5 ms·

I largely agree with you, except for the subtext that homeless people are all fucked up losers who aren't really trying/can't really be helped. There is a huge

by Mz 9y ago

I largely agree with you, except for the subtext that homeless people are all fucked up losers who aren't really trying/can't really be helped. There is a huge deficit of affordable housing in the US. This significantly contributes to people who have various problems being unable to keep a roof over their head. I actually think "homes for the homeless" is an oxymoron. We need basic, decent housing for people who are living at the fringe of society because they are elderly, handicapped, single moms, etc. We need homes for a certain demographic for whom the standard 3 bedroom, 2 bath house in the 'burbs simply does not work, in part because it is just too much money (in part because it is just too much space -- it is nigh impossible to find a small place in the US). I think two things need to happen: 1) We need to develop programs aimed at empowering homeless people to solve it themselves. 2) We need more affordable housing -- nationwide. I would actually prefer to see more market based affordable housing. We tore down most of that in the 60s and 70s, largely because the Baby Boomers who were coming of age didn't need a small, cheap place. But, they were a demographic anomaly, and we haven't rebuilt what we tore down. We are seeing the consequences of that.

zanny 9y ago
> We need more affordable housing -- nationwide. Problem is job growth is incredibly centralized into a few urban cores. While property values on the west coast and the Boston -> DC strip bloat out of control entire counties worth of homes are being abandoned in the Rust Belt and midwest as the recession killed the last sparks of industry and never brought any jobs back there. That is why housing prices are out of control. We should realize that the centralization of work should come with the centralization of living, where we build much denser housing to accommodate, but we don't do that because of NIMBY city councils and obtuse zoning laws. Affordable housing is profitable if you let it be built. It isn't a matter of needing the government to throw money at building affordable housing. 50 stories of condos in almost any major metro area at 400-800 sq ft could sell at tens of thousands rather than millions of dollars and still be profitable for the materials and labor that went into building them, even at the current inflated land values. It is simply the case that nobody can build anything like that because every city in the country staunchly opposes such construction for both private NIMBY interests and the desires of businesses operating to attract the rich to the cities and not the poor, even when the jobs they want to fill they only offer poor wages for.
- Mz 9y ago
  Problem is job growth is incredibly centralized into a few urban cores. That is why housing prices are out of control. We should realize that the centralization of work should come with the centralization of living, where we build much denser housing to accommodate, but we don't do that because of NIMBY city councils and obtuse zoning laws. I just got myself off the street earlier this month after 5 years, 8 months and 1 week. I did it by 1) developing a portable online income and 2) moving out of California to a small town. So, I beg to differ. I think this can be solved. We have the technology. We can rebuild it. We can make it better. ;-)
  - ttonkytonk 9y ago
    I first became homeless about four months after you, and have been homeless off and on ever since. Now I stay in a tent and am fairly satisfied except that it's always possible my spot will be compromised. I wish they would simply normalize campsites for living. I've heard people live in tents in India. Seems more humane than pretending we don't need that here when in reality we're denying people the right to be ANYWHERE.
    - Mz 9y ago
      At some point while homeless, I talked to someone who traveled. They observed that in some South American country they visited, homelessness did not exist because slums were tolerated. So, people had housing, even though a lot of it was substandard by US standards. American zoning, minimum house sizes, do contribute to the problem. We have created a situation where the Haves live in ever larger houses and can afford two or more places and the Have Nots are increasingly out on the street. I don't know the answer here. I think certain minimum standards for housing matter. But, we should definitely tweak something. Setting the bar for minimum housing standards so high that large numbers of people can't attain housing at all is messed up.
    - ttonkytonk 9y ago
      * anywhere.
prostoalex 9y ago
> There is a huge deficit of affordable housing in the US. Source? Detroit still has properties like https://www.trulia.com/property/5031044564-16565-Strathmoor-St-Detroit-MI-48235 https://www.trulia.com/property/5031044564-16565-Strathmoor-... and some counties in Kansas and Missouri still give out free land if you promise to build a house there. There's a huge deficit of affordable housing in some areas of the US, and incredible imbalance of growth and job opportunities due to the increasing centralization and monopolization of the US economy.
- Mz 9y ago
