• usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I agree with you almost completely. The issue is if the homeless prevents the space from being suitable for disabled people or other commuters, then this is the “less worse” option from the subway’s perspective. The subway is focused on creating a safe and clean commuter environment; it’s not within their power to solve homelessness so they have little choice but to make everything a bit worse for everyone to stop the problem they’re dealing with from making it even worse yet for everyone.

    • Tiresia@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 minutes ago

      the subway’s perspective. The subway is focused on creating a safe and clean commuter environment

      Well there’s your problem. Your subway organisation is myopically focused on making its own little corner as “well-functioning” as possible even at the cost of the rest of the city. It ignores the social harm it causes to whatever the next place is that homeless people decide to congregate instead (and the additional harm it causes to homeless people by forcing them to stay in less hospitable locations, and the additional harm it causes everyone in those homeless people’s vicinity because they are more desperate on account of staying in less hospitable environments and thus more likely to resort to crime).