4 ms·

Ok..then what is it caused by? Provide your sources.

cscurmudgeon 3y ago
Even if it is caused by other states, is it valid to complain about that? What is the solution to that? Borders between states (while having no borders between countries)? Edit: I dug up some data: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.ht... > As the data shows us, most of the homeless people you pass on the streets every day are in fact Californians. > “This is a local crisis and a homegrown problem,” said Peter Lynn, the executive director of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, the agency that conducts the largest homeless census count in the country. > L.A.H.S.A.’s 2019 homeless count found that 64 percent of the 58,936 Los Angeles County residents experiencing homelessness had lived in the city for more than 10 years. CA considers you a resident for tax purposes if you live in the state for a year but in homeless studies they consider you a resident if you live here for more than 10 years. Really shows the bias.
- ncallaway 3y ago
  If it is caused by other states, that would indicate the problem is not uniquely California related, making the likely necessary solutions to be federal. If it is not caused by other states, that would indicate that the problem is something happening in California, and maybe a state level solution is best. You have to start the solution in the right place to have any hope of addressing the root cause.
  - throwway120385 3y ago
    Good luck getting the federal government to do anything to help a coastal state that isn't already covered by the executive branch.
    - ncallaway 3y ago
      I don't think the frame of "does this help or hurt a particular state" is a useful frame for the problem. We should look at it as "does this help or hurt people"
- doctorwho42 3y ago
  Two words: Federal Support. If the problem is exacerbated by active policy or indirect action/non-action, then as a collection of people/states it is the burden of every state to shoulder it. And the federal government is just that, the collective power of all states combined.
  - ttonkytonk 3y ago
    Exactly. The logistics may not be simple (i.e. actually getting the federal government's support) but the logic should be obvious: piecemeal support results in the ones that are doing the most to help get "penalized" with more people seeking help.
- pixl97 3y ago
  >What is the solution to that? So, lets imagine that the problem is being caused by other states sending their homeless over. Well, in the US you can't stop that, at least by direct migration, you might be able to stop particular organizations like city governments from doing so. But in a general sense there is freedom of movement. The problem comes with that, the better you're at solving homelessness the more people will get sent there, and even more homeless will want to come there even if they are not sent. Suddenly Texas, for example would see California spending billions on the problem... Texas would have no motivation of spending billions to solve the problem themselves, in fact in terms of getting rid of the appearance of a homeless problem it would be more beneficial for them to be draconian on homelessness. This would push individuals to migrate to the promise land of California. California would see is homeless costs increase dramatically and would be incentivized to stop (increasing?) funding on the problem themselves. Moloch wins. More people suffer. Yay humanity.
  - Izikiel43 3y ago
    What you describe is what happens in Canada. Most homeless in Canada end up in Vancouver, because of weather and assistance offered. The other provinces, with the 6 months freezing winter, not as much assistance, and I think a bit of enforcement, causes the homeless to end up at Vancouver.
beerpls 3y ago
It’s a warm climate with large cities which provide sufficient incentive for people to choose to be homeless over other avenues of living Homeless people obviously want to live somewhere like Cali over Canada for the winter. California also provides massive welfare to homeless. They also have a very open arms policy to illegals who are often poor and homeless These aren’t exhaustive reasons why, but it’s a core part of it. California politicians seem to be unwilling to address complicated social problems head on and instead virtue signal and allow these problems to grow and fester I’m not going to provide you with sources. It’s too politicized of a subject. If you don’t want to accept it for being this way i’ve learned not to argue. But at the very least if people really can’t see why this problem exists as it does, here an entry
- peter422 3y ago
  Your argument is that an immigrant would rather be homeless in the US than housed in their home country? Almost no data backs that up.
  - beerpls 3y ago
    lol people would rather be poor in the US than mexico yes. your dichotomy is a false representation. and a poor one at that
- thebigwinning 3y ago
  Why do they live in SF and further north if it's for weather?
- WeylandYutani 3y ago
  You think people choose to be fucked up? And what's the solution here, shoot the homeless? Guess what you're in a never ending war. Every day new crazy people are born or made by our wonderful society, poverty keeps spreading (where's my replicators!).
  - beerpls 3y ago
    people who take this emotional and illogical approach is exactly why the homeless suffer to the extent they do stop virtue signaling and start thinking or kindly avoid this topic because you’re only causing harm
bluGill 3y ago
There is no one cause. Anyone who says there is, is wrong. CA has many problems. Houses are expensive, and that makes it impossible for poor people to buy a house. This is something that CA can fix over time, and those who are only homeless because they cannot afford a place to live are low hanging fruit. They only need to build a lot of housing (reforming zoning for example) There are also people who are homeless because of some other problem. Mental issues, drug addiction, and other such things. they are harder to deal with - I'm not sure what can be done about it: I've seen a lot of proposals, but people proposing them tend to be overly optimistic about the ability of their ideas to work without downsides. There are more issues as well, but those are the big ones, and you cannot treat them the same.

