4 ms·

While i can't disagree with Michael's points, i feel like this is one of those occasions when it's not that one side is misrepresenting, but that rather both si

While i can't disagree with Michael's points, i feel like this is one of those occasions when it's not that one side is misrepresenting, but that rather both sides have a piece of a greater truth. Michael's research is very notable and addresses a serious epidemic of mental illness and addiction, but downplays an increasingly just as real epidemic of homelessness based on socio-economic factors. Admittedly, my interactions with the homeless, while much of which occurred while i myself was homeless, did seem related to addiction/mental illness. However, i also met many that clearly had a good head on their shoulders. It's much easier than many may realize to have stability taken from you, and once that occurs, it can be harder than ever to get back on your feet (it often has a snowballing effect), because while you are without shelter you live in a constant state of stress. I was one of the luckier ones that quickly bounced back, in no small part due to the rare kindness of a stranger. And to expand on that snowballing effect, i have no doubt that homelessness can indeed be just as capable of leading to addiction and mental illness as the inverse. It definitely put my mind into places it has never been before, and without the kindness of a stranger, i can see how the stress of homelessness and the way the majority of society alienated me, avoiding eye contact and the like, and other subtle indications of my sub-human status, could have quickly lead down that path.

epistasis 5y ago
> Michael's research is very notable and addresses a serious epidemic of mental illness and addiction, but downplays an increasingly just as real epidemic of homelessness based on socio-economic factors. No, this is just plain false. There is plenty of research on who is homeless, and all of Shellenberger's claims are refuted by actual research.
batoure 5y ago
I would tack on to this and say the post is talking about homelessness restricted to the microcosm of san francisco while John Oliver is trying to discuss it more broadly. the author contends that the “just give them housing” argument is debunked which is true but also not. these types of efforts didn’t succeed in the bay area but helped states like utah and new mexico decrease homelessness to the tune of something like 90%. this feels somewhat like an unnecessary take down of an exposes that broadly does a good job talking about some of the challenges and solitions.
throwntoday 5y ago
It's difficult to convince people to care about the homelessness problem. Particularly if they have only ever had unpleasant interactions with the homeless. You can't easily ignore your instinct of pattern recognition. Increase in spending on jobs for homeless does nothing for those that are mentally ill. Conversely increase in spending on mental health programs does nothing for those that were simply down on their luck. Given a finite amount of money, there doesn't seem to be a simple solution. And you'll have to forgive anyone that would rather just not spend anymore as the relationship between expenditure and number of homeless is not inversely correlated, quite the opposite unfortunately.

epistasis 5y ago

> Michael's research is very notable and addresses a serious epidemic of mental illness and addiction, but downplays an increasingly just as real epidemic of homelessness based on socio-economic factors. No, this is just plain false. There is plenty of research on who is homeless, and all of Shellenberger's claims are refuted by actual research.

batoure 5y ago

I would tack on to this and say the post is talking about homelessness restricted to the microcosm of san francisco while John Oliver is trying to discuss it more broadly. the author contends that the “just give them housing” argument is debunked which is true but also not. these types of efforts didn’t succeed in the bay area but helped states like utah and new mexico decrease homelessness to the tune of something like 90%. this feels somewhat like an unnecessary take down of an exposes that broadly does a good job talking about some of the challenges and solitions.

throwntoday 5y ago

It's difficult to convince people to care about the homelessness problem. Particularly if they have only ever had unpleasant interactions with the homeless. You can't easily ignore your instinct of pattern recognition. Increase in spending on jobs for homeless does nothing for those that are mentally ill. Conversely increase in spending on mental health programs does nothing for those that were simply down on their luck. Given a finite amount of money, there doesn't seem to be a simple solution. And you'll have to forgive anyone that would rather just not spend anymore as the relationship between expenditure and number of homeless is not inversely correlated, quite the opposite unfortunately.