5 ms·

In what sane universe is not requiring toilets and showers a solution to housing issues? I'm reasonably sure we can meet housing needs and still maintain basic

In what sane universe is not requiring toilets and showers a solution to housing issues? I'm reasonably sure we can meet housing needs and still maintain basic human dignity.

andrewmutz 5y ago
Not all housing need to go to a 4-person family. In my late teens and early 20s I shared a bathroom and a bedroom and never felt my dignity impinged. At that age it was much more important for it to be cheap than for it to be good. It should not be illegal for such housing to exist.
- evilduck 5y ago
  I think you're speaking past each other. The comment mentioned no access to shower facilities at all. Go search Youtube for tiny apartments in Japan or Tokyo and you'll quickly find rooms for rent where bathrooms and personal or communal showers simply don't exist, residents must walk to nearby businesses or public facilities like libraries during business hours just to relieve themselves. This is not a desirable housing situation either. I think a dormitory or barracks style housing is perfectly acceptable as a solution but putting the burden of supplying bathrooms on private businesses or implicitly requiring people shit in buckets in their one and only room is not.
oneoff786 5y ago
One with a public bathhouse culture
hpkuarg 5y ago
For example, it would be nice to be able to build a dormitory- or barracks-style high-density, low-creature comforts housing, where multiple rooms may share a common bathroom and a kitchen, in areas with high homelessness to give those folks a place to call home. This is not currently legal in many jurisdictions due to building code limitations. I might feel that a gigabit fiber connection is necessary to maintain basic human dignity ;-) but I don't think that should be enforced via law. One should be able to opt out for something more afforable.
- lwkl 5y ago
  What is more affordable than Gigabit Fiber? Fiber infrastructure is cheaper to build than copper after all.
  - hpkuarg 5y ago
    Well, that's another whole issue that relates to policy. From what I've gathered, there's an ungodly amount of red tape involved in trying to be an upstart ISP at the residential level. So much so that one of the richest companies on the planet has only made inroads in like ten cities.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
seanmcdirmid 5y ago
A $250/month room with a shared toilet is better than living in a tent somewhere. Also, the need for showers can be mitigated with public bath houses, we used to have more of those...again...it makes lower end housing more viable, but most people will probably want their own toilet and shower and will pay for it. > I'm reasonably sure we can meet housing needs and still maintain basic human dignity. The proof of your hope would be in the pudding, and right now we have no pudding.
- troupe 5y ago
  > A $250/month room with a shared toilet is better than living in a tent somewhere. For the person living in it, yes. For other people living in the area, bringing in a large number of people who are just one step above living in a tent, may have impacts on the neighborhood that they don't want. Much of the resistance to building more housing is this at various different levels.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    NIMBY just is “keep out the poors” for the most part.

In what sane universe is not requiring toilets and showers a solution to housing issues? I'm reasonably sure we can meet housing needs and still maintain basic human dignity.

andrewmutz 5y ago

Not all housing need to go to a 4-person family. In my late teens and early 20s I shared a bathroom and a bedroom and never felt my dignity impinged. At that age it was much more important for it to be cheap than for it to be good. It should not be illegal for such housing to exist.

evilduck 5y ago
I think you're speaking past each other. The comment mentioned no access to shower facilities at all. Go search Youtube for tiny apartments in Japan or Tokyo and you'll quickly find rooms for rent where bathrooms and personal or communal showers simply don't exist, residents must walk to nearby businesses or public facilities like libraries during business hours just to relieve themselves. This is not a desirable housing situation either. I think a dormitory or barracks style housing is perfectly acceptable as a solution but putting the burden of supplying bathrooms on private businesses or implicitly requiring people shit in buckets in their one and only room is not.

oneoff786 5y ago

One with a public bathhouse culture

hpkuarg 5y ago

For example, it would be nice to be able to build a dormitory- or barracks-style high-density, low-creature comforts housing, where multiple rooms may share a common bathroom and a kitchen, in areas with high homelessness to give those folks a place to call home. This is not currently legal in many jurisdictions due to building code limitations. I might feel that a gigabit fiber connection is necessary to maintain basic human dignity ;-) but I don't think that should be enforced via law. One should be able to opt out for something more afforable.

lwkl 5y ago
What is more affordable than Gigabit Fiber? Fiber infrastructure is cheaper to build than copper after all.
- hpkuarg 5y ago
  Well, that's another whole issue that relates to policy. From what I've gathered, there's an ungodly amount of red tape involved in trying to be an upstart ISP at the residential level. So much so that one of the richest companies on the planet has only made inroads in like ten cities.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

seanmcdirmid 5y ago

A $250/month room with a shared toilet is better than living in a tent somewhere. Also, the need for showers can be mitigated with public bath houses, we used to have more of those...again...it makes lower end housing more viable, but most people will probably want their own toilet and shower and will pay for it. > I'm reasonably sure we can meet housing needs and still maintain basic human dignity. The proof of your hope would be in the pudding, and right now we have no pudding.

troupe 5y ago
> A $250/month room with a shared toilet is better than living in a tent somewhere. For the person living in it, yes. For other people living in the area, bringing in a large number of people who are just one step above living in a tent, may have impacts on the neighborhood that they don't want. Much of the resistance to building more housing is this at various different levels.
- bombcar 5y ago
  NIMBY just is “keep out the poors” for the most part.