Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday December 08 2017, @05:24PM   Printer-friendly
from the don't-walk-barefoot dept.

San Diego continues to face a hepatitis A outbreak:

Like other major cities all along the West Coast, San Diego is struggling with a homeless crisis. In a place that bills itself as "America's Finest City," spiraling real estate values have contributed to spiraling homelessness, leaving more than 3,200 people living on the streets or in their cars.

Most alarmingly, the deplorable sanitary conditions help spread a liver-damaging virus that lives in fæces, contributing to the deadliest U.S. hepatitis A epidemic in 20 years. "Some of the most vulnerable are dying in the streets in one of the most desirable and livable regions in America," a San Diego County grand jury wrote in its report in June — reiterating recommendations it gave the city over the past decade to address homelessness.

San Diego has struggled to do that. Two years ago, Mayor Kevin Faulconer closed a downtown tent shelter that operated for 29 years during winter months. He promised a "game changer" — a new, permanent facility with services to funnel people to housing. But it wasn't enough. The result? Legions of Californians without shelter. A spreading contagion. And an extraordinary challenge to the city's sunny identity that threatens its key tourism industry.

Previously: San Diego Declares Emergency Due to Outbreak of Hepatitis A
San Diego Power-Washing Streets to Fight Hepatitis A Outbreak


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Friday December 08 2017, @06:12PM (8 children)

    by meustrus (4961) on Friday December 08 2017, @06:12PM (#607312)

    Why limit yourself to just west of the Mississippi? The upper midwest tends to be the most productive farmland. Everyone gets crop insurance subsidies. And most of the shipping infrastructure is government-managed, not to mention financial instruments, land ownership claims, corporate protections/welfare to make sure they're in control of the benefits of technological innovation...

    --
    If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by legont on Friday December 08 2017, @06:37PM (7 children)

    by legont (4179) on Friday December 08 2017, @06:37PM (#607333)

    Shhhh... most kids here still believe in free market mantra. One point in a time...

    But more seriously, upper midwest would survive without the government while places like California or Texas would go under in a year or two.

    Besides, food industry can and should grow at the population rate, but at this rate nobody ever would invest anything in it, but the government.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Friday December 08 2017, @07:23PM (6 children)

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 08 2017, @07:23PM (#607360)

      Its interesting that you can search n replace fossil fuels (and fossil water aka Ogallala Aquifer) and get about the same result. Midwest without saudi arabian crude, not so good but we'll live. Out west without saudi crude, tens of millions gonna have to move or die. Midwest is long term sustainable, out west is a temporary blip. There's a reason aside from smallpox why the original native americans would be outnumbered about 10000:1 by the modern USA residents. Without the underground aquifer (which is nearing empty) and without crude oil and without electricity the westerners are all dead in weeks at most. There's no sustainable human model for depopulating an area by exactly 99%, although we have plenty of historical and archaeological examples of 100% depopulation. Its highly unlikely that a century from now there will be more than, perhaps, 10M people west of the Mississippi, virtually all in the upper NW and along the coasts. You can cheat mother nature for awhile and build a Vegas in the desert, but Ma Nature always wins in the end...

      • (Score: 2, Troll) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday December 08 2017, @08:51PM (2 children)

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday December 08 2017, @08:51PM (#607412) Journal

        And you're jizzing your pants over the thought of all those latte-swilling, Democrat-voting, college-degree-having, homo-bi-pan-trans-poly-a-sexual lib'rul traitors suffering and dying, aren't you? You'd just love that.

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
        • (Score: 2, Funny) by Sulla on Friday December 08 2017, @09:30PM (1 child)

          by Sulla (5173) on Friday December 08 2017, @09:30PM (#607443) Journal

          I think if he was wanting that he would be more concerned that nothing would happen to DC/Virginia/New York

          --
          Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
          • (Score: 4, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday December 08 2017, @10:16PM

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday December 08 2017, @10:16PM (#607464) Journal

            I think the dumb bastard thinks the coasts are entirely the same everywhere and assumed it would. We're not exactly dealing with a deep thinker here; this is VLM, master of the pseudo-profound and badly-closeted RWA-nutjob talking points.

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Friday December 08 2017, @10:40PM (1 child)

        by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Friday December 08 2017, @10:40PM (#607476) Homepage Journal

        We get our oil from many states. And from the Saudis, terrific guys. Our biggest oil producing states are TX, AK, CA, OK & ND, in that order. In that order. And we need all of it, even that California oil. Because our economy is growing AMAZINGLY.

        One thing we're doing in the Tax Cut bill, we're opening up the ANWR so our oil companies can get to that oil. We're ending decades of federal overreach. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama believe the natural resources of Alaska should be controlled by a small handful of very distant bureaucrats located in Washington. And guess what? They are wrong. We want to put that oil in the hands of the people who care about it. Our great oil companies. They know how to drill for it. And they know best how to pump this oil for many, many months to come.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 08 2017, @11:31PM

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 08 2017, @11:31PM (#607507) Journal

          We want to put that oil in the hands of the people who care about it. Our great oil companies. They know how to drill for it. And they know best how to pump this oil for many, many months to come.

          Yuuuuge mistake. No longer the 1970'ies world.

          * 1970 - expensive oil meant economic crisis [wikipedia.org]

          * 2017 - oil prices slump drags down Wall Street and share markets around the world [bostonherald.com] - more oil, closer to crisis**

          (grin)

          ---

          ** If you think there's no relation with homelessness, think again. If you still don't get it, ask.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 09 2017, @01:12AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 09 2017, @01:12AM (#607540)

        Have you not been paying attention? We haven't needed Saudi oil in forever. Canada has plenty. And even in some hypothetical situation where we can't use that, natural gas has already made us largely energy independent. How do people not notice any of this.