Desperate people do desperate things. Living next to one of these camps is always tense, one doesn't go out alone after dusk, one has to add razor wire and more locks and more security or people WILL break in, gangs and dealers move in on camps almost immediately so there are weapons and fencing and chop shops and etc. There is noise 24/7, generators and music and screaming and fights and whatnot. ODs, sirens, cops, more screaming, more fights, weapons used. People start fires and they quickly get out of hand. Cleaning up piss, shit, needles, garbage, and blood so you can use your front door - daily. Garbage accumulates inside the camps; rats rats rats and more rats and eventually disease. Angry fucked up people destroy stuff for no reason beyond expressing their anger. I've lived next door to one and a couple blocks away from another, and even with all the empathy in the world you still have to deal with the negative side effects and they are not trivial. And that's not to mention that the camp is probably located on a park or other public amenity, so the public use of that area is lost.
There's bugger all I can do in the short term as an individual to convince the government to build more social housing, which is the actual solution, but I CAN call the cops and politicians and "demand that something be done", and the cops and politicians are ever-ready for an excuse to look indispensable. Vancouver has a new mayor elected on exactly this premise - he's going to "clean up" the camps, without ever talking about socialized housing. He's going to do this by hiring 100 more cops. And people will throw money at him to do it. The candidates who DID talk about public housing got less than 20% of the already pathetic voter turnout (nowhere in the Vancouver area was it over 39% of eligible voters) and people will tell you upfront it's because they don't see why they should pay for someone else's housing when their own is already so expensive - and that's as far as they're willing to think through the issue. The low voter turnout in itself is a message - most of the electorate do not feel their vote is meaningful.
no subject
There's bugger all I can do in the short term as an individual to convince the government to build more social housing, which is the actual solution, but I CAN call the cops and politicians and "demand that something be done", and the cops and politicians are ever-ready for an excuse to look indispensable. Vancouver has a new mayor elected on exactly this premise - he's going to "clean up" the camps, without ever talking about socialized housing. He's going to do this by hiring 100 more cops. And people will throw money at him to do it. The candidates who DID talk about public housing got less than 20% of the already pathetic voter turnout (nowhere in the Vancouver area was it over 39% of eligible voters) and people will tell you upfront it's because they don't see why they should pay for someone else's housing when their own is already so expensive - and that's as far as they're willing to think through the issue. The low voter turnout in itself is a message - most of the electorate do not feel their vote is meaningful.
Or was your question entirely rhetorical :)