4 ms·

Homelessness exists because the landlords and business people prefer it. Homelessness is a demonstrated threat of what not paying the rent and having a job will

Homelessness exists because the landlords and business people prefer it. Homelessness is a demonstrated threat of what not paying the rent and having a job will do to you. If you remove that dire threat, the housing market and job market becomes far more competitive for the workers and the owner class is disadvantaged. In the US, we have many more vacant houses than we have homeless people. The market system is incapable of solving this very simple problem.

kelnos 6y ago
That's an interesting theory. I think there are competing interests, though. Landlords and businesses generally won't want homeless people in their areas, though, because their presence alone will decrease property values and rent (landlords), and drive away customers (businesses). But for what you suggest to work, homeless people need to be visible. Do you have any data on this? This doesn't really pass the smell test for me, even though it potentially sounds like a satisfying explanation of part of the problem.
- pille 6y ago
  I don't think GP was saying that landlords keep hoards of miserable homeless people just outside the property, in order to scare tenants into paying their rent. People are plenty aware of economic reality.
  - Synaesthesia 6y ago
    They certainly collaborate to keep rent high, its known that property developers in the US don't rent out property in manhattan to keep prices high. Why would they want to solve homelessness? They're motivated by profit in their role at the institution.
    - fastball 6y ago
      This is just nonsense. Right now, homeless people are not customers, meaning they are not making money off of those people, when they could be if those people were actually renters.
      - tehjoker 6y ago
        The argument is that would be penny-wise and pound-foolish. It also isn't penny-wise: homeless people don't have cash.
        fastball 6y ago
        It is absolutely not clear that this would be pound-foolish, and homeless people do have cash if you get them off the streets and back as productive members of society.
        tehjoker 6y ago
        Well, yea in a larger sense they would but they don't have cash so you can't rent to them for any significant sums. This is why socialists critique the market system as irrational.
- scotty79 6y ago
  > But for what you suggest to work, homeless people need to be visible. Not necessarily physically visible. Just mentally visible.
tertius 6y ago
Private property getting in the way again?
syshum 6y ago
I want to believe this is hyperbolic. Do you really believe business owners, and landlords are sitting in some smokey room plotting to keep people homeless so people will pay their rent? Really, that is your honest held belief of the situation?
- RobertoG 6y ago
  Are you saying that there are not smokey rooms in all countries where they are plotting how to cut public services?
  - mistermann 6y ago
    That is a similar, but distinctly different topic. Indeed, there are always people who are looking to cut public services, but the discussion was about the motive for doing that.
    - RobertoG 6y ago
      Yeah, but we are not talking about people in general, we are talking about board rooms in think tanks and cameras of commerce. What is the motive there?
      - mistermann 6y ago
        That's just your perception of what "we're" talking about. Think about it as you would when debugging software: how might you (an instance of a class in a complex system) know what other people (instances of classes within the system) are "talking about" (where talking derives from thinking/computation that takes place within those object instances)? Are you obtaining this knowledge via the calling of public interfaces? If not, then what is the True source of this knowledge? Ironically (or not), the title of this overall thread is "This is Real, That's Not". The content of the discussions is a fine reflection of the very phenomenon that Doreen is talking about, and I suspect a plausible demonstration of why humanity can't sort its shit out, decade after decade: an inability (or unwillingness) to acknowledge the self-delusional nature of the human mind. > What is the motive there? The motives are complex, and unknown (the necessary callable public interfaces to obtain such knowledge do not exist - and yet, observe the number of people in this thread who perceive that they have knowledge of the contents of other people's minds. Is this not an extremely interesting phenomenon? Might this phenomenon have consequences in a complex system, especially if it exists but is completely unrealized? I suspect that a specific, conscious motivation to bring about the specific end state that we are experiencing (inequality, homelessness, human suffering in general) also does not actually exist. Rather, I reckon the mess we are living in is more like some sort of a cosmic demonstration of the law unintended consequences, due to an unwillingness to acknowledge the complexities inherent in reality. A religious person may consider this punishment from God for disobedience. A comedian (or a schizophrenic) may consider it to be comedy at its finest. Each individual perceives reality through a custom lens, and comes to vastly different conclusions. I could be wrong of course, but it's a fun way to look at it. Part of the fun is observing how people react to crazy ideas like this, that may actually have a fair amount of validity to them (how might we know, for sure, if they do, or do not?).
nlh 6y ago
I think your sentiment is in the right direction but I don’t think it’s as explicit as you’re proposing. Landlords don’t “prefer” homelessness to exist. Their position, as capitalists, ends with their interests. Many (not all!) landlord are quite simple: “Pay rent or I will evict you and find someone else”. That’s it. After an eviction, they don’t care whether the person moves elsewhere or is homeless. In fact I’d argue that most people are probably on the gooder side of good and would prefer their former tenant move elsewhere and live a nice comfortable life and someone else can deal with their poorness. What they do absolutely want is the ability to enforce that eviction. That’s key. But I doubt they care so much about the looming threat of homelessness.
- scotty79 6y ago
  If someone would end homelessness by providing homes to all of the homeless free of charge and then some more empty ones then landlords would mind very much because this oversupply would make their prices drop. They would accuse homelessness solver of dumping prices. Landlords "prefer" homelessness exist because that the surplus demand over the supply that they provide.
  - tertius 6y ago
    That already happens. Section 8 is profitable for the right landlords... Yes, rents going down is not what a landlord wants. Just like salary going down (all things being equal). But it's not as if all landlords are conspiring to keep people homeless to increase their rents. Yes they would accuse/blame the homelessness solver of decreasing their rents and they would be correct. I'm not a landlord and I would 'blame' or point out the same thing. That doesn't mean that I think it's wrong while at the same time correctly identifying it as the cause...

