Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 658964091997782066
Oh yeah... the naturalistic fallacy and the is/ought gap are basically one and the same
You can't get from "It is good to live" to "You ought to live" through reason alone
sure
anti-natalism gang <:PEPELAUGH:643817011117424708>
@muhahahahe you online?
mmh
what up?
The death grip
Lol
Economy of scale
@Tbg1203 Unironically, it's cheaper more efficient to have homeless in places where it's easier to get goods to them
Urban areas
Yeah
I don't have the exact reasoning, but this is one possible reason
Communist boi has down stats on this
What's the relevance of 125?
66 is the delorian
Or 68 mph
I don't even know where these memes went
Yeah, this is ... obvious / basic economics of comparative advantage
It is cheaper to live in certain locales
If you wanted to care for your homeless, it seems wisest to move them into one of the cheapest locales
However... this naturally leads to the counter argument that you're gentrifying
Which... has a bad history
Tangential meme on concentration camps though... I'd agree to basically any semantic name like calling the detainment camps of Mexicans at our border such... I just don't know what conditions it actually entails
I've heard it's shit at our Mexican border though... people starving, no food, shower, water, etc
So no basic needs met
@actual_communist_boi cummy boi, where is it cheapest to concentration camp the homeless? <:Smug:643129431434461194>
Modest Proposal up in here
...
What a frightening question
@L.A.IN Don't ever compare me to Bent
It's a pragmatic question... economists do this constantly since they need to know where comparative advantage lies
Also, it came up because people are saying cities are moving their homeless around to other cities