Chaos on the streets

[njbiodude]

Originally Posted by bad debt

Have you been to other major cities?

Yes a lot, and recently.

F*** even wandering throw Newark NJ two years ago and it was depressing to note the characters were a lot less filthy than SF or LA. And Newark isn’t nice or safe and hasn’t been since about 1965.

Nice areas of NYC were far nicer than LA or SF. Boston same. Jacksonville, Raleigh etc—same.

[bad debt]

Originally Posted by njbiodude

Yes a lot, and recently.

F*** even wandering throw Newark NJ two years ago and it was depressing to note the characters were a lot less filthy than SF or LA. And Newark isn’t nice or safe and hasn’t been since about 1965.

Nice areas of NYC were far nicer than LA or SF. Boston same. Jacksonville, Raleigh etc—same.

Feel free to visit Portland, Seattle, Chicago, or Baltimore. You can see it there. Here are the cities with the most heroin use.

[tstieber]

Originally Posted by njbiodude

For public overdoses in broad daylight?

Keep dreaming. I haven’t seen that anywhere else

If you look on youtube, you can see it's everywhere. It just depends where you are in which city and what time. I live in San diego, and we currently have some small pockets of homeless east of downtown, where people look passed out on the sidewalk. Whether they are passed out from tranq or alcohol or are just sleeping, I have no idea. Never actually seen someone pass out in front of me though

[mattja]

Originally Posted by wac_432

I dunno, would it? I guess it depends on whether the pipeline in of new addict creation is wider than the pipeline out of overdose deaths.

Narcan narrows the out pipe, but eventually you fall through that crack as well, when you OD in a riverbed or alone in an alleyway or room and nobody notices to call the paramedics in time.

The homeless addicts we see in our cities are most likely to be saved by Narcan and live to OD again. They are close to both the dealers and the first responders that provide Narcan. And they are fed and aided by the non-profits of the homelessness industry.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by mattja

The homeless addicts we see in our cities are most likely to be saved by Narcan and live to OD again.

It appears that there's not enough supply to meet the demand.

In Colorado, two years ago: Narcan demand outweighs supply as homeless overdose deaths skyrocket:
https://kdvr.com/news/problem-solver...ths-skyrocket/

In this cohort study of 60,092 individuals experiencing homeless in Boston, Massachusetts, drug overdose accounted for 1 in 4 deaths.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2787711

An Exploration of Narcan as a Harm Reduction Strategy and User’s Attitudes toward Law Enforcement Involvement in Overdose Cases:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8954857/

[mattja]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

It appears that there's not enough supply to meet the demand.

In Colorado, two years ago: Narcan demand outweighs supply as homeless overdose deaths skyrocket:
https://kdvr.com/news/problem-solver...ths-skyrocket/

In this cohort study of 60,092 individuals experiencing homeless in Boston, Massachusetts, drug overdose accounted for 1 in 4 deaths.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2787711

An Exploration of Narcan as a Harm Reduction Strategy and User’s Attitudes toward Law Enforcement Involvement in Overdose Cases:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8954857/

They'll make more and the taxpayers will pay for it.

[cheapdad00]

Originally Posted by RayHammer

A few things could skew the data here. The map shows only deaths per 100k population. It doesn't tell us anything about overall usage (although deaths could be considered a proxy measurement).

It's also possible that usage in other states is happening in more rural areas where first responders are less likely to save someone overdosing.

Other states might not be so keen on providing life-saving measures, either due to not wanting to spend money on the resources, or simply preferring that the addicts just die (which is my preference) so that they are no longer a burden.

It's also possible that California's drug inventory is simply less lethal.

Another possibility is that because California attracts druggies from other areas due to a combination of handouts and lax enforcement of open-air drug use, that the population there is more experienced which can lead to either having greater levels of tolerance, or being more aware of amounts that could lead to an overdose (likely both).

The CDC map also only shows data BY THE STATE, but tells us nothing about what is happening in third or fourth tier geographies. A more accurate picture would break things down by county, or if possible, by zip code. This is similar to the problem with crime rates where states like Louisiana indeed have a high rate of crime, but virtually all of it is concentrated in New Orleans, Baton Rouge and Shreveport. A similar situation arises in Ohio where the vast majority of crime happens in Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Toledo with a little around Columbus. Granted, drug use in Ohio is likely just as heavy in Appalachia (the southeast of that state) as it is in the cities and may even be higher per capita in the rural areas. So everything is very nuanced and really needs to be explored locality by locality.





The visibility of it is what bothers me. If you can somehow be a functioning addict and it only affects you inside of your own home then the libertarian side of me says that that's your personal choice.

My problem is when it affects society as a whole. The presence of these people alone drags down the "vibe" of an area, which affects businesses, property values, tourism, and overall quality of life, just like litter or broken down cars or boarded up houses (and obviously these things cycle into and feed off each other). The lower quality of life actually attracts criminals and crime, and that crime in turn leads to further lowering quality of life.

For vertical cities, in addition to per capita metrics, there needs to be a per area metric (as well as for crime). As that would reflect a better measurement of the chances that event would impact/be visible to you in your daily life.

Using the CDC data posted earlier (and making the state rates apply at the city level - which is just for the exercise):
The overdose rate is 30 per 100k in NY (~10 per 30K people) but 39 per 100K in NC (~1.2 per 3K people), then applying those rates to population density, you get a view of how many times the problem happens within a square mile.

If you are in NYC, where population density is 30K people per sq. mile, you would expect to see 10 overdoses in that 1 sq. mile per year.
If you are in Raleigh, where population density is ~3K people per sq. mile, you would expect to see 1.2 overdoses in that 1 sq. mile in Raleigh. Or you would have to expand your area to ~8sq. miles to find 10 overdoses per annum you see in NYC.

So even though the rate is lower in NYC, it is more concentrated in the space you traverse every day, thus making it more visible.

[ditchlights]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

The statistics win, my friend. California’s drug problem isn’t any worse than average across the nation.

You're right, but that is only because the statistics are for the entire state as a whole, which waters things down quite a bit. When broken down by city/county, the pictures look quite different I'm sure.

Oregon and Washington are in the middle of the pack as well per the state map, but if you broke it down by county, the Portland and Seattle areas would be lit up like a christmas tree.

[RayHammer]

Originally Posted by mattja

The homeless addicts we see in our cities are most likely to be saved by Narcan and live to OD again. They are close to both the dealers and the first responders that provide Narcan. And they are fed and aided by the non-profits of the homelessness industry.

Agreed. This is likely why DEATHS, but not use alone, might be higher in percentage terms in more rural or semi-rural areas. If you are OD-ing in your trailer deep in some holler in Appalachia no one is coming to get you. Even if they do, those back roads are treacherous both in and out.

The dealers have every incentive to keep people alive of course, as does the Homelessness Industrial Complex. They want the dollars coming in, but don't have to prove that they're attaining meaningful results.

[Axxlrod]

Typical blue city run by Democrats.