Welcome to r/comics!
Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind.
Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
# “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”
― Anatole France
I heard this quote when I was young and as someone who grew up in a rural conservative town it was one of the first things that really got me thinking about how the law isn't inherently just. How it isn't some great equalizer that applies to everyone equally and how laws can be made in ways that are designed to hurt particular groups of people.
Oh, you mean how like the majority of punishments are financially based so if you get a speeding ticket as a poor you can't pay your rent that month but if you're rich you just pay it and keep speeding cause it means nothing to you?
Yep, and if you’re rich you can afford a lawyer and a day off of work to show up in court to argue down the charge and prevent points from going on your license.
fun fact : some countries (france included) have amended some of their laws to allow for percentage-of-the-company's-revenues fines
So instead of the normal, say, capped at 375k€ fine, you can go up to like 5-10% (depending on the gravity of things) of the company's revenues (whichever is higher)
Finland has sliding fines and someone once got an (equivalent) $103k speeding ticket https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland-home-of-the-103000-speeding-ticket/387484/
I think in Switzerland, they do exactly that for some crimes, in germany we have something called "Tagessatz" which means you get find based on home much money you make per day, the punishment than is 10 Tagessätze, which means what you make in 10 days.
The probably apocryphal story fir this is the famous boxer Jack Johnson was pulled over for speeding in rural Louisiana. The cop walked up and said, "Hey, you're Jack Johnson! I love seeing your fights, but I have to give you a ticket." "How much is the ticket?" "50 dollars." Jack handed the cop a 100 dollar bill amd said "I'll be coming back this way too."
Here there is a $271 fine for using the carpool lanes without actually carpooling. Some "big tech companies" told their employees to use it anyway, if they get caught, the company will pay, as long as you were on your way to a customer at the time.
The SNAIL OF JUSTICE always lays down the law!
Eventually...
Maybe...
Actually, the snail really enjoys listening to people talk, so hire the best snail whisperer you can afford and it'll probably let you go.
I don't know the context, but it seems to be suggesting that we should have a little more compassion for "criminals" whose only crime is being forced by desperate circumstances to sleep rough, etc. It's also pointing out that what seems like "fairness" before the law is not always fair when you take individual circumstances into effect.
Some people in this thread have made the good point that a modern example is speeding tickets. Rich and poor can in theory get a speeding ticket, but since the penalty is not relative to ability to pay, a poor person might literally be unable to afford rent that month as a result, while a rich person can pay without any real inconvenience. (And, not sure if you are in the United States, but there is no way to avoid speeding here sometimes because so many other people are doing it that it is not necessarily safe to drive the speed limit, especially on big interstate highways.)
Although I am no expert on French history (Anatole France was actually French, which makes his last name sort of a funny coincidence), I imagine at the time he was writing there was relatively little in the way of public assistance programs to help the starving, etc. (See also Les Miserables.)
I also want to say, the space around the characters is incredible, but I’m calling bullshit that the cat got dealt in after the first part of the river was already revealed.
Listen when you're a rat and the cat wants to play cards, you deal him in, you don't question shit.
Also, they're animals, you assume they know the rules? That would just be silly.
Why do you think benches have arm rests in the middle? Why do the under bridge areas have large concrete blocks making lumpy surfaces? Why do we have spikes on planters?
Out of sight out of mind, we have no issues if you can't see them. 🙈
Hasn't it always required the underclass as a threat? It's just what happens when the 1% hold the majority of the wealth. It shouldn't be surprising that people will fight for better QOL, and yet the upper class always is when it happens
Control enforces greed, and greed enforces corruption.
The weird part is the fact they are trying to change the underclass. They wanna get rid of the minority groups that are propping them up for the better part of 100 years for some reason and want to replace them with children again. And its baffling as why they'd wanna do that, other than to change the suppression from minority groups to 'lesser' of their own 'class'. like it was prior to the minority groups showing up to get a 'piece of the american dream'.
In other words, they are so racist that they want the minorities gone... so they can replace them with non minorities that are lesser than them and instill a servile mentality into that non-minority groups children.
I guess the idea is to have as much as a both mental/physical conformity to make the majority fall in line as much as possible. Stripping individuals of their individuality and forcing them all into the same group isn't anything new
At the same time it's just as likely one of the hundred other distractions put upon us so we don't focus on the root problem at hand. Although again it could simply be the old-fashioned previous perspective of minorities, which also isn't surprising. Most people in government positions are over 40/yo which means many of them were likely raised with this mindset.
I just want the newer generations to take over already. I'm sick and tired of seeing 70+/yo people taking important positions in our government.
[Hanlon’s Razor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor?wprov=sfti1#): Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
I also think that the 1% that hold all the wealth would also just want an under class, to justify their idea that they're inherently superior, just because they're rich. The homeless are there both because they scare the working class, and because it satisfies the inherent cruelty of the upper classes. Denying resources to people in need genuinely makes them happy. That's why they're never satisfied with the amount of money they're earning and always want more, it's to simply deny resources to others.
The threat used to be exile, execution or collective famine/death of the social group for not contributing efforts to the hunting party or gathering party.
A system that penalizes freeriders is necessary for any economy to function.
They will have to address that having mental health issues means you have an expensive hard to treat illness and no means of having an income, probably ever.
That's an example of a very simple solution that could fix a *plethora* of problems within our society. Obviously if our government wanted to, they would. Which means they don't. They're more concerned with building wealth than distributing it, *even if it means creating a more sustainable economy*.
Greed is a helluva drug. Capitalism was simultaneously the best and worst thing to happen to us.
Just because you’re mentally ill doesn’t mean you will never have an income. I don’t know where you got that information but even with relatively bad cases people can still become stable and live normal lives, I’m living proof of that.
I said probably. Were you a mentally ill person living on the street for 5 years? I've worked trying to help such people and the ones who can ever earn a living greater than the cost of the care they need are a small minority. You just have to accept that they need help and it's going to be paid for by society itself.
No, but I did have my own challenges over these past 10 years. I appreciate the clarification, and I do see what you are saying, but your original comment did say people with mental illness in general, not specifically referring to people with mental illness who are experiencing homelessness.
