22 ms·

Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

288 points by zdw 2y ago

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Carrok 2y ago
> In the United Kingdom, for instance, people who had been living on the streets or in shelters were housed in individual accommodations in a matter of days. So it was always possible. We just didn’t care to do so.
- mistrial9 2y ago
  it was striking to see Hong Kong in the British-law phase.. there used to be social layers including homeless and "boat people" but the British changed that .. under the British law, every single person and every single place to sleep was counted, numbered, licensed and taxed.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    Didn't the British control Hong Kong from the mid-19th century until the 1990s?
- ipaddr 2y ago
  When they refuse to go inside do you jail them? Some cities with big hearts have been through this before.
  - Carrok 2y ago
    Everything won't be perfect immediately, so let's do nothing instead! /s
    - lostlogin 2y ago
      It’s an interesting phenomenon that seems universal. People point to any failure anywhere in a system and then right it off in its entirety. Is there every a system of any sort that someone doesn’t try to exploit?
  - gwbas1c 2y ago
    Depends on circumstances. IE, if someone's camping in the woods, who cares. But, if someone is camping in a public park, or on someone's doorstep, or in a tunnel, than that's a different story.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  And then we told ourselves it wasn't possible so we could sleep at night.
- gwbas1c 2y ago
  I get the impression "individual accommodations" were hotel rooms; and the goal was also to subsidize hotels that had no business due to the pandemic. Housing homeless people in hotels is not sustainable. (It's also overkill, as adequate shelter doesn't need to be a motel with a queen bed. It can be a much smaller room and still be humane.)
philip1209 2y ago
Worth pointing out that Finland is one of the most ethnically homogeneous societies in Europe - only ~10% of the population is of foreign origin and background [1]. So, like Japan, it's easier to have a high-trust society if you eschew immigration. Edit: Just to be clear, I'm very pro-immigration. I just think that studying rich homogeneous societies doesn't result in many useful takeaways for countries like the USA. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#:~:text=As%20of%202023%2C%20Statistics%20Finland,born%20outside%20Finland%20is%209.6%25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#:~:tex....
- rs999gti 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > you are getting downvoted "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - ipaddr 2y ago
      Is it boring reading about the meta or how something works. Understanding the inner workings of a system or society is something we can use as an outsider to the system. Hearing that these opinions get downvoted helps explain why these comments were judged this way.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Hearing that these opinions get downvoted helps explain why these comments were judged HN greys and hides downvoted comments. The commentary adds nothing. An analysis around why would have been interesting. It isn’t what that comment did. Nor what most comments complaining about downvoting do, for the simple reason that said comment is almost always stronger without the whining.
rs999gti 2y ago
In the article, I did not see anything about mental illness or addicts. How did FI solve for those people? Both groups have people who want to be homeless, so they can be left alone.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  Probably close to zero people want to be homeless per se. What happens is that people are unwilling or unable to accept the terms of housing offered, like for example strict sobriety, or not allowing pets. Family housing is also rare, and I don't think it's fair to say someone choosing to be homeless with their spouse over housed separately miles away from each other "wants to be homeless." If people are consistently declining the aid we're offering, that's a problem we can address. It is our fault, not theirs.
  - samspot 2y ago
    "unwilling or unable" is extremely key. I recall a US Senator talking about his son who has schizophrenia. The father would pay for an apartment for his son, no strings attached, and still find him sleeping in the street. It may be possible to "solve" homelessness for some majority of people. But I doubt 100% is ever humanly achievable. At least, not without some massive breakthrough in understanding and intervention for mental illnesses.
- metalman 2y ago
  So we build semi-automomous free zones, where the infrastructure is essentialy indistructable,anyone can get a lockable secure space, and the violent sociopaths, are picked off. Facets from other proven models could include, a work for drunks program, like in some german areas, they get to clean the streets they hang out on, and are a sort of invisible "watch". Free "heroine" , for any and all who check into a controlled access facility. The real ferrals are just a fact, but are very easy to spot so the threat level is lower, but as they dont have adequate shelter, see point #1, they congregate in more southerly areas, and or, get into trouble trying to survive in northern areas. I have lived on the edge, for most of my life, seen a lot of wild things, in a lot of different places, and the story is that people just want to be seen and accepted, there, in the moment. Those moments are impossible to predict or create with any kind of predictability or repeatability. All ww can do is build the places, where that can happen, or not, and its "even", everybody can walk away, If nothing works, then there is the road, and that needs to be ok, and no one is a "vagrant" as they got a place to go. nobody is stuck.
octopusRex 2y ago
The US chooses not to end homelessness. We have the highest GDP in the world. We could end it if we wanted to. I was in Japan recently. A choice was made there as well.
- ipaddr 2y ago
  The US could end homelessness but would need to stop immigration and change the constitution which could force people in shelter. Not sure it's the outcome we all want.
  - marssaxman 2y ago
    Simpler than that: just roll back the restrictive zoning codes which have been making sufficient development infeasible for many years, thus creating a steadily growing housing deficit. When laws have turned the housing market into a game of musical chairs, someone is guaranteed to be left outside.
    - mywittyname 2y ago
      I'm often skeptical of simple solutions like this. They tend to assume that the regulation causes the problem, but when looked at more critically, it's clear that the regulation is a formalization of a combination of consumer & business preference. For example, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations. If you get into the gritty details, you'll find that they have a whole bunch ofloopholes that seem to favor larger trucks & SUVs. Many people will point to these regulation as causing people to buy light trucks & SUVs, but the data seems to suggest consumers prefer to buy these vehicles and auto manufacture prefer to sell them (they are extremely profitable). I postulate that, if CAFE requirements were eliminated, the best selling vehicle in the USA would continue to be the F-series and other trucks and SUVs would continue to dominate the top 10, because the regulations are influenced by consumer preference, not the other way around. I think the same logic applies to zoning. People largely want to own single family homes (SFH) in the suburbs; builders largely want to build SFHs in the suburbs. There's no reason to believe that changes in zoning will cause a meaningful shift in consumer and business preference. In the handful of ultra expensive metro areas, sure it might move the needle because economics trump preference, but in most of the USA, there's plenty of space to build housing. It's hard to imagine a developer in Pittsburgh choosing to build housing in an industrial area in the city over some empty land on the outskirts.
tencentshill 2y ago
Note this is a country where you cannot survive without shelter for most of the year. It's much "easier" to remain unhoused somewhere like California.
- jltsiren 2y ago
  There used to be homeless alcoholics living in shacks and WW1 bunkers in the forests around Helsinki. Many (most?) of them were WW2 veterans. Older kids still told stories about them in the 80s, but most of them had actually died or found shelter by then.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  The winter climate is comparable to, even milder than, large parts of the US including large cities like Boston, Chicago, Minneapolis that have significant homeless populations. Homeless people are not necessarily completely shelterless, in a survival sense. They're associated with tents for a reason.
- ge96 2y ago
