There've been a group of homeless folks encamped under a railroad bridge for the last year or more -- now the rail operator needs to work on the bridge and the city is pushing them out. Some have already pulled up stakes; others are refusing to go.
No tanks or flamethrowers, though I won't be surprised to see a bulldozer or two before it's over.
Plenty of people in comments at the linked story are expressing support but so far, none of them are offering their own back yard. Funny, that, but not very. What're you gonna do? Chase them off to shelters? (Not always the safest option.) Should the city find some tolerable spot for a "hobo jungle," a barrio? Ought tax money dig 'em latrines and pipe in water, police them for crime and too-obvious vice? Or do we keep letting them settle in overlookable corners and then shoo them out to find another when the mess and bother gets too offensive? --Either way, they're not going to just dissolve.
(And how come it's not an "Obamaville," or, by historical analogy, a "Bushville?")
The poor, we're told, will always be with us, and there are few folks poorer than those living under a bridge. Some of the people and organizations trying to help out seem to've provided tents...but no land to put under them.
One Evening On Kansas II
1 week ago