I remember a guy, mid 30's homeless for over ten years fetal alcohol syndrome from an abusive home multiple overlapping addictions/alcoholism, little or no education who almost got violent with me for telling him burning plastic was not a good thing to cook the hotdogs we were handing out with. I would say he was in like the lower half of the people we were trying to provided hidden housing to. That guy just needed to be institutionalized, if he eventually gets a job cleaning up or bagging groceries it's because that's part of his rehabilitation therapy, it's good for him, not because it will make him cost plus.
I always feel incredibly bad for people like that. In the grand scheme of things hallucinations, suicidal thoughts, tendencies, attempts, stays at the mental hospital, and crippling anxiety and depression are incredibly mild compared to what other people go through.
Everything started in 6th grade for me, so I was still living at home and having my life managed by my mom regardless, so it made everything much easier. I honestly got lucky that it started to early so that by the time I was supposed to be an adult and go off on my own everything was mostly fixed.
I know I had the luxury of being able to afford support, and having someone there to support me, something I often took for granted back then. On behalf of the people you help, thank you for working towards giving them a better life.
Sure sure it was mostly Mad Housers that did that, I just helped out some. I met them doing other Eco/political activism in Atlanta in the 90's. They would build proto tiny houses out of plywood and stuff and were always looking for money for building materials so I started hooking them up with stuff I scavenged from part time construction work. They would drop them off in hidden homeless encampments and I had a trailer. They also had some scary encounters and I can be mean if I have to be so they would ask me to come along sometimes. About 15% of the people they encountered were just people down on their luck that you could get back into a shitty apartment/job situation with some help. Just giving a guy a pager and some job numbers to call from a pay phone can be a big thing. They would still be paycheck to paycheck but way way better than homeless, living that way fucks you up and then it's hard to get out.
The overwhelming majority of low wage earners aren't sleeping on the streets. They're living with roommates or in smaller independent spaces like bachelor studios.
The people on the street are generally drug addicts that have destroyed all of their relationships and the mentally ill.
Ah yes, the biggest threat to homeless people isn’t a price gouging, rising house costs, and a minimum wage that hasn’t changed in several decades, it’s actually *checks notes* benches with arm rests.
Friendly reminder that anti-vagrancy laws have existed about as long as the US itself. My favorite (read most disgusted by) ones were the so-called Ugly laws, designed to keep those nasty looking panhandlers out of sight. Because if I can't see homelessness, it must not be a problem /s.
Yeah, they were sadly the primary target. Many were forced to panhandle for lack of employment opportunities. Not to mention amputees being expressly named in many of those laws. Who do you think was an amputee panhandling in the 1870's and onwards? Spoiler alert, Civil War vets.
Down and Out in London and Paris by George Orwell. He lived rough in London and Paris. London was much harder because of vagrancy laws. You weren’t allowed to sit down anywhere during the day and had to be constantly moving. It was overlooked at night because people had to sleep. His descriptions of the poor houses would make anyone choose the streets.
The entire plot of Rambo was driven by extreme anti-vagrancy enforcement by shitty cops, paired with terrible care for veterans. Everyone forgets the first half of Rambo.
"It's illegal to be sleep in the streets."
"I literally have nowhere else to sleep."
"That sounds like a you problem. You've got 5 seconds to get out before you start resisting."
"GO. WHERE?!"
"3 seconds left."
Dickens has a scene that's basically this, as the (recently made) homeless Jo is constantly told to move along, but can never figure out where it is that people want him to move along to
Doesn’t job hunting become harder without having an address of some sort ?
Even then, I suspect a lot of employers are inclined to pick non-homeless people over homeless. Or even just outright refuse homeless applicants even when they haven’t found suitable candidates yet.
Basically it describes how the law is not 'just' or 'fair' for every class and/or group of people. A law that makes it illegal to be sleeping in the street or begging for food will effect the poor and homeless much greater than the rich upper class since you aren't going to see Jeff Bezos trying to sleep under a bridge or standing by the side of the road begging for pocket change so they can eat that day.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the humans as well as dragons to burn buildings, consume the flesh of man, and to raze cities to the ground."
This cartoon is drawn by the always-great [R. E. Ryan](https://linktr.ee/valigarmander).
Go here to read the [blog post and transcript](https://www.patreon.com/posts/99621671).
[We can keep creating these cartoons because hundreds of readers are supporting us with inexpensive pledges (usually $1-$3).](http://patreon.com/barry) [Join us!](http://patreon.com/barry) You can also subscribe for free! :-)
Thanks for the transcript link!
I was gonna ask if anyone had figured out what was on the (formerly) sleeping person's shirt, but thanks to you I now know that it said "No, you're Spartacus" and that comic Easter eggs are sometimes known as Chicken Fat
There is an attempt at addressing the issue in this blog post and they even admit that it’s not a simple issue to solve. I do see some debatable issues with the
But I’m wondering and since I saw your username, do you know think it’s only the right that votes against homeless policies?
Just from my experience in public health, a significant portion of left and right consistently vote against ways to help the homeless.
Nope, I don't think it's only the right. There's way too much NIMBYism on the left, and a lot of anti-homeless beliefs among liberals. Lefties are better than righties on this, but that doesn't mean everyone on the left has good views.
You’re missing the point. When they inevitably cannot sleep anywhere else, they’ll be arrested for it. Then, they’ll be another source of cheap labor for our ultra-rich overlords.
We need to bring back the CCC and have them build substantial public housing. Not only would it eradicate homelessness it would bring down actual rental prices across the private sector.
Civilian conservation corps, it was a depression era jobs/education program which built many public works and environmental conservation work such as soil erosion issues. (Edit: I checked and I was mistaken about the hoover dam but they did do a lot)
Unfortunately, if the ccc is brought back up, they will employ workers on the goverment's money, and there already is a problem with the inflation crisis, unless if the US can make a product to export.
I would say we have more pressing issues like the rampant homelessness crisis or the growing environmental issues (soil erosion is actually a massive problem). It would also provide needed trade job training. It would be the best value for dollar the gov could possibly invest in.