  I don't have a link handy. I have seen these stats a lot and discussion of the problem hits HN so often that it never fails to shock me that the statement gets questioned. Someday, I will learn to keep a link handy. For now, I will just note that: 1) I have portable income and can potentially move anywhere in the US. 2) I was willing to move to almost anywhere in the continental US to get back into housing that I could afford that also would not be a threat to my health. 3) I have spent 2+ years searching for a town with either rents around $400 a month and/or houses for sale that were under ~$70k that also were actually fit for human habitation without first putting tens of thousands of dollars worth of work into them. 4) I have spent hours upon hours combing through real estate listings, auction sites that list distressed property etc. 5) I have looked at the details of super cheap properties in Detroit and other cities. There were a bunch of houses in Detroit listed at $1 on one auction site. When you read the fine print, there is at least $500 worth of closing costs and the houses are horrifying uninhabitable shitholes. I found a place I could go, but it was like the proverbial needle in a haystack. Most of those super cheap houses listed on the internet are absolutely not the sort of thing where someone could just move in and start paying a couple hundred a month for the mortgage. Many of them are being sold as tear downs. They have been through a fire or flood and are not currently fit for human habitation. I also looked at houses in the middle of nowhere. I have looked at houses that explicitly say things like "No foundation. Will not qualify for financing. Cash only." I signed up for a rent to own website. The first property I inquired about got a reply that said, no, they don't actually do rent to own arrangements. I have six years of college. I bought a house for no money down in my twenties. I was willing and able to go just about anywhere. I found it to be a very hard problem to solve. So, I would really like to see your sources for these mythical affordable houses. Because I haven't purchased one yet, so I could potentially still go someplace else for some real steal of a deal. My research suggests that, no, you aren't actually going to get a decent house anywhere in the US for $16k with conventional financing (not "cash buyers only" and/or "oh, yeah, it has this long list of serious problems"). That isn't real.
katastic 9y ago
> except for the subtext that homeless people are all fucked up losers who aren't really trying/can't really be helped. I would never say that. My point is only that with even if we had "unlimited free money" to give, there's only a fraction we will save. I'm not saying "don't give money" and saying need more than just money. I'm actually living near the poverty line and surrounded by people with similar financial situations. I make just too much to afford food stamps, but my medical bills (and large debt from student loans and a period of having to live off credit cards) basically throw me below the line. Money would absolutely help me. I need bills paid. I need treatment. All I want to do is get back to my career. (Read: fixing me would generate a net gain in GDP.) But I'm also surrounded by many people who are not interested in getting better. I'm surrounded by people who (to quote someone else) "act poor"--that is, even though we're poor we don't keep our house like a trashheap with stuff piled up. We don't associate with people with drug problems, stealing problems, and more. We're poor but you've never guess at face value because we spend very carefully, and we're entirely functional adults. Meanwhile, there are people who make more money than us who--through their conscious and subconscious decisions--are constantly in trouble with the law. Giving these people money won't magically stop them from having drug dealers in their extended family. Give two people the same internet (everyone has internet on their phones these days), one uses it to read Wikipedia and watch instructional videos, and another uses it to watch videos of people fighting all day. Clearly one is statistically more likely to succeed than the other.
- Mz 9y ago
  except for the subtext that homeless people are all fucked up losers who aren't really trying/can't really be helped. I would never say that... But I'm also surrounded by many people who are not interested in getting better. I'm surrounded by people who (to quote someone else) "act poor"--that is, even though we're poor we don't keep our house like a trashheap with stuff piled up. We don't associate with people with drug problems, stealing problems, and more. We're poor but you've never guess at face value because we spend very carefully, and we're entirely functional adults. Meanwhile, there are people who make more money than us who--through their conscious and subconscious decisions--are constantly in trouble with the law. Giving these people money won't magically stop them from having drug dealers in their extended family. I agree that you can't force people to get better. But you absolutely said explicitly what was only subtext in your previous comment. You genuinely do feel that a lot of these people are simply lazy fuck ups -- unlike you. You have real problems. This is a really common attitude. I am aware it is hard to figure out what really works. It is a hard problem to solve. But there are systemic problems here that tremendously compound the problems of folks who already have personal challenges in trying to get their act together.