  It's funny I've considered going there when my life imploded. Just get dropped off and live there Venice beach but yeah I get how annoying that would be to a non-homeless. I have family who are poor (3rd world) and I think about how it's fair for me to b here and they are over there but yeah etc etc idk. Why does it feel bad to be. I do help (virtue signal) donate but I'm also in a shit ton of debt but I'm not technically poor/homeless. I have a car/apt/toys. Still thinking about it. Oh yeah giving money isn't a fix it turns out because people fight over it/demand more. Next thing you know everyone is your relative hunting you down online. My personal gmail chat pops up "hey man..." It does piss me off when I pull up to a light and there's a guy right there with a sign. How do I know he's homeless? I'm coming out of a grocery store at night somebody's like "sir, sir, sir..." trying to get my attention. I guess it shouldn't be a problem to just hand em a dollar. But then they say "that's it?". Again I donate to a local food shelter, NHA, etc... just funny is altruism real idk why do I feel annoyed (greed?). I can't even ask people for money without feeling shame but other people don't care. Alright rant over I am privileged I know. I'm gonna live a life though, mid sports car, land, not give up. I'll continue to donate too whether in cash or open source work but first I have to get out of debt, been in debt for 15 years now crazy. That's why I have my tech job, drive for UE, donate plasma and freelance to speed run my debt off. Thankfully I'm single so it's only my own life I gotta worry about.
cadamsau 2y ago
[flagged]
- barbazoo 2y ago
  I don't get the joke or are you actually suggesting a significant number of homeless people are so by choice?
  - cadamsau 2y ago
    My comment was about how tolerance affects the way homelessness is viewed and addressed, nothing more nothing less.
barbazoo 2y ago
> a “Housing First” approach, which provides people experiencing homelessness with immediate, independent, permanent housing Could timing have something to do with it? Maybe if the cycle is broken right at the start, when one becomes homeless, it prevents some of the mental health issues and addiction issues that come from living without support for too long. People here in NA often have lived on the streets for years or decades. That's so much trauma, many say it's impossible to heal at that point.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Maybe if the cycle is broken right at the start, when one becomes homeless, it prevents some of the mental health issues and addiction issues that come from living without support for too long What fraction of the homeless addicts or mentally ill started out that way?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
    Suffering from mental trauma does not mean that one cannot suffer from additional mental trauma.
motohagiography 2y ago
Comparing the homlessness chart in the article to Finland's net immigration chart (https://stat.fi/en/publication/cl8n2ksks2yau0dukaxe3it75 https://stat.fi/en/publication/cl8n2ksks2yau0dukaxe3it75) the country's net negative immigration created much of the housing availability to house people immediately. Next door in Sweden, the situation is different. Their approach of building flats and committing to getting homeless people into them absolutely worked and should be an example, but not without a relatively fixed homeless rate. This is the general issue with the nordic social model. it was the model of functioning social programs, but in a vacuum of relative isolation and homegeneity.
thePhytochemist 2y ago
This issue is very relevant for me since I have been homeless since May. It's been a bad run of being a target of criminal activity, unemployment and just running out of money during my job search. I cope with a mix of volunteering, overpriced housing (think $1200/month for a room in a rural area before I ran out of money for that), catsitting, house-sitting, staying with family and sleeping in my ancient car. Although I'm a citizen I don't qualify for any government support or programs, even though we have employment insurance here which I paid into for years. I'm from Ottawa where the cold is obviously deadly, as it is in Finland. I do feel that we need to take shelter more seriously in public policy compared to warm areas because of that. Last week someone froze to death overnight a few blocks away from where I was crashing on a couch with family. Walking through downtown Ottawa and seeing the huge empty, lit, warm buildings with people freezing to death right outside is striking. Any practically minded person can see the problem is political and philosophical, not practical. I can tell all the posters who think people choose to be homeless that I'm certainly not one of them. The comments about the importance of avoiding a downward spiral are certainly correct. Searching for work is hard enough normally and becomes increasingly difficult without access to things like a kitchen and toilet. What I see in this Finnish policy is the starting assumption that doing nothing is not a good option. After reaching that point there can a rational discussion about what to do with whatever money is being spent - do you pay more people to hand out blankets and conduct surveys or just use it to buy housing units? As a homeless person I would really like to see Canada have a policy like I'm reading in this article instead of what we are doing now. The crappy temporary shelters and bureaucratic spending strategy obviously isn't working. Even just economically, to have a government pay for years of schooling and subsidize advanced degrees then just be ready to let that person die on the street when they are ready to work but can't happen to find something seems like a waste. I'd rather see a functioning "social safety net" as described in this article.
- peab 2y ago
  The housing situation in Canada is insane and is so obviously due to not building enough housing and bringing too many people into the country via immigration. The fact that it costs 1200$/month for a room in a rural area is incredibly damning. I went to college in Ottawa, and now I live in Austin Texas. It's similar in size, although Austin has been growing more lately. Curiously, they are also both capitols, college towns and they have a river flowing through them. A major difference is that Austin has a new development with 200-400 unites on every block it seems. Cranes are everywhere downtown, and even in random neighborhoods they have huge new developments. Ottawa has no shortage of land, there's a huge amount of available land to develop in either direction, but they evidently aren't building nearly as much. The result? I'm looking at 2 bedroom apartments, and they are 1000$ cheaper than they were 3 years ago when I first moved here. Rent has gone down and continues to go down. I'm seeing studio apartments in the middle of the city renting out for 800$ now!
johnea 2y ago
So, they reduced homelessness by giving people a permanent place to live? Inconceivable! Who would have ever thought of that? Those commonist Scandinavians, they just don't understand the "power of the market"... Why would anyone even live indoors if it mitigated investor ROI?
- 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
  I thought building houses was a skill lost to history, like Damascus steel!
deanc 2y ago
Helsinki, at least is an interesting place. Much like any other capital if you go to certain neighbourhoods you can see drug dealers, drug users (many which are living in shelters) - even in downtown. They kind of blend in, are part of the scenery and on the whole only interact with their "own kind". You might hear some grumbling, shouting, smelly folk on the tram - but they aren't treated with the same contempt at existing as I've seen in other countries.
rossdavidh 2y ago
"Building flats is key: otherwise, especially if housing supply is particularly rigid, the funding of rentals can risk driving up rents (OECD, 2021a), thus reducing the “bang for the buck” of public spending." So, yes, if you want low homelessness, you build a lot of housing and make sure that rents are low. This is true, and a good strategy.
- Scoundreller 2y ago
  And don’t “fix” the problem at the expense of the paycheque-to-paycheque lower-working class. Otherwise it’s zero sum and you create a homeless for every homeless you remove and disincentivize work.
  - TinyBig 2y ago
    How would it be possible to fix the problem at the expense of the lower working class?
    - markus_zhang 2y ago
      For example just add tax to shoot at the target, eventually salary owners get hurt while riches can get away with an army of lawyers and accountants.
    - fooker 2y ago
      If you force owners to artificially reduce rent for a single class of properties (here: cheap flats made for the homeless) the rent for others go up a bit. This has happened in several US cities.
      - throwawayq3423 2y ago
        But that's not what is being discussed. Increasing supply is being discussed, which would lower prices for everyone.
    - Scoundreller 2y ago
PaulHoule 2y ago
It helps to have a winter.
emh68 2y ago
1. Build a house for each homeless person 2. Remove them from the homeless count, because they now have a house. 3. Reach zero homelessness! 4. There are still people living on the streets... But we don't call them homeless!
- erehweb 2y ago
  I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. From the article, basically no one was sleeping on the streets in Finland in 2020.
  - eesmith 2y ago
    I don't know where the #4 is from, but I can point to https://kritisches-netzwerk.de/sites/default/files/homelessness_in_finland_2020_-_report_2021_-_the_housing_finance_and_development_centre_of_finland_-_ara.pdf https://kritisches-netzwerk.de/sites/default/files/homelessn... with a more complete breakdown: Types of homelessness | Living Alone | Long-term homeless ----------------------+--------------+------------------- Temporarily living | 2 773 | 522 with friends and | | relatives | | ----------------------+--------------+------------------- Outside, in | 721 | 186 stairwells, in | | temporary | | shelters, etc. | | ----------------------+--------------+------------------- In dormitories | 489 | 195 or hostels | | ----------------------+--------------+------------------- In institutions | 358 | 151
