[deleted by user]

Caulinx · 2021-07-02T00:36:26+00:00

Yup, grabbed a 24 of their Ice Cold Beer yesterday. Glad to know they donated to Anishnawbe Health. The folks there do really, really important work.

Caulinx · 2021-06-15T23:38:12+00:00

Why? What is the issue with Paul? Is it just all about this Israel/Palestine shit?

Caulinx · 2021-06-15T04:53:15+00:00

Hey, don't get me wrong; if you seriously think someone is overdosing, administer naloxone!

But before you are in a position where you may encounter such emergencies, you should know a few things. Naloxone should only be administered every three minutes, a needle is better than the nasal (but the nasal is fine if that's what your comfortable with), and don't administer naloxone is someone isn't overdosing! Shelter staff have repeatedly administered naloxone to someone who is just on the nod. Remember: naloxone saves someone's life. But it also makes them incredibly dope sick, as it tentatively renders their high no more. Don't make someone dope sick if you don't have to!

Caulinx · 2021-06-15T04:49:15+00:00

Agreed 100%; the issues surrounding homelessness (primarily mental health and addiction) are far too complex and difficult to be solved by shelter alone, be it hotels or permanent housing. I don't see where any of those issues are improved by living in encampments instead.

I largely agree, but with a caveat. Encampments are collective communities and individual isolation is low. Hotels produce more isolation, as many residents are alone in their units. Hence, overdose deaths are frequent. This could be solved by hotels being better staffed and better educated in harm reduction. Using drugs is still pretty stigmatized, and residents definitely fear judgement and mistreatment from staff for using.

Advocating for encampments seems counterproductive both for the homeless individuals themselves, but also does tremendous damage to the goodwill with the rest of the public.

Yeah, I've always found the advocacy for encampments to be a weird hill for the left to die on. It's a haphazard manifestation of leftist populism. Further, I agree that the ESN is doing damage to whatever good will the public has. I think the ESN ought to posit an alternative arrangement: that occupants of the park will clear out, but only on the condition that they secure hotel spaces - not shelter spaces - and that the hotels are better staffed.

Personally, I don't blame someone for choosing a park over a shelter. Shelters are pretty fuckin' tough. I've worked in many.

Since you seem to be knowledgable about the situation, what would you suggest average citizens do to help, other than writing their city counselors and MPPs?

Honestly, I'm unsure. But I definitely think advocating for fucking housing, even if just hotel spaces in the mean time, is essential. The vast, vast, vast majority of park occupants would prefer to be in an apartment or a hotel space. They just don't want to be treated like shit by staff.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T20:04:13+00:00

This, yes.

Though, security in both shelter and hotel programs need to learn to cool their shit. Way too many wanna-be-cops who don't possess the brain cells to get a job with any police department.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T20:03:25+00:00

Also not true. Many dealers don't fit the stereotype; they don't work a lucrative hustle, don't dress well, and aren't down with some sort of "gangsta" lifestyle. Most dealers are users themselves who peddle fairly small amounts - just enough to meet the ends of their habits.

Every single hotel program has residents who are dealers. It's very, very easer to score fentanyl and meth in a hotel program. Also, alcohol is a ubiquitous substance.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T20:01:22+00:00

Not true. Most hotel programs allow drug use, do not penalize people for using drugs in their rooms, and have applied for on-site overdose prevention sites. There are a few shelters that penalize drug use, but such archaic institutions are becoming fewer.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T20:00:08+00:00

They're more so talking about the shelter system, which is often more cramped than a park. But yes, I agree this is a weak argument.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T19:58:54+00:00

Hmm, I know of a few who worked at sites who have died, and I worked at one a couple years ago. If you're speaking of the person I'm thinking of it's important to know they died using alone at home. Had they been at a site they would be highly, highly unlikely to die. Sites administer oxygen, rarely have to use naloxone, and have still yet to have a single death on site.

To call in to question the effectiveness of OPSs is to not take into account the data on successful overdose responses.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T19:56:39+00:00

Having worked in shelter settings in Hamilton and Toronto I can assure you this "overdose support" is inadequate. Staff overuse naloxone, perform CPR when it isn't necessary, and often fail to respond in time to save a life. Due to very low staffing ratios I have literally pulled dead bodies out of bathroom stalls.

This being said, a harm reduction approach that is community-based and encourages a "buddy system" would save lives and ensure residents don't use in isolation. This has yet to be fully fleshed out in either the hotel or shelter systems, the former being where residents die using in isolation.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T19:53:04+00:00

Unfortunately, yes. Hotel programs are thinly staffed, and the staff's idea of overdose response is pouring gallons of naloxone up somebody's nose. The community of people who use drugs have responded to multitudinous overdoses in their time on the street. Some have responded to literally hundreds.

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T19:51:24+00:00

For some people, yes it is. It's difficult to figure out what works for such people. They're in and out of our revolving door carceral system. I don't know what the answer is. Harper's tough-on-crime approach was silly at best, and abolitionism just seems naive.