by Mz 9y ago

zanny 9y ago

> We need more affordable housing -- nationwide. Problem is job growth is incredibly centralized into a few urban cores. While property values on the west coast and the Boston -> DC strip bloat out of control entire counties worth of homes are being abandoned in the Rust Belt and midwest as the recession killed the last sparks of industry and never brought any jobs back there. That is why housing prices are out of control. We should realize that the centralization of work should come with the centralization of living, where we build much denser housing to accommodate, but we don't do that because of NIMBY city councils and obtuse zoning laws. Affordable housing is profitable if you let it be built. It isn't a matter of needing the government to throw money at building affordable housing. 50 stories of condos in almost any major metro area at 400-800 sq ft could sell at tens of thousands rather than millions of dollars and still be profitable for the materials and labor that went into building them, even at the current inflated land values. It is simply the case that nobody can build anything like that because every city in the country staunchly opposes such construction for both private NIMBY interests and the desires of businesses operating to attract the rich to the cities and not the poor, even when the jobs they want to fill they only offer poor wages for.

Mz 9y ago
Problem is job growth is incredibly centralized into a few urban cores. That is why housing prices are out of control. We should realize that the centralization of work should come with the centralization of living, where we build much denser housing to accommodate, but we don't do that because of NIMBY city councils and obtuse zoning laws. I just got myself off the street earlier this month after 5 years, 8 months and 1 week. I did it by 1) developing a portable online income and 2) moving out of California to a small town. So, I beg to differ. I think this can be solved. We have the technology. We can rebuild it. We can make it better. ;-)
- ttonkytonk 9y ago
  I first became homeless about four months after you, and have been homeless off and on ever since. Now I stay in a tent and am fairly satisfied except that it's always possible my spot will be compromised. I wish they would simply normalize campsites for living. I've heard people live in tents in India. Seems more humane than pretending we don't need that here when in reality we're denying people the right to be ANYWHERE.
  - Mz 9y ago
    At some point while homeless, I talked to someone who traveled. They observed that in some South American country they visited, homelessness did not exist because slums were tolerated. So, people had housing, even though a lot of it was substandard by US standards. American zoning, minimum house sizes, do contribute to the problem. We have created a situation where the Haves live in ever larger houses and can afford two or more places and the Have Nots are increasingly out on the street. I don't know the answer here. I think certain minimum standards for housing matter. But, we should definitely tweak something. Setting the bar for minimum housing standards so high that large numbers of people can't attain housing at all is messed up.
  - ttonkytonk 9y ago
    * anywhere.

prostoalex 9y ago

> There is a huge deficit of affordable housing in the US. Source? Detroit still has properties like https://www.trulia.com/property/5031044564-16565-Strathmoor-St-Detroit-MI-48235 https://www.trulia.com/property/5031044564-16565-Strathmoor-... and some counties in Kansas and Missouri still give out free land if you promise to build a house there. There's a huge deficit of affordable housing in some areas of the US, and incredible imbalance of growth and job opportunities due to the increasing centralization and monopolization of the US economy.

