[yur3i__]

>We lost gobs of tenants and the riff raff tookover

Not trying to get into an argument but you are no more entitled to the city than your fellow citizens aka the "riff raff"

[ipsento606]

I'm also not trying to get into an argument, but totally disagree, and honestly believe that your attitude leads to an untenable breakdown of the social contract.

I don't agree with use of the tongue-in-cheek term "riff raff" for unhoused people living in tents and shanties on the sideway. And I think such people deserve help.

But yes, they have less of a right to live on the sidewalk than the right of people and businesses that pay rent and expect public spaces that are usable, safe, and free of people so intoxicated that they have lost contact with reality and are not safe to be around.

[ynac]

And I can't disagree with either, especially the riff raff usage, but the term "takeover" was the one intended to play the important role in the sentence. And it wasn't for the unhoused - but the dealers and traffickers.

[allthetime]

Paying rent and taxes and following the law are exactly what entitle someone to more than someone who does not in our society.

[adjejmxbdjdn]

“Paying rent”

Is someone living with their friends, relatives, family, entitled to less in a society?

[allthetime]

Well, yes. You have less rights over the place you live because you live there entirely at the mercy of the person who legally owns/rents it.

I, a renter, can’t renovate the house I live in. The owner can. You, a house guest, can’t unilaterally decide to change my WiFi password.