17 ms·

Americans will do anything to avoid providing people with housing.

by serverlessmom 5y ago

pinewurst 5y ago
The serious crazies won't go to housing.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- codezero 5y ago
  Those represent a very small fraction of the unhoused population.
  - viscanti 5y ago
    But probably the source of a large portion of the antisocial behavior that cities are trying to deal with (e.x. human feces in subway escalators that cause constant breakdowns in the escalators that aren't actually designed to be defecated into).
    - jjeaff 5y ago
      Is there something particularly attractive about an escalator to someone who needs to poop? Or is it just that there is so much pooping all over the place that some just ends up in the escalators?
      - viscanti 5y ago
        As one who rarely defecates in escalators in subways I'd only be speculating, but I would imagine that at night, when the subway is closed, they afford more privacy and protection from the elements than the street.
  - qqqwerty 5y ago
    But they are responsible for large portion of the quality of life issues impacting local residents. I feel like the homeless issue is a case of two sides talking past each other. Homeless advocates (and the "industry") are doing their best to support the "down on their luck" individuals. These folks are capable of holding down a job (maybe with some support), but might struggle to afford rent. The "homeless industry" is heavily focused on helping them. Meanwhile, local residents are complaining about the decline in quality of life from having individuals with drug and mental health issues living on their doorsteps. These types of homeless are very resistant to the services provided by the traditional "homeless industry". When you see a significant amount of tax revenue going to homeless services, but the guy living in a tent down the street is getting no help, it can be very frustrating. Hopefully this measure is the first step towards solving that issue.
  - urda 5y ago
    And yet they are causing the majority of issues.
cato_the_elder 5y ago
> Americans will do anything to avoid providing people with housing. Including resorting to $60K per year tents. [1] But we could steelman the argument for proposals like this one: you could see homelessness as a problem of loneliness, addiction, mental health issues and unstable families. This might be more realistic compared to seeing it as merely a housing issue. [1]: https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-want-15-million-for-tent-sites-16269998.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-w...
- serverlessmom 5y ago
  The fact that governments spend money on tents and 'temporary solutions' doesn't disprove my assertion that we refuse to build safe and stable housing for all our citizens.
  - cato_the_elder 5y ago
    I kinda meant that as evidence for your assertion. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.
    - serverlessmom 5y ago
      Ahhh gotcha gotcha. <3
1270018080 5y ago
If something even slightly threatens the capitalist dogma, it has to be reduced to a performative half measure. From healthcare, to housing, transportation... etc.
- 0_____0 5y ago
  healthcare/housing/transportation are good for economic growth and "capitalists." the issue is more that the landowner/rentier class are still the most politically vocal, and anything that upsets the status quo for them gets an insane amount of pushback.
- _haoa 5y ago
  There has been a rise in homelessness and people becoming disillusioned by the tethers of society, to the point that people are voluntarily retreating into cities and wildernesses to live freely off the land. Homelessness (particularly voluntary) is an existential threat to capitalism because it reduces the productivity of the working class. This in turn diminishes the gains of the proletariat, who need workers and purchasers of their goods and services (such as houses). The title story seems like a scary way for the system to force people into becoming productive members of society. In the system's eyes, these people are useless, unwanted wastes of space, so they are going to force them into treatment so they can "lead normal lives," a euphemism for turning them into productive cogs in the proletariat's capitalist machine.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
The east cost for the most part doesn't have these problems or at least not to the same extent (with a couple exceptions for Philly and NYC both of which are nowhere near as bad as cities in CA/OR/WA) This isn't an American problem. This isn't even a liberal/conservative problem. This is a west coast problem.
- colinmhayes 5y ago
  The east coast is cold. The homeless leave. It's hard for me to blame west coast policy when it's really just the weather that's the difference.
  - 0_____0 5y ago
    Your theory entirely falls apart when you acknowledge that there are warm places in the country that don't have large homeless populations.
    - colinmhayes 5y ago
      Yes, homeless people want to live near wealthy people who don't mind being surrounded by the homeless. Most large cities in the US have this, but sunbelt ones typically are more conservative and therefore harsher on the homeless. There are of course many other reasons why homeless leave too. Harsh summers, car dominant culture are obvious ones.
    - Aloha 5y ago
      Yes, warm places, which in exchange for not having a brutal winter, have a brutal summer. It seems to me that all 'temperate' locations, do have a huge homeless issue, Summer in Texas is enough to drive the homeless away.
      - 0_____0 5y ago
        But that's simply not true. Much of the Southeast US is considered a temperate climate, and homelessness is not an acute problem like it is on the west coast. Miami, while humid, doesn't often get above the low 90s and has one of the lowest homeless-per-capita rates of cities in the US. The entire European Mediterranean region has similar weather to the Western US and doesn't have the same homelessness issue. Lake Tahoe, Chicago, NYC, Vancouver hit freezing in the winter and do have homelessness. I think it's easier to permit homelessness when people don't freeze to death or become heat casualties, but the causes are way more complex than the weather being nice year round.
DeWilde 5y ago
Most homeless people in America are people who has some form of mental illness or have suffered from some traumatic event. In any case just giving them a home won't help much, those homes would quickly become drug dens. A better solution is to provide them with shelter, community, mental help, education, and generally good care. This is actually even harder to do than just throwing houses at them. But there is also merit to giving housing to people who are homeless but not mentally ill. Many European countries do this.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >those homes would quickly become drug dens. I don't see a problem with that. Sure it's trashy and sure I'd appreciate it if I didn't have to pay for it but a) the alternative is drugs on the sidewalk b) who am I to tell others how to live?
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    You have to consider destruction of the housing. You can't build a new million dollar home every 5 years for addicts.
  - hedora 5y ago
    OK, say you go crazy for some reason. You want me to drop you off in a drug den, and tell the hospitals to refuse to admit you if you seek treatment?
  - jimbob45 5y ago
    Remember that virtually every homeless individual started out as a homed individual. To inhabit a home, you need an income to pay rent, you need food, and you need utilities somehow for a bare minimum existence. If you're making the choice to spend your income on drugs rather than rent every month, you're going to quickly return to homelessness and we won't have solved your problem. If you're proposing giving people free rent, food, and utilities indefinitely, that starts to get uncomfortable as it edges toward slavery.
- magicalist 5y ago
xeromal 5y ago
There are often lots of housing options with strict drug control policies which prohibit many homeless for joining.
- animal_spirits 5y ago
  Prevent is not the best word here, filter instead maybe? Some homeless refuse to join shelters because of these conditions
  - xeromal 5y ago
    You might be right. I struggled for a good word.
hodgesrm 5y ago
You are incorrect. We don't provide mentally ill people with even basic treatment, most particularly in cases where they are too sick to recognize the need themselves. Instead, we walk around people on the sidewalk as they suffer psychotic breaks. I support this proposal 100%. It will not solve the housing crisis in California, because it's largely driven by high prices. But it will help us restore basic decency in our treatment of fellow citizens who badly need help.