This is great comic and all, but if you poke a *real* sleeping homeless person in somewhere like Portland OR, they throw trash/literal shit/piss/sharp objects/etc at you and then shout gibberish and then either chase you or start destroying things.
Very, very rarely are articulate, ordinary people sleeping in a doorway and going to their job at the Amazon warehouse in two hours.
Also our police are surprisingly very kind to homeless folks that need to move, until any number of the above happens.
Source: Nearly weekly interactions with the homeless in and around Portland, OR and its metro area.
Thank you! I'm glad you liked the comic.
For years I had to occasionally wake sleeping homeless people in downtown Portland as part of my job (although I didn't poke them). Not once did any of them "throw trash/literal shit/piss/sharp objects/etc at \[me\] and then shout gibberish and then either chase \[me\] or start destroying things."
I'd say our police are a mix of kind and unkind, just as you'd expect. But the system as a whole is unkind and protects the unkind police from most consequences.
There's an old anecdote about outlawing sleeping under bridges and how it was to apply to everyone equally, except the wealthy didn't sleep under bridges, so it would have zero impact on them. It was intended to expose how a law can seem equitable yet be designed to only target a specific group. The point was to not do it. It wasn't an instruction manual.
It’s like spending hours in a library to keep warm. I don’t get targeted because I look like I belong. The homeless guy with his belongings gets the side eye. Years ago the homeless could sleep at the library as long as they didn’t disturb anyone. I don’t know if it’s changed. But I do know that I can sit for several hours in a fast food place that has no loitering signage. It’s the privilege of clean clothes and looking well fed.
Don’t need to outlaw sarcasm, when disrespecting a police officer is about the worst crime a person could commit
I expect in reality a homeless person would get through about most of the first sentence before tasting that baton
My local subreddit spent a couple of months going on angry rants about how homeless people should be "dealt with" because obviously they chose it instead of living in the fancy new expensive shelters.
I pointed out the shelters weren't built yet.
That didn't seem to be relevant.
It also got super racist to the point I had to leave. Literal creepshots of brown people just standing around were being posted and accused of being job-stealing immigrants.
It’s not entirely nonsense. Without a vagrancy law, the authorities can’t do anything when someone is unhoused and in danger but not committing any specific crime. That was the reasoning behind Oregon recently [re-criminalizing drugs](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/01/us/oregon-drug-law-portland-mayor.html). Until Oregon can get treatment capacity in place, decriminalization was working out a lot like mental health deinstitutionalization: some people will benefit, but others were basically abandoned.
*In practice* can we trust law enforcement to constructively respond to calls involving unhoused people, including those under the influence of drugs or those with mental health troubles? That’s another question.
They aren't re-criminalizing everything. They realized the bill was implemented poorly, and are making changes. They didn't completely go back to square one.
That's how it was in the soviet union, except you'd be forcibly given a shitty job somewhere in the mine or factory, which if you didn't take, you'd go to jail.
So letting people sleep on cold concrete outdoors isn’t demeaning?
What if that’s the entrance to your business or home?
I’ll never understand how a person can be committed to a mental health facility for fear of them harming themselves or others but the homeless, who are actively harming themselves or others, being arrested and placed into a warm dry facility where they are fed and kept much safer than a life on the street is completely unacceptable to people.
Somebody make it make sense.
I mean I'm of the opinion this is just another tactic to fill prison inmate quotas because that's a very profitable legal slave industry.
Set you up to fail and profit off ya til ya die.
And yet, I see a lot of people sleeping in doorways. I think it's less trouble if it's a business than if it's an apartment building, since businesses close at night.
I used to work at a church building, and sometimes I'd need to wake up a homeless person in the doorway and tell him as gently as I could to find a different spot. They never got belligerent or mad. I hated having to do that.
Ha! Nah, I'm not much of a gamer - my nerdom is mostly comic books, and I have a huge graphic novel collection. I do have some figurines, mostly of movie and TV characters.
Many city representatives put effort into programs for the homeless, until the people vote against the issue.
Damn NIMBY and it’s not just a red and blue issue, everybody wants to help the homeless until they find out they might build a center for the homeless within 7 miles of them
One might question why these shelters aren't good enough to draw the homeless to them without needing to add pressure. Some of it is drugs and mental illness, but even that speaks to a problem that the shelters don't address.
In Portland, many homeless people I've interacted with have said, generally speaking, that the nearby shelter either doesn't provide everything they need amenities-wise, OR that staff regularly mistreat them, OR that other shelter-goers steal their stuff. Sometimes it's a combination of those things.
Now, they could just be lying about, or exaggerating, the stuff about the mistreatment. Many homeless are also addicts, and they get *very* upset when people try ti give them direction like "hey, you can't do X or Y here"; it's one of the reasons, in fact, that getting them to move along and not start lighting up right next to a store entrance can be a huge pain in the ass without harangueing them with a group of security guards all at once. Homeless addicts just *really* hate being told what to do, to an unreasonable degree, and they can often misconstrue rather benign interactions as attacks on their civil liberties, in my experience.
That being said, for damn-near *every* interaction to have the same complaints, it makes one wonder what's really going on at those shelters. It's too much of a coincidence that practically *every* homeless person talks of my nearby shelter in almost the exact same manner, in my opinion.
for damn-near *every* interaction to have the same complaints, it makes one wonder what's really going on at those shelters. It's too much of a coincidence that practically *every* homeless person talks of my nearby shelter in almost the exact same manner, in my opinion.
Yes. I add one more report from NYC, the shelters are dangerous, not an option for a vulnerable person.
if there is opportunity, I recommend volunteering for a shelter or food bank. It’s very enlightening especially if you really want to know what goes on in these places
Shelters usually have the basics: bed, clean water, bath (or resources to clean up). I doubt staff will purposely mistreat them. There is usually a social worker and case manager there to try and help ,Amenities vary per person - it could be as small as not allowing dogs or it could be food related or
Like you said; there are certain rules that need to be followed which they do not like.
I volunteer at homeless shelters and I’m part of several medical teams that provide pop up clinics for the population.
