian@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago

Me too. I plan to make some coffee and watch the world burn.

[-] ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

I do like my coffee hot....

[-] gibmiser@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

If we get a star trec future out of it... I say it's worth it

[-] teft@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

That's the attitude we want around here!

[-] lugal@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Honestly, the end justifying all means is an attitude I'd expect from lemmygrad, not from here. I know, that's not how you put it, but think about it that way

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"The ends justify the means" is an argument often used by people that know the thing that they're doing is pretty awful, and are trying to come up with some kind of hand waving justification.

But as a thought process it isn't bad in and of itself. Every time you undergo surgery it's because the ends justify the means.

It could be more favorably expressed as "short-term pain, long-term gain".

[-] Naura@startrek.website 1 points 2 months ago

Inaction is being complicit especially when it comes to fighting oppression.

[-] lugal@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

And power structures reproduce themselves. Unity of means and ends is crucial when you don't want to just build a new oppressive system

[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

And all Japan gets on Sunday is a lousy typhoon.

[-] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

You could always move to (northern)Tohoku... not as many jobs but at least the typhoons and quakes are rare.

[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago
[-] prole 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[-] problematicPanther@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

i heard this image

[-] MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

God dammit, I lost my ocarina!

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
224 points (100.0% liked)

TenForward: Where Every Vulcan Knows Your Name

3781 readers
1251 users here now

/c/TenFoward: Your home-away-from-home for all things Star Trek!

Re-route power to the shields, emit a tachyon pulse through the deflector, and post all the nonsense you want. Within reason of course.

~ 1. No bigotry. This is a Star Trek community. Remember that diversity and coexistence are Star Trek values. Any post/comments that are racist, anti-LGBT, or generally "othering" of a group will result in removal/ban.

~ 2. Keep it civil. Disagreements will happen both on lore and preferences. That's okay! Just don't let it make you forget that the person you are talking to is also a person.

~ 3. Use spoiler tags. This applies to any episodes that have dropped within 3 months prior of your posting. After that it's free game.

~ 4. Keep it Trek related. This one is kind of a gimme but keep as on topic as possible.

~ 5. Keep posts to a limit. We all love Star Trek stuff but 3-4 posts in an hour is plenty enough.

~ 6. Try to not repost. Mistakes happen, we get it! But try to not repost anything from within the past 1-2 months.

~ 7. No General AI Art. Posts of simple AI art do not 'inspire jamaharon'

~ 8. No Political Upheaval. Political commentary is allowed, but please keep discussions civil. Read here for our community's expectations.

Fun will now commence.


Sister Communities:

!startrek@lemmy.world

!memes@lemmy.world

!tumblr@lemmy.world

!lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world

Want your community to be added to the sidebar? Just ask one of our mods!


Honorary Badbitch:

@jawa21@startrek.website for realizing that the line used to be "want to be added to the sidebar?" and capitalized on it. Congratulations and welcome to the sidebar. Stamets is both ashamed and proud.


Creator Resources:

Looking for a Star Trek screencap? (TrekCore)

Looking for the right Star Trek typeface/font for your meme? (Thank you @kellyaster for putting this together!)


founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS