17 ms·
“Medieval” Diseases Flare as Unsanitary Living Conditions Proliferate
- onetimemanytime 8y agoIn other words: take away soap + water + disposal of you-know-what and...
- rsln-s 8y agoYet another reason to support higher taxes and more wealth redistribution.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoHomelessness and the problems that go along with it is only a serious problem in certain cities on the west coast. Don't get me wrong, every city has some homeless but cities in the rest of the country seem to be able to keep the problem at bay without increased "wealth redistribution", many of those cities even exist in states with far less "wealth redistribution" than the cities that have the biggest homeless problems. I see no indication that increased wealth distribution will fix the problem. There does not seem to be any substantial correlation. I think the problem lies elsewhere. Problems like this don't tend to have single sources and single solutions anyway.
- ceejayoz 8y ago> Don't get me wrong, every city has some homeless but cities in the rest of the country seem to be able to keep the problem at bay without increased wealth distribution. I'd imagine part of that is the weather; you can't live outdoors year-round in, say, Maine. Sometimes they're just shipping the problem elsewhere, too. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/20/bussed-out-america-moves-homeless-people-country-study https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/...
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoOnce you're homeless your chances of scraping up the $100+ for a bus ticket across the country are basically 0. When your homeless your biggest asset is your local knowledge, where you can sleep, where you can work as a day laborer for a few bucks, etc, etc. and you'd be giving that up by relocating. Hence most homeless people do not relocate. The homeless guy in Bangor is going to find somewhere he can sleep inside.
- ceejayoz 8y ago> Once you're homeless your chances of scraping up the $100+ for a bus ticket across the country are basically 0. Read the article I linked. Quite a few cities are happy to subsidize such a bus ticket, as you become someone else's problem.
- dsfyu404ed 8y agoThe number of people being subsidized is not that large. I'd wager that it's aproximatly made up for by non-homeless people who leave the destination states and then advocate for public policy that exacerbates the homelessness problem in their new cities/states. The spread of severe homelessness problems (i.e. the difference between homelessness in Baltimore and homelessness in SF) northward up the west coast but lagging CA's level of homelessness by a couple years seems to support my hypothesis.
- macspoofing 8y agoEven on the west coast there is plenty money allocated for fighting homelessness. The problem is that long-term chronic homelessness almost always results from either mental illness and/or drug abuse. Forcible eviction or institutionalization always leads to legal battles with activists leading to municipal governments simply doing nothing.
- jdavis703 8y agoSo the big difference in east coast vs west coast is the percent of unsheltered people. If you disregard whether people have shelter, the homeless rates are pretty similar between coasts. One of the main problems is CA local governments are severely restricted from raising revenue. Property taxes are capped at 1% of assessed value, and assessed value is capped from raising faster than inflation. Other taxes require a 2/3 vote in order to pass. This means city governments are unable to capture a lot of the wealth increases that are leading to displacement among low income people. This is a tough problem to fix, but it requires both money and a will to tolerate low income people in our neighborhoods.
- WillPostForFood 8y agoYet California has the highest overall taxation in the country (income, property, sales, capital gains, gas). So there is plenty of money being collected by the government. If the homelessness requires money as a solution, then the money is already there. It is an allocation problem.
- UI_at_80x24 8y agoYes because it's the regions fault people don't want to freeze to death on a sidewalk in Minnesota. The first thing I would do if it looked like sleeping on the street was my only option is start walking south. The problem is wealth disparity; not drugs, not geography, not 'life-style', not 'poor choices'. These "certain cities" on the West coast are prime examples of the wealth gap, people are homeless because they can't afford to live there. Nothing more. The wealth-gap is CAUSING the problem. The wealth gap was less at the start of the French Revolution then it is now.
- bluGill 8y agoMost homeless have mental issues. Minnesota has a good welfare system. However the cold in MN means that those who generally don't trust government (meaning that they will run away from any help the government tries to give unless restrained in an often inhuman way) either freeze to death or make their way south. Thus the poor in MN have a house of some sort. There are a few who migrate north for the summer and back south for winter. No amount of safety net helps when your mental illness makes escaping the notice of the safety net a priority. It is a hard problem and I don't think anyone has a good solution.
- macspoofing 8y ago>The problem is wealth disparity; not drugs, not geography, not 'life-style', not 'poor choices'. I just don't think so. Anybody can get a bad break and end up homeless, I agree. But for long-term multi-year/multi-decade homelessness, mental illness and alcohol+drug abuse has to be a key component. Having lived in a big city with a major homeless problem, you can't ignore those factors because you see it right in front of you every day. It feels like gas-lighting to claim otherwise.
