3 ms·

Worth noting that the solution is simple. If you want to end homelessness, you give the homeless houses. It turns out we have a ton of empty houses and apartmen

by ixtli 6y ago

Worth noting that the solution is simple. If you want to end homelessness, you give the homeless houses. It turns out we have a ton of empty houses and apartments in America. If that’s not palatable I’d be more interested in looking at why.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
daenz 6y ago
That doesn't solve homelessness, it solves houselessness.
twblalock 6y ago
That doesn't solve the problem. If you just gave housing to most homeless people and walked away, the majority of them would be homeless again after a short time. You'd need to commit to ongoing, indefinite financial support for the person and for the maintenance of the housing.
- totalZero 6y ago
  Your comment indicates the assumption that homeless people are homeless not for situational factors, but because of personal characteristics. However, I think it's more accurate to recognize that homelessness is a trap that makes it hard for a person to attain employment and healthy living. For example, a homeless person must invest far more energy to suit up for an interview than a non-homeless person. I see homelessness as a poverty trap. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_trap
  - twblalock 6y ago
    Homelessness is not simply a money problem. A lot of homeless people have mental illnesses, drug addictions, and other significant health problems. Many of them are suspicious of shelters and especially of the police and other forms of government authority because of bad past experiences. Even for people who initially became homeless because they couldn't afford housing, a lot of those other factors have become part of what keeps them homeless. Just giving them housing doesn't solve any of those other problems.
    - totalZero 6y ago
      First things first, either you're conflating my response with the parent commenter, who is a different person, or you are setting up a straw man with your first sentence. I never said homelessness is "simply a money problem." Poverty has social, medical, and political elements -- it is not solely an economic problem. I also never said it is possible to solve homelessness by just giving housing to homeless people. Now, to respond to your reasoning.... Your comment exhibits some willful blindness. SF housing, for example, is crazy expensive. Research shows that expensive rental rates correlate to higher homeless rates. If you reduce the concentration of housing demand by letting technocrat employees work from home in remote places (Utah, Colorado, other scenic millennial hotspots), that reduces demand for SF housing. Lowered demand reduces price, which eases the threshold at which a homeless person is able to cover the cost of housing. Cost of housing is but one of many situational factors. That said, it would be somewhat ignorant to look at homelessness as a non-economic problem. For many homeless people, the issue may not be intrinsic to their mental state, but rather the result of situational factors. One simple proof of this is the fact that many people come out of homelessness after a while. Instead of blaming the person, we should evaluate the situational factors. Often, one of those factors is money. However, other situational factors can reinforce poverty as well. All people experience shocks at certain points in their lives. If such a shock comes at a time of housing insecurity, it may result in homelessness. Illness is one such shock. Poor and disadvantaged people must often be more sophisticated than their more-well-off counterparts to accomplish the same tasks. Imagine, if you will, a person without credit who needs to borrow a few thousand dollars to buy a car to get to work. That person may have to go to friends or family. If he qualifies for a bank loan, the rate will be higher than what would be offered to a different person with superior credit. And the loan amount may be less. Thus, he may have to buy a used, possibly problematic vehicle. The debt service of the loan, plus maintenance cost of the vehicle, will be elevated versus a new car at a fair interest rate. If the neighborhood is insecure, insurance will be more expensive. Those are not solely money problems. However, they work in concert to bleed funds from the individual, preventing him from saving money. That's one example of a poverty trap.
- jahaja 6y ago
  This this just an assumption based on your own prejudices or something you can back up?

by ixtli 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

daenz 6y ago

That doesn't solve homelessness, it solves houselessness.

twblalock 6y ago

That doesn't solve the problem. If you just gave housing to most homeless people and walked away, the majority of them would be homeless again after a short time. You'd need to commit to ongoing, indefinite financial support for the person and for the maintenance of the housing.

totalZero 6y ago
Your comment indicates the assumption that homeless people are homeless not for situational factors, but because of personal characteristics. However, I think it's more accurate to recognize that homelessness is a trap that makes it hard for a person to attain employment and healthy living. For example, a homeless person must invest far more energy to suit up for an interview than a non-homeless person. I see homelessness as a poverty trap. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_trap
- twblalock 6y ago
  Homelessness is not simply a money problem. A lot of homeless people have mental illnesses, drug addictions, and other significant health problems. Many of them are suspicious of shelters and especially of the police and other forms of government authority because of bad past experiences. Even for people who initially became homeless because they couldn't afford housing, a lot of those other factors have become part of what keeps them homeless. Just giving them housing doesn't solve any of those other problems.
  - totalZero 6y ago
    First things first, either you're conflating my response with the parent commenter, who is a different person, or you are setting up a straw man with your first sentence. I never said homelessness is "simply a money problem." Poverty has social, medical, and political elements -- it is not solely an economic problem. I also never said it is possible to solve homelessness by just giving housing to homeless people. Now, to respond to your reasoning.... Your comment exhibits some willful blindness. SF housing, for example, is crazy expensive. Research shows that expensive rental rates correlate to higher homeless rates. If you reduce the concentration of housing demand by letting technocrat employees work from home in remote places (Utah, Colorado, other scenic millennial hotspots), that reduces demand for SF housing. Lowered demand reduces price, which eases the threshold at which a homeless person is able to cover the cost of housing. Cost of housing is but one of many situational factors. That said, it would be somewhat ignorant to look at homelessness as a non-economic problem. For many homeless people, the issue may not be intrinsic to their mental state, but rather the result of situational factors. One simple proof of this is the fact that many people come out of homelessness after a while. Instead of blaming the person, we should evaluate the situational factors. Often, one of those factors is money. However, other situational factors can reinforce poverty as well. All people experience shocks at certain points in their lives. If such a shock comes at a time of housing insecurity, it may result in homelessness. Illness is one such shock. Poor and disadvantaged people must often be more sophisticated than their more-well-off counterparts to accomplish the same tasks. Imagine, if you will, a person without credit who needs to borrow a few thousand dollars to buy a car to get to work. That person may have to go to friends or family. If he qualifies for a bank loan, the rate will be higher than what would be offered to a different person with superior credit. And the loan amount may be less. Thus, he may have to buy a used, possibly problematic vehicle. The debt service of the loan, plus maintenance cost of the vehicle, will be elevated versus a new car at a fair interest rate. If the neighborhood is insecure, insurance will be more expensive. Those are not solely money problems. However, they work in concert to bleed funds from the individual, preventing him from saving money. That's one example of a poverty trap.
jahaja 6y ago
This this just an assumption based on your own prejudices or something you can back up?