14 ms·

If you want an inside look of what that area is actually like (I left Seattle in 2021 after being disgusted by the state of the city), this article has some gre

If you want an inside look of what that area is actually like (I left Seattle in 2021 after being disgusted by the state of the city), this article has some great interviews. People on that block steal and then sell anything from diapers to beer to drugs to socks; all for a couple dollars. https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/03/04/67776468/the-people-of-3rd-and-pine https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2022/03/04/67776468/the-peo... I think it's great reading for anyone who believes homelessness is an issue that can be solved by throwing free housing at people. Here's an excerpt - >Andre said he has struggled with homelessness on and off since he was 14. That’s when he started selling at 3rd and Pine. He’s been there almost everyday since. He’s 30 now. “You get caught up,” Andre said when I asked him why he’s spent half his life on this corner. “You make your first sale, you get a little money. Then you’re 30 and you’re still at 3rd and Pine.” >Andre lives in an apartment thanks to a city-run housing program, but he doesn’t have a job other than selling flipped merchandise. Over the last two years, the government has forked over financial relief to taxpayers with formal jobs, but people like Andre, who work informal jobs, have not seen such benefits. By "informal jobs", they actually mean selling stolen merchandise. >I asked Andre what the city could do to get people to stop selling at 3rd and Pine. He said the city could give them something else to do: “Maybe build a basketball court? Somewhere to shoot hoops?” The logic being presented here is that because the government has only given them free housing and not a free place to play basketball, it's reasonable to expect that they'll fill their days selling stolen goods. By building somewhere to shoot hoops, the problem could be solved. This is a city where nearly any deli or corner-store has a We're Hiring sign and will gladly pay people under the table. Homelessness is a social phenomenon, not an economic wart caused by expensive housing.

