8 ms·

America is a country of huge wealth. Wealthy in natural resources, capital equipment, labor ... fucking everything. And yet we have such terrible poverty. Wh

• sanxiyn 8y ago
  Yes, it's all about density. Source: living in South Korea.
  • kijin 8y ago
    Exactly. There are almost no American-style "single-family homes" in South Korean cities, except in very wealthy or very poor neighborhoods. There needs to be a certain amount of communal spirit in your culture in order to make this work, though. People have to be comfortable with spending most of their time in common spaces such as parks, pubs, and Starbucks instead of hanging out in their own backyard. They also need to be willing to spend money (both publicly and privately) to keep those common spaces in good order. This might become a non-issue even in America, though, as more and more people just sit in bed and stare at their phones instead of going out.
• antocv 8y ago
  Well at least the Americans are not standing in queues. Seriously, I wonder why this scarcity for quite many is not highlighted as failure of capitalism, why the bailout of banks with tax-money is not marked as "capitalism and free market has failed" just like communism is?
  • Tade0 8y ago
    Too early. Communism failed relatively fast so it was pretty visible. Capitalism is failing in a slow, insidious way.
  • travelbuffoon 8y ago
    Really? SF is the worst place I've seen for queues, but Americans also spend plenty of time in TSA and CBP queues around the country.
• ekianjo 8y ago
  Terrible poverty? Well much less poverty than in about 95 percent of the planet so everything is relative. Now, the market cannot solve a problem that is linked to human nature. Humans like living in dense areas rather than on the top of mountains, so space will be more and more expansive as density increase. Nothing unusual. Density also brings more jobs and more commerce so this is a cycle that goes with it. This being said if you care nothing about living in a modern civilization it is perfectly possible to live far away from cities with very minimum expenses and a lot of land. Thats just not what people want.
  • ricardobeat 8y ago
    Only if you’re already well off, or have an income stream. No jobs in the middle of nowhere.
  • michaelmrose 8y ago
    How precisely can a person who isn't in the top half of the population move from where the majority of work is to an area where jobs aren't and how are they to afford even what you describe as minimum expenses. Then there are things like medical expenses, debt, family members in need of support.
  • achow 8y ago
    OP makes it very clear cheap space where it matters, where people need it: "NIMBY" and "neighborhood character".
    • ekianjo 8y ago
      Its never going to be cheap where it matters. Look at Tokyo, there are a lot of new appartment towers built every single year but prices dont go down because demand is always high. At best you can stabilize prices but cheap is unrealistic.
• ojii 8y ago
  > Why hasn't the market solved this problem? Maybe "the market" is not a good tool to solve inequality.
  • throwaway8879 8y ago
    Solving inequality goes against everything in nature. The market is as close to an evolutionary natural state as we can get.
    • ddnb 8y ago
      If anything, nature strives for balance and equality. If the market is as you claim it should be working towards an equilibrium.
      • Noughmad 8y ago
        Equilibrium does not mean equality, far from it. It just means the situation is stable. The predator-prey relationship is in an equilibrium, but they are in no way equal.
      • ericd 8y ago
        Not at all. In nature, the strongest lion has all the mates, while the second strongest has none.
        • ionised 8y ago
          Humans aren't lions, and our society doesn't work the same way, even in more primitive times. I'm assuming you were referring to survival of the fittest, which is commonly misunderstood to be survival of the strongest. What survival of the fittest actually means is survival of those most adaptive to change, which is not at all what you are describing.
          • ericd 8y ago
            Obviously humans aren't lions. I was just saying that the idea that nature tends toward equillibrium between individuals doesn't stand up to even the most cursory look at real nature. And if you think he meant human nature, I would say that generally, by nature, humans are kind and share with those they see as their people, but the complete opposite with anyone outside that group. Since the market is made up of people only in the abstract to most people, I would say that that nature doesn't tend toward equillibrium between individuals either.
• sintaxi 8y ago
  > Why hasn't the market solved this problem? The market did solve the problem and then we blew it by undermining the family unit so we have people dependent on the state with no significant family support. > Believe it or not, its not impossible to manufacture a living space in a factory and assemble it on site in a day, to provide extremely well made and affordable housing structures. The soviets tried this approach it doesn't work because you end up with a shitload of crappy communist housing blocks. The correct approach is to develop as much high end housing as possible which pushes all other houses down the depth chart. We want the poor living in houses that the rich used to own - not shittier houses. At some point we have to realize that the issue isn't wealth or even inequality. The harsh reality is a significant number of the population has a several hundred dollar a day drug addiction and no means of taking care of themselves even if they were handed a blank check.
  • girvo 8y ago
    Why do you think they got that habit to begin with? And frankly if you believe that a significant majority of the poor in America (or any other developed country) have multiple hundreds of dollars per day drug addictions, frankly I question how much experience you actually have with either the poor or drug addicts.
    • sintaxi 8y ago
      > Why do you think they got that habit to begin with? In short, childhood trauma and lack of family support. Often the trauma comes from abuse from their family. These are not problems you can just throw money at. > I question how much experience you actually have with either the poor or drug addicts. If you must know my experience I did youth work for inner city kids from 1999-2006 in Langley BC. I then lived and worked in the Vancouver DTES from 2006-2017. I have several close friends and family members who work at Insite Injection Clinic, Portland Hotel Society, HIV/Aids Clinic at St. Paul Hospital, and the Odyssey and Nexus programs in downtown Vancouver. Perhaps you are unaware what life on the streets is like. Edit: also, I never said I was a "majority" that has an expensive addiction. I said the number of people is significant - which it undoubtedly is.