kelnos 6y ago

That's an interesting theory. I think there are competing interests, though. Landlords and businesses generally won't want homeless people in their areas, though, because their presence alone will decrease property values and rent (landlords), and drive away customers (businesses). But for what you suggest to work, homeless people need to be visible. Do you have any data on this? This doesn't really pass the smell test for me, even though it potentially sounds like a satisfying explanation of part of the problem.

pille 6y ago
I don't think GP was saying that landlords keep hoards of miserable homeless people just outside the property, in order to scare tenants into paying their rent. People are plenty aware of economic reality.
- Synaesthesia 6y ago
  They certainly collaborate to keep rent high, its known that property developers in the US don't rent out property in manhattan to keep prices high. Why would they want to solve homelessness? They're motivated by profit in their role at the institution.
  - fastball 6y ago
    This is just nonsense. Right now, homeless people are not customers, meaning they are not making money off of those people, when they could be if those people were actually renters.
    - tehjoker 6y ago
      The argument is that would be penny-wise and pound-foolish. It also isn't penny-wise: homeless people don't have cash.
      - fastball 6y ago
        It is absolutely not clear that this would be pound-foolish, and homeless people do have cash if you get them off the streets and back as productive members of society.
        tehjoker 6y ago
        Well, yea in a larger sense they would but they don't have cash so you can't rent to them for any significant sums. This is why socialists critique the market system as irrational.
scotty79 6y ago
> But for what you suggest to work, homeless people need to be visible. Not necessarily physically visible. Just mentally visible.

tertius 6y ago

Private property getting in the way again?

syshum 6y ago

I want to believe this is hyperbolic. Do you really believe business owners, and landlords are sitting in some smokey room plotting to keep people homeless so people will pay their rent? Really, that is your honest held belief of the situation?

RobertoG 6y ago
Are you saying that there are not smokey rooms in all countries where they are plotting how to cut public services?
- mistermann 6y ago
  That is a similar, but distinctly different topic. Indeed, there are always people who are looking to cut public services, but the discussion was about the motive for doing that.
  - RobertoG 6y ago
    Yeah, but we are not talking about people in general, we are talking about board rooms in think tanks and cameras of commerce. What is the motive there?
    - mistermann 6y ago
      That's just your perception of what "we're" talking about. Think about it as you would when debugging software: how might you (an instance of a class in a complex system) know what other people (instances of classes within the system) are "talking about" (where talking derives from thinking/computation that takes place within those object instances)? Are you obtaining this knowledge via the calling of public interfaces? If not, then what is the True source of this knowledge? Ironically (or not), the title of this overall thread is "This is Real, That's Not". The content of the discussions is a fine reflection of the very phenomenon that Doreen is talking about, and I suspect a plausible demonstration of why humanity can't sort its shit out, decade after decade: an inability (or unwillingness) to acknowledge the self-delusional nature of the human mind. > What is the motive there? The motives are complex, and unknown (the necessary callable public interfaces to obtain such knowledge do not exist - and yet, observe the number of people in this thread who perceive that they have knowledge of the contents of other people's minds. Is this not an extremely interesting phenomenon? Might this phenomenon have consequences in a complex system, especially if it exists but is completely unrealized? I suspect that a specific, conscious motivation to bring about the specific end state that we are experiencing (inequality, homelessness, human suffering in general) also does not actually exist. Rather, I reckon the mess we are living in is more like some sort of a cosmic demonstration of the law unintended consequences, due to an unwillingness to acknowledge the complexities inherent in reality. A religious person may consider this punishment from God for disobedience. A comedian (or a schizophrenic) may consider it to be comedy at its finest. Each individual perceives reality through a custom lens, and comes to vastly different conclusions. I could be wrong of course, but it's a fun way to look at it. Part of the fun is observing how people react to crazy ideas like this, that may actually have a fair amount of validity to them (how might we know, for sure, if they do, or do not?).

nlh 6y ago

I think your sentiment is in the right direction but I don’t think it’s as explicit as you’re proposing. Landlords don’t “prefer” homelessness to exist. Their position, as capitalists, ends with their interests. Many (not all!) landlord are quite simple: “Pay rent or I will evict you and find someone else”. That’s it. After an eviction, they don’t care whether the person moves elsewhere or is homeless. In fact I’d argue that most people are probably on the gooder side of good and would prefer their former tenant move elsewhere and live a nice comfortable life and someone else can deal with their poorness. What they do absolutely want is the ability to enforce that eviction. That’s key. But I doubt they care so much about the looming threat of homelessness.

scotty79 6y ago
If someone would end homelessness by providing homes to all of the homeless free of charge and then some more empty ones then landlords would mind very much because this oversupply would make their prices drop. They would accuse homelessness solver of dumping prices. Landlords "prefer" homelessness exist because that the surplus demand over the supply that they provide.
- tertius 6y ago
  That already happens. Section 8 is profitable for the right landlords... Yes, rents going down is not what a landlord wants. Just like salary going down (all things being equal). But it's not as if all landlords are conspiring to keep people homeless to increase their rents. Yes they would accuse/blame the homelessness solver of decreasing their rents and they would be correct. I'm not a landlord and I would 'blame' or point out the same thing. That doesn't mean that I think it's wrong while at the same time correctly identifying it as the cause...