- skirge 2y ago
  at least now they can't say there's no home for them, it's just choice - some prefer that way.
127 2y ago
Also -40C winters might have something to do with it.
- pyuser583 2y ago
  If you’re going to use -40, why include the “C”?
  - pinkmuffinere 2y ago
    It’s a fun fact that -40 c == -40 f, but if you leave off the units people who aren’t ‘in the know’ would be confused. Also they might (adversarially) wonder if the units are in a lesser known scale like rømer
    - pyuser583 2y ago
      I use nerdy in-jokes a bit too much.
      - pinkmuffinere 2y ago
        Sorry if I took your original comment too seriously — I do legitimately think it’s a fun fact! As penance, here’s a bonus fun fact: wtf is 0F???? It’s the temperature saturated brine freezes at! (It’s very close but not exact, because Mr Fahrenheit wasn’t perfect)
  - yard2010 2y ago
    I for one have no idea how much is -40f, is it colder or hotter than -40c? I do remember -32 or something is the same?
- andriamanitra 2y ago
  -40°C is extremely rare in Southern Finland where most people live. In Helsinki the average temperature is about -6°C in the coldest months of the year, and at worst it might drop down to around -15 to -25°C (depending on the year).
andrewla 2y ago
Without digging too deep into the nature of the statistics they use, I'm a little skeptical of this. The transition to using the word "homeless" has resulted in transforming something we can't easily measure -- "drug addicted or mentally ill people being a public menace" -- into something that we can measure -- "people without a good living arrangement". Sure, the latter is important in a lot of ways too. And there housing is a tolerable solution. But the former is the actual problem that we care about. It's nearly impossible to measure. It's nearly impossible to fix. The horrors of involuntary commitment vs. the horrors of not having involuntary commitment vs. the horrors of using the criminal justice system vs. the horrors of not using the criminal justice system. The fact is that we have no real model for treatment of severely mentally ill people. We have a number of effective drugs, but they rapidly become ineffective if not taken. Our ability to treat or "cure" people in these conditions is essentially non-existent. The question I would ask of Finland before considering this data or analysis to be interesting is what is their state of involuntary indefinite commitment.
- wesselbindt 2y ago
  Have you ever considered that it may be the other way around? That the horrors of living on the street (and "horrors" is an appropriate term here, you are fighting for survival every day; it is beyond the realm of comprehension of the housed) might be causing the mental illness and drug use, rather than the other way around? If I want to get a homeless person off of drugs, it sure as crisps is not going to happen until they have a roof over their head. The core issue is the lack of affordable housing. That should be priority number 1.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    In fact, that's one thing the article talks about. Finland's successful plan focuses on 'housing first'. "Finland’s success is not a matter of luck or the outcome of “quick fixes.” Rather, it is the result of a sustained, well-resourced national strategy, driven by a “Housing First” approach, which provides people experiencing homelessness with immediate, independent, permanent housing, rather than temporary accommodation (OECD, 2020)"
  - 2y ago
cousin_it 2y ago
I think governments should offer free housing to everyone who asks, in their city of choice. "But why should taxpayers pay for that? It's expensive!" Yes, it would be very expensive. But you know what's even more expensive? The sum of everybody's lowered wages, bad bosses, fear for the future, fear of having kids and so on, due to the threat of homelessness. Yes, building housing is expensive, but the removal of fear will pay for it many times over.
- skirge 2y ago
  Everyone wants to live in the centre of Helsinki, because why not?
  - cousin_it 2y ago
    I'm not saying give everyone the nicest center flat. Let's say an acceptable commute distance away, up to 30min by public transport.
    - skirge 2y ago
      Why not? Am I worse than others?
      - cousin_it 2y ago
        Yes, or just unlucky. The goal of my proposal is not to create equality, but to establish a minimum below which people cannot fall.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Who gets to determine the minimum threshold? And how will they enforce it?
        titaniumtown 2y ago
        The government and laws?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
cryptozeus 2y ago
Seeing comments from few homeless folks here, I wish you good luck and hope your situation changes. I have a very different image in mind when it comes to homeless people and having to live on roadside let alone afford a phone and time to comment on hacker news.
- daemonologist 2y ago
  Phones are pretty cheap, and probably essential for finding work and staying in contact with family/other resources, and I imagine a homeless person has time more than anything else. I'm also a bit surprised at first when I see a post from someone is such a different economic situation here on HN but logically it makes sense. (I recall seeing an engineer in Palestine post in a recent Who wants to be hired? and I tread similar thoughts.)
verteu 2y ago
They also do a lot of compulsory psychiatric detention: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychiatric-bulletin/article/compulsory-psychiatric-detention-and-treatment-in-finland/4757FEDD5BB56849744DDE76A7FEBBE1 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychiatric-bulletin... > Finnish mental health legislation takes a medical approach to compulsory measures, emphasising the need for treatment of psychiatric patients over civil liberties concerns... Finland has the highest rates of detention per 100 000 inhabitants, about 214 compared with 93 in the UK and 11 in Italy. > If at the end of the 3-month period it is considered likely that detention criteria are still fulfilled, new recommendations MII and MIII are filed and the renewed detention is then valid for 6 months. However, this second period of detention has to be immediately confirmed by a local administrative court. edit: I should mention that I've seen fairly convincing cross-sectional evidence that homelessness is more related to the housing market than mental illness: https://www.ucpress.edu/books/homelessness-is-a-housing-problem/epub-pdf https://www.ucpress.edu/books/homelessness-is-a-housing-prob... , https://www.nahro.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/NAHRO-Summit_080222-Greg.pdf https://www.nahro.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/NAHRO-Summi...
- timewizard 2y ago
  "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" does not automatically mean "good, moral, and upstanding lifestyle." To the extent that people have a natural right to exist and society does not I think it should be contingent on administrators to prove the standard they're applying is actually reasonable and non discriminatory.
  - ty6853 2y ago
    The standard ought to be they have or imminently are going to harm others. Like actually harm a real victim, criminally by violence or taking property. If they want to live in a gutter worshipping lizard king, well, not everyone has the same idea of the pursuit of happiness.
    - lern_too_spel 2y ago
      As a society building a public space, do we not get a say in how it's used? If you cannot find a place to live without blocking a sidewalk, one will be provided for you. That place will not let you take hard drugs indefinitely.
black_13 2y ago
[dead]
INTPenis 2y ago
I'm proud of all the socialist policies here in Sweden, and our neighbors. But a lot of times these things are posted as comparisons with the US, and let's get real, there is no comparison. The United States as a country is vastly different from any nordic european country. So stop holding these countries with insignificant populations up as beacons of light. I think the problem with the US is very clear to me as an outsider observer. It's a vast country that is so big that technically it's still being colonized. And in order to speed up this process there is unchecked capitalism. And you can never rely on a benevolent billionaire to solve your problems. Only the government can be held responsible for its citizens.
- CaptainFever 2y ago
  In this case, does socialist mean "high amounts of government intervention" and capitalist mean "low amounts of government intervention"? I think it's important to be clear about such muddy terms.
  - INTPenis 2y ago
    But that's also a simplification because it's a government that does anything it can to protect its citizens, to make sure that everyone gets an equal share. I took it for granted for most of my life, and I idolized the US for all their music and cultural output. Until social media brought me more and more real stories from real Americans and I realized how lucky I was to be born where I was born.
h_tbob 2y ago
My problem is this: Being homeless is not inherently wrong. But I feel when a society makes camping on common ground a crime - like native Americans did, it owes it to them to a) give them land to camp on or b) give them housing. It shouldn’t be a crime to sleep, ever. It horrifies me that the “conservative” Supreme Court could deny the most fundamental right to existence, literally jailing people for sleeping.
