Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire evidently, they really that stupid in Portland

Ahhh Portland.........
Where young people go to retire.

Fuggit, it's their city. Let them have at it. Hope it works out for somebody.

I not sure the gov't owns those trailers any longer. I bought one in Hope Arkansas , then they started selling by the 10's, then by the hundreds just to get rid of them. I see them all the time, but they are privately owned now.

You don't need a chitter. Just use your host family's can, may as well, it's a village..... What better way to teach your children about the Democrat way then to open your home to freeloaders, share your chitter, share the crabs, the lice, the TB. They'll share the finer points of panhandling, thieving, alternative dress and victim playing. Gawd I miss Portland!

In most areas a small building can be up to 200 square feet and not be taxed , if it were on raw land the land would still be considered unimproved land and taxed accordingly . But the building can't be a permanent structure i.e. built on a foundation -basement etc. .
A concrete pad can be poured and the building anchored to it by local code - like 2x4 or 2x6 floor joist sitting in the concrete pad . So anything with brick exterior walls etc. wouldn't be legal . It would no longer be considered a portable structure , what a portable structure is or isn't can have varying definitions .
Some areas only allow 150 sq. ft. others 250 s.f. .

I think that it's a great idea for those that are willing to put their words into action. It's fine with me if liberals actually start shouldering some of the responsibility for the outcome of their policies. In fact all registered democrats, communist and Green Party members should be required to house and pay for the homeless.

Yep. Im sure there is federal grant money being used somewhere in this endeavor, but by and large it is there issue and it seems neighbors are stepping up, which is the way it should be.

The idea of small "tiny" homes being used for homeless is actually not a bad idea. The issue comes with the crime that permeates these camps. Damned if I'd want one in my back yard.

KC Missurah has a similar program for homeless, but it utilizes empty lots to erect a whole "tiny town" instead of locals backyards.

I'm not sure there are too many bare lots in Portland for $200k, much less one with a shock and a tarp!

Portland real estate has blown the fugg up over the last 6-8 years.

no matter how much money a City throws at the homeless problem, the problem never goes away.
Here in my fair City, we have what is euphemistically called "Dignity Village". The local tax payers ponied up a couple of million bucks to buy a no longer used State minimum security prison at the edge of town.
The homeless won't stay in the buildings, because it's a former prison and they feel stigmatized. Seriously.
So they let the homeless put up a tent city on the grounds. Nothing but crime, rape, theft, and murder there. That is what they call 'Dignity City', no one being able to see the irony of it all.
Now it's too far out for the homeless to like being there, so we spend another quarter of a million bucks each year, for FREE BUS SERVICE to and from there to down town, where they like to hang out. Our multi million dollar state of the art library is the preferred spot. Free internet (porn), AC, bathrooms and what not.
When it gets cold, the City also opens shelters, and provides free motel rooms.
For reasons like this, we can't get rid of the homeless.

Seattle may be worse than Portland when it comes to homeless. Hell, they're opening safe spots to help them shoot herion out here.

Some folks need help, some just need to be forgotten.

Look at the bright side. The loons are concentrating on both coasts. When the meltdown comes, we won't have to weed them out of flyover country ..... just keep them on the coasts. After the first winter 70% will be dead and the rest will kill one another. Then that country can be repopulated with conservative European Christians fleeing Muslim Europe.