5 ms·

>> At one time while I was homeless, relatives helped me deal with some of my financial drama >> I was able to resist such pressures and make decisions for mys

>> At one time while I was homeless, relatives helped me deal with some of my financial drama >> I was able to resist such pressures and make decisions for myself, including moving my bank account at a later date on terms that made more sense for me, because I had some maneuvering room in the form of food stamps and knowing where I could get a free meal or free clothes. Food stamps didn't cover some essential nonfood items that we needed and couldn't get from a homeless services center, specifically peroxide and plastic cups, but we made more of an effort to get better at finding change on the street and we used that to buy those essentials at some local "dollar" store. This article is a good example of a "First World Problem". Before jumping to conclusions, let me explain. There is world of a difference between being homeless in a first world country and a third world country. This article completely discounts that. Food stamps, bank accounts are something 'poor' can only find in first world countries. >> Join reward programs, clip coupons, etc. >> Check Reddit for pertinent subreddits for meeting your needs cheaply. To access Reddit you first need a device AND an internet connection AND you need to be literate. >> Ultimately, I concluded that being able to choose wasn't really about money per se but was about maneuvering room. Yes, having sufficient resources helps, but making choices in life and exercising free will is not directly related to how much or how little money a person has. It helps if you have some confidence you won't starve or otherwise experience catastrophe, but that isn't about money per se. It completely discounts any family members that may be disabled and maybe completely reliant on you for making ends meet. Have you ever seen a slum?(if not, then you probably won't get the point). This doesn't even touch the surface of what real problems most of the world in poor countries face. I don't blame the author for she has probably not been to a third world country but I do not agree with the above points.