- changoplatanero 2y ago
  It's not going to stay common ground for very long if anyone can just set up camp there and claim it for themselves.
  - Ylpertnodi 2y ago
    I agree with, but maybe someone, or a group of people, could make a legally-defined difference between 'sleeping', and 'camping'. Perhaps they could start by using different words, plainly understood by most - or, easily researched, for each of the different (perhaps) activities.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- itake 2y ago
  I don't think people would mind if it was _just_ camping that they were doing..
sylware 2y ago
Wait, in finland, homeless means death most of the time. This is creepy.
- lifestyleguru 2y ago
  This is similar problem to "the more suicides we have the less suicides there will be".
- smcl 2y ago
  Alright what are the odds that Finland’s famous and much lauded approach to reducing homelessness was actually nonsense, and you’re the first person to tell the truth: that it’s actually because the homeless all just froze to death? That’d mean every news outlet has somehow ignored it, there are no whistleblowers and nobody else has bothered to look at any data on it.
  - lifestyleguru 2y ago
    If life taught me something, it's that the brutal answer is usually the right one. The world somehow undeservedly give enormous credit to the social systems of Nordic countries. Simply look at the numbers. Finland for a country larger than Poland and UK has only 5m inhabitants. Another "fun fact" - Sweden has worse wealth inequality than Russia.
    - sylware 2y ago
      As far I understand things, due to the weather and climate over there, anybody not in a seriously built home properly connected to utility networks is literaly dead. And those home must be properly maintained, not to mention they must have some empty spares, which must stay empty but ready, in case some nasty big local event does happen. In other words, you better be welcomed over there, or you'll die, literaly. And with climate change, I wonder if the current weather computer simulations on the new climate we are creating will generate extreme cold events in more southern countries, long enough event to kill many homeless if not all.
    - smcl 2y ago
kazinator 2y ago
Almost nothing from mainland Europe, Scandinavia, Japan and other places (often, even Canada!) is transplantable to the USA. Yet these articles keep cropping up. > national strategy, driven by a “Housing First” approach, which provides people experiencing homelessness with immediate, independent, permanent housing, rather than temporary accommodation Homeless --- pardon me, unhoused --- from America, would trash that shit faster than you can "vodka, tar and sauna".
tlogan 2y ago
I wanted to point out that the approach adopted by Finland may not be suitable for the United States. Finland has a population of only 5.6 million—less than two-thirds of the Bay Area—so their solutions, unfortunately, may not scale effectively in a larger, more complex environment. The other - even more important issue with all these approaches, however, lies in treating all homeless individuals as a single category. This is a common flaw in most homelessness strategies. In reality, there are at least 5 to 10 broad categories—such as former convicts, individuals with substance abuse issues, those with mental health challenges, people who lost jobs or income, refugees, and more. Each of these groups requires a unique approach tailored to their specific circumstances. A one-size-fits-all solution simply doesn’t work. That said, simplifying the issue makes for great marketing, which is why we often see oversimplified strategies being proposed and success reported (as in this report). Unfortunately, this also means we’re unlikely to solve the homelessness crisis in the U.S. anytime soon.
- epistasis 2y ago
  Why would they not scale? We have more people, more capacity to build, and greater opportunities for economies of scale. Every homeless person, regardless of mental state, still needs housing. It is the one unifying aspect of homelessness.
  - tlogan 2y ago
    > Why would they not scale? Due to the complexity and diversity in economic, cultural, and social value networks. For example, the approach which is working for Modesto will probably not work for San Francisco.
    - epistasis 2y ago
      That has less to do with the size of the US but everything to do with the lack of size in the US. We make it impossible to do things by making each city small independent, and having a lack of unity. Our government is not more complex than Finland's because we have more people, it's because we chose to make it inefficient and complex. Removing local cities' power to be different for the sake of complexity would solve the issue quickly. If the Bay Area had a regional government rather than tiny fiefdoms devoted to allowing wealthy people to extract the maximum economic value from shared business interests, while willing away their own tax dollars in tiny enclaves that are protected by minimum lot sizes and apartment bans, not only would we have far less homelessness to begin with, but we could solve the leftover homelessness much better, refuse crime and poverty, and have a far better functioning society.
jameson 2y ago
I wish US implement a similar system but I wonder how its going to work when housing prices are astonomical especially in the Bay Area Getting paid 250k/yr with 20% downpayment isn't enough to afford a house with 2 kids, so providing a "free" or "afforable" housing to those who aren't currently employees is only going to upset those who are working hard IMO govn't need to relax the regulation to build more houses and drive the cost down I completely agree with Finland's approach though. Permanent housing is the minimal requirement to reduce homelessness. Without placed to stay, mailing address, security, it's difficult to get out of homelessness
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  A key to this strategy is building sufficient numbers of housing units; if you split these between units to be offered in the market (prevention) and units dedicated to permanent housing of the currently unhoused (cure) you bring down costs for people with income seeking housing in the market while providing immediate (as the units become ready, obviously there is a lag from adopting the approach as policy unless you have vacant capacity that can be instantly repurposed) assistance to those who even with greater supply are not inmediately able to make market rents. You can't execute a Housing First strategy effectively without adequate housing supply, which is the most fundamental problem in a number of locales, including the Bay Area. But additional market supply alone is not sufficient to address the urgent homelessness problem. > IMO govn't need to relax the regulation to build more houses and drive the cost down That absolutely needs to happen, and that helps with prevention, but except for the fairly-well-employed homeless (a group that actually exists and is often ignored, but isn't a big part of the homeless problem), adding new market rate supply alone does not provide significant assistance to the currently homeless.
basicwolf 2y ago
A great video from Invisible People on the topic: "Finland Solved Homelessness: Here's How (Spoiler: It's More Than Housing First)" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jt_6PBnCJE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jt_6PBnCJE
anovikov 2y ago
Easy to see how trying this in the U.S. will turn into a dystopia. It requires a society with much fewer avenues to wealth, the wealth being a lot less normalised, than America.
pavlov 2y ago
So many people in these comments are arguing some form of: “Let’s first figure out if the homelessness is actually the person’s own fault. If we can really be confident that they’re repentant and sober, then we should perhaps consider helping them find housing.” This is the approach that Finland had in the 1950s! And it didn’t work. Hundreds of young WWII veterans were dying under the bridges after years in the streets drinking illegal booze (and many also abusing stronger substances, since e.g. amphetamine was given to soldiers during the war). Post-war Finland was not some socialist wonderland but a hard, poor, unforgiving place. Finland’s U-turn on treating homelessness came after the dismal failure that left so many of these deeply traumatized men and women to die. For the past decades, the policy has been to try to get everyone off the streets into safe and private housing, and then sort out the rest. And the numbers show it has worked. Many of America’s homeless are also war veterans, just like 1950s Finland. They deserve better.
- itake 2y ago
  you're not wrong, but I think the underlying premise is: "We have limited resources. Lets identify the most impactful places for our $$." Presumably, people with social disorders will be much more expensive to house than someone that is more recently functioning in our society.
onecondom 2y ago
[dead]
asdf6969 2y ago
There is no solution because most chronically homeless prefer that lifestyle. I know I would if I was homeless. Living in a tent, hanging out with friends, and drinking beer in the park. In good weather and with access to food it’s not so bad. Remember that not everyone has good opportunities. If my other choice was working a dehumanizing job to afford a tiny room with several roommates and no leftover money.. can’t really blame them for not wanting help.