dixie_land 5y ago
Exactly. Some of those troubled neighborhoods (belltown) were home to me when I first moved to Seattle. It’s sad seeing liberals ruining it by legalizing and encouraging crimes (no persecution). Seattle is worse than downtown Detroit by a large margin now. Probably crime capital of the nation. And they’re actively exporting the problems to the east side.
- torbTurret 5y ago
  I’ve lived in both Seattle and Detroit and many other cities as well. Painting Seattle as the crime capital of the nation is the most hyperbolic thing I’ve ever read on this site. By miles. Get real lol.
tonguez 5y ago
"I think it's great reading for anyone who believes homelessness is an issue that can be solved by throwing free housing at people." By definition, if you give someone a home, they are not homeless. "Andre lives in an apartment" So he's not homeless. "Homelessness is a social phenomenon, not an economic wart caused by expensive housing." The problem with Andre is that he steals stuff. He's not homeless. Not every homeless person steals stuff or is an evil person. The problem is the money is going to the wrong people. There are a lot of good and honest people that are homeless and/or struggling to pay their rent. Andre isn't one of them. Andre gets his housing for free while other people freeze and are basically forced to kill themselves. Why is that?
- katbyte 5y ago
  give people a free home, someone is now making money/profit off it with all the incentives that creates, and you need more than a home to live and thrive. just give people money so they can decide what they need to be happy, as well pay regular businesses, restaurants, and landlords instead of the poverty industry.
  - immibis 5y ago
    (landlords are part of the poverty industry FWIW)
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  So what should happen to andre?
  - tiahura 5y ago
    What used to happen was that he’d be sent to “the farm” for a few months to sober up and decide if he wanted to continue down the path he was on, or get his ** together. Alternatively, he’d get a bus ticket out of town. This was highly effective until activists decided that present-day Market Street was something to aspire to.
  - tomschlick 5y ago
GoodJokes 5y ago
You are not describing homelessness. Andre has a home. You are describing a class that has resorted to this type of activity due to inequities in society.
- lliamander 5y ago
  He is the kind of person who would have been homeless were it not for a government program. Many people assume the problems associated with homelessness (e.g. crime) will go away if you give people free housing and other social support. Andre is evidence that simply giving people what they need is not enough to stop criminal behavior.
  - MartinCron 5y ago
    By "the kind of person who would have been homeless were it not for a government program" you mean someone who chose their parents badly and was homeless at 14, a literal child?
    - filoleg 5y ago
      I think they literally mean “they receive government assistance that allows them to have a roof over their head”. Where does the part about “choosing parents” even come from? The comment you were replying to wasn’t making any sort of a judgement, what they said was straight up just factually describing the current situation. They weren’t blaming Andre for becoming homeless. They were using him as an illustration that just giving free housing isn’t some magic pill that will solve everything, and the effective solutions need to be more comprehensive than that.
      - immibis 5y ago
        "Choosing parents" is mocking a frequently-held attitude that when people do bad things, it's 100% of the time 100% their own fault and nobody else ever had anything to do with it. "Andre steals stuff because he makes bad choices. If he'd just stop making bad choices, he wouldn't be in trouble so much. It's all his fault." The reality is that people often do make reasonably good decisions from the set of decisions available to them - and that set is often quite bad. Andre's only source of income is selling stolen goods. If he'd stop doing that, wouldn't it be worse for him because he'd have no income? People will say "he should just get a job" but have you tried getting a job? Like, ever? It's far from trivial, especially if you have a criminal record! So, given the choice between A (easy and effective) or B (difficult and probably ineffective) or C (having no money) the best decision is obvious. Choosing A is a good decision. And if we don't want Andre to choose A, we need to give him a better option. Oftentimes it starts with growing up: > Andre said he has struggled with homelessness on and off since he was 14. That’s when he started selling at 3rd and Pine. He’s been there almost everyday since. He’s 30 now. If Andre had a computer at 14 he could be commenting on Hacker News today. Or with other factors he could be an athlete, an artist, an entrepreneur, idk, anything. But he got started on the "petty crime to pay bills" path and that constrained his options from then on. When we combine this known fact - that his crime begins with not having a stable childhood, which is largely determined by who you have as a parent and how your society treats them - with the attitude that "everything you do is your fault" - we come to the conclusion that it must be Andre's fault that his parents were poor and homeless, which is absurd.
klyrs 5y ago
> Homelessness is a social phenomenon, not an economic wart caused by expensive housing. It can be both, and you can cherrypick anecdotes to support whatever narrative you prefer. Alternatively, one can seek data and look for trends in the statistics. https://www.zillow.com/research/homelessness-rent-affordability-22247/ https://www.zillow.com/research/homelessness-rent-affordabil...
Centigonal 5y ago
These are people. They don't disappear if you crack down on them. How do you propose Seattle treat them? Hassle them with repeated arrests and releases? When has this approach ever worked? Put them in prison and make them an expensive, institutionalized ward of the state? I don't want that on my taxes. I know you don't like this interviewee's attitude, but think about it for a second. This is a man who has spent most of his life flipping small-dollar goods outside on a street corner and being looked down on by many. This is not a life most people would envy. I don't condone petty theft, but I don't think Seattle would benefit from this person losing their housing or being prosecuted either.
- honkdaddy 5y ago
  All I think is that if the city is in the business of giving out free homes (great!), maybe they shouldn't start by giving them to criminals who openly say they're not interested in real work? Maybe single-mothers, veterans, or the physically disabled could be at the front of the line? Andre doesn't represent all homeless people; I'm aware of that. But I think he represents a much larger population than people would like to believe.
  - Centigonal 5y ago
    I can agree with that, as long as the process for detemining who gets to be at the front of the line isn't so onerous or expensive to the that it outweighs the benefits.
    - culpable_pickle 5y ago
      99% Invisible did an amazing series on exactly that, how do you pick who gets what. It's called "According to Need" https://99percentinvisible.org/need/ https://99percentinvisible.org/need/
- sydbarrett74 5y ago
  Petty theft times a hundred or a thousand equals grand theft. He's a habitual offender, ergo, he belongs in prison. He knows exactly what he's doing.
adamredwoods 5y ago
You've formulated a policy from one anecdote? Homelessness is complex. That is why no single policy can remedy it, because people try to see it or treat it as one-solution-fits-all. https://www.seattle.gov/homelessness/the-roots-of-the-crisis https://www.seattle.gov/homelessness/the-roots-of-the-crisis http://archive.kuow.org/post/tenants-risk-homelessness-were-evicted-building-heres-what-happened http://archive.kuow.org/post/tenants-risk-homelessness-were-... http://archive.kuow.org/post/community-talk-about-jungle http://archive.kuow.org/post/community-talk-about-jungle
- MartinCron 5y ago
  People don't formulate policies from anecdotes, silly. They adopt policies that align with their existing world view and then anecdotes to back up these policies. I strongly doubt it was the article from the Stranger's blog that completely turned around honkdaddy's thinking on this subject.
- honkdaddy 5y ago
  I haven't formulated a policy, nor would I be very good at it if I tried. You're absolutely right, homelessness _is_ complex, that's sort of what I was getting at, though I could've phrased it much better. I think the viewpoint I find frustrating is that if we could "just" solve the housing affordability issue, that everything else would fall into place. There are places with very affordable housing with lots of homeless people. There are places with very expensive housing and almost no homeless people. The issue is multi-faceted and complex, but I personally think it's better to start by looking at the social factors than it is the strict economics.