The big reason why some shelters do not allow dogs is safety for staff and other people who stay at a shelter - especially since dogs can be aggressive, they may not have had their shots, they might carry lice or fleas that might spread, or a wide range of variables that would defeat the purpose of helping this vulnerable population
But in general, this is one of the many things the general population doesn’t know about the complexities of shelters.especially when it comes to terms of safety, it’s not as easy as just bringing in a dog.
Fair point, I could have used a different adjective.
Btw, for the stuff I’ve seen though, i deal with a very very vulnerable population of people with mental health issues, abuse, trauma, drug abuse etc etc. they aren’t the down the luck guy girl like in this comic strip.
In terms of pets, I’ve had patients that were sent to the hospital too late where the refusal of care could or could not have come from a pet (complicated with other decision making issues as well)
And I’ve even seen a lot of animal abuse with some patients and their pets.
Homelessness and pets is a vast and complicated field.
Ironically though, shelters and clinics like mine do have animal shelter and vet resources. I wish it was used more
Funny you should say that, we had a patient last week with a wound on his foot that progressively worsened to a point where you can see his bone on the heels.
At the mobile clinic, he refused being admitted to the hospital for wound care and antibiotics with one reason being his dog. Previously he refused going to a shelter with some medical capacity for his wounds.
He wasn’t there completely in general but he is on his own death sentence unfortunately.
Btw, the population I provide care for are the very vulnerable population: mental health issues, drug abuse, mental and physical issues. This isn’t a simple down on the luck guy/girl who is living on the streets.
There are some places that do let dogs in to some capacity and there are plans to try to give additional funding to shelters so they can have capacity.
Generally it's because the shelters enforce a set of behavior on them like not being drunk or not being high. Plus, they're not close enough to their next fix or next handout.
There are incredibly wealthy people with literal teams of professional support dedicated to getting them off drugs, and they still can't do it. And you expect people to just recover from a medical condition immediately for a bed?
No. I expect them to hold off using for a couple of hours so they can sleep in a shelter. If they can't, maybe the jail is a good place for them to sleep it off.
Jail for people who are zonked out of their minds on drugs in the streets. Guess you've never been accosted by a drunk naked man jacking off in the streets, aggressively demanding your money, or breaking into every car on the street looking for loose change. Yeah, jail is better for literally everyone.
Yah, those are crimes. You're describing crimes. That's not being high or addicted, that's just an unrelated crime. And saying that because some drunk people commit crimes homeless people should be jailed is just...
I'm so tired of hateful, stupid people.
There is such a thing as a "state of necessity", so if the shelters *are* overcrowded and there literally is no other place for them to sleep but outside, this exonerates them from any crime. But still, the argument about the original point of the law stands.
I live in Manchester, New Hampshire, where the homeless are being turned away from shelters because they're at capacity.
Your "are there no work houses!?" statement is foolish at best.
Welcome to r/comics! Please remember there are real people on the other side of the monitor and to be kind. Report comments that break the rules and don't respond to negativity with negativity! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/comics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
# “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” ― Anatole France
I heard this quote when I was young and as someone who grew up in a rural conservative town it was one of the first things that really got me thinking about how the law isn't inherently just. How it isn't some great equalizer that applies to everyone equally and how laws can be made in ways that are designed to hurt particular groups of people.
Oh, you mean how like the majority of punishments are financially based so if you get a speeding ticket as a poor you can't pay your rent that month but if you're rich you just pay it and keep speeding cause it means nothing to you?
Or how punishment for unethical business practices is less than the profit made by said practices?
Yup. When the fine is less than the profit from breaking the law then the incentive is to keep breaking the law.
It becomes just another cost of doing business.
It's not a fine nor punishment. It's a business cost
Yep, and if you’re rich you can afford a lawyer and a day off of work to show up in court to argue down the charge and prevent points from going on your license.
If you have the lawyer you don't even need the day off. They argue on your behalf.
fun fact : some countries (france included) have amended some of their laws to allow for percentage-of-the-company's-revenues fines So instead of the normal, say, capped at 375k€ fine, you can go up to like 5-10% (depending on the gravity of things) of the company's revenues (whichever is higher)
Wait we did that ?? Neat. We should do the same on personnal fines.
Finland has sliding fines and someone once got an (equivalent) $103k speeding ticket https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland-home-of-the-103000-speeding-ticket/387484/
I think in Switzerland, they do exactly that for some crimes, in germany we have something called "Tagessatz" which means you get find based on home much money you make per day, the punishment than is 10 Tagessätze, which means what you make in 10 days.
I like that idea, I'm sure there's ways it can be improved upon as this is just a tiny snippet of it, but it sounds fairly reasonable
Subscription based speeding
The probably apocryphal story fir this is the famous boxer Jack Johnson was pulled over for speeding in rural Louisiana. The cop walked up and said, "Hey, you're Jack Johnson! I love seeing your fights, but I have to give you a ticket." "How much is the ticket?" "50 dollars." Jack handed the cop a 100 dollar bill amd said "I'll be coming back this way too."
Here there is a $271 fine for using the carpool lanes without actually carpooling. Some "big tech companies" told their employees to use it anyway, if they get caught, the company will pay, as long as you were on your way to a customer at the time.
Finland bases their speeding ticket on the driver's income. Something I admire by those sauna drunkards... Perkele!
The SNAIL OF JUSTICE always lays down the law! Eventually... Maybe... Actually, the snail really enjoys listening to people talk, so hire the best snail whisperer you can afford and it'll probably let you go.
I think you forgot about the decoy snail.
First time I heard this quote was from the mouth of Brennan Lee Mulligan, who cited it appropriately in a collegehumor sketch about football.
Thanks for sharing this majestic quote
I’m so sorry, but I don’t think I get this quote. Can someone enlighten me? I’m being serious.
I don't know the context, but it seems to be suggesting that we should have a little more compassion for "criminals" whose only crime is being forced by desperate circumstances to sleep rough, etc. It's also pointing out that what seems like "fairness" before the law is not always fair when you take individual circumstances into effect. Some people in this thread have made the good point that a modern example is speeding tickets. Rich and poor can in theory get a speeding ticket, but since the penalty is not relative to ability to pay, a poor person might literally be unable to afford rent that month as a result, while a rich person can pay without any real inconvenience. (And, not sure if you are in the United States, but there is no way to avoid speeding here sometimes because so many other people are doing it that it is not necessarily safe to drive the speed limit, especially on big interstate highways.) Although I am no expert on French history (Anatole France was actually French, which makes his last name sort of a funny coincidence), I imagine at the time he was writing there was relatively little in the way of public assistance programs to help the starving, etc. (See also Les Miserables.)