  • 8y ago
• BlackFly 8y ago
  > Why hasn't the market solved this problem? Well my elementary knowledge of economics suggests that the market equilibrium price is the intersection of the supply and demand curves. There is additional demand but at a price lower than can be supplied. It is not profitable to supply housing further, and some demand is not met. This will always be the case (according to my elementary understanding of economics). That is where socialism comes in in most countries. Since profit motive cannot solve this problem, compassion motive can. Supplying low cost housing without disrupting the rest of the real estate market is managed in a variety of fashions in different countries to greater or lesser success.
  • kingofhdds 8y ago
    In most countries where it exists "social housing" is a synonym of "depressive, unsafe space, continuously destroyed by its inhabitants". Probably, this approach solves some problems, but creates new ones at the same time.
• peterwwillis 8y ago
  > How can such a large country suffer from a bigger housing crisis Because we don't just provide things to people because they are struggling or starving. They have to be literally dying, or appear to be in medical distress, and then we send a fire truck as a first responder, and then they go to the emergency room because we waited until they were dying to provide care, and then we rack up unpayable bills that raise health care prices. I mean, we create the conditions that cause homelessness, and then literally criminalize the homeless. If that doesn't tell you how little of a shit we give about people in distress, I don't know what will. America is a land of plenty only for people that already have plenty.
• gepi79 8y ago
  The problem in the USA is lack of morality. The lack of morality to vote for decent politicians. Why do US citizens claim to want medicare for all but vote for Democrats or Republicans who do not want medicare for all ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX5GSClA8z4&t=207 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX5GSClA8z4&t=207 The lack of morality that private property should be spent to help other persons in need. The lack of morality that allows an insane military budget and immoral lies and crimes and murder in other countries by political and military and economic warfare. https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/ https://chomsky.info/1990____-2/ https://www.globalresearch.ca/america-has-been-at-war-93-of-the-time-222-out-of-239-years-since-1776/5565946 https://www.globalresearch.ca/america-has-been-at-war-93-of-...
  • UncleSlacky 8y ago
    Not so much morality as empathy, I think.
• WheelsAtLarge 8y ago
  Unable to afford stuff is not poverty. It's a symptom of poverty. Poverty is the inability to know how or be able to survive at a minimum comfortable level in our society. The causes are many, such as lack of education, addiction, early parenthood, good role models, lack of good health and many more I can't even begin to imagine. So giving people stuff and housing is only a temporary solution. The solution is so much more and it takes years to get ahead of it. Look at Venezuela, they tried to solve their poverty problem very simply by basically giving people food and shelter without fixing the fundamental problem of lack of knowledge and the other problems that cause poverty and now they are in worst trouble than ever and yet in theory they had the financial resources to fix the problem. What you mention is just a start and poverty will always be unless the more fundamental problems are fixed.
  • ejstronge 8y ago
    > Look at Venezuela, they tried to solve their poverty problem very simply by basically giving people food and shelter without fixing the fundamental problem of lack of knowledge and the other problems that cause poverty and now they are in worst trouble than ever I’m sorry I can’t give you a better answer being on my phone. But, Venezuela’s current crisis has about as little to do with commoners working as you could find in a modern-day country. As a small example, how would the arrival of a new president fit into your (kind of derogatory) theory? What evidence do you have for your assertion?
    • WheelsAtLarge 8y ago
      I don't want to get too deep into this because we can go on and on on this but Venezuela's current problems have a root on the country's flash approach to fix poverty. Hugo Chávez was brought to power by direct mandate of the underrepresented poor. He nationalized many industries which included the country's oil assets. He used them to create large-scale social programs to help the poor. It seemed like a great success but once oil prices collapsed the whole situation fell apart because the fundamental problems with poverty were never addressed and we see the result now. An economy that's in chaos. The poor are in worst shape than when Chávez was elected. Not only do they not have what they need but now they have a president, Maduro, that's not fixing the problems because it helps him stay in power by blaming the problems on other sources other than his government. Poverty can't just be fixed by giving people things. I don't know the answer but it starts by making sure everyone knows how to make a living in the society they live in. Yes, there's a fraction of the people that will never be able to get out and those are the ones you help with food, shelter and whatever else they need but you hope that that's a small minority of the segment. There are no simple answers.
• ensiferum 8y ago
  Because the market doesn't try to solve this problem You have to keep in mind that everything in the US (health care, education, food industry (which causes the health problem)) is harnessed just for one single purpose: Make money for the share holders. Subsequently the US goverment doesn't serve the people and their interest, it serves the interest of these big companies. This whole system is optimized for making money for the select few, not to cater for the society by and large. Therefore it creates these unfortunate side effects.
• brann0 8y ago
  Markets alone won't do shit of it's not profitable. That's why you need government regulations. Some things should not be driven by profit. Thinking otherwise is delusional.
• dawidw 8y ago
  > America is a country of huge wealth. Wealthy in natural resources, capital equipment, labor ... fucking everything. Doing nothing will not remove poverty. Still some work is needed at least to bring up natural resources and work on other areas... yes - everything needs some work. Just sitting and complaining will not make anyone richer.
• stale2002 8y ago
  The issue is not that we don't have enough space. You could rent a house in the middle of nowhere Tennessee for a couple hundred dollars a month if you wanted. The problem is instead housing in places that people actually want to live.