For a normal bench with arm rests just at the sides obviously isn’t hostile, but if they put them in the middle so people can’t lie down to take a nap / sleep at night it can be considered hostile or just a “camping deterrent” might be a more accurate description.
Most major homeless camp in my county is right next to entrance to navy air base, this seems unusual.
You could be right… But I wonder how effectual homeless sleeper cells could be without any resources. But your comment reminds me of that old adage about Chinese restaurants… They are in every city, they deal in cash and some of them (not all) are probably sleeper cells. Another interesting thing about Chinese restaurants is the NEVER advertise, no commercials, no print ads, etc., it’s actually kind of refreshing.
Not the pigeons too lol!!! This thread reminds me of a quote about designing trash cans that keep bears out (i.e. hostile trashcans 
)
I guess it’s hostile to create attractive architectural features that defend themselves against becoming antisocial landmarks for the cesspool lifestyle.
America’s accommodations to disfunction are no answer for any question. The concept of Hostile Architecture, however, is most definitely the answer to this question: Who’s your daddy?
Who is the father of the houseless then?
That would be the local gangster, Lue the Cipher, no?
BTW, benches made of steel are no fun at all for the elderly or handicapped in cold weather.
Have never heard of this Lue a Cipher individual you speak of.
nope!, there are other, even now employed like Charity and/or Volunteerism for making the Life of Homeless more bearable … social services are also systemic way but more like survival glitch around the problem … and more logical step is introducing Subsidized Rural Communes as fastest mean for resolving this issue … yet someone long for ghettoization of the masses in urban cages so its not even interested in resolving this issue in context of the current system, while longing as fast as possible to rig circumstances for technocracy and planned economy so would secure its utopian euroatlantic agendas!, thus its introducing not hostile but broiler architecture!
in the next linked thread there is some ontopic exploration of the issue, that is far from coherent or final stance of mine, but it gets close to the current dissonance of problems and solutions that we are witnessing due to the splash of Life On Debt and/or broilered chances for progress success and transcendence towards Happy Citizens that are sustaining the system and live long after 
~ RENTERS: Hear This Guy Out! Rents Could Be About To Go Waaay Up! - #2 by Pelister
But communal living does not solve the fact that for every dollar printed, more than a dollar of debt is owed, who will be your new people who now owe the debt? Besides what if the homeless people dont want to be exiled to a rural commune, what if these homeless strangers who have been relocated to communes don’t like each other, what happens if they don’t contribute (are they kicked out to become homeless again), who is going to pay for it, who is going to teach them how to farm and where would the money come from? If the farm has a bad year, who covers the loss… If it had a good year, who gets the benefits? If the benefits are distributed equally but some people have harder jobs than others, how do you keep them doing the harder jobs.
Our current debt-based fractional reserve system that is based on debt instead of real assets ensures that there is and always will be an underclass. Communes wont fix that in my opinion.
we are going too oftopic in this thread like this, I’ll propose to continue in new thread, hope will find time for it simply its too important to be forgotten, just know if I was living on street and it was offered to me decent home with means to selfsustain it will be rejected only if have second thoughts that could become experimental rat in someones social experiment, lsd and prisoners comes to mind!, yet if things are fully public and with rural commune system that has practical means for compatibility among residents, but also evaluation of behavior and through it chance for advancement to next levels like own housing reached by merit, then dont see why someone would reject such offer, maybe not all homeless will accept such deal but all enough aware that they will loose their health living like hobos without doubt will took the oportunity!
back ontopic I see this “hostile” urban furniture not so problematic from ergonomic aspect but from aesthetic one i.e. gives wrong emphasis on the urban space pulling down or confusing the observer, at least this is my impression from first look interactively!, also the approach looks like braking an fractal in small instead the urban furniture to be contributing if not connected part of all the space around!, maybe workable solution for prisons tho, and hm maybe we are warned aetherically like this that cities indeed will become con.camps!?
anyway, this trend especially with the no-bench-approach on public stations will provoke interesting trends like having folded plastic chairs behind the baggage, useful also if end up nowhere mids the trip, and if that becomes normal routine surely baggage companies will offer such extensions for temporary camping alike stretchable seating as part of the luggage!?, hm hm hm paracord hammock attached on two telescopic poles on heavy wheeled base of two suitcases, hm with detachable ballast before departure on plane coz cheaper weight fees I mean how else to be cornered this kind of lunatic solutions of megacities regards the fear from hobos and the needs of citizens to rest a bit somewhere and that to be free of charge!?
Honestly, I can appreciate people trying to come up with solutions… However, subsidized communal living does not align with my value system, so that’s a debate rabbit hole that I would not go down… But. I would definitely read the thread for entertainment if you post it… It would be a fun debate to watch unfold, just not take part in!
It can be difficult to make anything subsidized work well and for people to be happy about that working, when you are talking about government subsidies of money from tax revenue.
Nothing about that even makes any sense at all when as you say the whole currency system is debt based and there is more than a dollar owed for every dollar printed, how is that even possible?
Community based living can be a good thing, that is how many civilizations developed from little towns where people worked together and didn’t spend all their time texting to folks they’ve never met in other countries.
I agree Bahri… When the system collapses, whether it is 1 year from now or 50 years from now… My hunch is that small like minded communities will be the future. Not diverse communities, not subsidized communities, not strangers who occupy the same space… There is something to communities that works Unfortunately taxes keep communes dependent on the system, so they usually fail. The Amish are an amazing example of a community that has succeeded despite all the attacks from the government.
Bahri every time a dollar is printed at the federal reserve, the only way that dollar makes it into circulation is if it is borrowed, with interest, from the federal reserve, either by a bank or the government. So for example if 100 dollars is printed at the federal reserve, then 105 dollars (depends on the interest rate, usually it is a small percentage) is owed to the federal reserve from whoever borrows the money. It is a ponzi scheme. You will never have enough money to pay the debt.
It gets even more convoluted when banks start loaning money they do not even have. If a bank has 100 dollars in cash, they can loan out 2000 dollars worth of promissory notes. If you or I did that we would be arrested, but banks can loan money that does not exist.
So to sum it all up…for every dollar that exists a debt that is larger than a dollar exist. Eventually the system will crash like all ponzi schemes… That is why the powers that be are pushing for digital currency.
That makes sense, and the collapse has already begun. I’m being sued by a couple of banks for minor credit debt but the courts don’t even care about those cases.
Federal student loans are different hope to be at least able to pay those so taxpayers won’t get more upset.
One other way new bills are put into circulation is if they are replacements for if they destroy old damaged or defaced bills.
That’s weird because I’ve been looking at all my bills (different denominations) for at least 6 months and I have never seen one dated past 2017.
Maybe that isn’t true but thought they did that.
They might have used to do that but I find it very strange that none were dated past 2017.
… The Russians showed how to build a wall and the French showed how to build a penal facility. Just sayin’.
Maybe that is “2017 edition,” not necessarily when they were printed?
There has never been any money in architecture.