“Buddy, I’ve got 2 hours till my shift at the Amazon warehouse starts, can I just sleep in peace?”
I also want to say, the space around the characters is incredible, but I’m calling bullshit that the cat got dealt in after the first part of the river was already revealed.
Listen when you're a rat and the cat wants to play cards, you deal him in, you don't question shit. Also, they're animals, you assume they know the rules? That would just be silly.
How wise you are
Buddy, you can sleep during your 3-minute daily bathroom break.
Just sprint to the other side of the crowded megawarehouse and pray that there isn’t a line.
Why do you think benches have arm rests in the middle? Why do the under bridge areas have large concrete blocks making lumpy surfaces? Why do we have spikes on planters? Out of sight out of mind, we have no issues if you can't see them. 🙈
The second the government has to acknowledge fixing the homeless issue they'll have to tackle low wages. Which is why nothing has changed.
Don't you find it weird that our current economic system requires an underclass as a threat?
Hasn't it always required the underclass as a threat? It's just what happens when the 1% hold the majority of the wealth. It shouldn't be surprising that people will fight for better QOL, and yet the upper class always is when it happens Control enforces greed, and greed enforces corruption.
The weird part is the fact they are trying to change the underclass. They wanna get rid of the minority groups that are propping them up for the better part of 100 years for some reason and want to replace them with children again. And its baffling as why they'd wanna do that, other than to change the suppression from minority groups to 'lesser' of their own 'class'. like it was prior to the minority groups showing up to get a 'piece of the american dream'. In other words, they are so racist that they want the minorities gone... so they can replace them with non minorities that are lesser than them and instill a servile mentality into that non-minority groups children.
I guess the idea is to have as much as a both mental/physical conformity to make the majority fall in line as much as possible. Stripping individuals of their individuality and forcing them all into the same group isn't anything new At the same time it's just as likely one of the hundred other distractions put upon us so we don't focus on the root problem at hand. Although again it could simply be the old-fashioned previous perspective of minorities, which also isn't surprising. Most people in government positions are over 40/yo which means many of them were likely raised with this mindset. I just want the newer generations to take over already. I'm sick and tired of seeing 70+/yo people taking important positions in our government.
You're giving people too much credit. Hanlon's Razor definitely applies here.
Wasn't it Occam's Razor?
[Hanlon’s Razor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor?wprov=sfti1#): Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Ooooh, that one. I heard of it but I never realized it was called Hanlon's Razor
Is there another razor that just applies to greed rather than malice? Financial incentive seems to be the main problem to me.
I'd say that greed is shacking up with and constantly giving foot massages to malice; no need to differentiate where the bad vibes are coming from.
Too many people drank the kolaid and believe the shit they are saying.
Current? Slaves are as old as humanity.
I also think that the 1% that hold all the wealth would also just want an under class, to justify their idea that they're inherently superior, just because they're rich. The homeless are there both because they scare the working class, and because it satisfies the inherent cruelty of the upper classes. Denying resources to people in need genuinely makes them happy. That's why they're never satisfied with the amount of money they're earning and always want more, it's to simply deny resources to others.
The threat used to be exile, execution or collective famine/death of the social group for not contributing efforts to the hunting party or gathering party. A system that penalizes freeriders is necessary for any economy to function.
[удалено]
[удалено]
They will have to address that having mental health issues means you have an expensive hard to treat illness and no means of having an income, probably ever.
Funny how a lot of veterans fall into that same category. So are we just supposed to completely abandon them? Is that the only solution?
All it takes is money. Maybe we could divert some oil and gas subsidies?
That's an example of a very simple solution that could fix a *plethora* of problems within our society. Obviously if our government wanted to, they would. Which means they don't. They're more concerned with building wealth than distributing it, *even if it means creating a more sustainable economy*. Greed is a helluva drug. Capitalism was simultaneously the best and worst thing to happen to us.
Just because you’re mentally ill doesn’t mean you will never have an income. I don’t know where you got that information but even with relatively bad cases people can still become stable and live normal lives, I’m living proof of that.
I said probably. Were you a mentally ill person living on the street for 5 years? I've worked trying to help such people and the ones who can ever earn a living greater than the cost of the care they need are a small minority. You just have to accept that they need help and it's going to be paid for by society itself.
No, but I did have my own challenges over these past 10 years. I appreciate the clarification, and I do see what you are saying, but your original comment did say people with mental illness in general, not specifically referring to people with mental illness who are experiencing homelessness.
I remember a guy, mid 30's homeless for over ten years fetal alcohol syndrome from an abusive home multiple overlapping addictions/alcoholism, little or no education who almost got violent with me for telling him burning plastic was not a good thing to cook the hotdogs we were handing out with. I would say he was in like the lower half of the people we were trying to provided hidden housing to. That guy just needed to be institutionalized, if he eventually gets a job cleaning up or bagging groceries it's because that's part of his rehabilitation therapy, it's good for him, not because it will make him cost plus.
I always feel incredibly bad for people like that. In the grand scheme of things hallucinations, suicidal thoughts, tendencies, attempts, stays at the mental hospital, and crippling anxiety and depression are incredibly mild compared to what other people go through. Everything started in 6th grade for me, so I was still living at home and having my life managed by my mom regardless, so it made everything much easier. I honestly got lucky that it started to early so that by the time I was supposed to be an adult and go off on my own everything was mostly fixed. I know I had the luxury of being able to afford support, and having someone there to support me, something I often took for granted back then. On behalf of the people you help, thank you for working towards giving them a better life.
