Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The big homeless area in Boston is outside the main tourist area:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_and_Cass
Former Boston resident (but way back in the 90s), I think it's this. You can tour around Back Bay, Public Gardens, Faneuil Hall, even the Financial District, etc. and not run across the same number of homeless as you would touring around downtown DC. It's broken up now, but the homeless encampment around McPherson Square was particularly egregious (and scary, sad to say). So maybe it's not that Boston has fewer overall, but they're more out of sight from tourists.
Sigh. No “maybe” about it. Boston’s homeless problem is as big as DC’s. FACT. See previous posts.
GOOGLE people.
Boston & DC's numbers are basically the same and PP hit it on the head, the homeless are in a non-touristy area of town. MAYBE you should calm down.
Assuming that there is some registration system that tracks the number of homeless people. I don't know how that would work. Last time I checked, the mayor said we only 223 homeless.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The big homeless area in Boston is outside the main tourist area:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_and_Cass
Former Boston resident (but way back in the 90s), I think it's this. You can tour around Back Bay, Public Gardens, Faneuil Hall, even the Financial District, etc. and not run across the same number of homeless as you would touring around downtown DC. It's broken up now, but the homeless encampment around McPherson Square was particularly egregious (and scary, sad to say). So maybe it's not that Boston has fewer overall, but they're more out of sight from tourists.
Sigh. No “maybe” about it. Boston’s homeless problem is as big as DC’s. FACT. See previous posts.
GOOGLE people.
Boston & DC's numbers are basically the same and PP hit it on the head, the homeless are in a non-touristy area of town. MAYBE you should calm down.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Maybe Jeff could set up a separate forum for all of the posts hating on DC forum. Like, the "Hating On DC" forum. That would reduce a lot of the repetitive spam on this forum. If there were a "Hating on DC" forum and also a "Hating on Bike Lanes" forum, it would be even better. Or maybe they could be combined.
He has one. It is called Metropolitan DC Local Politics.
Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised people don't know about Boston's methadone mile. I pass by several times a month and it's no different from any other city's homeless phenomenon.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I have noticed this, too, specifically about Boston.
Without turning this into the 14th "DC homeless fentanyl Tenley sucks!" thread of the week ...
... does anyone know why Boston seemingly alone among large cities doesn't have the Night of the Living Dead, meth zombie encampments ? I mean, even TEXAS / Gov. Abbott big cities now have this problem (despite their willingness to ship ppl out on a Greyhound and lock up everyone for everything)
My relatives told me Boston forced all the poor people to move out in the 90s
This is probably true, but basically Massachusetts is the best state on almost any measure of social well-being. Across the board in so many categories.
False
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The big homeless area in Boston is outside the main tourist area:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_and_Cass
Former Boston resident (but way back in the 90s), I think it's this. You can tour around Back Bay, Public Gardens, Faneuil Hall, even the Financial District, etc. and not run across the same number of homeless as you would touring around downtown DC. It's broken up now, but the homeless encampment around McPherson Square was particularly egregious (and scary, sad to say). So maybe it's not that Boston has fewer overall, but they're more out of sight from tourists.
Sigh. No “maybe” about it. Boston’s homeless problem is as big as DC’s. FACT. See previous posts.
GOOGLE people.
Boston & DC's numbers are basically the same and PP hit it on the head, the homeless are in a non-touristy area of town. MAYBE you should calm down.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The big homeless area in Boston is outside the main tourist area:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_and_Cass
Former Boston resident (but way back in the 90s), I think it's this. You can tour around Back Bay, Public Gardens, Faneuil Hall, even the Financial District, etc. and not run across the same number of homeless as you would touring around downtown DC. It's broken up now, but the homeless encampment around McPherson Square was particularly egregious (and scary, sad to say). So maybe it's not that Boston has fewer overall, but they're more out of sight from tourists.
Sigh. No “maybe” about it. Boston’s homeless problem is as big as DC’s. FACT. See previous posts.
GOOGLE people.
Anonymous wrote:Maybe Jeff could set up a separate forum for all of the posts hating on DC forum. Like, the "Hating On DC" forum. That would reduce a lot of the repetitive spam on this forum. If there were a "Hating on DC" forum and also a "Hating on Bike Lanes" forum, it would be even better. Or maybe they could be combined.
Anonymous wrote:There’s an underlying implication in Boston that any provocation will be responded to swiftly and disproportionately. This is probably necessary to keep certain groups from habitually acting out.
Anonymous wrote:The big homeless area in Boston is outside the main tourist area:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_and_Cass
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The big homeless area in Boston is outside the main tourist area:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_and_Cass
Former Boston resident (but way back in the 90s), I think it's this. You can tour around Back Bay, Public Gardens, Faneuil Hall, even the Financial District, etc. and not run across the same number of homeless as you would touring around downtown DC. It's broken up now, but the homeless encampment around McPherson Square was particularly egregious (and scary, sad to say). So maybe it's not that Boston has fewer overall, but they're more out of sight from tourists.