3 ms·

> In the developed world, provision of basic goods and services is a solved problem thanks to free markets. My homeless friends would really love for you to te

> In the developed world, provision of basic goods and services is a solved problem thanks to free markets. My homeless friends would really love for you to tell them this to their faces. In fact, they would love it so much, they would absolutely be willing to give you the gift of additional orifices in your abdomen. > Where? Even if the house doesn't appreciate in value, the land it sits on does. Everywhere that believes housing is an actual human need rather than an investment vehicle.

unmole 5y ago
> My homeless friends would really love for you to tell them this to their faces. Homeless make up ~0.17% of the US population. Of these, the majority live in some form of shelter transitional housing. Tell me again how a system that manages to provide shelter to 99.9% of the population isn't working. > Everywhere that believes housing is an actual human need rather than an investment vehicle. Do the have have actual names or are they simply a concept?
- genocidicbunny 5y ago
  Your math doesn't add up. If .17% are homeless, then its 99.83% that it's 'working for.' But the part you missed is that anything less than 100% is unacceptable. If the system is working, it must work for 100.0% of the population, not 99.83%. Nothing less is acceptable for a 'working system'. Anything else is 'work in progress' Also, I would like to point out that .17% of 330 is 56000 people. Are you saying that 56000 people don't matter?
  - unmole 5y ago
    > If .17% are homeless, then its 99.83% that it's 'working for.' Like I said, the majority of the people who are classed as homeless live in some form of shelter or transitional housing [0] > the system is working, it must work for 100.0% of the population, not 99.83%. Nothing less is acceptable for a 'working system'. Have fun in Narnia. > .17% of 330 is 56000 0.17% of 330 million is 561000. > Are you saying that 56000 people don't matter? I'm saying that a system that works for 99.9% of people must be doing something right and that helping the less than 0.1% population should not require a fundamental change. 0: https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report-legacy/ https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homeless...
    - genocidicbunny 5y ago
      > Have fun in Narnia. And you have fun in your hellhole. > 0.17% of 330 million is 561000. Whoops, you're right I missed a zero. Thanks for furthering my point. > I'm saying that a system that works for 99.9% of people must be doing something right and that helping the less than 0.1% population should not require a fundamental change. You're basically arguing for status quo and I contend that status quo is not enough. A system that works for 99.9% of people could be better if it worked for 99.99% of people, and even better yet, if it worked for 100% of people.

unmole 5y ago

> My homeless friends would really love for you to tell them this to their faces. Homeless make up ~0.17% of the US population. Of these, the majority live in some form of shelter transitional housing. Tell me again how a system that manages to provide shelter to 99.9% of the population isn't working. > Everywhere that believes housing is an actual human need rather than an investment vehicle. Do the have have actual names or are they simply a concept?

genocidicbunny 5y ago
Your math doesn't add up. If .17% are homeless, then its 99.83% that it's 'working for.' But the part you missed is that anything less than 100% is unacceptable. If the system is working, it must work for 100.0% of the population, not 99.83%. Nothing less is acceptable for a 'working system'. Anything else is 'work in progress' Also, I would like to point out that .17% of 330 is 56000 people. Are you saying that 56000 people don't matter?
- unmole 5y ago
  > If .17% are homeless, then its 99.83% that it's 'working for.' Like I said, the majority of the people who are classed as homeless live in some form of shelter or transitional housing [0] > the system is working, it must work for 100.0% of the population, not 99.83%. Nothing less is acceptable for a 'working system'. Have fun in Narnia. > .17% of 330 is 56000 0.17% of 330 million is 561000. > Are you saying that 56000 people don't matter? I'm saying that a system that works for 99.9% of people must be doing something right and that helping the less than 0.1% population should not require a fundamental change. 0: https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report-legacy/ https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homeless...
  - genocidicbunny 5y ago
    > Have fun in Narnia. And you have fun in your hellhole. > 0.17% of 330 million is 561000. Whoops, you're right I missed a zero. Thanks for furthering my point. > I'm saying that a system that works for 99.9% of people must be doing something right and that helping the less than 0.1% population should not require a fundamental change. You're basically arguing for status quo and I contend that status quo is not enough. A system that works for 99.9% of people could be better if it worked for 99.99% of people, and even better yet, if it worked for 100% of people.