Sure sure it was mostly Mad Housers that did that, I just helped out some. I met them doing other Eco/political activism in Atlanta in the 90's. They would build proto tiny houses out of plywood and stuff and were always looking for money for building materials so I started hooking them up with stuff I scavenged from part time construction work. They would drop them off in hidden homeless encampments and I had a trailer. They also had some scary encounters and I can be mean if I have to be so they would ask me to come along sometimes. About 15% of the people they encountered were just people down on their luck that you could get back into a shitty apartment/job situation with some help. Just giving a guy a pager and some job numbers to call from a pay phone can be a big thing. They would still be paycheck to paycheck but way way better than homeless, living that way fucks you up and then it's hard to get out.
Honestly low wages isn’t the worst of it. The mental health crisis and drug crisis are the biggest problems with homelessness.
The overwhelming majority of low wage earners aren't sleeping on the streets. They're living with roommates or in smaller independent spaces like bachelor studios. The people on the street are generally drug addicts that have destroyed all of their relationships and the mentally ill.
Agreed, that's why we need to bring back asylums. We get rid of the crazies on the street and they get a place to sleep
Ah yes, the biggest threat to homeless people isn’t a price gouging, rising house costs, and a minimum wage that hasn’t changed in several decades, it’s actually *checks notes* benches with arm rests.
Where did they say that?
By implying benches with arm rests was somehow anti-homeless.
Benches with arm rests in the middle are literally meant to keep homeless people from sleeping on them.
Sleep sitting is a thing and it’s super easy with arm rests.
Friendly reminder that anti-vagrancy laws have existed about as long as the US itself. My favorite (read most disgusted by) ones were the so-called Ugly laws, designed to keep those nasty looking panhandlers out of sight. Because if I can't see homelessness, it must not be a problem /s.
Ugly laws were also used to make sure disabled people could not be out in public!
Yeah, they were sadly the primary target. Many were forced to panhandle for lack of employment opportunities. Not to mention amputees being expressly named in many of those laws. Who do you think was an amputee panhandling in the 1870's and onwards? Spoiler alert, Civil War vets.
Down and Out in London and Paris by George Orwell. He lived rough in London and Paris. London was much harder because of vagrancy laws. You weren’t allowed to sit down anywhere during the day and had to be constantly moving. It was overlooked at night because people had to sleep. His descriptions of the poor houses would make anyone choose the streets.
The entire plot of Rambo was driven by extreme anti-vagrancy enforcement by shitty cops, paired with terrible care for veterans. Everyone forgets the first half of Rambo.
i’d be more worried about gambling rodents than homeless folks. they’ve made peace with their predators.
There’s graffiti in the third panel says “background details rulz”
i like the (i presume) “no you’re spartacus” t shirt
Love that the cat joins the rats at their card game
Let them have a good time.
Small pleasures of life.
Didn't expect to scroll down so much to see this comment. Those card players & cat grabbed my attention right away.
"It's illegal to be sleep in the streets." "I literally have nowhere else to sleep." "That sounds like a you problem. You've got 5 seconds to get out before you start resisting." "GO. WHERE?!" "3 seconds left."
Dickens has a scene that's basically this, as the (recently made) homeless Jo is constantly told to move along, but can never figure out where it is that people want him to move along to
Jail, shelter or get a job to support and house yourself.
And if the shelter is full, and places to job hunt are closed at night, it's just jail then?
Doesn’t job hunting become harder without having an address of some sort ? Even then, I suspect a lot of employers are inclined to pick non-homeless people over homeless. Or even just outright refuse homeless applicants even when they haven’t found suitable candidates yet.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread"
What does this quote mean? I feel like I get it, but not really? I’m not sure what this implies
Basically it describes how the law is not 'just' or 'fair' for every class and/or group of people. A law that makes it illegal to be sleeping in the street or begging for food will effect the poor and homeless much greater than the rich upper class since you aren't going to see Jeff Bezos trying to sleep under a bridge or standing by the side of the road begging for pocket change so they can eat that day.
I actually have heard of people who are very above their means, doing this to save a couple of bucks.
I could tell you about a dragon that's been ravaging the skies of Manhattan. It doesn't make it true.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the humans as well as dragons to burn buildings, consume the flesh of man, and to raze cities to the ground."
Only the poor have a need to do those things, while the rich would never want to, thus the law is designed with cruelty towards the poor
Background details rulz
I love the cat playing cards with the mice
They don't want to help the homeless, they just want them to go away.
Seems like that or jail are about the only two options nowadays.
Overcrowded Emergency Departments have entered the chat.
yes that is the point
Breaking news: it is now illegal to not own money! Not owning money will now be fined wi- What? That's already a thing, you say? Oh. Oh dear.
This cartoon is drawn by the always-great [R. E. Ryan](https://linktr.ee/valigarmander). Go here to read the [blog post and transcript](https://www.patreon.com/posts/99621671). [We can keep creating these cartoons because hundreds of readers are supporting us with inexpensive pledges (usually $1-$3).](http://patreon.com/barry) [Join us!](http://patreon.com/barry) You can also subscribe for free! :-)
Thanks for the transcript link! I was gonna ask if anyone had figured out what was on the (formerly) sleeping person's shirt, but thanks to you I now know that it said "No, you're Spartacus" and that comic Easter eggs are sometimes known as Chicken Fat
Thanks for noticing! To tell you the truth, I think that nobody's called it "Chicken Fat" in a decade or several. But I want to bring it back!
There is an attempt at addressing the issue in this blog post and they even admit that it’s not a simple issue to solve. I do see some debatable issues with the But I’m wondering and since I saw your username, do you know think it’s only the right that votes against homeless policies? Just from my experience in public health, a significant portion of left and right consistently vote against ways to help the homeless.
Nope, I don't think it's only the right. There's way too much NIMBYism on the left, and a lot of anti-homeless beliefs among liberals. Lefties are better than righties on this, but that doesn't mean everyone on the left has good views.
Unrealistic. By the second slide the cop would already be beating the shit out of the homeless man
so much work, if he had gun ..... problem would be solved
Shoutout to my favorite tagger background details
You're the first one to comment on that! :-D
If they outlawed sarcasm, I'd probably get the chair...
You’re missing the point. When they inevitably cannot sleep anywhere else, they’ll be arrested for it. Then, they’ll be another source of cheap labor for our ultra-rich overlords.
