The Oregon case decided Friday is the most significant to come before the high court in decades on the issue and comes as a rising number of people in the U.S. are without a permanent place to live.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Seems that way. Empowering local governments to determine legality will inevitably allow NIMBY to criminalize homelessness across the nation, with each city pointing fingers as the next.

    • sunzu@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      you only matter if you own property.

      While technically true… There is a difference between a guy owning a factory and a guy owning a home.

      They are not the same lol

        • sunzu@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          Many people are few pay checks away from being homeless

          System works as intended

      • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        This is pedantic and totally irrelevant to the topic of homeless having no place to simply exist.

        Unless of course you are trying to highlight the billions of unhoused factory owners?

        • sunzu@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          Point being “home owner” is a temporaly housed person ;)

          You got own right property to be part of the right class.

          Learn to read

            • sunzu@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 days ago

              You can look at it like that…

              My value add here is clarifying detail was that was lost in that statement.

              I am not hurting the reader or the OP thesis, just adding to the body of work.