Even if it is caused by other states, is it valid to complain about that? What is the solution to that? Borders between states (while having no borders between countries)? Edit: I dug up some data: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/06/us/homeless-population.ht... > As the data shows us, most of the homeless people you pass on the streets every day are in fact Californians. > “This is a local crisis and a homegrown problem,” said Peter Lynn, the executive director of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, the agency that conducts the largest homeless census count in the country. > L.A.H.S.A.’s 2019 homeless count found that 64 percent of the 58,936 Los Angeles County residents experiencing homelessness had lived in the city for more than 10 years. CA considers you a resident for tax purposes if you live in the state for a year but in homeless studies they consider you a resident if you live here for more than 10 years. Really shows the bias.

ncallaway 3y ago
If it is caused by other states, that would indicate the problem is not uniquely California related, making the likely necessary solutions to be federal. If it is not caused by other states, that would indicate that the problem is something happening in California, and maybe a state level solution is best. You have to start the solution in the right place to have any hope of addressing the root cause.
- throwway120385 3y ago
  Good luck getting the federal government to do anything to help a coastal state that isn't already covered by the executive branch.
  - ncallaway 3y ago
    I don't think the frame of "does this help or hurt a particular state" is a useful frame for the problem. We should look at it as "does this help or hurt people"
doctorwho42 3y ago
Two words: Federal Support. If the problem is exacerbated by active policy or indirect action/non-action, then as a collection of people/states it is the burden of every state to shoulder it. And the federal government is just that, the collective power of all states combined.
- ttonkytonk 3y ago
  Exactly. The logistics may not be simple (i.e. actually getting the federal government's support) but the logic should be obvious: piecemeal support results in the ones that are doing the most to help get "penalized" with more people seeking help.
pixl97 3y ago
>What is the solution to that? So, lets imagine that the problem is being caused by other states sending their homeless over. Well, in the US you can't stop that, at least by direct migration, you might be able to stop particular organizations like city governments from doing so. But in a general sense there is freedom of movement. The problem comes with that, the better you're at solving homelessness the more people will get sent there, and even more homeless will want to come there even if they are not sent. Suddenly Texas, for example would see California spending billions on the problem... Texas would have no motivation of spending billions to solve the problem themselves, in fact in terms of getting rid of the appearance of a homeless problem it would be more beneficial for them to be draconian on homelessness. This would push individuals to migrate to the promise land of California. California would see is homeless costs increase dramatically and would be incentivized to stop (increasing?) funding on the problem themselves. Moloch wins. More people suffer. Yay humanity.
- Izikiel43 3y ago
  What you describe is what happens in Canada. Most homeless in Canada end up in Vancouver, because of weather and assistance offered. The other provinces, with the 6 months freezing winter, not as much assistance, and I think a bit of enforcement, causes the homeless to end up at Vancouver.

beerpls 3y ago

It’s a warm climate with large cities which provide sufficient incentive for people to choose to be homeless over other avenues of living Homeless people obviously want to live somewhere like Cali over Canada for the winter. California also provides massive welfare to homeless. They also have a very open arms policy to illegals who are often poor and homeless These aren’t exhaustive reasons why, but it’s a core part of it. California politicians seem to be unwilling to address complicated social problems head on and instead virtue signal and allow these problems to grow and fester I’m not going to provide you with sources. It’s too politicized of a subject. If you don’t want to accept it for being this way i’ve learned not to argue. But at the very least if people really can’t see why this problem exists as it does, here an entry

peter422 3y ago
Your argument is that an immigrant would rather be homeless in the US than housed in their home country? Almost no data backs that up.
- beerpls 3y ago
  lol people would rather be poor in the US than mexico yes. your dichotomy is a false representation. and a poor one at that
thebigwinning 3y ago
Why do they live in SF and further north if it's for weather?
WeylandYutani 3y ago
You think people choose to be fucked up? And what's the solution here, shoot the homeless? Guess what you're in a never ending war. Every day new crazy people are born or made by our wonderful society, poverty keeps spreading (where's my replicators!).
- beerpls 3y ago
  people who take this emotional and illogical approach is exactly why the homeless suffer to the extent they do stop virtue signaling and start thinking or kindly avoid this topic because you’re only causing harm

bluGill 3y ago

There is no one cause. Anyone who says there is, is wrong. CA has many problems. Houses are expensive, and that makes it impossible for poor people to buy a house. This is something that CA can fix over time, and those who are only homeless because they cannot afford a place to live are low hanging fruit. They only need to build a lot of housing (reforming zoning for example) There are also people who are homeless because of some other problem. Mental issues, drug addiction, and other such things. they are harder to deal with - I'm not sure what can be done about it: I've seen a lot of proposals, but people proposing them tend to be overly optimistic about the ability of their ideas to work without downsides. There are more issues as well, but those are the big ones, and you cannot treat them the same.