288 points by zdw 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

> In the United Kingdom, for instance, people who had been living on the streets or in shelters were housed in individual accommodations in a matter of days. So it was always possible. We just didn’t care to do so.

mistrial9 2y ago
it was striking to see Hong Kong in the British-law phase.. there used to be social layers including homeless and "boat people" but the British changed that .. under the British law, every single person and every single place to sleep was counted, numbered, licensed and taxed.
- mmooss 2y ago
  Didn't the British control Hong Kong from the mid-19th century until the 1990s?
ipaddr 2y ago
When they refuse to go inside do you jail them? Some cities with big hearts have been through this before.
- Carrok 2y ago
  Everything won't be perfect immediately, so let's do nothing instead! /s
  - lostlogin 2y ago
    It’s an interesting phenomenon that seems universal. People point to any failure anywhere in a system and then right it off in its entirety. Is there every a system of any sort that someone doesn’t try to exploit?
- gwbas1c 2y ago
  Depends on circumstances. IE, if someone's camping in the woods, who cares. But, if someone is camping in a public park, or on someone's doorstep, or in a tunnel, than that's a different story.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
kelseyfrog 2y ago
And then we told ourselves it wasn't possible so we could sleep at night.
gwbas1c 2y ago
I get the impression "individual accommodations" were hotel rooms; and the goal was also to subsidize hotels that had no business due to the pandemic. Housing homeless people in hotels is not sustainable. (It's also overkill, as adequate shelter doesn't need to be a motel with a queen bed. It can be a much smaller room and still be humane.)

philip1209 2y ago

Worth pointing out that Finland is one of the most ethnically homogeneous societies in Europe - only ~10% of the population is of foreign origin and background [1]. So, like Japan, it's easier to have a high-trust society if you eschew immigration. Edit: Just to be clear, I'm very pro-immigration. I just think that studying rich homogeneous societies doesn't result in many useful takeaways for countries like the USA. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#:~:text=As%20of%202023%2C%20Statistics%20Finland,born%20outside%20Finland%20is%209.6%25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#:~:tex....

rs999gti 2y ago
[flagged]
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > you are getting downvoted "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - ipaddr 2y ago
    Is it boring reading about the meta or how something works. Understanding the inner workings of a system or society is something we can use as an outsider to the system. Hearing that these opinions get downvoted helps explain why these comments were judged this way.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Hearing that these opinions get downvoted helps explain why these comments were judged HN greys and hides downvoted comments. The commentary adds nothing. An analysis around why would have been interesting. It isn’t what that comment did. Nor what most comments complaining about downvoting do, for the simple reason that said comment is almost always stronger without the whining.

rs999gti 2y ago

In the article, I did not see anything about mental illness or addicts. How did FI solve for those people? Both groups have people who want to be homeless, so they can be left alone.

giraffe_lady 2y ago
Probably close to zero people want to be homeless per se. What happens is that people are unwilling or unable to accept the terms of housing offered, like for example strict sobriety, or not allowing pets. Family housing is also rare, and I don't think it's fair to say someone choosing to be homeless with their spouse over housed separately miles away from each other "wants to be homeless." If people are consistently declining the aid we're offering, that's a problem we can address. It is our fault, not theirs.
- samspot 2y ago
  "unwilling or unable" is extremely key. I recall a US Senator talking about his son who has schizophrenia. The father would pay for an apartment for his son, no strings attached, and still find him sleeping in the street. It may be possible to "solve" homelessness for some majority of people. But I doubt 100% is ever humanly achievable. At least, not without some massive breakthrough in understanding and intervention for mental illnesses.
metalman 2y ago
So we build semi-automomous free zones, where the infrastructure is essentialy indistructable,anyone can get a lockable secure space, and the violent sociopaths, are picked off. Facets from other proven models could include, a work for drunks program, like in some german areas, they get to clean the streets they hang out on, and are a sort of invisible "watch". Free "heroine" , for any and all who check into a controlled access facility. The real ferrals are just a fact, but are very easy to spot so the threat level is lower, but as they dont have adequate shelter, see point #1, they congregate in more southerly areas, and or, get into trouble trying to survive in northern areas. I have lived on the edge, for most of my life, seen a lot of wild things, in a lot of different places, and the story is that people just want to be seen and accepted, there, in the moment. Those moments are impossible to predict or create with any kind of predictability or repeatability. All ww can do is build the places, where that can happen, or not, and its "even", everybody can walk away, If nothing works, then there is the road, and that needs to be ok, and no one is a "vagrant" as they got a place to go. nobody is stuck.

octopusRex 2y ago

The US chooses not to end homelessness. We have the highest GDP in the world. We could end it if we wanted to. I was in Japan recently. A choice was made there as well.

ipaddr 2y ago
The US could end homelessness but would need to stop immigration and change the constitution which could force people in shelter. Not sure it's the outcome we all want.
- marssaxman 2y ago
  Simpler than that: just roll back the restrictive zoning codes which have been making sufficient development infeasible for many years, thus creating a steadily growing housing deficit. When laws have turned the housing market into a game of musical chairs, someone is guaranteed to be left outside.
  - mywittyname 2y ago
    I'm often skeptical of simple solutions like this. They tend to assume that the regulation causes the problem, but when looked at more critically, it's clear that the regulation is a formalization of a combination of consumer & business preference. For example, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations. If you get into the gritty details, you'll find that they have a whole bunch ofloopholes that seem to favor larger trucks & SUVs. Many people will point to these regulation as causing people to buy light trucks & SUVs, but the data seems to suggest consumers prefer to buy these vehicles and auto manufacture prefer to sell them (they are extremely profitable). I postulate that, if CAFE requirements were eliminated, the best selling vehicle in the USA would continue to be the F-series and other trucks and SUVs would continue to dominate the top 10, because the regulations are influenced by consumer preference, not the other way around. I think the same logic applies to zoning. People largely want to own single family homes (SFH) in the suburbs; builders largely want to build SFHs in the suburbs. There's no reason to believe that changes in zoning will cause a meaningful shift in consumer and business preference. In the handful of ultra expensive metro areas, sure it might move the needle because economics trump preference, but in most of the USA, there's plenty of space to build housing. It's hard to imagine a developer in Pittsburgh choosing to build housing in an industrial area in the city over some empty land on the outskirts.

tencentshill 2y ago

Note this is a country where you cannot survive without shelter for most of the year. It's much "easier" to remain unhoused somewhere like California.

jltsiren 2y ago
There used to be homeless alcoholics living in shacks and WW1 bunkers in the forests around Helsinki. Many (most?) of them were WW2 veterans. Older kids still told stories about them in the 80s, but most of them had actually died or found shelter by then.
giraffe_lady 2y ago
The winter climate is comparable to, even milder than, large parts of the US including large cities like Boston, Chicago, Minneapolis that have significant homeless populations. Homeless people are not necessarily completely shelterless, in a survival sense. They're associated with tents for a reason.
ge96 2y ago
It's funny I've considered going there when my life imploded. Just get dropped off and live there Venice beach but yeah I get how annoying that would be to a non-homeless. I have family who are poor (3rd world) and I think about how it's fair for me to b here and they are over there but yeah etc etc idk. Why does it feel bad to be. I do help (virtue signal) donate but I'm also in a shit ton of debt but I'm not technically poor/homeless. I have a car/apt/toys. Still thinking about it. Oh yeah giving money isn't a fix it turns out because people fight over it/demand more. Next thing you know everyone is your relative hunting you down online. My personal gmail chat pops up "hey man..." It does piss me off when I pull up to a light and there's a guy right there with a sign. How do I know he's homeless? I'm coming out of a grocery store at night somebody's like "sir, sir, sir..." trying to get my attention. I guess it shouldn't be a problem to just hand em a dollar. But then they say "that's it?". Again I donate to a local food shelter, NHA, etc... just funny is altruism real idk why do I feel annoyed (greed?). I can't even ask people for money without feeling shame but other people don't care. Alright rant over I am privileged I know. I'm gonna live a life though, mid sports car, land, not give up. I'll continue to donate too whether in cash or open source work but first I have to get out of debt, been in debt for 15 years now crazy. That's why I have my tech job, drive for UE, donate plasma and freelance to speed run my debt off. Thankfully I'm single so it's only my own life I gotta worry about.