olcor 6y ago
This so much. It felt so weird that this person was talking about poverty and blogging/reading on the internet at the same time. Few poor people in the third world would know what blogging even is, forget about even wasting precious resources like time, money for a smartphone and an internet connection just to read/write some ideas which few are ever going to read and you won’t be making anything out of. This feels like being written by a person who knows that she’s writing for people who like to think about the idea of poverty living, but haven’t experienced it much first or even second-hand, only knowing about it from the news or glossy donation pamphlets.
- odshoifsdhfs 6y ago
  While I don't disagree the 'real' poor can choose the alternative and agree with GP, I think you also have a very fatalistic view of 3rd world poor. I have family living in the '3rd world' and even there the poor have phones. Sure they are 20 dollars, 10 year old models running android 5.0 or something, but they still check facebook and whatever. They aren't probably blogging but they also read websites/blogs
  - imheretolearn 6y ago
    Have you been to Africa? Or even rural India? The fact that you have access to HN means that: 1. You are able to afford to connect to HN 2. Are privileged enough to be able to read it 3. Your family also has the ability to do 1 if not 2 And let's assume for a minute they do have phones and an internet connection, which in itself is an egregious assumption(the real poor are the ones who don't even have phones). What are they going to do with their phones if they are unable to read half if not most of the internet?
    - frequentnapper 6y ago
      I fail to see the point you're trying to make. This post was written by a homeless person in a "first world" country so the target audience is people in those countries. Nobody is obligating whomsoever you consider "third world" to read or follow her advice...
    - odshoifsdhfs 6y ago
      Not rural india but africa yes. Family there. Not all countries are bad, but I saw some that are quite horrible. Saw people 'bathing' in puddles in the street as to not pay for water. Saw slums where 6-7 live to a zero-bedroom 'house' (I wouldn't call that a house in most parts of the world). Family works with local schools and institutions to make sure kids have food. But I can say, even in those situations, most has a cheap-ass phone with internet. Sure, not 5g to watch HD movies or whatnot, but they could talk with people and go to facebook As for rural india, it seems they have more internet users than urban india: https://www.warc.com/newsandopinion/news/internet-usage-in-rural-india-overtakes-urban-areas/43588 https://www.warc.com/newsandopinion/news/internet-usage-in-r...
DoreenMichele 6y ago
I'm the author. I'm disabled and the primary provider for my family of three, which includes two disabled sons. I absolutely didn't want to be poor. I'm still poor and I hate every minute of it. I wish desperately that I had more money and I am doing all in my power to resolve my problems and this has been true for years. "First world problem" or not, being homeless in a first world country is still a very real problem. Among other things, people who are homeless die at much younger ages on average than people who are housed. People who experience homelessness have an average life expectancy of around 50 years of age, almost 20 years lower than housed populations. https://nationalhomeless.org/category/mortality/ https://nationalhomeless.org/category/mortality/ So homelessness is literally killing people. I do what I can to provide useful information, both for those on the street/at risk of homelessness and for those interested in finding effective solutions. My knowledge comes from first-hand experience -- having spent nearly six years homeless -- as well as formal education on the topic of homelessness. For the record, I'm a woman. So I'm a "ma'am," not a "sir," if you want to know the correct term with which to express your contempt while pretending to be respectful.
- rumanator 6y ago
  > So homelessness is literally killing people. Correlation does not imply causality. I'm pretty sure that an individual's real estate portfolio doesn't play any role in the equation if they experience a health problem that they are unable to treat. Lack of access to healthcare, that's available in pretty much all civilized nations, would do a whole lot of good to bump up life expectancy among the US's homeless population.
  - DoreenMichele 6y ago
    People get literally murdered simply because they are homeless and for no other reason. Health problems that would be readily and easily treated if you were in housing turn into medical emergencies on the street. I'm well aware that correlation does not imply causality. But I also know for a fact that homelessness helps shorten lifespans. And in the US, even if it were the case that we simply dump our dying on the streets instead of providing hospice, that would be plenty atrocious right there. And we do, in fact, do a certain amount of that. But that's not the entire explanation for the statistic.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
aahortwwy 6y ago
I figure there's probably a name for this sort of comment (which appears a lot on Hacker News). Would it be "relative privation"?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Luc 6y ago
  One-upper?
hurrdurr2 6y ago
This is some weird "whataboutism".
TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
Before I read Doreen’s sibling comment, it seemed pretty clear to me the context within which the article was written. Of course she isn’t talking about solving global poverty, she’s talking about being poor in the USA, with access to services. If everyone had to constantly preface everything they said with the context within which they were about to say it, that would swiftly get tiring.
imtringued 6y ago
>To access Reddit you first need a device AND an internet connection AND you need to be literate. That's an incredibly low barrier. Homeless people are merely people without homes. Compare the cost of a smartphone and mobile internet to how much you would have to spend on rent to cease being homeless. Let's be extremely reckless and just get an iPhone Xs plan for $60 per month including 20GB worth of data. Even the most expensive option is basically less than 10% of my rent. It's easy to find a prepaid smartphone for $200-$300 that will be equally useful as the iPhone, last you at least 6 years and you can charge the balance up by going to a retail store where you can simply pay with cash. Although I agree that literacy is priceless it's probably not 100% required with a modern smartphone. You can probably use voice commands and watch videos and listen to podcasts. >This doesn't even touch the surface of what real problems most of the world in poor countries face. Poor countries only have themselves to blame. The real problem they face is primarily the result of government incompetence or corruption and conflicts between countries. In a globalized world prosperity is coming to everyone that is embracing it. Slums are the result of the poor showing their willpower to pull themselves out of their misery but they are usually prevented by government policy to make their dreams come true. Tent cities in San Francisco are truly worthy of being called slums because their root cause is exactly the same. I personally think your argumentation is weird. (Don't feel bad about this) You classify homelessness in the US (or any other developed country) as a "First World Problem" because it does not compare to "true poverty" experienced in "truly poor" countries. The implication is that we should be glad that poverty in the US is this "insignificant" but therein lies the paradox. If it's truly insignificant then why should homelessness/poverty as we know it exist at all? People somehow think that the poor should suffer as if they have received a punishment that they badly deserved but yet the poor should also feel good about themselves because it could be even worse. All of this is merely a justification to not help anyone. What you are doing is the same thing you accuse the author of doing. The author isn't thinking about people poorer than her but what about you? Are you thinking about people poorer than you (such as the author)? No, you aren't, not even after reading one article from a poor person.

olcor 6y ago

This so much. It felt so weird that this person was talking about poverty and blogging/reading on the internet at the same time. Few poor people in the third world would know what blogging even is, forget about even wasting precious resources like time, money for a smartphone and an internet connection just to read/write some ideas which few are ever going to read and you won’t be making anything out of. This feels like being written by a person who knows that she’s writing for people who like to think about the idea of poverty living, but haven’t experienced it much first or even second-hand, only knowing about it from the news or glossy donation pamphlets.

odshoifsdhfs 6y ago
While I don't disagree the 'real' poor can choose the alternative and agree with GP, I think you also have a very fatalistic view of 3rd world poor. I have family living in the '3rd world' and even there the poor have phones. Sure they are 20 dollars, 10 year old models running android 5.0 or something, but they still check facebook and whatever. They aren't probably blogging but they also read websites/blogs
- imheretolearn 6y ago
  Have you been to Africa? Or even rural India? The fact that you have access to HN means that: 1. You are able to afford to connect to HN 2. Are privileged enough to be able to read it 3. Your family also has the ability to do 1 if not 2 And let's assume for a minute they do have phones and an internet connection, which in itself is an egregious assumption(the real poor are the ones who don't even have phones). What are they going to do with their phones if they are unable to read half if not most of the internet?
  - frequentnapper 6y ago
    I fail to see the point you're trying to make. This post was written by a homeless person in a "first world" country so the target audience is people in those countries. Nobody is obligating whomsoever you consider "third world" to read or follow her advice...
  - odshoifsdhfs 6y ago
    Not rural india but africa yes. Family there. Not all countries are bad, but I saw some that are quite horrible. Saw people 'bathing' in puddles in the street as to not pay for water. Saw slums where 6-7 live to a zero-bedroom 'house' (I wouldn't call that a house in most parts of the world). Family works with local schools and institutions to make sure kids have food. But I can say, even in those situations, most has a cheap-ass phone with internet. Sure, not 5g to watch HD movies or whatnot, but they could talk with people and go to facebook As for rural india, it seems they have more internet users than urban india: https://www.warc.com/newsandopinion/news/internet-usage-in-rural-india-overtakes-urban-areas/43588 https://www.warc.com/newsandopinion/news/internet-usage-in-r...