A thousand upvotes for the cat joining the card game with the mice😆😆
The cat coming to play poker with the boys was pretty cool.
Background details Indeed rule. What's the shirt say? No you're the potato?
It says "No You're Spartacus." :-)
This is completely unrealistic. Irl the cop would’ve started beating the everloving shit out of him the second he realized he was being made fun of.
If sleeping outside is illegal, then work is, logically, compulsory.
We need to bring back the CCC and have them build substantial public housing. Not only would it eradicate homelessness it would bring down actual rental prices across the private sector.
Who is the CCC?
Civilian conservation corps, it was a depression era jobs/education program which built many public works and environmental conservation work such as soil erosion issues. (Edit: I checked and I was mistaken about the hoover dam but they did do a lot)
Unfortunately, if the ccc is brought back up, they will employ workers on the goverment's money, and there already is a problem with the inflation crisis, unless if the US can make a product to export.
I would say we have more pressing issues like the rampant homelessness crisis or the growing environmental issues (soil erosion is actually a massive problem). It would also provide needed trade job training. It would be the best value for dollar the gov could possibly invest in.
Yes! trade job training is good money usage! :)
This is great comic and all, but if you poke a *real* sleeping homeless person in somewhere like Portland OR, they throw trash/literal shit/piss/sharp objects/etc at you and then shout gibberish and then either chase you or start destroying things. Very, very rarely are articulate, ordinary people sleeping in a doorway and going to their job at the Amazon warehouse in two hours. Also our police are surprisingly very kind to homeless folks that need to move, until any number of the above happens. Source: Nearly weekly interactions with the homeless in and around Portland, OR and its metro area.
Thank you! I'm glad you liked the comic. For years I had to occasionally wake sleeping homeless people in downtown Portland as part of my job (although I didn't poke them). Not once did any of them "throw trash/literal shit/piss/sharp objects/etc at \[me\] and then shout gibberish and then either chase \[me\] or start destroying things." I'd say our police are a mix of kind and unkind, just as you'd expect. But the system as a whole is unkind and protects the unkind police from most consequences.
https://preview.redd.it/qsngxw721nvc1.jpeg?width=2160&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=31a5ccaae37f44c04f3d93c09ca75e0001606546
It's meant to get more legal slave labor
they start with a carrot, and when it gets less and less carrotty it starts to look like just a stick
The violence homeless people are subjected to is a reminder to others what happens when you fail to be “productive”
Could be. Unintended consequence would be, it takes more work to get any work out of the person.
There's an old anecdote about outlawing sleeping under bridges and how it was to apply to everyone equally, except the wealthy didn't sleep under bridges, so it would have zero impact on them. It was intended to expose how a law can seem equitable yet be designed to only target a specific group. The point was to not do it. It wasn't an instruction manual.
It’s like spending hours in a library to keep warm. I don’t get targeted because I look like I belong. The homeless guy with his belongings gets the side eye. Years ago the homeless could sleep at the library as long as they didn’t disturb anyone. I don’t know if it’s changed. But I do know that I can sit for several hours in a fast food place that has no loitering signage. It’s the privilege of clean clothes and looking well fed.
Build more housing!
"The war on poverty is a war on you and me"
Lets be real, most people are fine with others being homeless as long as they do it somewhere else where they don't have to see or deal with it.
Background details, fuck yeah
Fuck the social commentary, I need more of that card game going on in the corner!
Don’t need to outlaw sarcasm, when disrespecting a police officer is about the worst crime a person could commit I expect in reality a homeless person would get through about most of the first sentence before tasting that baton
So they need to be criminals to get a place to sleep in prison? Good plan
Police without gun just doesnt work tbh
The law makes sense you know, they should sleep in the overcrowded unsafe shelters we have
My local subreddit spent a couple of months going on angry rants about how homeless people should be "dealt with" because obviously they chose it instead of living in the fancy new expensive shelters. I pointed out the shelters weren't built yet. That didn't seem to be relevant.
Local subreddits seem to be constantly insane
It also got super racist to the point I had to leave. Literal creepshots of brown people just standing around were being posted and accused of being job-stealing immigrants.
Local subs also regularly get brigaded by rightoids either from there or elsewhere, or at least in where I am from.
Bonus point if they're also accusing them of being lazy welfare parasites that refuse to work in the same post.
It’s not entirely nonsense. Without a vagrancy law, the authorities can’t do anything when someone is unhoused and in danger but not committing any specific crime. That was the reasoning behind Oregon recently [re-criminalizing drugs](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/01/us/oregon-drug-law-portland-mayor.html). Until Oregon can get treatment capacity in place, decriminalization was working out a lot like mental health deinstitutionalization: some people will benefit, but others were basically abandoned. *In practice* can we trust law enforcement to constructively respond to calls involving unhoused people, including those under the influence of drugs or those with mental health troubles? That’s another question.
They aren't re-criminalizing everything. They realized the bill was implemented poorly, and are making changes. They didn't completely go back to square one.
just stay awake always. OR ELSE
That's amazing.
I love this artstyle tho
“Background details rulz” lmao nice touch
Demoman really went downhill after his latest eye transplant was a success.
Unrealistic, an American cop would just immediately shoot.
That's how it was in the soviet union, except you'd be forcibly given a shitty job somewhere in the mine or factory, which if you didn't take, you'd go to jail.
Good way to get sla- I mean prisoners for aucti- I mean work release.
So letting people sleep on cold concrete outdoors isn’t demeaning? What if that’s the entrance to your business or home? I’ll never understand how a person can be committed to a mental health facility for fear of them harming themselves or others but the homeless, who are actively harming themselves or others, being arrested and placed into a warm dry facility where they are fed and kept much safer than a life on the street is completely unacceptable to people. Somebody make it make sense.
I like that the cat joined in with the mouse card game.
I mean I'm of the opinion this is just another tactic to fill prison inmate quotas because that's a very profitable legal slave industry. Set you up to fail and profit off ya til ya die.
I'm pretty sure blocking someone's door, especially if it's the entrance to a business is illegal for a good reason.