  - woodruffw 5y ago
    > I think the viewpoint I find frustrating is that if we could "just" solve the housing affordability issue, that everything else would fall into place. This is not a viewpoint that I've ever heard earnestly expressed by anyone involved in homelessness/housing policy. Housing is something we should provide for two reasons: because it is the humane thing to do, and because it lowers the ceiling for other restorative/rehabilitative efforts. It can't on it's own solve every social ill that comes with homelessness or privation, and it isn't intended to.
stonogo 5y ago
The logic being presented here is that the guy selling stolen socks on a street corner should have all the answers?
staticassertion 5y ago
He'd been homeless on and off since he was 14. The vast majority of his life he was not being given a free place to stay. Do you think if, at 14, had he not ever experienced homelessness, that he might be a more productive member of society? Yes, for some people it's too late for "just" a free place to live to solve their problems. But I think it will absolutely make a difference for people on the brink, families, and future generations. No one is going to solve homelessness in a generation. The damage it does to people is so significant. But we should work to assure that people like Andre never exist to begin with. You say that delis should hire them. Do you expect delis to hire homeless people? Who can't shower? Who have no address? A home is a critical step to getting hired. It doesn't mean you'll suddenly get a job and be productive, but without it you're absolutely fucked. Yes, we should give everyone housing. We should also pay them to go to school, give them free health care, etc, so that they have the opportunity to actually move forward.
- honkdaddy 5y ago
  I live in a shitty area of NYC now. I walk past people like Andre every single day, and you can call me cynical, but I'm unconvinced that the problems they face are outside of their control to stop. These are guys with a new blanket of merch, often hundreds of dollars worth, every single day on my corner. This is merchandise usually stolen from Mom & Pop pharmacies without any security, so there's quite literally 0 repercussions from walking in and taking as much as you can carry. I see that happen at least once a week, as well. You can make at least $100/day selling stolen crap on the sidewalk. For perspective, a shelter (with beds and a shower) is $20/night. There are also countless places in this city you can get clean for either free or a couple dollars [1]. As I mentioned in my post, there are quite literally thousands of restaurants, warehouses, cleanup crews in the city you can work under the table for if you show up sober and willing to work. I say this because I personally know individuals that do this. Don't believe me? Go to /r/homeless and look up cash jobs. Thousands of other people have figured it out, why can't Andre? I'm all for societal change which ensures that individuals like Andre don't end up in that situation in the first place, but I'm of the opinion those changes start in the classroom and with ones parents, not by the state giving away free apartments. The fact of the matter is that if Andre's already been stealing from Target's and selling the goods on the sidewalk for fifteen years, maybe he doesn't want a minimum wage job in the first place? I don't doubt that a free place to live would help Andre, I mean hell, not having to pay rent would help me as well. But surely there's a better strategy than housing life-long criminals for free, indefinitely? There's a program in New York called ACE [2] which guides homeless people from the street to a job to eventually subsidized rent or a temporary free place to live. Every year they move a couple thousand individuals out of poverty. It's worth watching some of their success stories. All it will do is resonate the point I've been making this entire time - homelessness is an incredibly complex problem and the strategy of 'free houses for anyone who asks' is misguided, expensive, and ultimately fruitless. I don't doubt it works for some, but for others, it's at best an incredibly expensive band-aid, and at worst a point of enablement of their already destructive behaviour. I've seen it remarked before on this site that the real solution to the Fermi Paradox is that every other intelligent civilization in the universe is forever held back because of its need to provide for its members that have collectively decided they no longer feel like contributing. In the words of Ned Flanders, "taxes pay for trees, sunshine, policemen, and the folks who just don't feel like working - god bless 'em!" [1] https://www.dare2bnyc.org/showers https://www.dare2bnyc.org/showers [2] https://acenewyork.org/ https://acenewyork.org/
Aunche 5y ago
> This is a city where nearly any deli or corner-store has a We're Hiring sign and will gladly pay people under the table. To be fair, I doubt any corner store would hire him. Any real job is probably more lucrative than peddling stolen goods off the street, so there's likely a good reason for why he doesn't have another option (e.g. mental health or substance abuse).
- asdff 5y ago
  a real job is only paying $15/hr. You can honestly probably make a lot more just selling cigarettes on a train, that's like a couple sales, or panhandling outside a bunch of restaurants, if people are giving $5's on avg thats only 3 people, and I've seen people give $20s to panhandlers. An hour is a lot of time to only come up with $15. Plus theres taxes too. Maybe child support or alimony garnishes wages earned traditionally too.
monksy 5y ago
From the drug selling, I wonder how much this guy pays tax on the sell. I wonder what his power bill is.
tryitnow 5y ago
Well, there's a lot to comment on here, I'll address just your last sentence. If you owned a deli or corner-store would you be willing to hire someone with criminal record? Would you be willing to hire someone who doesn't have a home? Keep in mind that not having a home means they probably have no way to consistently keep themselves clean. And what do they put on the employment application for their address? And how good of an employee is someone going to be when they don't know where they're going to sleep at night?
mdoms 5y ago
Why do they keep using the euphemism "flipped" in place of "stolen". It's stolen merchandise they're selling. Stolen.
- RobertMiller 5y ago
  - nervlord 5y ago
  - nervlord 5y ago
0xbadcafebee 5y ago
> steal and then sell anything ... all for a couple dollars When people's socioeconomic situation is so incredibly messed up and they know the system doesn't care about them, they'll do whatever they have to to survive. The cracks in the system have always been pushed to the fringes of society where the middle and upper class didn't have to pay attention to them, but now the cracks are visible downtown.
unsupp0rted 5y ago
> This is a city where nearly any deli or corner-store has a We're Hiring sign But then Andre would need to work for somebody else and with somebody else, on somebody else's own schedule. If you're amoral and see having a criminal record as a cost of doing business, then selling stolen merchandise on a street corner lets you be your own boss on your own schedule, which, as we on HN know, lots of people are willing to give up a third to half of their paycheck to achieve.
- 30367286 5y ago
  This is one aspect of homelessness that I never see addressed by those advocating for liberal policies like free housing. What do we do with the people who simply prefer not to work at all? Even giving them Basic Income would not stop them from selling stolen merchandise.
  - pas 5y ago
    Giving them housing doesn't mean they also get immunity from criminal laws. Recidivism itself is seen as a factor during sentencing, which means that even for the same isolated criminal act the same perpetrator gets longer and longer sentences.
    - 30367286 5y ago
      > Giving them housing doesn't mean they also get immunity from criminal laws. All evidence to the contrary. SF, Seattle, LA… seems like the free housing people are indeed immune to at least petty crime laws.
    - honkdaddy 5y ago
      In theory yes, in practice, no. Here in New York people aren't reprimanded for petty theft anymore, and even if they are, they're not usually charged. The Yonkers man who brutally beat a 67yo Asian woman [1] had already been arrested 14 times. Only now, after they beat a harmless elder half to death for no reason, will they see any level of punishment. [1] https://pix11.com/news/local-news/northern-suburbs/yonkers-man-charged-after-allegedly-punching-asian-woman-more-than-125-times/ https://pix11.com/news/local-news/northern-suburbs/yonkers-m...
TulliusCicero 5y ago
