5 ms·

And you still have plenty of homesless and destitute. Pretty sad that you can't look after the most vunerable.

by soperj 7y ago

fuzz4lyfe 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes
- skybrian 7y ago
  I mean, it's not like they were wrong about that. I don't know what to conclude from this other than most of history is terrible and the present often isn't so great either. Until we live in a utopia, there will be no shortage of targets for whataboutism.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    The point is that it's nothing but a deflection tactic, and I don't believe the people doing the lynching were typically the same people concerned about human rights abuses in the USSR. It's an oversimplification used to prevent discussion about real problems.
    - skissane 7y ago
      I think there is a valid point to it – there is a certain degree of hypocrisy in criticising other country's human rights problems when you aren't doing enough to resolve your own country's human rights problems. Calling it "Whataboutism" seems to excuse that hypocrisy rather than giving it the condemnation it deserves.
      - fuzz4lyfe 7y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
        skissane 7y ago
        I'm not defending the Soviet Union, which was truly a horrible regime. What I'm saying, is the proper response to a criticism of lynching, is to agree with the criticism, not argue that the crimes (no matter how horrid) of those who are making the criticism renders the criticism invalid.
        EpicEng 7y ago
        Agreed. You're right, it is hypocritical. There was fierce fighting between two sides of the civil rights issue during that time though. We weren't doing enough, but many people were trying.
lacampbell 7y ago
Have you been to a major European train station recently?
- __s 7y ago
  Yes
- soperj 7y ago
  Somehow I'm the one deflecting?
EpicEng 7y ago
I saw a ton of people sleeping on mattresses and blankets in German train stations last time I went. Were they just enjoying their freedom from the pressures of society? Maybe we should look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_... So what are you talking about exactly?
- rndgermandude 7y ago
  wtf are you talking about? This literally does not happen in normal operation (because train stations security or police aided by social workers will direct people to homeless shelters, or make them leave if they refuse homeless shelters), and only happened a few times during the height of the refugee crisis in the big cities with new arrivals coming in at a rate where the refugee and homeless shelters in those major arrival cities were overloaded and bureaucracy was too slow to process and re-distribute these arrivals quick enough to avoid some camping in train stations. The wikipedia article explicitly states: > This is a list of countries (not all 195) by the homeless population present on any given night. Different countries often use different definitions of homelessness, making direct comparisons of numbers complicated.[3] For Germany it further states: >*Includes around 350000 refugees in temporary housing or awaiting asylum. Temporary housing might be shit, but it's still better than living in a cardboard box on skid row. Unless your government provided temporary housing is a literal cage, of course, but we don't have those here. In Germany "homeless" includes all people who do not have a permanent residence, i.e. people living on the streets but also people who e.g. temporarily live with relatives or friends, e.g. because they have a hard time finding an affordable place in the overcrowded big cities. PS: I was "homeless" for about a year in Germany. I was looking for a new place after uni, couldn't find one due to overcrowding in the city I was looking in, and stayed in my parents' house during that time, just like I did in my youth. I had a better life incl more privacy there than I previously had with some roommate arrangements. But I was technically homeless under the definition they use for the stats.
- soperj 7y ago
  What does that have to do with the US having the resources to do something about it, and not doing anything?
rayiner 7y ago
Homelessness rates in the US are lower than many big European countries: https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-population.pdf https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-population.pd... Lower than France, Germany, and the UK, Sweden, Canada, and Australia. Equal to the Netherlands.
- lacampbell 7y ago
  Interesting fact, but not sure what Canada or Australia are doing in that list. Maybe they're in Eurovision?
  - emmelaich 7y ago
    Correct. They're semantically European but syntactically not. :-) i.e. in the OECD countries.. http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/oecd-countries/ http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/oecd-countries/
- rndgermandude 7y ago
  You read the part where they say things are not really comparable because different nations use different definitions, right? E.g. if you scroll in the article you will find that Germany reports as homeless: "Living temporarily with family and friends due to lack of housing", "Living in institutions" "Living in institutions" is clarified as: "Including people who stay longer than needed in health institutions needed due to lack of housing; and people in penal institutions with no housing available prior to release". The US does not count these categories. Now, it would be interesting to see how the numbers would change if the US actually counted all the millennials who moved back in with their parents because they could not find an affordable place, and all the prisoners and parolees who stay with relatives.
- kalleboo 7y ago
  It sounds like these statistics are utterly useless for national comparisons > About half of the surveyed countries also cover people living in non-conventional dwellings and people living temporarily with family and friends due to lack of housing, > In Sweden the official figure given by the National Board of Health and Welfare includes lots of people who don’t have a permanent home but aren’t living in shelters or on the streets. For instance, Sweden includes people set to be released from jail within three months and have nowhere to go