cadamsau 2y ago

[flagged]

barbazoo 2y ago
I don't get the joke or are you actually suggesting a significant number of homeless people are so by choice?
- cadamsau 2y ago
  My comment was about how tolerance affects the way homelessness is viewed and addressed, nothing more nothing less.

barbazoo 2y ago

> a “Housing First” approach, which provides people experiencing homelessness with immediate, independent, permanent housing Could timing have something to do with it? Maybe if the cycle is broken right at the start, when one becomes homeless, it prevents some of the mental health issues and addiction issues that come from living without support for too long. People here in NA often have lived on the streets for years or decades. That's so much trauma, many say it's impossible to heal at that point.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Maybe if the cycle is broken right at the start, when one becomes homeless, it prevents some of the mental health issues and addiction issues that come from living without support for too long What fraction of the homeless addicts or mentally ill started out that way?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago
  Suffering from mental trauma does not mean that one cannot suffer from additional mental trauma.

motohagiography 2y ago

Comparing the homlessness chart in the article to Finland's net immigration chart (https://stat.fi/en/publication/cl8n2ksks2yau0dukaxe3it75 https://stat.fi/en/publication/cl8n2ksks2yau0dukaxe3it75) the country's net negative immigration created much of the housing availability to house people immediately. Next door in Sweden, the situation is different. Their approach of building flats and committing to getting homeless people into them absolutely worked and should be an example, but not without a relatively fixed homeless rate. This is the general issue with the nordic social model. it was the model of functioning social programs, but in a vacuum of relative isolation and homegeneity.

thePhytochemist 2y ago

This issue is very relevant for me since I have been homeless since May. It's been a bad run of being a target of criminal activity, unemployment and just running out of money during my job search. I cope with a mix of volunteering, overpriced housing (think $1200/month for a room in a rural area before I ran out of money for that), catsitting, house-sitting, staying with family and sleeping in my ancient car. Although I'm a citizen I don't qualify for any government support or programs, even though we have employment insurance here which I paid into for years. I'm from Ottawa where the cold is obviously deadly, as it is in Finland. I do feel that we need to take shelter more seriously in public policy compared to warm areas because of that. Last week someone froze to death overnight a few blocks away from where I was crashing on a couch with family. Walking through downtown Ottawa and seeing the huge empty, lit, warm buildings with people freezing to death right outside is striking. Any practically minded person can see the problem is political and philosophical, not practical. I can tell all the posters who think people choose to be homeless that I'm certainly not one of them. The comments about the importance of avoiding a downward spiral are certainly correct. Searching for work is hard enough normally and becomes increasingly difficult without access to things like a kitchen and toilet. What I see in this Finnish policy is the starting assumption that doing nothing is not a good option. After reaching that point there can a rational discussion about what to do with whatever money is being spent - do you pay more people to hand out blankets and conduct surveys or just use it to buy housing units? As a homeless person I would really like to see Canada have a policy like I'm reading in this article instead of what we are doing now. The crappy temporary shelters and bureaucratic spending strategy obviously isn't working. Even just economically, to have a government pay for years of schooling and subsidize advanced degrees then just be ready to let that person die on the street when they are ready to work but can't happen to find something seems like a waste. I'd rather see a functioning "social safety net" as described in this article.

peab 2y ago
The housing situation in Canada is insane and is so obviously due to not building enough housing and bringing too many people into the country via immigration. The fact that it costs 1200$/month for a room in a rural area is incredibly damning. I went to college in Ottawa, and now I live in Austin Texas. It's similar in size, although Austin has been growing more lately. Curiously, they are also both capitols, college towns and they have a river flowing through them. A major difference is that Austin has a new development with 200-400 unites on every block it seems. Cranes are everywhere downtown, and even in random neighborhoods they have huge new developments. Ottawa has no shortage of land, there's a huge amount of available land to develop in either direction, but they evidently aren't building nearly as much. The result? I'm looking at 2 bedroom apartments, and they are 1000$ cheaper than they were 3 years ago when I first moved here. Rent has gone down and continues to go down. I'm seeing studio apartments in the middle of the city renting out for 800$ now!

johnea 2y ago

So, they reduced homelessness by giving people a permanent place to live? Inconceivable! Who would have ever thought of that? Those commonist Scandinavians, they just don't understand the "power of the market"... Why would anyone even live indoors if it mitigated investor ROI?

01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
I thought building houses was a skill lost to history, like Damascus steel!

deanc 2y ago

Helsinki, at least is an interesting place. Much like any other capital if you go to certain neighbourhoods you can see drug dealers, drug users (many which are living in shelters) - even in downtown. They kind of blend in, are part of the scenery and on the whole only interact with their "own kind". You might hear some grumbling, shouting, smelly folk on the tram - but they aren't treated with the same contempt at existing as I've seen in other countries.

rossdavidh 2y ago

"Building flats is key: otherwise, especially if housing supply is particularly rigid, the funding of rentals can risk driving up rents (OECD, 2021a), thus reducing the “bang for the buck” of public spending." So, yes, if you want low homelessness, you build a lot of housing and make sure that rents are low. This is true, and a good strategy.

Scoundreller 2y ago
And don’t “fix” the problem at the expense of the paycheque-to-paycheque lower-working class. Otherwise it’s zero sum and you create a homeless for every homeless you remove and disincentivize work.
- TinyBig 2y ago
  How would it be possible to fix the problem at the expense of the lower working class?
  - markus_zhang 2y ago
    For example just add tax to shoot at the target, eventually salary owners get hurt while riches can get away with an army of lawyers and accountants.
  - fooker 2y ago
    If you force owners to artificially reduce rent for a single class of properties (here: cheap flats made for the homeless) the rent for others go up a bit. This has happened in several US cities.
    - throwawayq3423 2y ago
      But that's not what is being discussed. Increasing supply is being discussed, which would lower prices for everyone.
  - Scoundreller 2y ago

PaulHoule 2y ago

It helps to have a winter.

emh68 2y ago

1. Build a house for each homeless person 2. Remove them from the homeless count, because they now have a house. 3. Reach zero homelessness! 4. There are still people living on the streets... But we don't call them homeless!

erehweb 2y ago
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. From the article, basically no one was sleeping on the streets in Finland in 2020.
- eesmith 2y ago
  I don't know where the #4 is from, but I can point to https://kritisches-netzwerk.de/sites/default/files/homelessness_in_finland_2020_-_report_2021_-_the_housing_finance_and_development_centre_of_finland_-_ara.pdf https://kritisches-netzwerk.de/sites/default/files/homelessn... with a more complete breakdown: Types of homelessness | Living Alone | Long-term homeless ----------------------+--------------+------------------- Temporarily living | 2 773 | 522 with friends and | | relatives | | ----------------------+--------------+------------------- Outside, in | 721 | 186 stairwells, in | | temporary | | shelters, etc. | | ----------------------+--------------+------------------- In dormitories | 489 | 195 or hostels | | ----------------------+--------------+------------------- In institutions | 358 | 151
skirge 2y ago
at least now they can't say there's no home for them, it's just choice - some prefer that way.