Housing First is about housing first — not “housing is the conclusion”. Obviously you need other programs to help people, and for the ones who can’t or won’t be helped voluntarily, you need institutions and prison, respectively. I don’t want people to go to prison, that should be what happens as a sort of last resort. People should have plenty of options before you get there, but yeah there’s always gonna be some number of dickheads that are better just kept away from the rest of society.
Tiktaalik 5y ago
It would not be an improvement if Andre didn't have an apartment. Then you'd have the same problem as now, except that Andre would have no option but to sleep in a tent in a park, which would make life worse for everyone that uses that park. Creating affordable low income housing makes the city better for everyone and it's a necessary first step towards solving the sort of problems Andre has.
- honkdaddy 5y ago
  I think the part that many people find frustrating is that Andre is still _choosing_ a life of crime, despite being given the incredible gift of a free place to live, when it's unarguable that both under the table and formal employment is bountifully available in a place like Seattle.
  - blacksmith_tb 5y ago
    I am skeptical that someone who has no job history in his adult life (and a rap sheet) can easily find formal employment - even if he had an absolute change of heart, it would take a pretty big-minded boss to trust him with the keys to the register. And it's a hard sell as a career change - sweeping out a fast food joint for hours and hours is not exactly living by your wits, even if you don't have to worry about getting arrested for doing it.
    - honkdaddy 5y ago
      Would it surprise then that a massive, massive chunk of Americans have never had formal employment and have worked under the table their entire lives? It's far more common than we like to think in our cushy tech bubble. These places aren't running background checks or taking SSNs, these are gigs where you unload trucks or chop vegetables for 8h and get paid at the end of your shift. Workers who are undocumented actually make up almost 5% of America's workforce - cash pay workers are probably an even higher percent. It's an almost comically bourgeoisie myth that one needs an SSN and job history to get paid in America. Go to any Home Depot outside the city around 6am and ask any of the hard-working, skilled, day labourers making $100/day to support a family of five if they think the government of Seattle should be happily giving out free apartments to life-long criminals.
nemothekid 5y ago
>The logic being presented here is that because the government has only given them free housing and not a free place to play basketball, it's reasonable to expect that they'll fill their days selling stolen goods. By building somewhere to shoot hoops, the problem could be solved. This is a strawman - expect the strawman here is Andre. When, during the course of this interview, did Andre become a city planner? Why are you taking his suggestion so literally? You have successfully quoted the problem ("he has struggled with homelessness on and off since he was 14"), but then refuse to actually address it. Someone who has been homeless since 14 is not going to magically become better without significant resources expended. Someone who has been homeless since 14 is probably someone who is very difficult to reintegrate into society and likely has problems holding down an actual job. The "solution" for Andre is likely therapy and education, the latter which he missed during his developmental years. To try and fix issues like these is very expensive and can only be done on a case by case basis. The people who believe "homelessness is an issue that can be solved by throwing free housing at people" are looking to avoid creating these types of individuals instead of "fixing" them post-hoc. You aren't going to fix a problem exacerbated over 20 years by a policy change in 2. I don't blame those who live there (or in any cities like SF), as I personally don't believe the problem was caused by Amazon or any other tech company; I understand the frustration of dealing with people who think homelessness was personally caused by Jeff Bezos. Both are just side effects of policy changes and tech advancements that happened decades ago; and in the same vein I think solutions to homeless must consider approaches on the same time scale.
RC_ITR 5y ago
The problem that isn't solved by housing is 'streetscape attractiveness.' Whether they like to admit it or not, the thing that is appealing to most people about authoritarianism is the aesthetics (look at the meme of Singapore and gum, something that is reflective of a decades-long policy of corporal punishment for minor antisocial behaviors). Homelessness is related to this, because authoritarian governments are happy spend resources to jail the homeless (or otherwise hide their existence). Whether or not they realize it, the US used to be a lot more authoritarian about streetscape attractiveness (at least in areas where the wealthy would congregate) - tents would be taken immediately by police, people would sit in jail for camping, etc. Then COVID caused a one-time burst in anti-authoritarian compassion, but now people are grappling with how much of that should become permanent vs. temporary (if you think the WFH debate is hot, ask a local unhoused person about a return to group shelters vs. relaxed camping laws). The trend you're identifying is that people conflate the broad problem of streetscape attractiveness with one of its causes (also a broad problem). We as a society can solve homelessness, but that does not mean that streetscapes will immediately become attractive. My bet is that a lot of streetscape attractiveness laws get passed/enforced now that the trauma-induced compassion of the pandemic is fading (because as you so rightfully point out, people like clean safe streets), and my hope is that improved housing policy coincides with that to limit the impact on society's most vulnerable.
woodruffw 5y ago
The point of housing isn't to "solve" every single problem caused by homelessness or indigence. It's to give people housing, because it's the humane thing to do. It sounds like Andre's problem isn't homelessness (he's housed, per the article), but that he's a petty thief with no other real prospects or skills. Those aren't problems that housing can solve, but housing does eliminate some of the barriers in the way of those problems (such as Andre being robbed while sleeping on the street).
- sershe 5y ago
  I think Andre the petty thief being robbed (or freezing to death, or ODing) while sleeping on the street is not ideal, but better than the status quo where we actively support and encourage his activities in the city. Why would we be humane to someone who fundamentally doesn't respect others' rights?
  - woodruffw 5y ago
    Not letting someone die of exposure or crime is not supporting or encouraging his activities. > Why would we be humane to someone who fundamentally doesn't respect others' rights? This is a deeply dispiriting and reactionary way to look at the world. You do it because humane treatment is an end in itself, not a reward we give people for being “good.” It’s not earned, it’s due. Edit: And, to be absolutely clear: there’s no world in which pointlessly punishing Andre gets what you what you want. Giving caffeine to a drunk doesn’t make them less drunk; it turns them into a wide awake drunk. Punishing someone with homelessness and exposure doesn’t make them into less of a petty criminal; it turns them into a more desperate and jaded one.
    - sershe 5y ago
      There's space between "punishing" and "rewarding". In my book, giving someone free housing when they came somewhere to steal as a career, is "rewarding". That is why e.g. immigration systems in Canada and Australia have point systems where they want to encourage good workers to come to them - keeping them out would not be "punishing" - letting them in is "rewarding" them for planning to do useful work in e.g. Canada. Also "humane treatment is an end in itself, not a reward we give people for being “good.” It’s not earned, it’s due." this is a deeply naive and childish view of the world. The humane treatment is not "earned", yes - it's the default. But it can be "unearned" - if someone doesn't give others the "humane" treatment, they don't deserve one either. Social contract, sorta.
baby 5y ago
At this point they should just do loosely regulated street markets a thing. There's plenty of that in the rest of the world.
sydbarrett74 5y ago
Incarceration would be an act of mercy for people like this. Three hots and a cot. They could while their days away watching TV in the rec room and jerking off in their cells.
raxxorrax 5y ago
You need to provide a perspective, not a distraction. Free housing is good, but people will want to make money in any case to satisfy their needs. Of course that alone won't serve the problem. Crime decreases where there are better opportunities to earn money honestly. Of course providing employment is easier said than done.