Americans will do anything to avoid providing people with housing.

pinewurst 5y ago

The serious crazies won't go to housing.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
codezero 5y ago
Those represent a very small fraction of the unhoused population.
- viscanti 5y ago
  But probably the source of a large portion of the antisocial behavior that cities are trying to deal with (e.x. human feces in subway escalators that cause constant breakdowns in the escalators that aren't actually designed to be defecated into).
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    Is there something particularly attractive about an escalator to someone who needs to poop? Or is it just that there is so much pooping all over the place that some just ends up in the escalators?
    - viscanti 5y ago
      As one who rarely defecates in escalators in subways I'd only be speculating, but I would imagine that at night, when the subway is closed, they afford more privacy and protection from the elements than the street.
- qqqwerty 5y ago
  But they are responsible for large portion of the quality of life issues impacting local residents. I feel like the homeless issue is a case of two sides talking past each other. Homeless advocates (and the "industry") are doing their best to support the "down on their luck" individuals. These folks are capable of holding down a job (maybe with some support), but might struggle to afford rent. The "homeless industry" is heavily focused on helping them. Meanwhile, local residents are complaining about the decline in quality of life from having individuals with drug and mental health issues living on their doorsteps. These types of homeless are very resistant to the services provided by the traditional "homeless industry". When you see a significant amount of tax revenue going to homeless services, but the guy living in a tent down the street is getting no help, it can be very frustrating. Hopefully this measure is the first step towards solving that issue.
- urda 5y ago
  And yet they are causing the majority of issues.

cato_the_elder 5y ago

> Americans will do anything to avoid providing people with housing. Including resorting to $60K per year tents. [1] But we could steelman the argument for proposals like this one: you could see homelessness as a problem of loneliness, addiction, mental health issues and unstable families. This might be more realistic compared to seeing it as merely a housing issue. [1]: https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-want-15-million-for-tent-sites-16269998.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/S-F-officials-w...

serverlessmom 5y ago
The fact that governments spend money on tents and 'temporary solutions' doesn't disprove my assertion that we refuse to build safe and stable housing for all our citizens.
- cato_the_elder 5y ago
  I kinda meant that as evidence for your assertion. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.
  - serverlessmom 5y ago
    Ahhh gotcha gotcha. <3

1270018080 5y ago

If something even slightly threatens the capitalist dogma, it has to be reduced to a performative half measure. From healthcare, to housing, transportation... etc.