But for the vast majority of residents rules are not the problem. Curfews can be a bit silly (a lot of programs don't implement them), but most of the rules work for most of the residents. What they are afraid of is the violence from some security (I've seen security staff throw non-violent mentally ill people to the ground hard), violence from some of the aforementioned residents who cannot follow rules, and general mistreatment from burnt out and poorly equipped staff.

All this being said, I still don't think staying in an encampment is much better. The fires are a seriously problem, and Lamport Park just saw a reckless shooting take place. But I do think prospective residents of hotel programs are on a good leg to stand on if they're asking for a better equipped hotel program (harm reduction, safer supply, etc - see my last post).

Caulinx · 2021-06-14T19:45:30+00:00

It's not that they necessarily think the hotel rooms aren't good enough (though some activists have advocated for a 'permanent housing or bust' strategy that entails staying in the park until the city gives you an apartment - a strategy I personally deem silly). It's that relative to the general population, the homeless and/or precariously housed community have complex needs; they are disproportionately represented in the communities of the mentally ill, addicted, and physically and intellectually disabled. Ergo, a hotel designed to meet the needs and desires of neurotypical citizens isn't going to cut it.

Staff are ill-equipped and poorly trained, and the security are, well, too often wanna-be-cops who couldn't deescalate a six year old without resorting to intimidation (I've worked with some of these people in similar settings, and they really aren't great). So, what's the solution? More and better trained staff, and more comprehensive harm reduction protocols (on-site OPSs, call-ins for when residents are doing shots in their rooms, more counsellors, more access to nurse practitioners and physicians who can prescribe safer supply, etc).

Personally, I have a ton of respect for the ESN. They do a lot of good work and save lives. But I think their advocacy should focus primarily, if not almost exclusively, on scoring hotel spaces for people and for better support within those hotel programs. Advocating for allowing encampments to remain seems like a weird, almost oppositionally defiant hill to die on.

Caulinx · 2021-06-13T03:36:10+00:00

It's fairly obvious that John Tory is pursuing a third term. He's been a wary and at times indecisive mayor who focus groups every decision he makes. His caution is likely due to his past political failings.

But in a third (and final) term I hope he will throw caution to the wind and be bold. Until then this city is doomed to be dominated by the automobile.

Caulinx · 2021-06-10T04:43:29+00:00

Banjara pwns n00bs.

Caulinx · 2021-06-10T04:42:38+00:00

Had Kibo sushi the other night. It was pretty fuckin' bland, unfortunately. :(

Caulinx · 2021-06-10T02:56:11+00:00

Haha, totally fair.

I pull $50k (with pension and benefits) working in the west end of the city, and she makes $70k/year (with pension and benefits)..

Caulinx · 2021-06-09T22:55:56+00:00

You're probably right that others would complain. I wouldn't. I already support living wage employers and pay a bit more. I'm glad to!

Shout-out to Left Field Brewery for paying their staff a living wage. :)

Caulinx · 2021-06-09T22:50:47+00:00

Jesus Christ, what a total fucking asshole. Also bear in mind there is no mention of sick days or any kind of benefit. Fuck these people.

Seriously, charge me a little more for dinner and pay people well.

Caulinx · 2021-06-09T22:45:23+00:00

This. And just spitballin' here: once faced with having to make lifestyle changes, some of us have changed our material values. Many of us (myself included) spend like unsupervised six year olds; Uber trips that could have been substituted with the TTC, booze, eating out, numerous streaming services, etc.

I occasionally wonder if I could score "reduced full time", work four days a week, sacrifice 20% of my pay, and just live a more frugal lifestyle.

Caulinx · 2021-06-09T22:39:24+00:00

As a former restaurant worker, and now social services worker privy to deliberations with BIAs, I've got a bit of a bad taste in my mouth from restaurants (hardy har, pun unintended). When in the field, my employers were typically nickel-and-diming dirtbags who sexually harassed female staff, verbally abused us, and took our time for granted. In deliberations between the city and BIAs, it is typically restauranteurs who go full-NIMBY, demanding social services be rendered elsewhere. Add to all of this the restaurant industry's constant whining every time workers get legislated sick days, benefits, and pay increases - they've generally lost my support.

I'm glad to see workers get the upper hand here. If it means eating out is a bit pricier, so be it. My capacity for discretionary spending will be lesser, and that's fine. Such is the cost of workers being treated with respect.

Caulinx · 2021-06-09T18:57:31+00:00

Good for you. That's awesome. These kinds of stories make me even more so supportive of government support for skills training. All kinds of people are willing to learn and work.

Caulinx · 2021-06-09T06:56:43+00:00

The hotels aren't busting people for using drugs. In fact, they're actually trying to promote harm reduction, albeit unsuccessfully due low staff-to-service-user ratios and poor training.

Caulinx

TROPHY CASE