- Mc_Big_G 8y agoEast coast cities don't have as many homeless as West coast for a single reason. Weather. Pretending like there's something inherently wrong with West coast cities is disingenuous. You even have cities bussing them out to SF. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/20/bussed-out-america-moves-homeless-people-country-study https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/...
- supernova87a 8y agoReally, are you serious? I can't tell. I'm generally liberal, but I have absolutely 0 confidence that the asinine state and local governments whose policies led to this condition, would be skilled even more to get us out of it if we just gave them more money. You don't think that the ineptitude / conflicts of the sort that prevent housing construction and neighborhood change would similarly infect any decision on who to tax, how to distribute it? While creating yet another new CA state agency to administer it? How many bandaids do you want to apply? Hm?
- ceejayoz 8y agoThere's some evidence smarter spending helps. https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chroni...
- ams6110 8y agoThe trick is how to get smart people interested in government jobs.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoNot vilifying public sector might be a good start.
- logfromblammo 8y agoI once overheard actual-employees of the government discussing the possibility of hiring the current contractor-employee workers as actual-employees: "We couldn't pay them half of what they're making now, and the person with ten years of experience--experience specifically in the exact job we'd be hiring for, the guy actually doing the work right now--wouldn't even be higher than the third page of the interview list." Smart people are interested in interesting jobs. The government does not want to hire them, in accordance with its own laws. Those people do exactly the same jobs for a contractor company, and then the government hires the contractor, because they are legislatively, executively, and economically barred from hiring the best-qualified personnel directly. This setup tends to prevent anyone that has good ideas, and anyone with any control over government budget items, from ever coming into direct contact with one another. I don't think it's a setup that can be fixed with better advertising.
- jerf 8y agoWe've tried that a lot. Especially in very liberal California cities. Why would next time work any better? As a follow-up question, for whatever your answer is, why can't we try that now with the amount of money already dedicated to the problem to see if it helps? (It's not really a money problem at this point.)
- macspoofing 8y agoPredictable result of modern municipal government acceptance of homeless encampments. If you try to prune a tree on your front yard you'll need 17 approvals before you can even think about touching shears, but pitch a tent in the middle of the sidewalk and nobody will ever bother you.
- ceejayoz 8y agoI doubt homeless people would agree with the assertion that "nobody will ever bother you".
- macspoofing 8y agoIt was colloquial phrasing. The existence of permanent encampments and even tents on pedestrian walkways (experienced in San Fran, LA and Toronto) shows me that municipal governments have abrogated any semblance of enforcement of their own by-laws.
- wbronitsky 8y agoI'm curious as to why you are so wrapped up in law enforcement, and not in common decency. Isn't the issue that these cities don't house their homeless? If removed from the sidewalk, where would these people go? Fixing this problem starts with humanizing the homeless and proposing coherent solutions, not complaining about the lack of law enforcement.
- macspoofing 8y ago>I'm curious as to why you are so wrapped up in law enforcement, and not in common decency That's a fair interpretation based on my phrasing, but I would like to further qualify my point that outside of enforcing bylaws, it is also the decent and moral thing for local governments not to allow people with mental illness and drug problems to languish in the streets, tents and encampments. >Fixing this problem starts with humanizing the homeless and proposing coherent solutions The problem is that activists have completely hijacked policy. Attempting to institutionalize a homeless person with severe mental illness leads to boycotts, lawsuits and FUD from activists. It has gotten to the point that even immediate families cannot take those individuals off the streets and into institutional care.
- kylehotchkiss 8y agoI've spent some time living in a third-world country and one of the things I've observed is that even the poorest people are still living in some sort of structure that is capable of providing a limited amount of protection from the elements, a small bit of privacy, and a place to come back to at night. Even in villages, these small homes have electricity and satellite TV. They're often built with low cost materials like bricks and tin roofs, but they allow people who can't afford a brick-and-mortor home the opportunity to have some stability in life. I'm a big fan of safety regulations for construction but after time living abroad, I'm beginning to see a case for loosening some construction rules to make true low-cost housing available to more people. I don't intend to say bricks and tin, nor so dense it becomes a large fire risk, but some simple allowances that would let people build theirselves a small place to call home without city regulators barring it. Perhaps this could help with the increasing amount of health issues occurring like typhus.
- sambull 8y agoWe can't because we put them there for this reason. Zoning regulations affecting occupation like needing to be connected to water, sewage and sometimes electrical grid instantly prevent most of this. We could give people land and a shelter; but they wouldn't be able to occupy them, and we are UNWILLING to change this.
- jdavis703 8y agoI’m not sure we even need to lower construction rules. It might be enough to just build dorm-room style (i.e. SROs) for affordable housing. The problem is people don’t want this kind of housing going in near them. If you thought opposition to “luxury condos” was bad, wait until you see the opposition to homeless shelters in SF.