127 2y ago

Also -40C winters might have something to do with it.

pyuser583 2y ago
If you’re going to use -40, why include the “C”?
- pinkmuffinere 2y ago
  It’s a fun fact that -40 c == -40 f, but if you leave off the units people who aren’t ‘in the know’ would be confused. Also they might (adversarially) wonder if the units are in a lesser known scale like rømer
  - pyuser583 2y ago
    I use nerdy in-jokes a bit too much.
    - pinkmuffinere 2y ago
      Sorry if I took your original comment too seriously — I do legitimately think it’s a fun fact! As penance, here’s a bonus fun fact: wtf is 0F???? It’s the temperature saturated brine freezes at! (It’s very close but not exact, because Mr Fahrenheit wasn’t perfect)
- yard2010 2y ago
  I for one have no idea how much is -40f, is it colder or hotter than -40c? I do remember -32 or something is the same?
andriamanitra 2y ago
-40°C is extremely rare in Southern Finland where most people live. In Helsinki the average temperature is about -6°C in the coldest months of the year, and at worst it might drop down to around -15 to -25°C (depending on the year).

andrewla 2y ago

Without digging too deep into the nature of the statistics they use, I'm a little skeptical of this. The transition to using the word "homeless" has resulted in transforming something we can't easily measure -- "drug addicted or mentally ill people being a public menace" -- into something that we can measure -- "people without a good living arrangement". Sure, the latter is important in a lot of ways too. And there housing is a tolerable solution. But the former is the actual problem that we care about. It's nearly impossible to measure. It's nearly impossible to fix. The horrors of involuntary commitment vs. the horrors of not having involuntary commitment vs. the horrors of using the criminal justice system vs. the horrors of not using the criminal justice system. The fact is that we have no real model for treatment of severely mentally ill people. We have a number of effective drugs, but they rapidly become ineffective if not taken. Our ability to treat or "cure" people in these conditions is essentially non-existent. The question I would ask of Finland before considering this data or analysis to be interesting is what is their state of involuntary indefinite commitment.

wesselbindt 2y ago
Have you ever considered that it may be the other way around? That the horrors of living on the street (and "horrors" is an appropriate term here, you are fighting for survival every day; it is beyond the realm of comprehension of the housed) might be causing the mental illness and drug use, rather than the other way around? If I want to get a homeless person off of drugs, it sure as crisps is not going to happen until they have a roof over their head. The core issue is the lack of affordable housing. That should be priority number 1.
- mmooss 2y ago
  In fact, that's one thing the article talks about. Finland's successful plan focuses on 'housing first'. "Finland’s success is not a matter of luck or the outcome of “quick fixes.” Rather, it is the result of a sustained, well-resourced national strategy, driven by a “Housing First” approach, which provides people experiencing homelessness with immediate, independent, permanent housing, rather than temporary accommodation (OECD, 2020)"
- 2y ago

cousin_it 2y ago

I think governments should offer free housing to everyone who asks, in their city of choice. "But why should taxpayers pay for that? It's expensive!" Yes, it would be very expensive. But you know what's even more expensive? The sum of everybody's lowered wages, bad bosses, fear for the future, fear of having kids and so on, due to the threat of homelessness. Yes, building housing is expensive, but the removal of fear will pay for it many times over.

skirge 2y ago
Everyone wants to live in the centre of Helsinki, because why not?
- cousin_it 2y ago
  I'm not saying give everyone the nicest center flat. Let's say an acceptable commute distance away, up to 30min by public transport.
  - skirge 2y ago
    Why not? Am I worse than others?
    - cousin_it 2y ago
      Yes, or just unlucky. The goal of my proposal is not to create equality, but to establish a minimum below which people cannot fall.
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Who gets to determine the minimum threshold? And how will they enforce it?
        titaniumtown 2y ago
        The government and laws?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

cryptozeus 2y ago

Seeing comments from few homeless folks here, I wish you good luck and hope your situation changes. I have a very different image in mind when it comes to homeless people and having to live on roadside let alone afford a phone and time to comment on hacker news.

daemonologist 2y ago
Phones are pretty cheap, and probably essential for finding work and staying in contact with family/other resources, and I imagine a homeless person has time more than anything else. I'm also a bit surprised at first when I see a post from someone is such a different economic situation here on HN but logically it makes sense. (I recall seeing an engineer in Palestine post in a recent Who wants to be hired? and I tread similar thoughts.)

verteu 2y ago

They also do a lot of compulsory psychiatric detention: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychiatric-bulletin/article/compulsory-psychiatric-detention-and-treatment-in-finland/4757FEDD5BB56849744DDE76A7FEBBE1 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychiatric-bulletin... > Finnish mental health legislation takes a medical approach to compulsory measures, emphasising the need for treatment of psychiatric patients over civil liberties concerns... Finland has the highest rates of detention per 100 000 inhabitants, about 214 compared with 93 in the UK and 11 in Italy. > If at the end of the 3-month period it is considered likely that detention criteria are still fulfilled, new recommendations MII and MIII are filed and the renewed detention is then valid for 6 months. However, this second period of detention has to be immediately confirmed by a local administrative court. edit: I should mention that I've seen fairly convincing cross-sectional evidence that homelessness is more related to the housing market than mental illness: https://www.ucpress.edu/books/homelessness-is-a-housing-problem/epub-pdf https://www.ucpress.edu/books/homelessness-is-a-housing-prob... , https://www.nahro.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/NAHRO-Summit_080222-Greg.pdf https://www.nahro.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/NAHRO-Summi...

timewizard 2y ago
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" does not automatically mean "good, moral, and upstanding lifestyle." To the extent that people have a natural right to exist and society does not I think it should be contingent on administrators to prove the standard they're applying is actually reasonable and non discriminatory.
- ty6853 2y ago
  The standard ought to be they have or imminently are going to harm others. Like actually harm a real victim, criminally by violence or taking property. If they want to live in a gutter worshipping lizard king, well, not everyone has the same idea of the pursuit of happiness.
  - lern_too_spel 2y ago
    As a society building a public space, do we not get a say in how it's used? If you cannot find a place to live without blocking a sidewalk, one will be provided for you. That place will not let you take hard drugs indefinitely.

black_13 2y ago

[dead]

INTPenis 2y ago

I'm proud of all the socialist policies here in Sweden, and our neighbors. But a lot of times these things are posted as comparisons with the US, and let's get real, there is no comparison. The United States as a country is vastly different from any nordic european country. So stop holding these countries with insignificant populations up as beacons of light. I think the problem with the US is very clear to me as an outsider observer. It's a vast country that is so big that technically it's still being colonized. And in order to speed up this process there is unchecked capitalism. And you can never rely on a benevolent billionaire to solve your problems. Only the government can be held responsible for its citizens.

