4 ms·

The laws themselves are unjust. In NA we don't build the housing we badly need, making it arduous and illegal to build in most places, which has spiked the pri

The laws themselves are unjust. In NA we don't build the housing we badly need, making it arduous and illegal to build in most places, which has spiked the price of having a home, making it unaffordable to many, and then we've turned around and made it illegal to not have a home. That there are so many people "breaking the law" is a self created problem by refusing to build homes for people to live in.

souplesse 4y ago
While this might seem pedantic, is it actually illegal not to have a home?
- Tiktaalik 4y ago
  Not literally but effectively. There is not enough housing available that is affordable to people whose only income is whatever the minimums the government can provide. Accordingly they're homeless. There's also not enough temporary shelters for people who are homeless, so the only option is to sleep in a tent outdoors. Sleeping in a tent outdoors is against the law. So in effect there is no real alternative for these persons but to break the law. Supreme Courts in Canada (unsure on the USA) have noted this fact, that people have literally no choice but to break the law, and have accordingly ruled that cities are not legally able to stop people from setting up tents in public land (parks) if there is no other housing options available. (Cities are however able to put time limits on tenting in parks)
  - toast0 4y ago
    > Supreme Courts in Canada (unsure on the USA) Washington State Supreme Court has ruled similarly.
xyzelement 4y ago
// In NA we don't build the housing we badly need, making it arduous and illegal to build in most places, which has spiked the price of having a home, making it unaffordable to many As a capitalist who believes that everything is driven by supply and demand, I agree that enabling more build would drive down prices. But that's completely irrelevant to the topic here. We're talking about people so severely mentally ill that "forced treatment" is a consideration. These aren't the people who are going to be buying/renting houses in a normal way regardless of availability and cost. We're talking about people where the options are street life, incarceration, or institutionalization.
- Tiktaalik 4y ago
  It's relevant to the conversation in that 1) having a home is a basic necessary building block on the path to some sort of stability and management of mental illness and 2) being homeless is bad for mental health. Politicians seem to be going "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" shrug and leaping to "lets institutionalize everyone" before they've done any basic things that would improve the mental health and wellbeing of people. It's very depressing to see.

souplesse 4y ago

While this might seem pedantic, is it actually illegal not to have a home?

Tiktaalik 4y ago
Not literally but effectively. There is not enough housing available that is affordable to people whose only income is whatever the minimums the government can provide. Accordingly they're homeless. There's also not enough temporary shelters for people who are homeless, so the only option is to sleep in a tent outdoors. Sleeping in a tent outdoors is against the law. So in effect there is no real alternative for these persons but to break the law. Supreme Courts in Canada (unsure on the USA) have noted this fact, that people have literally no choice but to break the law, and have accordingly ruled that cities are not legally able to stop people from setting up tents in public land (parks) if there is no other housing options available. (Cities are however able to put time limits on tenting in parks)
- toast0 4y ago
  > Supreme Courts in Canada (unsure on the USA) Washington State Supreme Court has ruled similarly.

xyzelement 4y ago

// In NA we don't build the housing we badly need, making it arduous and illegal to build in most places, which has spiked the price of having a home, making it unaffordable to many As a capitalist who believes that everything is driven by supply and demand, I agree that enabling more build would drive down prices. But that's completely irrelevant to the topic here. We're talking about people so severely mentally ill that "forced treatment" is a consideration. These aren't the people who are going to be buying/renting houses in a normal way regardless of availability and cost. We're talking about people where the options are street life, incarceration, or institutionalization.

Tiktaalik 4y ago
It's relevant to the conversation in that 1) having a home is a basic necessary building block on the path to some sort of stability and management of mental illness and 2) being homeless is bad for mental health. Politicians seem to be going "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" shrug and leaping to "lets institutionalize everyone" before they've done any basic things that would improve the mental health and wellbeing of people. It's very depressing to see.