DoreenMichele 6y ago

I'm the author. I'm disabled and the primary provider for my family of three, which includes two disabled sons. I absolutely didn't want to be poor. I'm still poor and I hate every minute of it. I wish desperately that I had more money and I am doing all in my power to resolve my problems and this has been true for years. "First world problem" or not, being homeless in a first world country is still a very real problem. Among other things, people who are homeless die at much younger ages on average than people who are housed. People who experience homelessness have an average life expectancy of around 50 years of age, almost 20 years lower than housed populations. https://nationalhomeless.org/category/mortality/ https://nationalhomeless.org/category/mortality/ So homelessness is literally killing people. I do what I can to provide useful information, both for those on the street/at risk of homelessness and for those interested in finding effective solutions. My knowledge comes from first-hand experience -- having spent nearly six years homeless -- as well as formal education on the topic of homelessness. For the record, I'm a woman. So I'm a "ma'am," not a "sir," if you want to know the correct term with which to express your contempt while pretending to be respectful.

rumanator 6y ago
> So homelessness is literally killing people. Correlation does not imply causality. I'm pretty sure that an individual's real estate portfolio doesn't play any role in the equation if they experience a health problem that they are unable to treat. Lack of access to healthcare, that's available in pretty much all civilized nations, would do a whole lot of good to bump up life expectancy among the US's homeless population.
- DoreenMichele 6y ago
  People get literally murdered simply because they are homeless and for no other reason. Health problems that would be readily and easily treated if you were in housing turn into medical emergencies on the street. I'm well aware that correlation does not imply causality. But I also know for a fact that homelessness helps shorten lifespans. And in the US, even if it were the case that we simply dump our dying on the streets instead of providing hospice, that would be plenty atrocious right there. And we do, in fact, do a certain amount of that. But that's not the entire explanation for the statistic.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

aahortwwy 6y ago

I figure there's probably a name for this sort of comment (which appears a lot on Hacker News). Would it be "relative privation"?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Luc 6y ago
One-upper?

hurrdurr2 6y ago

This is some weird "whataboutism".

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago

Before I read Doreen’s sibling comment, it seemed pretty clear to me the context within which the article was written. Of course she isn’t talking about solving global poverty, she’s talking about being poor in the USA, with access to services. If everyone had to constantly preface everything they said with the context within which they were about to say it, that would swiftly get tiring.

imtringued 6y ago

>To access Reddit you first need a device AND an internet connection AND you need to be literate. That's an incredibly low barrier. Homeless people are merely people without homes. Compare the cost of a smartphone and mobile internet to how much you would have to spend on rent to cease being homeless. Let's be extremely reckless and just get an iPhone Xs plan for $60 per month including 20GB worth of data. Even the most expensive option is basically less than 10% of my rent. It's easy to find a prepaid smartphone for $200-$300 that will be equally useful as the iPhone, last you at least 6 years and you can charge the balance up by going to a retail store where you can simply pay with cash. Although I agree that literacy is priceless it's probably not 100% required with a modern smartphone. You can probably use voice commands and watch videos and listen to podcasts. >This doesn't even touch the surface of what real problems most of the world in poor countries face. Poor countries only have themselves to blame. The real problem they face is primarily the result of government incompetence or corruption and conflicts between countries. In a globalized world prosperity is coming to everyone that is embracing it. Slums are the result of the poor showing their willpower to pull themselves out of their misery but they are usually prevented by government policy to make their dreams come true. Tent cities in San Francisco are truly worthy of being called slums because their root cause is exactly the same. I personally think your argumentation is weird. (Don't feel bad about this) You classify homelessness in the US (or any other developed country) as a "First World Problem" because it does not compare to "true poverty" experienced in "truly poor" countries. The implication is that we should be glad that poverty in the US is this "insignificant" but therein lies the paradox. If it's truly insignificant then why should homelessness/poverty as we know it exist at all? People somehow think that the poor should suffer as if they have received a punishment that they badly deserved but yet the poor should also feel good about themselves because it could be even worse. All of this is merely a justification to not help anyone. What you are doing is the same thing you accuse the author of doing. The author isn't thinking about people poorer than her but what about you? Are you thinking about people poorer than you (such as the author)? No, you aren't, not even after reading one article from a poor person.