dixie_land 5y ago

Exactly. Some of those troubled neighborhoods (belltown) were home to me when I first moved to Seattle. It’s sad seeing liberals ruining it by legalizing and encouraging crimes (no persecution). Seattle is worse than downtown Detroit by a large margin now. Probably crime capital of the nation. And they’re actively exporting the problems to the east side.

torbTurret 5y ago
I’ve lived in both Seattle and Detroit and many other cities as well. Painting Seattle as the crime capital of the nation is the most hyperbolic thing I’ve ever read on this site. By miles. Get real lol.

tonguez 5y ago

"I think it's great reading for anyone who believes homelessness is an issue that can be solved by throwing free housing at people." By definition, if you give someone a home, they are not homeless. "Andre lives in an apartment" So he's not homeless. "Homelessness is a social phenomenon, not an economic wart caused by expensive housing." The problem with Andre is that he steals stuff. He's not homeless. Not every homeless person steals stuff or is an evil person. The problem is the money is going to the wrong people. There are a lot of good and honest people that are homeless and/or struggling to pay their rent. Andre isn't one of them. Andre gets his housing for free while other people freeze and are basically forced to kill themselves. Why is that?

katbyte 5y ago
give people a free home, someone is now making money/profit off it with all the incentives that creates, and you need more than a home to live and thrive. just give people money so they can decide what they need to be happy, as well pay regular businesses, restaurants, and landlords instead of the poverty industry.
- immibis 5y ago
  (landlords are part of the poverty industry FWIW)
spywaregorilla 5y ago
So what should happen to andre?
- tiahura 5y ago
  What used to happen was that he’d be sent to “the farm” for a few months to sober up and decide if he wanted to continue down the path he was on, or get his ** together. Alternatively, he’d get a bus ticket out of town. This was highly effective until activists decided that present-day Market Street was something to aspire to.
- tomschlick 5y ago

GoodJokes 5y ago

You are not describing homelessness. Andre has a home. You are describing a class that has resorted to this type of activity due to inequities in society.

lliamander 5y ago
He is the kind of person who would have been homeless were it not for a government program. Many people assume the problems associated with homelessness (e.g. crime) will go away if you give people free housing and other social support. Andre is evidence that simply giving people what they need is not enough to stop criminal behavior.
- MartinCron 5y ago
  By "the kind of person who would have been homeless were it not for a government program" you mean someone who chose their parents badly and was homeless at 14, a literal child?
  - filoleg 5y ago
    I think they literally mean “they receive government assistance that allows them to have a roof over their head”. Where does the part about “choosing parents” even come from? The comment you were replying to wasn’t making any sort of a judgement, what they said was straight up just factually describing the current situation. They weren’t blaming Andre for becoming homeless. They were using him as an illustration that just giving free housing isn’t some magic pill that will solve everything, and the effective solutions need to be more comprehensive than that.
    - immibis 5y ago
      "Choosing parents" is mocking a frequently-held attitude that when people do bad things, it's 100% of the time 100% their own fault and nobody else ever had anything to do with it. "Andre steals stuff because he makes bad choices. If he'd just stop making bad choices, he wouldn't be in trouble so much. It's all his fault." The reality is that people often do make reasonably good decisions from the set of decisions available to them - and that set is often quite bad. Andre's only source of income is selling stolen goods. If he'd stop doing that, wouldn't it be worse for him because he'd have no income? People will say "he should just get a job" but have you tried getting a job? Like, ever? It's far from trivial, especially if you have a criminal record! So, given the choice between A (easy and effective) or B (difficult and probably ineffective) or C (having no money) the best decision is obvious. Choosing A is a good decision. And if we don't want Andre to choose A, we need to give him a better option. Oftentimes it starts with growing up: > Andre said he has struggled with homelessness on and off since he was 14. That’s when he started selling at 3rd and Pine. He’s been there almost everyday since. He’s 30 now. If Andre had a computer at 14 he could be commenting on Hacker News today. Or with other factors he could be an athlete, an artist, an entrepreneur, idk, anything. But he got started on the "petty crime to pay bills" path and that constrained his options from then on. When we combine this known fact - that his crime begins with not having a stable childhood, which is largely determined by who you have as a parent and how your society treats them - with the attitude that "everything you do is your fault" - we come to the conclusion that it must be Andre's fault that his parents were poor and homeless, which is absurd.

klyrs 5y ago

> Homelessness is a social phenomenon, not an economic wart caused by expensive housing. It can be both, and you can cherrypick anecdotes to support whatever narrative you prefer. Alternatively, one can seek data and look for trends in the statistics. https://www.zillow.com/research/homelessness-rent-affordability-22247/ https://www.zillow.com/research/homelessness-rent-affordabil...