Mz 9y ago
I don't have a link handy. I have seen these stats a lot and discussion of the problem hits HN so often that it never fails to shock me that the statement gets questioned. Someday, I will learn to keep a link handy. For now, I will just note that: 1) I have portable income and can potentially move anywhere in the US. 2) I was willing to move to almost anywhere in the continental US to get back into housing that I could afford that also would not be a threat to my health. 3) I have spent 2+ years searching for a town with either rents around $400 a month and/or houses for sale that were under ~$70k that also were actually fit for human habitation without first putting tens of thousands of dollars worth of work into them. 4) I have spent hours upon hours combing through real estate listings, auction sites that list distressed property etc. 5) I have looked at the details of super cheap properties in Detroit and other cities. There were a bunch of houses in Detroit listed at $1 on one auction site. When you read the fine print, there is at least $500 worth of closing costs and the houses are horrifying uninhabitable shitholes. I found a place I could go, but it was like the proverbial needle in a haystack. Most of those super cheap houses listed on the internet are absolutely not the sort of thing where someone could just move in and start paying a couple hundred a month for the mortgage. Many of them are being sold as tear downs. They have been through a fire or flood and are not currently fit for human habitation. I also looked at houses in the middle of nowhere. I have looked at houses that explicitly say things like "No foundation. Will not qualify for financing. Cash only." I signed up for a rent to own website. The first property I inquired about got a reply that said, no, they don't actually do rent to own arrangements. I have six years of college. I bought a house for no money down in my twenties. I was willing and able to go just about anywhere. I found it to be a very hard problem to solve. So, I would really like to see your sources for these mythical affordable houses. Because I haven't purchased one yet, so I could potentially still go someplace else for some real steal of a deal. My research suggests that, no, you aren't actually going to get a decent house anywhere in the US for $16k with conventional financing (not "cash buyers only" and/or "oh, yeah, it has this long list of serious problems"). That isn't real.

katastic 9y ago

> except for the subtext that homeless people are all fucked up losers who aren't really trying/can't really be helped. I would never say that. My point is only that with even if we had "unlimited free money" to give, there's only a fraction we will save. I'm not saying "don't give money" and saying need more than just money. I'm actually living near the poverty line and surrounded by people with similar financial situations. I make just too much to afford food stamps, but my medical bills (and large debt from student loans and a period of having to live off credit cards) basically throw me below the line. Money would absolutely help me. I need bills paid. I need treatment. All I want to do is get back to my career. (Read: fixing me would generate a net gain in GDP.) But I'm also surrounded by many people who are not interested in getting better. I'm surrounded by people who (to quote someone else) "act poor"--that is, even though we're poor we don't keep our house like a trashheap with stuff piled up. We don't associate with people with drug problems, stealing problems, and more. We're poor but you've never guess at face value because we spend very carefully, and we're entirely functional adults. Meanwhile, there are people who make more money than us who--through their conscious and subconscious decisions--are constantly in trouble with the law. Giving these people money won't magically stop them from having drug dealers in their extended family. Give two people the same internet (everyone has internet on their phones these days), one uses it to read Wikipedia and watch instructional videos, and another uses it to watch videos of people fighting all day. Clearly one is statistically more likely to succeed than the other.

Mz 9y ago
except for the subtext that homeless people are all fucked up losers who aren't really trying/can't really be helped. I would never say that... But I'm also surrounded by many people who are not interested in getting better. I'm surrounded by people who (to quote someone else) "act poor"--that is, even though we're poor we don't keep our house like a trashheap with stuff piled up. We don't associate with people with drug problems, stealing problems, and more. We're poor but you've never guess at face value because we spend very carefully, and we're entirely functional adults. Meanwhile, there are people who make more money than us who--through their conscious and subconscious decisions--are constantly in trouble with the law. Giving these people money won't magically stop them from having drug dealers in their extended family. I agree that you can't force people to get better. But you absolutely said explicitly what was only subtext in your previous comment. You genuinely do feel that a lot of these people are simply lazy fuck ups -- unlike you. You have real problems. This is a really common attitude. I am aware it is hard to figure out what really works. It is a hard problem to solve. But there are systemic problems here that tremendously compound the problems of folks who already have personal challenges in trying to get their act together.