- Spooky23 8y agoThat’s lowering the standard of housing. Many of the fancy 4 story buildings in NYC housed like 10-20x more people in those kind of accommodations. Opening that door will recreate the situations that led people who could to flee the city again.
- awakeasleep 8y agoAfter learning about hep C (diarrheal, can survive in an infectious state for up to 6 months outdoors) the issue of sanitation became very 'real' to me. I had the idea of starting a charity to rent port-o-potties for the homeless encampments near our office. For context, my company is filled with _completely_ woke people, super concerned about social justice and stuff like that... But when i pitched the idea everyone universally shot it down, in disgust and with a dismissive attitude like it wasn't even worthy of consideration. It messed with my head. It's a symptom of our fucked up country where "wokeness" is a separate idea from kindness, where disgust about the poor crosses all colors of skin, and it's worth keeping the poor in misery even when that decision threatens your own health.
- DoreenMichele 8y agoI was homeless for nearly six years. I did my level best to never use a port-a-potty. I think they are generally gross. I think the only exception was one set up permanently in a park as the only bathroom there. It was not as gross as the ones set up on city sidewalks, apparently usually for homeless individuals. I really dislike most solutions aimed at helping the homeless. They are often solutions no middle class person would accept. If you wouldn't want it for yourself, please think about why you think this is a good thing to do for the homeless population. It probably isn't. It's probably part of the pattern of societal behavior that helps keep this issue entrenched.
- cco 8y agoI use portapotties all the time, they're not unicorns and rainbows but assuming they haven't been defaced, i.e. poop or urine all over the inside and not in the receptacle, they're just fine. I don't see them as a dehumanizing thing. Shoot, nearly all construction workers use them as their office toilet, is that unacceptable?
- DoreenMichele 8y agoWhen you are homeless, you tend to wear the same clothes for days or weeks at a time. You may be unable to shower for long stretches. Construction workers are going to go home, shower, change clothes, wash the clothes they wore all day and worked hard in. You seem to be taking it for granted that one can get cleaned up again after being exposed to a port-a-potty. This is not a given for homeless individuals. If you are in good health -- which many homeless people are not -- and have regular access to showers, laundry service, etc, using a port-a-potty may be no big deal. But this is generally not the case for people on the street.
- argd678 8y agoHow come you don’t see homeless in Europe to the same degree like in the US?
- swerner 8y agoCan’t speak for other countries, but in Germany there is a social security safety net that will pay rent up to a certain apartment size and just barely cover living expenses. It doesn’t eliminate homelessness entirely, a lack of affordable housing in cities is a problem here just like anywhere else, but it makes it much less likely. I know the narrative from some, especially in the US is a “why would anyone work when the state will pay for you”, but the standard of living you get in welfare is just basic survival and most if not all desire more than just that. And there is of course mental health, a much lower rate of opioid prescriptions and therefore addictions, etc.
- shereadsthenews 8y agoThe relevant German policy is one of massive housebuilding. For decades they have had policies and programs to just build a ton of housing, because that depresses wage inflation pressure, which is important for their export economy. Building homes also happens to be a good idea for your citizens! California, meanwhile, has recently hit an all-time low in home construction and the 2018 "boom" in housing starts was lower per-capita than any pre-1980 housing "bust".
- refurb 8y agoHmmm... Rates of homelessness: Germany - 0.50% USA - 0.17% https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_...
- swerner 8y agoInteresting. The difference in homelessness between EU and US may just be perception and not reality?
- minikites 8y agoAt the Hubert Humphrey Building dedication in Washington, D.C. on November 1, 1977, Humphrey spoke about the treatment of the weakest members of society as a reflection of its government: “the moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life; the sick, the needy and the handicapped.”
- freeone3000 8y agoClearly the solution here is to reduce the unsanitary living conditions is to eliminate homelessness. The easiest way to do that is to close the gap between the wealth gap between the richest and the poorest, and the easiest way to do that is to let the homeless die. As diseases become worse, those able to afford healthcare will live, and those unable to (the "potential homeless") will start to die in droves. Of course, we'll spend a bit more on cremations, but perhaps we can get a bulk discount? We'll have people look into that. All measures state that if the least wealthy people simply stopped being there at all, we'd be closer as a society to our ideals by every quantifiable metric. So hats off to typhus, and cholera, and dysentery, for existing in 2019 and doing what we always wanted to happen but haven't got the stomach to do ourselves.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- komali2 8y ago>let the homeless die This is immoral and thus not a potential solution, full stop. Others must be considered instead.
- ptah 8y agomakes sense to just give them free houses
- coldtea 8y agoCan't be, Hans Rosling and Steven Pinker had all the good stats for how it's all ever more perfect in this best of all worlds...
