4 ms·

People not having jobs means they could end up homeless and vulnerable. Hard to practice social distancing in a homeless shelter and get access to adequate nutr

People not having jobs means they could end up homeless and vulnerable. Hard to practice social distancing in a homeless shelter and get access to adequate nutrition, especially if they become overpopulated, and there could be a huge amount of deaths as a result as well. Is the government going to suddenly pay everyone's rent that loses a job? $1000 checks won't pay rent in many part of the country.

mirimir 7y ago
They can ban eviction, however.
- blackrock 7y ago
  Socialized housing for everyone?
  - Buttons840 7y ago
    Maybe. It seems likely that the optimal economic and societal systems are going to be different during these unusual and temporary circumstances. Thus, to not make temporary changes would be sub-optimal.
- techntoke 7y ago
  Temporarily banning evictions until things improve (possibly temporarily) is only going to help people stay in their homes in the short term, and they will still be required to pay rent for those periods.
Buttons840 7y ago
You're right that human lives are on both sides of the balance. It's interesting that paying people's rent for them is on the table, but denying rent to the literal rent-seekers isn't. As though ensuring those who collect rent get their rent is more important than keeping people in homes.
- sigstoat 7y ago
  > It's interesting that paying people's rent for them is on the table, but denying rent to the literal rent-seekers isn't. As though ensuring those who collect rent get their rent is more important than keeping people in homes. do you imagine every tenant's landlord is a literal scrooge mcduck? my elderly neighbors rent their basement out. should they just be told they don't get paid for a few months? my retired parents own REITs, and pay their bills with those dividends. if the real estate companies don't get paid, there's no dividends, and then my parents are buying cat food. pensions and retirement funds across the country rely on rents coming in. this "just suspend rents" line would be less insane if you'd acknowledge there are trade-offs to it.
dragonwriter 7y ago
> People not having jobs means they could end up homeless and vulnerable. Eviction/foreclosure bans have in many places been adopted along with shelter-in-place orders. > Hard to practice social distancing in a homeless shelter and get access to adequate nutrition, especially if they become overpopulated Why California’s emergency approach includes the power to seize hotels to rapidly expand shelter capacity (and why SF is in negotiations to buy hotel space for an extended time for that purpose.)
- techntoke 7y ago
  > Eviction/foreclosure bans have in many places been adopted along with shelter-in-place orders. They are simply pausing evictions. So, you lose your job due to the pandemic and as soon as it has improved then you still get kicked out. I don't think that is much relief, especially if there is another wave. Here is the order: https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499_90705-522509--,00.html https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499_90705-52... > Why California’s emergency approach includes the power to seize hotels to rapidly expand shelter capacity (and why SF is in negotiations to buy hotel space for an extended time for that purpose.) All I've seen is for quarantine sites, not for shelters.
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago
  Seattle / Wa state has already been buying hotels around here too. And we started building temporary hospitals on soccer fields.

mirimir 7y ago

They can ban eviction, however.

blackrock 7y ago
Socialized housing for everyone?
- Buttons840 7y ago
  Maybe. It seems likely that the optimal economic and societal systems are going to be different during these unusual and temporary circumstances. Thus, to not make temporary changes would be sub-optimal.
techntoke 7y ago
Temporarily banning evictions until things improve (possibly temporarily) is only going to help people stay in their homes in the short term, and they will still be required to pay rent for those periods.

Buttons840 7y ago

You're right that human lives are on both sides of the balance. It's interesting that paying people's rent for them is on the table, but denying rent to the literal rent-seekers isn't. As though ensuring those who collect rent get their rent is more important than keeping people in homes.

sigstoat 7y ago
> It's interesting that paying people's rent for them is on the table, but denying rent to the literal rent-seekers isn't. As though ensuring those who collect rent get their rent is more important than keeping people in homes. do you imagine every tenant's landlord is a literal scrooge mcduck? my elderly neighbors rent their basement out. should they just be told they don't get paid for a few months? my retired parents own REITs, and pay their bills with those dividends. if the real estate companies don't get paid, there's no dividends, and then my parents are buying cat food. pensions and retirement funds across the country rely on rents coming in. this "just suspend rents" line would be less insane if you'd acknowledge there are trade-offs to it.

dragonwriter 7y ago

> People not having jobs means they could end up homeless and vulnerable. Eviction/foreclosure bans have in many places been adopted along with shelter-in-place orders. > Hard to practice social distancing in a homeless shelter and get access to adequate nutrition, especially if they become overpopulated Why California’s emergency approach includes the power to seize hotels to rapidly expand shelter capacity (and why SF is in negotiations to buy hotel space for an extended time for that purpose.)

techntoke 7y ago
> Eviction/foreclosure bans have in many places been adopted along with shelter-in-place orders. They are simply pausing evictions. So, you lose your job due to the pandemic and as soon as it has improved then you still get kicked out. I don't think that is much relief, especially if there is another wave. Here is the order: https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499_90705-522509--,00.html https://www.michigan.gov/whitmer/0,9309,7-387-90499_90705-52... > Why California’s emergency approach includes the power to seize hotels to rapidly expand shelter capacity (and why SF is in negotiations to buy hotel space for an extended time for that purpose.) All I've seen is for quarantine sites, not for shelters.
NotSammyHagar 7y ago
Seattle / Wa state has already been buying hotels around here too. And we started building temporary hospitals on soccer fields.