4 ms·

Honestly this isn't the right conversation to be having at all. In the United States, ~40% of the homeless are employed. A deeply non-trivial percent either ar

Honestly this isn't the right conversation to be having at all. In the United States, ~40% of the homeless are employed. A deeply non-trivial percent either are kids or have kids. Everyone should volunteer at a support center for homeless youth some time. Sure, there may be some kind of Pareto principal in play for the hardest 20% of cases to crack. Who cares? Let's eliminate 80% of the existing problem and worry about the rest when we get there. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the median HN reader has very little appreciation of the human reality of homelessness in the United States, and primarily see it through the lens of people at the extreme, visible margins. I know I used to until I got involved. edit: I mean all of this in a very boring, matter of fact way, not some kind of holier-than-thou virtue signaling way. The 80% problem of homelessness is a tractable economic problem. While it's true that the United States has an almost dizzying level of propaganda demonizing poor people, it's also true that real homelessness is hard to spot because people have a natural instinct to preserve their and their family's dignity. The first time I came to terms with this was coaching debate in highschool. I had a varsity debater who couldn't afford pants to meet the dress code. Incredibly bright, academically successful kid. His father was an unemployed teacher working menial jobs, his mother was taking care of three kids. They lived in a tent at campsites. I had absolutely no idea. We obviously bought him pants and paid all his travel/etc. fees (he'd been making excuses to not go to events requiring travel). That's a very boring, normal case. That family should have had a free or nearly free housing option. They did not. They still wouldn't.

cwmoore 2mo ago
And then there are people who aren't families, without the knack for conveying a moving story, or exceptionally good in every way but unfair circumstances. Many of these people, and not just the really, really bad nuisance ones people use as excuses to superiority, are literally slaves, performing the scarecrow work of deterrence as living examples, for "society", for no pay. I think this is an injustice, subverted by its own cruelty, and one of the more compelling arguments for UBI.
- jknoepfler 2mo ago
  That's the plain truth, and I think it's unfortunate that we need to use sympathetic examples as a bridge. I guess I've accepted the premise that the privileged gestalt is profoundly distorted and that "charismatic macrofauna" are a necessary ladder to be kicked away. The example is true, but to your point, isn't representative... and that doesn't matter.
californical 2mo ago
To be clear, I agree with you. I was making a point to the person that I replied to who wanted zero homeless people. My point was that there is a bottom some-percent of homeless people that can’t immediately be helped. But yeah I think I made my point clear in the second paragraph that we need the resources to provide housing and basic necessities for the majority of homeless people who are able to receive it, though I probably should’ve clarified that those benefits should be tiered and someone who just goes through a terrible point in life and is otherwise in a reasonably healthy place should have easy access to something decent.

cwmoore 2mo ago

And then there are people who aren't families, without the knack for conveying a moving story, or exceptionally good in every way but unfair circumstances. Many of these people, and not just the really, really bad nuisance ones people use as excuses to superiority, are literally slaves, performing the scarecrow work of deterrence as living examples, for "society", for no pay. I think this is an injustice, subverted by its own cruelty, and one of the more compelling arguments for UBI.

jknoepfler 2mo ago
That's the plain truth, and I think it's unfortunate that we need to use sympathetic examples as a bridge. I guess I've accepted the premise that the privileged gestalt is profoundly distorted and that "charismatic macrofauna" are a necessary ladder to be kicked away. The example is true, but to your point, isn't representative... and that doesn't matter.

californical 2mo ago

To be clear, I agree with you. I was making a point to the person that I replied to who wanted zero homeless people. My point was that there is a bottom some-percent of homeless people that can’t immediately be helped. But yeah I think I made my point clear in the second paragraph that we need the resources to provide housing and basic necessities for the majority of homeless people who are able to receive it, though I probably should’ve clarified that those benefits should be tiered and someone who just goes through a terrible point in life and is otherwise in a reasonably healthy place should have easy access to something decent.