0_____0 5y ago
healthcare/housing/transportation are good for economic growth and "capitalists." the issue is more that the landowner/rentier class are still the most politically vocal, and anything that upsets the status quo for them gets an insane amount of pushback.
_haoa 5y ago
There has been a rise in homelessness and people becoming disillusioned by the tethers of society, to the point that people are voluntarily retreating into cities and wildernesses to live freely off the land. Homelessness (particularly voluntary) is an existential threat to capitalism because it reduces the productivity of the working class. This in turn diminishes the gains of the proletariat, who need workers and purchasers of their goods and services (such as houses). The title story seems like a scary way for the system to force people into becoming productive members of society. In the system's eyes, these people are useless, unwanted wastes of space, so they are going to force them into treatment so they can "lead normal lives," a euphemism for turning them into productive cogs in the proletariat's capitalist machine.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

The east cost for the most part doesn't have these problems or at least not to the same extent (with a couple exceptions for Philly and NYC both of which are nowhere near as bad as cities in CA/OR/WA) This isn't an American problem. This isn't even a liberal/conservative problem. This is a west coast problem.

colinmhayes 5y ago
The east coast is cold. The homeless leave. It's hard for me to blame west coast policy when it's really just the weather that's the difference.
- 0_____0 5y ago
  Your theory entirely falls apart when you acknowledge that there are warm places in the country that don't have large homeless populations.
  - colinmhayes 5y ago
    Yes, homeless people want to live near wealthy people who don't mind being surrounded by the homeless. Most large cities in the US have this, but sunbelt ones typically are more conservative and therefore harsher on the homeless. There are of course many other reasons why homeless leave too. Harsh summers, car dominant culture are obvious ones.
  - Aloha 5y ago
    Yes, warm places, which in exchange for not having a brutal winter, have a brutal summer. It seems to me that all 'temperate' locations, do have a huge homeless issue, Summer in Texas is enough to drive the homeless away.
    - 0_____0 5y ago
      But that's simply not true. Much of the Southeast US is considered a temperate climate, and homelessness is not an acute problem like it is on the west coast. Miami, while humid, doesn't often get above the low 90s and has one of the lowest homeless-per-capita rates of cities in the US. The entire European Mediterranean region has similar weather to the Western US and doesn't have the same homelessness issue. Lake Tahoe, Chicago, NYC, Vancouver hit freezing in the winter and do have homelessness. I think it's easier to permit homelessness when people don't freeze to death or become heat casualties, but the causes are way more complex than the weather being nice year round.

DeWilde 5y ago

Most homeless people in America are people who has some form of mental illness or have suffered from some traumatic event. In any case just giving them a home won't help much, those homes would quickly become drug dens. A better solution is to provide them with shelter, community, mental help, education, and generally good care. This is actually even harder to do than just throwing houses at them. But there is also merit to giving housing to people who are homeless but not mentally ill. Many European countries do this.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>those homes would quickly become drug dens. I don't see a problem with that. Sure it's trashy and sure I'd appreciate it if I didn't have to pay for it but a) the alternative is drugs on the sidewalk b) who am I to tell others how to live?
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  You have to consider destruction of the housing. You can't build a new million dollar home every 5 years for addicts.
- hedora 5y ago
  OK, say you go crazy for some reason. You want me to drop you off in a drug den, and tell the hospitals to refuse to admit you if you seek treatment?
- jimbob45 5y ago
  Remember that virtually every homeless individual started out as a homed individual. To inhabit a home, you need an income to pay rent, you need food, and you need utilities somehow for a bare minimum existence. If you're making the choice to spend your income on drugs rather than rent every month, you're going to quickly return to homelessness and we won't have solved your problem. If you're proposing giving people free rent, food, and utilities indefinitely, that starts to get uncomfortable as it edges toward slavery.
magicalist 5y ago

xeromal 5y ago

There are often lots of housing options with strict drug control policies which prohibit many homeless for joining.

animal_spirits 5y ago
Prevent is not the best word here, filter instead maybe? Some homeless refuse to join shelters because of these conditions
- xeromal 5y ago
  You might be right. I struggled for a good word.

hodgesrm 5y ago

You are incorrect. We don't provide mentally ill people with even basic treatment, most particularly in cases where they are too sick to recognize the need themselves. Instead, we walk around people on the sidewalk as they suffer psychotic breaks. I support this proposal 100%. It will not solve the housing crisis in California, because it's largely driven by high prices. But it will help us restore basic decency in our treatment of fellow citizens who badly need help.