CaptainFever 2y ago
In this case, does socialist mean "high amounts of government intervention" and capitalist mean "low amounts of government intervention"? I think it's important to be clear about such muddy terms.
- INTPenis 2y ago
  But that's also a simplification because it's a government that does anything it can to protect its citizens, to make sure that everyone gets an equal share. I took it for granted for most of my life, and I idolized the US for all their music and cultural output. Until social media brought me more and more real stories from real Americans and I realized how lucky I was to be born where I was born.

h_tbob 2y ago

My problem is this: Being homeless is not inherently wrong. But I feel when a society makes camping on common ground a crime - like native Americans did, it owes it to them to a) give them land to camp on or b) give them housing. It shouldn’t be a crime to sleep, ever. It horrifies me that the “conservative” Supreme Court could deny the most fundamental right to existence, literally jailing people for sleeping.

changoplatanero 2y ago
It's not going to stay common ground for very long if anyone can just set up camp there and claim it for themselves.
- Ylpertnodi 2y ago
  I agree with, but maybe someone, or a group of people, could make a legally-defined difference between 'sleeping', and 'camping'. Perhaps they could start by using different words, plainly understood by most - or, easily researched, for each of the different (perhaps) activities.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
itake 2y ago
I don't think people would mind if it was _just_ camping that they were doing..

sylware 2y ago

Wait, in finland, homeless means death most of the time. This is creepy.

lifestyleguru 2y ago
This is similar problem to "the more suicides we have the less suicides there will be".
smcl 2y ago
Alright what are the odds that Finland’s famous and much lauded approach to reducing homelessness was actually nonsense, and you’re the first person to tell the truth: that it’s actually because the homeless all just froze to death? That’d mean every news outlet has somehow ignored it, there are no whistleblowers and nobody else has bothered to look at any data on it.
- lifestyleguru 2y ago
  If life taught me something, it's that the brutal answer is usually the right one. The world somehow undeservedly give enormous credit to the social systems of Nordic countries. Simply look at the numbers. Finland for a country larger than Poland and UK has only 5m inhabitants. Another "fun fact" - Sweden has worse wealth inequality than Russia.
  - sylware 2y ago
    As far I understand things, due to the weather and climate over there, anybody not in a seriously built home properly connected to utility networks is literaly dead. And those home must be properly maintained, not to mention they must have some empty spares, which must stay empty but ready, in case some nasty big local event does happen. In other words, you better be welcomed over there, or you'll die, literaly. And with climate change, I wonder if the current weather computer simulations on the new climate we are creating will generate extreme cold events in more southern countries, long enough event to kill many homeless if not all.
  - smcl 2y ago

kazinator 2y ago

Almost nothing from mainland Europe, Scandinavia, Japan and other places (often, even Canada!) is transplantable to the USA. Yet these articles keep cropping up. > national strategy, driven by a “Housing First” approach, which provides people experiencing homelessness with immediate, independent, permanent housing, rather than temporary accommodation Homeless --- pardon me, unhoused --- from America, would trash that shit faster than you can "vodka, tar and sauna".

tlogan 2y ago

I wanted to point out that the approach adopted by Finland may not be suitable for the United States. Finland has a population of only 5.6 million—less than two-thirds of the Bay Area—so their solutions, unfortunately, may not scale effectively in a larger, more complex environment. The other - even more important issue with all these approaches, however, lies in treating all homeless individuals as a single category. This is a common flaw in most homelessness strategies. In reality, there are at least 5 to 10 broad categories—such as former convicts, individuals with substance abuse issues, those with mental health challenges, people who lost jobs or income, refugees, and more. Each of these groups requires a unique approach tailored to their specific circumstances. A one-size-fits-all solution simply doesn’t work. That said, simplifying the issue makes for great marketing, which is why we often see oversimplified strategies being proposed and success reported (as in this report). Unfortunately, this also means we’re unlikely to solve the homelessness crisis in the U.S. anytime soon.

epistasis 2y ago
Why would they not scale? We have more people, more capacity to build, and greater opportunities for economies of scale. Every homeless person, regardless of mental state, still needs housing. It is the one unifying aspect of homelessness.
- tlogan 2y ago
  > Why would they not scale? Due to the complexity and diversity in economic, cultural, and social value networks. For example, the approach which is working for Modesto will probably not work for San Francisco.
  - epistasis 2y ago
    That has less to do with the size of the US but everything to do with the lack of size in the US. We make it impossible to do things by making each city small independent, and having a lack of unity. Our government is not more complex than Finland's because we have more people, it's because we chose to make it inefficient and complex. Removing local cities' power to be different for the sake of complexity would solve the issue quickly. If the Bay Area had a regional government rather than tiny fiefdoms devoted to allowing wealthy people to extract the maximum economic value from shared business interests, while willing away their own tax dollars in tiny enclaves that are protected by minimum lot sizes and apartment bans, not only would we have far less homelessness to begin with, but we could solve the leftover homelessness much better, refuse crime and poverty, and have a far better functioning society.

jameson 2y ago

I wish US implement a similar system but I wonder how its going to work when housing prices are astonomical especially in the Bay Area Getting paid 250k/yr with 20% downpayment isn't enough to afford a house with 2 kids, so providing a "free" or "afforable" housing to those who aren't currently employees is only going to upset those who are working hard IMO govn't need to relax the regulation to build more houses and drive the cost down I completely agree with Finland's approach though. Permanent housing is the minimal requirement to reduce homelessness. Without placed to stay, mailing address, security, it's difficult to get out of homelessness

dragonwriter 2y ago
A key to this strategy is building sufficient numbers of housing units; if you split these between units to be offered in the market (prevention) and units dedicated to permanent housing of the currently unhoused (cure) you bring down costs for people with income seeking housing in the market while providing immediate (as the units become ready, obviously there is a lag from adopting the approach as policy unless you have vacant capacity that can be instantly repurposed) assistance to those who even with greater supply are not inmediately able to make market rents. You can't execute a Housing First strategy effectively without adequate housing supply, which is the most fundamental problem in a number of locales, including the Bay Area. But additional market supply alone is not sufficient to address the urgent homelessness problem. > IMO govn't need to relax the regulation to build more houses and drive the cost down That absolutely needs to happen, and that helps with prevention, but except for the fairly-well-employed homeless (a group that actually exists and is often ignored, but isn't a big part of the homeless problem), adding new market rate supply alone does not provide significant assistance to the currently homeless.

basicwolf 2y ago

A great video from Invisible People on the topic: "Finland Solved Homelessness: Here's How (Spoiler: It's More Than Housing First)" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jt_6PBnCJE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jt_6PBnCJE

anovikov 2y ago

Easy to see how trying this in the U.S. will turn into a dystopia. It requires a society with much fewer avenues to wealth, the wealth being a lot less normalised, than America.

pavlov 2y ago

So many people in these comments are arguing some form of: “Let’s first figure out if the homelessness is actually the person’s own fault. If we can really be confident that they’re repentant and sober, then we should perhaps consider helping them find housing.” This is the approach that Finland had in the 1950s! And it didn’t work. Hundreds of young WWII veterans were dying under the bridges after years in the streets drinking illegal booze (and many also abusing stronger substances, since e.g. amphetamine was given to soldiers during the war). Post-war Finland was not some socialist wonderland but a hard, poor, unforgiving place. Finland’s U-turn on treating homelessness came after the dismal failure that left so many of these deeply traumatized men and women to die. For the past decades, the policy has been to try to get everyone off the streets into safe and private housing, and then sort out the rest. And the numbers show it has worked. Many of America’s homeless are also war veterans, just like 1950s Finland. They deserve better.

itake 2y ago
you're not wrong, but I think the underlying premise is: "We have limited resources. Lets identify the most impactful places for our $$." Presumably, people with social disorders will be much more expensive to house than someone that is more recently functioning in our society.

onecondom 2y ago

[dead]

asdf6969 2y ago

There is no solution because most chronically homeless prefer that lifestyle. I know I would if I was homeless. Living in a tent, hanging out with friends, and drinking beer in the park. In good weather and with access to food it’s not so bad. Remember that not everyone has good opportunities. If my other choice was working a dehumanizing job to afford a tiny room with several roommates and no leftover money.. can’t really blame them for not wanting help.