15 ms·

Singapore is one of the most expensive cities in the world, yet it doesn't have a problem with people sleeping on the street - in true Singapore style it's actu

Singapore is one of the most expensive cities in the world, yet it doesn't have a problem with people sleeping on the street - in true Singapore style it's actually illegal to be homeless, the government has to provide homeless people with housing, and the homeless people have to accept it. Now you can make the argument that Singapore has a number of policies that stop people from becoming homeless in the first place, but I think the most fundamental reason why San Francisco and the US in general has a homelessness problem is because Americans don't feel sufficient shame for living in a city with a large number of homeless people. If Singapore suddenly found itself with the same number of people sleeping on the street as in San Francisco, you can bet that the problem would be solved extremely quickly because people would feel deeply ashamed at living in an environment with such a large number of homeless people.

mcntsh 5y ago
> Americans don't feel sufficient shame for living in a city with a large number of homeless people. I don't think this is true. No one likes living around massive homeless encampments, garbage, filth, and unpredictable people with severe mental issues. This is why the homeless services budget goes up significantly every single year in most coastal American cities. People want this problem to be solved, they just have a different idea on how to solve it. The difference between the US and Singapore is that "authoritarian" policies, like forcing people to live somewhere they might not want to, would never fly. One side of the spectrum would resent the handouts to others while they themselves continue to struggle with no help, and the other would complain the housing comes with too many rules and is too restrictive.
paxys 5y ago
Singapore also implements border controls. San Francisco cannot.
- dehrmann 5y ago
  This is huge. If SF tries to house its homeless, it'll attract homeless from Oakland (and probably even further). Since Singapore has border controls, it doesn't have to worry about its neighbors taking advantage of its charity.
rufus_foreman 5y ago
It used to be illegal to be homeless in the US as well, it was called vagrancy. There were various solutions depending on the cause. If you were homeless because you didn't want to work, there was the workhouse. If you were homeless because you were insane, there was the asylum. If you were homeless because you were a drunk or a drug addict, there was jail. People complained that those were authoritarian policies. Judges ruled against vagrancy laws. Petty theft was de facto legalized. Judges made rulings that make it very hard to commit insane people to an asylum. People wanted drugs legalized. Now there are bums defecating on the street, people passed out drunk or on drugs, needles on the sidewalk, insane people ranting and committing assault, so much shoplifting that stores are closing. Things are that way in San Francisco because people there want them that way. It's not a bad place to live if you are rich, you can insulate yourself from all that. And if you just want to shoot up heroin and meth every day until you die, well you know where to go.
silicon2401 5y ago
It's not very productive to compare countries with extremely different cultures. For example, places like Singapore and Japan are famous for being very clean and functional, but they're also extremely homogeneous ethnically and have wildly different cultures from the US, which is extremely individualistic. Solutions in one place won't always be solutions in the other.
- dehrmann 5y ago
  > they're also extremely homogeneous ethnically Japan, yes. Singapore is actually very diverse.
  - silicon2401 5y ago
    > Singapore is actually very diverse. The numbers I'm aware of show that Singapore is not diverse at all. > Han Chinese: 74.3% > Malay: 13.4% > Indian: 9.0% > Other: 3.2% ~3/4 Singaporeans are Han Chinese, ~88% are East Asian, and ~96% are Asian. That's extremely homogenous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore#Post-independence_census_figures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore#Post...
    - zarzavat 5y ago
      The label "Asian" doesn't really exist outside of the west. The Malays, Chinese and Tamils all have their own languages, ethnic backgrounds, culture and religion. They are not, and don't see themselves, as being instances of some general "Asian" race - that's a very western perspective. Also Malays are not East Asian but Southeast Asian, if anything Malay culture is historically closer to South than East Asian (e.g. Islam came to the Malay peninsular from South Asia), while still being very distinct from either. If you go to Singapore it does feel extremely diverse, it's the only place I know of where every sign is in four different languages.
      - silicon2401 5y ago
        > The label "Asian" doesn't really exist outside of the west. The Malays, Chinese and Tamils all have their own languages, ethnic backgrounds, culture and religion. They are not, and don't see themselves, as being instances of some general "Asian" race - that's a very western perspective. Where are the Africans? Where are the Europeans, the Latin Americans? Out of 7 continents, essentially everyone in Singapore is from the same continent. It could be more diverse. To take your race point, I acknowledge that continent doesn't equal race. But even by that point, what do you have to say about 75% of Singaporeans being Han Chinese, and ~95% of people being Han or Malay? That alone is quite the opposite of diverse. Sure, there may be a lot of languages, but the entire population is still close to just two ethnic groups.

mcntsh 5y ago

> Americans don't feel sufficient shame for living in a city with a large number of homeless people. I don't think this is true. No one likes living around massive homeless encampments, garbage, filth, and unpredictable people with severe mental issues. This is why the homeless services budget goes up significantly every single year in most coastal American cities. People want this problem to be solved, they just have a different idea on how to solve it. The difference between the US and Singapore is that "authoritarian" policies, like forcing people to live somewhere they might not want to, would never fly. One side of the spectrum would resent the handouts to others while they themselves continue to struggle with no help, and the other would complain the housing comes with too many rules and is too restrictive.

paxys 5y ago

Singapore also implements border controls. San Francisco cannot.

dehrmann 5y ago
This is huge. If SF tries to house its homeless, it'll attract homeless from Oakland (and probably even further). Since Singapore has border controls, it doesn't have to worry about its neighbors taking advantage of its charity.

rufus_foreman 5y ago

It used to be illegal to be homeless in the US as well, it was called vagrancy. There were various solutions depending on the cause. If you were homeless because you didn't want to work, there was the workhouse. If you were homeless because you were insane, there was the asylum. If you were homeless because you were a drunk or a drug addict, there was jail. People complained that those were authoritarian policies. Judges ruled against vagrancy laws. Petty theft was de facto legalized. Judges made rulings that make it very hard to commit insane people to an asylum. People wanted drugs legalized. Now there are bums defecating on the street, people passed out drunk or on drugs, needles on the sidewalk, insane people ranting and committing assault, so much shoplifting that stores are closing. Things are that way in San Francisco because people there want them that way. It's not a bad place to live if you are rich, you can insulate yourself from all that. And if you just want to shoot up heroin and meth every day until you die, well you know where to go.

silicon2401 5y ago

It's not very productive to compare countries with extremely different cultures. For example, places like Singapore and Japan are famous for being very clean and functional, but they're also extremely homogeneous ethnically and have wildly different cultures from the US, which is extremely individualistic. Solutions in one place won't always be solutions in the other.

dehrmann 5y ago
> they're also extremely homogeneous ethnically Japan, yes. Singapore is actually very diverse.
- silicon2401 5y ago
  > Singapore is actually very diverse. The numbers I'm aware of show that Singapore is not diverse at all. > Han Chinese: 74.3% > Malay: 13.4% > Indian: 9.0% > Other: 3.2% ~3/4 Singaporeans are Han Chinese, ~88% are East Asian, and ~96% are Asian. That's extremely homogenous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore#Post-independence_census_figures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore#Post...
  - zarzavat 5y ago
    The label "Asian" doesn't really exist outside of the west. The Malays, Chinese and Tamils all have their own languages, ethnic backgrounds, culture and religion. They are not, and don't see themselves, as being instances of some general "Asian" race - that's a very western perspective. Also Malays are not East Asian but Southeast Asian, if anything Malay culture is historically closer to South than East Asian (e.g. Islam came to the Malay peninsular from South Asia), while still being very distinct from either. If you go to Singapore it does feel extremely diverse, it's the only place I know of where every sign is in four different languages.
    - silicon2401 5y ago
      > The label "Asian" doesn't really exist outside of the west. The Malays, Chinese and Tamils all have their own languages, ethnic backgrounds, culture and religion. They are not, and don't see themselves, as being instances of some general "Asian" race - that's a very western perspective. Where are the Africans? Where are the Europeans, the Latin Americans? Out of 7 continents, essentially everyone in Singapore is from the same continent. It could be more diverse. To take your race point, I acknowledge that continent doesn't equal race. But even by that point, what do you have to say about 75% of Singaporeans being Han Chinese, and ~95% of people being Han or Malay? That alone is quite the opposite of diverse. Sure, there may be a lot of languages, but the entire population is still close to just two ethnic groups.