Centigonal 5y ago

These are people. They don't disappear if you crack down on them. How do you propose Seattle treat them? Hassle them with repeated arrests and releases? When has this approach ever worked? Put them in prison and make them an expensive, institutionalized ward of the state? I don't want that on my taxes. I know you don't like this interviewee's attitude, but think about it for a second. This is a man who has spent most of his life flipping small-dollar goods outside on a street corner and being looked down on by many. This is not a life most people would envy. I don't condone petty theft, but I don't think Seattle would benefit from this person losing their housing or being prosecuted either.

honkdaddy 5y ago
All I think is that if the city is in the business of giving out free homes (great!), maybe they shouldn't start by giving them to criminals who openly say they're not interested in real work? Maybe single-mothers, veterans, or the physically disabled could be at the front of the line? Andre doesn't represent all homeless people; I'm aware of that. But I think he represents a much larger population than people would like to believe.
- Centigonal 5y ago
  I can agree with that, as long as the process for detemining who gets to be at the front of the line isn't so onerous or expensive to the that it outweighs the benefits.
  - culpable_pickle 5y ago
    99% Invisible did an amazing series on exactly that, how do you pick who gets what. It's called "According to Need" https://99percentinvisible.org/need/ https://99percentinvisible.org/need/
sydbarrett74 5y ago
Petty theft times a hundred or a thousand equals grand theft. He's a habitual offender, ergo, he belongs in prison. He knows exactly what he's doing.

adamredwoods 5y ago

You've formulated a policy from one anecdote? Homelessness is complex. That is why no single policy can remedy it, because people try to see it or treat it as one-solution-fits-all. https://www.seattle.gov/homelessness/the-roots-of-the-crisis https://www.seattle.gov/homelessness/the-roots-of-the-crisis http://archive.kuow.org/post/tenants-risk-homelessness-were-evicted-building-heres-what-happened http://archive.kuow.org/post/tenants-risk-homelessness-were-... http://archive.kuow.org/post/community-talk-about-jungle http://archive.kuow.org/post/community-talk-about-jungle

MartinCron 5y ago
People don't formulate policies from anecdotes, silly. They adopt policies that align with their existing world view and then anecdotes to back up these policies. I strongly doubt it was the article from the Stranger's blog that completely turned around honkdaddy's thinking on this subject.
honkdaddy 5y ago
I haven't formulated a policy, nor would I be very good at it if I tried. You're absolutely right, homelessness _is_ complex, that's sort of what I was getting at, though I could've phrased it much better. I think the viewpoint I find frustrating is that if we could "just" solve the housing affordability issue, that everything else would fall into place. There are places with very affordable housing with lots of homeless people. There are places with very expensive housing and almost no homeless people. The issue is multi-faceted and complex, but I personally think it's better to start by looking at the social factors than it is the strict economics.
- woodruffw 5y ago
  > I think the viewpoint I find frustrating is that if we could "just" solve the housing affordability issue, that everything else would fall into place. This is not a viewpoint that I've ever heard earnestly expressed by anyone involved in homelessness/housing policy. Housing is something we should provide for two reasons: because it is the humane thing to do, and because it lowers the ceiling for other restorative/rehabilitative efforts. It can't on it's own solve every social ill that comes with homelessness or privation, and it isn't intended to.

stonogo 5y ago

The logic being presented here is that the guy selling stolen socks on a street corner should have all the answers?

staticassertion 5y ago

He'd been homeless on and off since he was 14. The vast majority of his life he was not being given a free place to stay. Do you think if, at 14, had he not ever experienced homelessness, that he might be a more productive member of society? Yes, for some people it's too late for "just" a free place to live to solve their problems. But I think it will absolutely make a difference for people on the brink, families, and future generations. No one is going to solve homelessness in a generation. The damage it does to people is so significant. But we should work to assure that people like Andre never exist to begin with. You say that delis should hire them. Do you expect delis to hire homeless people? Who can't shower? Who have no address? A home is a critical step to getting hired. It doesn't mean you'll suddenly get a job and be productive, but without it you're absolutely fucked. Yes, we should give everyone housing. We should also pay them to go to school, give them free health care, etc, so that they have the opportunity to actually move forward.

honkdaddy 5y ago
I live in a shitty area of NYC now. I walk past people like Andre every single day, and you can call me cynical, but I'm unconvinced that the problems they face are outside of their control to stop. These are guys with a new blanket of merch, often hundreds of dollars worth, every single day on my corner. This is merchandise usually stolen from Mom & Pop pharmacies without any security, so there's quite literally 0 repercussions from walking in and taking as much as you can carry. I see that happen at least once a week, as well. You can make at least $100/day selling stolen crap on the sidewalk. For perspective, a shelter (with beds and a shower) is $20/night. There are also countless places in this city you can get clean for either free or a couple dollars [1]. As I mentioned in my post, there are quite literally thousands of restaurants, warehouses, cleanup crews in the city you can work under the table for if you show up sober and willing to work. I say this because I personally know individuals that do this. Don't believe me? Go to /r/homeless and look up cash jobs. Thousands of other people have figured it out, why can't Andre? I'm all for societal change which ensures that individuals like Andre don't end up in that situation in the first place, but I'm of the opinion those changes start in the classroom and with ones parents, not by the state giving away free apartments. The fact of the matter is that if Andre's already been stealing from Target's and selling the goods on the sidewalk for fifteen years, maybe he doesn't want a minimum wage job in the first place? I don't doubt that a free place to live would help Andre, I mean hell, not having to pay rent would help me as well. But surely there's a better strategy than housing life-long criminals for free, indefinitely? There's a program in New York called ACE [2] which guides homeless people from the street to a job to eventually subsidized rent or a temporary free place to live. Every year they move a couple thousand individuals out of poverty. It's worth watching some of their success stories. All it will do is resonate the point I've been making this entire time - homelessness is an incredibly complex problem and the strategy of 'free houses for anyone who asks' is misguided, expensive, and ultimately fruitless. I don't doubt it works for some, but for others, it's at best an incredibly expensive band-aid, and at worst a point of enablement of their already destructive behaviour. I've seen it remarked before on this site that the real solution to the Fermi Paradox is that every other intelligent civilization in the universe is forever held back because of its need to provide for its members that have collectively decided they no longer feel like contributing. In the words of Ned Flanders, "taxes pay for trees, sunshine, policemen, and the folks who just don't feel like working - god bless 'em!" [1] https://www.dare2bnyc.org/showers https://www.dare2bnyc.org/showers [2] https://acenewyork.org/ https://acenewyork.org/

