5 ms·

I see a potential solution to Los Angeles's homeless population.

by supercanuck 10y ago

draw_down 10y ago
You mean, give them homes on farms? Sure, why not.
- kodfodrasz 10y ago
  Why give them work with decent wages? Just give people what they need: free stuff! Seriously, you were just joking, were you?
  - trentmb 10y ago
    Free housing is one of the benefits mentioned in the article.
    - kodfodrasz 10y ago
      This may help people get out of the hopeless situation, although I'm not sure how long an agricultural season is in California, here it is limited to at most 2/3 of the year, so this is a temporary solution at best.
  - anoonmoose 10y ago
    I doubt they were joking. The homeless need homes more than they need jobs.
    - kodfodrasz 10y ago
      It is hard to determine which is needed more, as a home has costs, loosing a job leads usually loosing a home. I believe both are equally important, and this is kind of a snake biting its own tail problem, as without a home it is very hard to get a job. (Although I can imagine someone living in a car temporarily in mild weather conditions, it would be impossible to survive a winter that way here in Central Europe) Hopefully this opportunity will help those in need.
      - zeroer 10y ago
        > loosing It's spelled "loosening", btw.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        kodfodrasz 10y ago
        It's misspelled indeed, but I'm pretty much sure I wanted to write losing. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lose https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lose
        chrisbennet 10y ago
        Looks like autocorrect may have "helped" you. I think you meant "It's spelled losing.." (not "loosening")
Kluny 10y ago
If I was homeless in LA, I still wouldn't work for 16 bucks an hour in the hot sun around dangerous chemicals with no benefits in the middle of nowhere.
- edblarney 10y ago
  " I still wouldn't work for 16 bucks an hour in the hot sun around dangerous chemicals with no benefits in the middle of nowhere." You wouldn't work for what is about 20% above the national wage, to feed yourself, put a roof over your head? If most people share your sentiment - then America is finished. You're done. It's over. I hope that's not the case.
  - Kluny 10y ago
    America is already finished. In my country, you can work in a warehouse. You get job security, full health coverage, and 18 per hour. There are worker safety regulations that actually get followed, regular breaks, shade, and ppe provided if you're working with dangerous chemicals. You're not out in the sun all day. The US agricultural industry can't provide any of this. Why would anyone work for them if they weren't a poor immigrant planning to take their wages back to Mexico, where 16 is at least a living wage?

I see a potential solution to Los Angeles's homeless population.

draw_down 10y ago

You mean, give them homes on farms? Sure, why not.

kodfodrasz 10y ago
Why give them work with decent wages? Just give people what they need: free stuff! Seriously, you were just joking, were you?
- trentmb 10y ago
  Free housing is one of the benefits mentioned in the article.
  - kodfodrasz 10y ago
    This may help people get out of the hopeless situation, although I'm not sure how long an agricultural season is in California, here it is limited to at most 2/3 of the year, so this is a temporary solution at best.
- anoonmoose 10y ago
  I doubt they were joking. The homeless need homes more than they need jobs.
  - kodfodrasz 10y ago
    It is hard to determine which is needed more, as a home has costs, loosing a job leads usually loosing a home. I believe both are equally important, and this is kind of a snake biting its own tail problem, as without a home it is very hard to get a job. (Although I can imagine someone living in a car temporarily in mild weather conditions, it would be impossible to survive a winter that way here in Central Europe) Hopefully this opportunity will help those in need.
    - zeroer 10y ago
      > loosing It's spelled "loosening", btw.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - kodfodrasz 10y ago
        It's misspelled indeed, but I'm pretty much sure I wanted to write losing. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lose https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lose
      - chrisbennet 10y ago
        Looks like autocorrect may have "helped" you. I think you meant "It's spelled losing.." (not "loosening")

Kluny 10y ago

If I was homeless in LA, I still wouldn't work for 16 bucks an hour in the hot sun around dangerous chemicals with no benefits in the middle of nowhere.

edblarney 10y ago
" I still wouldn't work for 16 bucks an hour in the hot sun around dangerous chemicals with no benefits in the middle of nowhere." You wouldn't work for what is about 20% above the national wage, to feed yourself, put a roof over your head? If most people share your sentiment - then America is finished. You're done. It's over. I hope that's not the case.
- Kluny 10y ago
  America is already finished. In my country, you can work in a warehouse. You get job security, full health coverage, and 18 per hour. There are worker safety regulations that actually get followed, regular breaks, shade, and ppe provided if you're working with dangerous chemicals. You're not out in the sun all day. The US agricultural industry can't provide any of this. Why would anyone work for them if they weren't a poor immigrant planning to take their wages back to Mexico, where 16 is at least a living wage?