And you still have plenty of homesless and destitute. Pretty sad that you can't look after the most vunerable.

by soperj 7y ago

And you still have plenty of homesless and destitute. Pretty sad that you can't look after the most vunerable.

fuzz4lyfe 7y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes

skybrian 7y ago
I mean, it's not like they were wrong about that. I don't know what to conclude from this other than most of history is terrible and the present often isn't so great either. Until we live in a utopia, there will be no shortage of targets for whataboutism.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  The point is that it's nothing but a deflection tactic, and I don't believe the people doing the lynching were typically the same people concerned about human rights abuses in the USSR. It's an oversimplification used to prevent discussion about real problems.
  - skissane 7y ago
    I think there is a valid point to it – there is a certain degree of hypocrisy in criticising other country's human rights problems when you aren't doing enough to resolve your own country's human rights problems. Calling it "Whataboutism" seems to excuse that hypocrisy rather than giving it the condemnation it deserves.
    - fuzz4lyfe 7y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
      - skissane 7y ago
        I'm not defending the Soviet Union, which was truly a horrible regime. What I'm saying, is the proper response to a criticism of lynching, is to agree with the criticism, not argue that the crimes (no matter how horrid) of those who are making the criticism renders the criticism invalid.
        EpicEng 7y ago
        Agreed. You're right, it is hypocritical. There was fierce fighting between two sides of the civil rights issue during that time though. We weren't doing enough, but many people were trying.

lacampbell 7y ago

Have you been to a major European train station recently?

__s 7y ago
Yes
soperj 7y ago
Somehow I'm the one deflecting?

EpicEng 7y ago

I saw a ton of people sleeping on mattresses and blankets in German train stations last time I went. Were they just enjoying their freedom from the pressures of society? Maybe we should look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_population https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_... So what are you talking about exactly?

rndgermandude 7y ago
wtf are you talking about? This literally does not happen in normal operation (because train stations security or police aided by social workers will direct people to homeless shelters, or make them leave if they refuse homeless shelters), and only happened a few times during the height of the refugee crisis in the big cities with new arrivals coming in at a rate where the refugee and homeless shelters in those major arrival cities were overloaded and bureaucracy was too slow to process and re-distribute these arrivals quick enough to avoid some camping in train stations. The wikipedia article explicitly states: > This is a list of countries (not all 195) by the homeless population present on any given night. Different countries often use different definitions of homelessness, making direct comparisons of numbers complicated.[3] For Germany it further states: >*Includes around 350000 refugees in temporary housing or awaiting asylum. Temporary housing might be shit, but it's still better than living in a cardboard box on skid row. Unless your government provided temporary housing is a literal cage, of course, but we don't have those here. In Germany "homeless" includes all people who do not have a permanent residence, i.e. people living on the streets but also people who e.g. temporarily live with relatives or friends, e.g. because they have a hard time finding an affordable place in the overcrowded big cities. PS: I was "homeless" for about a year in Germany. I was looking for a new place after uni, couldn't find one due to overcrowding in the city I was looking in, and stayed in my parents' house during that time, just like I did in my youth. I had a better life incl more privacy there than I previously had with some roommate arrangements. But I was technically homeless under the definition they use for the stats.
soperj 7y ago
What does that have to do with the US having the resources to do something about it, and not doing anything?

rayiner 7y ago

Homelessness rates in the US are lower than many big European countries: https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-population.pdf https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-population.pd... Lower than France, Germany, and the UK, Sweden, Canada, and Australia. Equal to the Netherlands.

lacampbell 7y ago
Interesting fact, but not sure what Canada or Australia are doing in that list. Maybe they're in Eurovision?
- emmelaich 7y ago
  Correct. They're semantically European but syntactically not. :-) i.e. in the OECD countries.. http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/oecd-countries/ http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/oecd-countries/
rndgermandude 7y ago
You read the part where they say things are not really comparable because different nations use different definitions, right? E.g. if you scroll in the article you will find that Germany reports as homeless: "Living temporarily with family and friends due to lack of housing", "Living in institutions" "Living in institutions" is clarified as: "Including people who stay longer than needed in health institutions needed due to lack of housing; and people in penal institutions with no housing available prior to release". The US does not count these categories. Now, it would be interesting to see how the numbers would change if the US actually counted all the millennials who moved back in with their parents because they could not find an affordable place, and all the prisoners and parolees who stay with relatives.
kalleboo 7y ago
It sounds like these statistics are utterly useless for national comparisons > About half of the surveyed countries also cover people living in non-conventional dwellings and people living temporarily with family and friends due to lack of housing, > In Sweden the official figure given by the National Board of Health and Welfare includes lots of people who don’t have a permanent home but aren’t living in shelters or on the streets. For instance, Sweden includes people set to be released from jail within three months and have nowhere to go