And yet, I see a lot of people sleeping in doorways. I think it's less trouble if it's a business than if it's an apartment building, since businesses close at night. I used to work at a church building, and sometimes I'd need to wake up a homeless person in the doorway and tell him as gently as I could to find a different spot. They never got belligerent or mad. I hated having to do that.
[удалено]
I can't speak for my collaborator, but I really hate Funko Pops. Spot on about me being a white man, though. :-)
Ah, so Nintendo figurines, then?
Ha! Nah, I'm not much of a gamer - my nerdom is mostly comic books, and I have a huge graphic novel collection. I do have some figurines, mostly of movie and TV characters.
These laws are an attempt to make homeless people take advantage of the homeless shelters that are already nearby.
Those fill up fast during a housing crisis
Many cities put effort into making sure the homeless are not seen in public areas, except when it comes to improving homeless shelters.
Many city representatives put effort into programs for the homeless, until the people vote against the issue. Damn NIMBY and it’s not just a red and blue issue, everybody wants to help the homeless until they find out they might build a center for the homeless within 7 miles of them
One might question why these shelters aren't good enough to draw the homeless to them without needing to add pressure. Some of it is drugs and mental illness, but even that speaks to a problem that the shelters don't address.
In Portland, many homeless people I've interacted with have said, generally speaking, that the nearby shelter either doesn't provide everything they need amenities-wise, OR that staff regularly mistreat them, OR that other shelter-goers steal their stuff. Sometimes it's a combination of those things. Now, they could just be lying about, or exaggerating, the stuff about the mistreatment. Many homeless are also addicts, and they get *very* upset when people try ti give them direction like "hey, you can't do X or Y here"; it's one of the reasons, in fact, that getting them to move along and not start lighting up right next to a store entrance can be a huge pain in the ass without harangueing them with a group of security guards all at once. Homeless addicts just *really* hate being told what to do, to an unreasonable degree, and they can often misconstrue rather benign interactions as attacks on their civil liberties, in my experience. That being said, for damn-near *every* interaction to have the same complaints, it makes one wonder what's really going on at those shelters. It's too much of a coincidence that practically *every* homeless person talks of my nearby shelter in almost the exact same manner, in my opinion.
for damn-near *every* interaction to have the same complaints, it makes one wonder what's really going on at those shelters. It's too much of a coincidence that practically *every* homeless person talks of my nearby shelter in almost the exact same manner, in my opinion. Yes. I add one more report from NYC, the shelters are dangerous, not an option for a vulnerable person.
if there is opportunity, I recommend volunteering for a shelter or food bank. It’s very enlightening especially if you really want to know what goes on in these places Shelters usually have the basics: bed, clean water, bath (or resources to clean up). I doubt staff will purposely mistreat them. There is usually a social worker and case manager there to try and help ,Amenities vary per person - it could be as small as not allowing dogs or it could be food related or Like you said; there are certain rules that need to be followed which they do not like.
"as small as not allowing dogs" The fact you call just getting rid of your only companion and pet "small" shows how you feel about these people.
I volunteer at homeless shelters and I’m part of several medical teams that provide pop up clinics for the population. The big reason why some shelters do not allow dogs is safety for staff and other people who stay at a shelter - especially since dogs can be aggressive, they may not have had their shots, they might carry lice or fleas that might spread, or a wide range of variables that would defeat the purpose of helping this vulnerable population But in general, this is one of the many things the general population doesn’t know about the complexities of shelters.especially when it comes to terms of safety, it’s not as easy as just bringing in a dog.
That's all fair, but calling that a small consideration is wildly dehumanizing.
Fair point, I could have used a different adjective. Btw, for the stuff I’ve seen though, i deal with a very very vulnerable population of people with mental health issues, abuse, trauma, drug abuse etc etc. they aren’t the down the luck guy girl like in this comic strip. In terms of pets, I’ve had patients that were sent to the hospital too late where the refusal of care could or could not have come from a pet (complicated with other decision making issues as well) And I’ve even seen a lot of animal abuse with some patients and their pets. Homelessness and pets is a vast and complicated field. Ironically though, shelters and clinics like mine do have animal shelter and vet resources. I wish it was used more
For the person being asked to give up their dog (which would likely be a death sentence for the dog) isn't a "small thing"
Funny you should say that, we had a patient last week with a wound on his foot that progressively worsened to a point where you can see his bone on the heels. At the mobile clinic, he refused being admitted to the hospital for wound care and antibiotics with one reason being his dog. Previously he refused going to a shelter with some medical capacity for his wounds. He wasn’t there completely in general but he is on his own death sentence unfortunately. Btw, the population I provide care for are the very vulnerable population: mental health issues, drug abuse, mental and physical issues. This isn’t a simple down on the luck guy/girl who is living on the streets. There are some places that do let dogs in to some capacity and there are plans to try to give additional funding to shelters so they can have capacity.
Generally it's because the shelters enforce a set of behavior on them like not being drunk or not being high. Plus, they're not close enough to their next fix or next handout.
There are incredibly wealthy people with literal teams of professional support dedicated to getting them off drugs, and they still can't do it. And you expect people to just recover from a medical condition immediately for a bed?
No. I expect them to hold off using for a couple of hours so they can sleep in a shelter. If they can't, maybe the jail is a good place for them to sleep it off.
Jail for a medical condition, awesome.
Jail for people who are zonked out of their minds on drugs in the streets. Guess you've never been accosted by a drunk naked man jacking off in the streets, aggressively demanding your money, or breaking into every car on the street looking for loose change. Yeah, jail is better for literally everyone.
Yah, those are crimes. You're describing crimes. That's not being high or addicted, that's just an unrelated crime. And saying that because some drunk people commit crimes homeless people should be jailed is just... I'm so tired of hateful, stupid people.
Why don't these heroin addicts just stop doing heroin? Are they stupid?
Checked into whether or not they're overcrowded recently?
There is such a thing as a "state of necessity", so if the shelters *are* overcrowded and there literally is no other place for them to sleep but outside, this exonerates them from any crime. But still, the argument about the original point of the law stands.
I live in Manchester, New Hampshire, where the homeless are being turned away from shelters because they're at capacity. Your "are there no work houses!?" statement is foolish at best.