3 ms·
Fair enough, but doesn’t the same principle apply? Namely, that if we really want to solve the problem, the root issues need to be the priority? You seem to ag
by bumby 3y ago
Fair enough, but doesn’t the same principle apply? Namely, that if we really want to solve the problem, the root issues need to be the priority?
You seem to agree with this, but that doesn’t necessarily align with the OP. Giving no strings attached housing isn’t fixing root issues.
- cutemonster 3y agoThey didn't say that housing fixes root issues. They said it's a "baseline for treating people".
- bumby 3y agoBut they also framed it as simply a means to an end: "finding people so you can treat them." I can sympathize with the "baseline for treating people" argument, but that, by itself, doesn't address the fact that there is a fundamental symmetry missing. If people want "freedom" they also need to demonstrate "responsibility" for a society to work. There is no free lunch, unfortunately. Literally every "baseline" right guaranteed by the US Constitution can be framed in this same give/take dynamic. The OP was conflating the issue IMO. They are saying basic shelter isn't enough; people have a right to free housing with no strings attached. I think those are two very different mental frameworks to view this problem.