Aunche 5y ago

> This is a city where nearly any deli or corner-store has a We're Hiring sign and will gladly pay people under the table. To be fair, I doubt any corner store would hire him. Any real job is probably more lucrative than peddling stolen goods off the street, so there's likely a good reason for why he doesn't have another option (e.g. mental health or substance abuse).

asdff 5y ago
a real job is only paying $15/hr. You can honestly probably make a lot more just selling cigarettes on a train, that's like a couple sales, or panhandling outside a bunch of restaurants, if people are giving $5's on avg thats only 3 people, and I've seen people give $20s to panhandlers. An hour is a lot of time to only come up with $15. Plus theres taxes too. Maybe child support or alimony garnishes wages earned traditionally too.

monksy 5y ago

From the drug selling, I wonder how much this guy pays tax on the sell. I wonder what his power bill is.

tryitnow 5y ago

Well, there's a lot to comment on here, I'll address just your last sentence. If you owned a deli or corner-store would you be willing to hire someone with criminal record? Would you be willing to hire someone who doesn't have a home? Keep in mind that not having a home means they probably have no way to consistently keep themselves clean. And what do they put on the employment application for their address? And how good of an employee is someone going to be when they don't know where they're going to sleep at night?

mdoms 5y ago

Why do they keep using the euphemism "flipped" in place of "stolen". It's stolen merchandise they're selling. Stolen.

RobertMiller 5y ago
- nervlord 5y ago
- nervlord 5y ago

0xbadcafebee 5y ago

> steal and then sell anything ... all for a couple dollars When people's socioeconomic situation is so incredibly messed up and they know the system doesn't care about them, they'll do whatever they have to to survive. The cracks in the system have always been pushed to the fringes of society where the middle and upper class didn't have to pay attention to them, but now the cracks are visible downtown.

unsupp0rted 5y ago

> This is a city where nearly any deli or corner-store has a We're Hiring sign But then Andre would need to work for somebody else and with somebody else, on somebody else's own schedule. If you're amoral and see having a criminal record as a cost of doing business, then selling stolen merchandise on a street corner lets you be your own boss on your own schedule, which, as we on HN know, lots of people are willing to give up a third to half of their paycheck to achieve.

30367286 5y ago
This is one aspect of homelessness that I never see addressed by those advocating for liberal policies like free housing. What do we do with the people who simply prefer not to work at all? Even giving them Basic Income would not stop them from selling stolen merchandise.
- pas 5y ago
  Giving them housing doesn't mean they also get immunity from criminal laws. Recidivism itself is seen as a factor during sentencing, which means that even for the same isolated criminal act the same perpetrator gets longer and longer sentences.
  - 30367286 5y ago
    > Giving them housing doesn't mean they also get immunity from criminal laws. All evidence to the contrary. SF, Seattle, LA… seems like the free housing people are indeed immune to at least petty crime laws.
  - honkdaddy 5y ago
    In theory yes, in practice, no. Here in New York people aren't reprimanded for petty theft anymore, and even if they are, they're not usually charged. The Yonkers man who brutally beat a 67yo Asian woman [1] had already been arrested 14 times. Only now, after they beat a harmless elder half to death for no reason, will they see any level of punishment. [1] https://pix11.com/news/local-news/northern-suburbs/yonkers-man-charged-after-allegedly-punching-asian-woman-more-than-125-times/ https://pix11.com/news/local-news/northern-suburbs/yonkers-m...

TulliusCicero 5y ago

Housing First is about housing first — not “housing is the conclusion”. Obviously you need other programs to help people, and for the ones who can’t or won’t be helped voluntarily, you need institutions and prison, respectively. I don’t want people to go to prison, that should be what happens as a sort of last resort. People should have plenty of options before you get there, but yeah there’s always gonna be some number of dickheads that are better just kept away from the rest of society.

Tiktaalik 5y ago

It would not be an improvement if Andre didn't have an apartment. Then you'd have the same problem as now, except that Andre would have no option but to sleep in a tent in a park, which would make life worse for everyone that uses that park. Creating affordable low income housing makes the city better for everyone and it's a necessary first step towards solving the sort of problems Andre has.

honkdaddy 5y ago
I think the part that many people find frustrating is that Andre is still _choosing_ a life of crime, despite being given the incredible gift of a free place to live, when it's unarguable that both under the table and formal employment is bountifully available in a place like Seattle.
- blacksmith_tb 5y ago
  I am skeptical that someone who has no job history in his adult life (and a rap sheet) can easily find formal employment - even if he had an absolute change of heart, it would take a pretty big-minded boss to trust him with the keys to the register. And it's a hard sell as a career change - sweeping out a fast food joint for hours and hours is not exactly living by your wits, even if you don't have to worry about getting arrested for doing it.
  - honkdaddy 5y ago
    Would it surprise then that a massive, massive chunk of Americans have never had formal employment and have worked under the table their entire lives? It's far more common than we like to think in our cushy tech bubble. These places aren't running background checks or taking SSNs, these are gigs where you unload trucks or chop vegetables for 8h and get paid at the end of your shift. Workers who are undocumented actually make up almost 5% of America's workforce - cash pay workers are probably an even higher percent. It's an almost comically bourgeoisie myth that one needs an SSN and job history to get paid in America. Go to any Home Depot outside the city around 6am and ask any of the hard-working, skilled, day labourers making $100/day to support a family of five if they think the government of Seattle should be happily giving out free apartments to life-long criminals.