- eric_b 8y agoI don't think this will go over well here, but.... These homeless people need to learn a base level of personal responsibility. Not "shitting where you sleep" is about the most basic human precept. Even in third world countries, where conditions are terrible, the people have managed some basic sanitation in most cases. I'm sure there's all kinds of excuses we can make for the homeless people's behavior, and emotional stories we can trot out to justify it, but at some point I lose sympathy. I've seen them do absolutely in-defensible things. The current mantra of "it's not their fault" is why the problem keeps getting worse.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- mikestew 8y agoNot "shitting where you sleep" is about the most basic human precept Such an easy solution, I'm surprised more haven't thought of it. I do have one practical question however. While sleeping under an interstate overpass, what is your suggested location for shitting such that it is not near where I sleep? Though homeless, I have not completely lost my humanity, and therefore would prefer to minimize my impact on others, as well. Suggestions?
- lixtra 8y agoI remember my grandfather in dire need defacating into a plastic bag and dropping that to the trash. Considering that this is how dog poo is treated in many communities it may be a step forward.
- wbronitsky 8y agoSo you're saying that instead of improving conditions for all of our fellow humans, that some of them should shit in a bag for their entire lives and we call that progress? I don't think I'm misunderstanding what you wrote, but I doubt that is the point you intended to make. Either that, or you fail to have any empathy for the homeless, which is much worse.
- Allower 8y ago>"But this homeless encampment off a Hollywood freeway ramp is often littered with needles and trash, and soaked in urine. Rats occasionally scamper through, and Millar fears the consequences." Great place to live, clearly a community you would want to put down some roots.
- blendo 8y agoFrom the SciAm article: “The hygiene situation is just horrendous” for people living on the streets, said Dr. Glenn Lopez, a physician with St. John’s Well Child & Family Center, who treats homeless patients in Los Angeles County. “It becomes just like a Third World environment where their human feces contaminate the areas where they are eating and sleeping.” My son gave me an eye-opening book this Christmas: "Righteous Dopefiend" https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520254985/righteous-dopefiend https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520254985/righteous-dopefie... "This powerful study immerses the reader in the world of homelessness and drug addiction in the contemporary United States. For over a decade Philippe Bourgois and Jeff Schonberg followed a social network of two dozen heroin injectors and crack smokers on the streets of San Francisco, accompanying them as they scrambled to generate income through burglary, panhandling, recycling, and day labor. Righteous Dopefiend interweaves stunning black-and-white photographs with vivid dialogue, detailed field notes, and critical theoretical analysis. Its gripping narrative develops a cast of characters around the themes of violence, race relations, sexuality, family trauma, embodied suffering, social inequality, and power relations. The result is a dispassionate chronicle of survival, loss, caring, and hope rooted in the addicts' determination to hang on for one more day and one more "fix" through a "moral economy of sharing" that precariously balances mutual solidarity and interpersonal betrayal." Personally, I'm now convinced the most practical short term solution is for the city of SF to a) allow use of IV drugs without fear of arrest, and b) provide a clean, dry place to shoot up and nod out.
- harrumph 8y agoIn this thread: zero mentions of the word capitalism. Which is very much like a conference about pollution that lacks any mention of industrial production.
- macspoofing 8y agoBecause capitalism has nothing to do with the issue at hand. 'Capitalism' is also a misnomer in this context. We live in a market-based economy with a social safety net and democratic government. This is true whether you are talking about United States, Canada, Germany or France. Our governments have all the legal and revenue-generating tools they need to enact any policy they wish. Finally, I'm not sure what alternative you're advocating for. Destroying our current system to adopt a Soviet-style, or Cuban-style, or Venezuelan-style socialism would be a disaster. Is that your solution?
- harrumph 8y ago>Because capitalism has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Your position is that the unavailability of housing to those suffering diseases tied directly to their being unable to pay market price for housing somehow has nothing to do with the prevailing economic arrangement that utterly defines the housing market these persons cannot participate in. They don't have and cannot borrow capital, but their suffering "has nothing to do with" the prevailing system that revolves around / is animated by nothing but...capital? Total nonsense. > Our governments have all the legal and revenue-generating tools they need to enact any policy they wish. Your position is that concentrations of wealth -- such wealth's tangible assets dominated by holdings of real estate -- do not overwhelmingly divert the attention, priorities, electoral outcomes and revenues of government to their own ends at the explicit costs of the safety net. You seem to believe government does not sell political results exclusively to persons who can pay for those results. Again: total nonsense. > Finally, I'm not sure what alternative you're advocating for I'm advocating for merely mentioning capitalism in the discussion! And that much is too much, apparently. I suggest you examine your own indoctrination in this economic arrangement if it is so sensitive that it cannot abide even its naming when discussing the intensification of suffering caused by lack of capital under the system that is exactly centered on capital.