4 ms·

Nowadays it's becoming more common to become homeless despite having a job, due to stagnant wages combined with no affordable housing. There are many documentar

by city41 7y ago

Nowadays it's becoming more common to become homeless despite having a job, due to stagnant wages combined with no affordable housing. There are many documentaries on YouTube covering this phenomenon, such as this one from CBS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0HcIJpWMDk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0HcIJpWMDk, and this one from DW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHDkALRz5Rk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHDkALRz5Rk

throwawaysea 7y ago
Would you accept a compromise where affordable housing is subsidized if the person is a long-term tax-paying/law-abiding resident of that area (5+ years) but not otherwise? I think there has to be a disincentive for people to move to expensive and desirable locations like SF and expect to be able to make ends meet. If they're a newcomer to an area, they should know the costs and what it takes and bear the responsibility instead of imposing themselves upon existing residents IMO.
- city41 7y ago
  What you describe is essentially rent control. From what I understand (and I am far from an expert), most of these people have lived in SF/LA for a long time, surviving due to rent control. But it's greatly in the landlord's interest to get them to move out, and eventually it happens, and then they are stuck.
  - fiter 7y ago
    Based on your summary, the comment you're replying to would be a better solution as there wouldn't be a perverse incentive. Do you think a replacement of rent control with such a policy could happen?
quotemstr 7y ago
And if laws against vagrancy were better-enforced, businesses wouldn't find it possible to employ people for poverty wages. They'd have to raise wages to the point that people can afford housing. This idea that we need to allow people to camp all over public space because the employment market is malfunctioning in some way is indicative of a "caring" mindset that's making it impossible to actually solve the real, underlying problems of resource misallocation. Our inability to address the homeless problem is a direct result of "caring" and "nurturing" eclipsing all other values. We've become incapable of enacting any policy that someone might call "harsh", even if that policy would be better for everyone in the long term. Sometimes the right approach really is tough love.
- city41 7y ago
  I'm not trying to suggest a solution. I think this is an incredibly complex problem and not something I have expertise in. I'm merely pointing out there is some recent evidence to suggest the make up of homeless people may be shifting.
- dtech 7y ago
  It sounds very unlikely that the reason for stagnant and too low wages is inadequate prosecution of the most vulnerable people in society.
  - quotemstr 7y ago
    > It sounds very unlikely that the reason for stagnant and too low wages is inadequate prosecution of the most vulnerable people in society. That's a pretty loaded statement presented without evidence. Vagrants are aren't "the most vulnerable people in society'. They're criminals. If we punish them like criminals, they'll stop their criminal behavior or spent time in prison where they can't cause problems for everyone else.
    - DrJosiah 7y ago
      > Vagrants are aren't "the most vulnerable people in society'. They're criminals. That's a pretty loaded statement presented without evidence.
      - quotemstr 7y ago
        Vagrants are breaking the law, by definition, because vagrancy is a crime. When someone commits a crime, we call him a criminal and remove him from society for a while. I see no reason to abandon this tradition now.
        DrJosiah 7y ago
        > When someone commits a crime, we call him a criminal and remove him from society for a while. Wow. I've received 3 speeding tickets, and 2 right on red tickets in my life. I committed a crime. I paid fines. I was not removed from society. That is the case with a huge number of crimes, today, otherwise we would have an even worse prison problem. > I see no reason to abandon this tradition now. We've already abandoned it, and we are reducing the sizes of prisons as you prattle on about the problems of vagrancy. Let's get mental health care facilities, rehab, and more, to the levels that existed before Republicans gutted them starting in the 50's. I don't know, like institute new-deal type things so people aren't wanting for basic needs, and maybe vagrancy will go away. Well, it did the last time we did that. Why wouldn't we do the exact same thing that worked last time?

by city41 7y ago

throwawaysea 7y ago

Would you accept a compromise where affordable housing is subsidized if the person is a long-term tax-paying/law-abiding resident of that area (5+ years) but not otherwise? I think there has to be a disincentive for people to move to expensive and desirable locations like SF and expect to be able to make ends meet. If they're a newcomer to an area, they should know the costs and what it takes and bear the responsibility instead of imposing themselves upon existing residents IMO.

city41 7y ago
What you describe is essentially rent control. From what I understand (and I am far from an expert), most of these people have lived in SF/LA for a long time, surviving due to rent control. But it's greatly in the landlord's interest to get them to move out, and eventually it happens, and then they are stuck.
- fiter 7y ago
  Based on your summary, the comment you're replying to would be a better solution as there wouldn't be a perverse incentive. Do you think a replacement of rent control with such a policy could happen?

quotemstr 7y ago

And if laws against vagrancy were better-enforced, businesses wouldn't find it possible to employ people for poverty wages. They'd have to raise wages to the point that people can afford housing. This idea that we need to allow people to camp all over public space because the employment market is malfunctioning in some way is indicative of a "caring" mindset that's making it impossible to actually solve the real, underlying problems of resource misallocation. Our inability to address the homeless problem is a direct result of "caring" and "nurturing" eclipsing all other values. We've become incapable of enacting any policy that someone might call "harsh", even if that policy would be better for everyone in the long term. Sometimes the right approach really is tough love.

city41 7y ago
I'm not trying to suggest a solution. I think this is an incredibly complex problem and not something I have expertise in. I'm merely pointing out there is some recent evidence to suggest the make up of homeless people may be shifting.
dtech 7y ago
It sounds very unlikely that the reason for stagnant and too low wages is inadequate prosecution of the most vulnerable people in society.
- quotemstr 7y ago
  > It sounds very unlikely that the reason for stagnant and too low wages is inadequate prosecution of the most vulnerable people in society. That's a pretty loaded statement presented without evidence. Vagrants are aren't "the most vulnerable people in society'. They're criminals. If we punish them like criminals, they'll stop their criminal behavior or spent time in prison where they can't cause problems for everyone else.
  - DrJosiah 7y ago
    > Vagrants are aren't "the most vulnerable people in society'. They're criminals. That's a pretty loaded statement presented without evidence.
    - quotemstr 7y ago
      Vagrants are breaking the law, by definition, because vagrancy is a crime. When someone commits a crime, we call him a criminal and remove him from society for a while. I see no reason to abandon this tradition now.
      - DrJosiah 7y ago
        > When someone commits a crime, we call him a criminal and remove him from society for a while. Wow. I've received 3 speeding tickets, and 2 right on red tickets in my life. I committed a crime. I paid fines. I was not removed from society. That is the case with a huge number of crimes, today, otherwise we would have an even worse prison problem. > I see no reason to abandon this tradition now. We've already abandoned it, and we are reducing the sizes of prisons as you prattle on about the problems of vagrancy. Let's get mental health care facilities, rehab, and more, to the levels that existed before Republicans gutted them starting in the 50's. I don't know, like institute new-deal type things so people aren't wanting for basic needs, and maybe vagrancy will go away. Well, it did the last time we did that. Why wouldn't we do the exact same thing that worked last time?