nemothekid 5y ago

>The logic being presented here is that because the government has only given them free housing and not a free place to play basketball, it's reasonable to expect that they'll fill their days selling stolen goods. By building somewhere to shoot hoops, the problem could be solved. This is a strawman - expect the strawman here is Andre. When, during the course of this interview, did Andre become a city planner? Why are you taking his suggestion so literally? You have successfully quoted the problem ("he has struggled with homelessness on and off since he was 14"), but then refuse to actually address it. Someone who has been homeless since 14 is not going to magically become better without significant resources expended. Someone who has been homeless since 14 is probably someone who is very difficult to reintegrate into society and likely has problems holding down an actual job. The "solution" for Andre is likely therapy and education, the latter which he missed during his developmental years. To try and fix issues like these is very expensive and can only be done on a case by case basis. The people who believe "homelessness is an issue that can be solved by throwing free housing at people" are looking to avoid creating these types of individuals instead of "fixing" them post-hoc. You aren't going to fix a problem exacerbated over 20 years by a policy change in 2. I don't blame those who live there (or in any cities like SF), as I personally don't believe the problem was caused by Amazon or any other tech company; I understand the frustration of dealing with people who think homelessness was personally caused by Jeff Bezos. Both are just side effects of policy changes and tech advancements that happened decades ago; and in the same vein I think solutions to homeless must consider approaches on the same time scale.

RC_ITR 5y ago

The problem that isn't solved by housing is 'streetscape attractiveness.' Whether they like to admit it or not, the thing that is appealing to most people about authoritarianism is the aesthetics (look at the meme of Singapore and gum, something that is reflective of a decades-long policy of corporal punishment for minor antisocial behaviors). Homelessness is related to this, because authoritarian governments are happy spend resources to jail the homeless (or otherwise hide their existence). Whether or not they realize it, the US used to be a lot more authoritarian about streetscape attractiveness (at least in areas where the wealthy would congregate) - tents would be taken immediately by police, people would sit in jail for camping, etc. Then COVID caused a one-time burst in anti-authoritarian compassion, but now people are grappling with how much of that should become permanent vs. temporary (if you think the WFH debate is hot, ask a local unhoused person about a return to group shelters vs. relaxed camping laws). The trend you're identifying is that people conflate the broad problem of streetscape attractiveness with one of its causes (also a broad problem). We as a society can solve homelessness, but that does not mean that streetscapes will immediately become attractive. My bet is that a lot of streetscape attractiveness laws get passed/enforced now that the trauma-induced compassion of the pandemic is fading (because as you so rightfully point out, people like clean safe streets), and my hope is that improved housing policy coincides with that to limit the impact on society's most vulnerable.

woodruffw 5y ago

The point of housing isn't to "solve" every single problem caused by homelessness or indigence. It's to give people housing, because it's the humane thing to do. It sounds like Andre's problem isn't homelessness (he's housed, per the article), but that he's a petty thief with no other real prospects or skills. Those aren't problems that housing can solve, but housing does eliminate some of the barriers in the way of those problems (such as Andre being robbed while sleeping on the street).

sershe 5y ago
I think Andre the petty thief being robbed (or freezing to death, or ODing) while sleeping on the street is not ideal, but better than the status quo where we actively support and encourage his activities in the city. Why would we be humane to someone who fundamentally doesn't respect others' rights?
- woodruffw 5y ago
  Not letting someone die of exposure or crime is not supporting or encouraging his activities. > Why would we be humane to someone who fundamentally doesn't respect others' rights? This is a deeply dispiriting and reactionary way to look at the world. You do it because humane treatment is an end in itself, not a reward we give people for being “good.” It’s not earned, it’s due. Edit: And, to be absolutely clear: there’s no world in which pointlessly punishing Andre gets what you what you want. Giving caffeine to a drunk doesn’t make them less drunk; it turns them into a wide awake drunk. Punishing someone with homelessness and exposure doesn’t make them into less of a petty criminal; it turns them into a more desperate and jaded one.
  - sershe 5y ago
    There's space between "punishing" and "rewarding". In my book, giving someone free housing when they came somewhere to steal as a career, is "rewarding". That is why e.g. immigration systems in Canada and Australia have point systems where they want to encourage good workers to come to them - keeping them out would not be "punishing" - letting them in is "rewarding" them for planning to do useful work in e.g. Canada. Also "humane treatment is an end in itself, not a reward we give people for being “good.” It’s not earned, it’s due." this is a deeply naive and childish view of the world. The humane treatment is not "earned", yes - it's the default. But it can be "unearned" - if someone doesn't give others the "humane" treatment, they don't deserve one either. Social contract, sorta.

baby 5y ago

At this point they should just do loosely regulated street markets a thing. There's plenty of that in the rest of the world.

sydbarrett74 5y ago

Incarceration would be an act of mercy for people like this. Three hots and a cot. They could while their days away watching TV in the rec room and jerking off in their cells.

raxxorrax 5y ago

You need to provide a perspective, not a distraction. Free housing is good, but people will want to make money in any case to satisfy their needs. Of course that alone won't serve the problem. Crime decreases where there are better opportunities to earn money honestly. Of course providing employment is easier said than done.