4 ms·

It's kind of helpful to think of the world in percentages, rather than "1 or 0, black or white". Some people with drug problems are able to hold down some mini

by davidw 2y ago

It's kind of helpful to think of the world in percentages, rather than "1 or 0, black or white". Some people with drug problems are able to hold down some minimum wage work or part time jobs or something that brings in money. In Mississippi, that might be enough to keep you housed. In Los Angeles, it's not. Also you're more likely to be able to stay with a friend or relative with some extra space if housing isn't so tight: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/why-housing-shortages-cause-homelessness/ https://worksinprogress.co/issue/why-housing-shortages-cause...

seanmcdirmid 2y ago
Yes, that’s totally true! I think this is a much more interesting problem when we get rid of the drug addiction component. It is just sad that drug addiction is consuming all of our social resources that could otherwise go into solving housing problems. A lot of kids from Vicksburg also move to LA and don’t make it because of housing costs, so they move elsewhere. But should they have made it? Should LA be affordable enough for everyone who wants to live there to live there? If not, but we want to subsidize housing for some segment of the American population to live in LA, how do we prioritize? If yes, how much housing do we need to build to satisfy all American and international demand to live in LA?
- mmooss 2y ago
  > drug addiction is consuming all of our social resources that could otherwise go into solving housing problems What is that based on? Also, why are people with a drug problem less deserving than people with housing problems. Finally, what I understand from experts is that the first step to helping people with drug problems is to get them stable housing.
  - in-pursuit 2y ago
    Not OP, but > What is that based on? This is based on the fact that we have finite resources. Any resources that go to housing drug addicts could have been used for something else. There is a real opportunity cost there. > Also, why are people with a drug problem less deserving than people with housing problems. There are a few issues with housing drug addicts: 1. Understand, these people aren't just run-of-the-mill addicts. They are so addicted to drugs that they'll live in unimaginably horrid conditions to support their addiction. Any housing they receive will be destroyed and made uninhabitable. 2. Housing them makes the system more miserable and undesirable for everyone else. If you're a parent with children and you're facing homelessness, are you really going to use a resource where close contact with heavy drug addicts is possible? > Finally, what I understand from experts is that the first step to helping people with drug problems is to get them stable housing. That's actually the second step. The first step is getting the addict to want to quit drugs. Many addicts don't want to stop using, and giving those people housing is not going to be an effective way to combat their addiction if they aren't first interested stopping their addictive behavior.
    - fragmede 2y ago
      The problem with that is that they're also a problem when they're on the streets, sometimes even more of a problem. Someone who's not a problem and generally minding their own business is less of an threat than someone who's drug addiction is driving them to commit violence. We can't arrest them before they do anything violent, and after they've harmed someone else is too late.
      - in-pursuit 2y ago
        > We can't arrest them before they do anything violent Why not? Using drugs is illegal.
        fragmede 2y ago
        Where are you? Surprisingly that's jurisdiction dependent and it's often not.
        in-pursuit 2y ago
        I'm in NY. Possession of a controlled substance is a class A misdemeanor here[0], which can carry a maximum prison sentence of 1 year. 0: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/220.03 https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/220.03
        fragmede 2y ago
        You said using, not possession, and after you've used it, it's no longer in your possession, externally. That distinction does not matter in New York, however, as it's not one of the places where it's illegal to posses but legal if you've just used it. (Unless it's weed.)
        in-pursuit 2y ago
        I feel like we're talking about semantics here. You must posses drugs before / while actively using, and heavy addicts use multiple times a day.

by davidw 2y ago

seanmcdirmid 2y ago

Yes, that’s totally true! I think this is a much more interesting problem when we get rid of the drug addiction component. It is just sad that drug addiction is consuming all of our social resources that could otherwise go into solving housing problems. A lot of kids from Vicksburg also move to LA and don’t make it because of housing costs, so they move elsewhere. But should they have made it? Should LA be affordable enough for everyone who wants to live there to live there? If not, but we want to subsidize housing for some segment of the American population to live in LA, how do we prioritize? If yes, how much housing do we need to build to satisfy all American and international demand to live in LA?

mmooss 2y ago
> drug addiction is consuming all of our social resources that could otherwise go into solving housing problems What is that based on? Also, why are people with a drug problem less deserving than people with housing problems. Finally, what I understand from experts is that the first step to helping people with drug problems is to get them stable housing.
- in-pursuit 2y ago
  Not OP, but > What is that based on? This is based on the fact that we have finite resources. Any resources that go to housing drug addicts could have been used for something else. There is a real opportunity cost there. > Also, why are people with a drug problem less deserving than people with housing problems. There are a few issues with housing drug addicts: 1. Understand, these people aren't just run-of-the-mill addicts. They are so addicted to drugs that they'll live in unimaginably horrid conditions to support their addiction. Any housing they receive will be destroyed and made uninhabitable. 2. Housing them makes the system more miserable and undesirable for everyone else. If you're a parent with children and you're facing homelessness, are you really going to use a resource where close contact with heavy drug addicts is possible? > Finally, what I understand from experts is that the first step to helping people with drug problems is to get them stable housing. That's actually the second step. The first step is getting the addict to want to quit drugs. Many addicts don't want to stop using, and giving those people housing is not going to be an effective way to combat their addiction if they aren't first interested stopping their addictive behavior.
  - fragmede 2y ago
    The problem with that is that they're also a problem when they're on the streets, sometimes even more of a problem. Someone who's not a problem and generally minding their own business is less of an threat than someone who's drug addiction is driving them to commit violence. We can't arrest them before they do anything violent, and after they've harmed someone else is too late.
    - in-pursuit 2y ago
      > We can't arrest them before they do anything violent Why not? Using drugs is illegal.
      - fragmede 2y ago
        Where are you? Surprisingly that's jurisdiction dependent and it's often not.
        in-pursuit 2y ago
        I'm in NY. Possession of a controlled substance is a class A misdemeanor here[0], which can carry a maximum prison sentence of 1 year. 0: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/220.03 https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/220.03
        fragmede 2y ago
        You said using, not possession, and after you've used it, it's no longer in your possession, externally. That distinction does not matter in New York, however, as it's not one of the places where it's illegal to posses but legal if you've just used it. (Unless it's weed.)
        in-pursuit 2y ago
        I feel like we're talking about semantics here. You must posses drugs before / while actively using, and heavy addicts use multiple times a day.