10 ms·

Places with good weather have huge visible homeless populations. (I have traveled all over the United States, and have been to all fifty states. AFTER EDIT: I h

Places with good weather have huge visible homeless populations. (I have traveled all over the United States, and have been to all fifty states. AFTER EDIT: I have been in, and have lived in, gritty "skid row" neighborhoods of large United States cities, and have lived in Los Angeles.) Places with lousy weather, like the place where I grew up and now live, certainly have people who are "homeless" in the sense of not having a secure legal right to occupy a particular place at their own discretion, but most people with that lack of legal right to choose their living circumstances are indoors during cold winter nights. There is much provision of emergency shelter in the United States, by both governmental organizations and private charities. There are also both federal and state programs for providing free or heavily subsidized leaseholds for housing to poor families, and private charities that build single-family homes for poor families. People are more visibly out on the street in the United States mostly on a regional or seasonal basis. Since quite a few of the comments here mention Europe, my question (as someone who has never been to any part of Europe) is where do people live in Europe if they have no personal funds to buy or rent housing? Do they live in housing operated by some unit of government, or where? All of the above said, yes, I am not sure that United States social policy is a model for anywhere, and perhaps hackers working on social policy here would be helpful. There are already enough empty housing units in the United States to house everyone who needs a house. The tough policy issues are in allocating people to houses (or houses to people) and looking out for other aspects of everyone's welfare.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
tobinfricke 14y ago
Having moved from the U.S. to northern Germany, I have to say: the difference is shocking. Here, mentally unstable homeless people are not a daily sight on the city streets. In fact, I have seen only one San Francisco-style lunatic: and he was, indeed, raving in English. Saying that "United States social policy is [not] a model for anywhere" must be an understatement. I would ask: what social policy? Any aid from the government ("welfare") is heavily stigmatized, except perhaps for retirees. From homelessness to health care to public transportation to to education to racial tension to gun violence, the U.S. appears a mockery of itself. Regarding the homelessness situation in California, I learned in school that it had something to do with Governor Ronald Reagan dismantling the state's mental health system. Have you seen skid row in Los Angeles? I can't imagine that such a scene exists anywhere in western Europe. This article looks relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_Stat...
- tokenadult 14y ago
  Having moved from the U.S. to northern Germany I'd really love to learn about what is actually done in Europe. Where is a "mentally unstable" person to be found in Germany? If a "San Francisco-style lunatic" (like the one you saw in public in Germany) is encountered out in public in Germany, where is he put? P.S. I have adequate reading knowledge of German to be able to read German-language links about what is done for such people in Germany, if anyone here has any such links to share.
  - tobinfricke 14y ago
    I'd guess that easy access to health care plays a big role. Regarding the raving lunatic: presumably it's not a matter of "where to put" him, but that, with access to care, fewer people end up in that situation. In that particular case, everyone just kind of steered clear of the guy and let him go about his (crazy) business. Bystanders appeared shocked and fearful of his behavior, which in San Francisco would have been completely mundane.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    England: If you're a danger to yourself or to other people there are various powers to detain you under section of the Mental Health Act. If you're in public a police officer will use a section 136 - that's to take you to a place of safety and have you assessed by doctors. If you're in a hospital nurses and doctors have powers to detain you for short times for you to be assessed. If you're in your home your "nearest relative" (that person is defined in law) can ask the community mental health to consider assessing you. They must consider your request, but they don't have to do an assessment. Or you can ask for an assessment. Or you could ask for a visit from your crisis[1] team, and they'll suggest an assessment. In general it is much better to be an informal patient (someone who goes into hospital voluntarily) rather than someone detained under section. In theory there should be a bunch of checks and measures. But, well, it's an imperfect world. If you are ever detained you should ask for the Code of Practice (they have to have a copy available for patients. They have to help you read it if you're having trouble reading) and for an advocate. (They must make advocacy available for you.) make a record of everything that is said to you. (http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Mental_Health_Act_1983_Code_Of_Practice_for_England http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Mental_Health_Act_1983_Code...) (http://www.mind.org.uk/mental_health_a-z/8052_mental_health_act http://www.mind.org.uk/mental_health_a-z/8052_mental_health_...)
onemorepassword 14y ago
There is no Europe. I can only speak for my country, the Netherlands, and there is no such thing as people not having the personal funds to buy or rent housing. That's why we have minimum wages, social security, rent subsidies and regulated rent. The homeless here are people mostly people with mental health issues that reject or don't respond to treatment. It's by far not a perfect utopian system, but to have people being homeless just because they can't afford it would be considered an unacceptable failure of a civilized society. Decent housing, like healthcare, is considered a human right, not something people have to be able to "afford".
- dominostars 14y ago
  > The homeless here are people mostly people with mental health issues that reject or don't respond to treatment. I would speculate that this is true for San Francisco, especially in the downtown (tenderloin) area.
  - pyoung 14y ago
    The lack of universal health care probably exacerbates the homelessness situation in the U.S. With that said, what you see in San Francisco is largely a product of the combination of homeless friendly policies and tolerable weather. Many of the 'homeless' you see during the day don't actually sleep on the street (although a decent number do) and actually reside in SRO's, subsidized housing, and shelters (One complaint I have heard about SF, you can only afford to live here if you are really rich, or if you are really poor). Fact is the homeless situation may be a bit ugly, but it exists everywhere, it just may not be as visible. At least in SF, it's harder to ignore.
    - LekkoscPiwa 14y ago
      European nations would not be able to afford universal healthcare and all the welfare if they had to pay for their security. US bases in Europe are great financial aid. I never hear discussions about Iran or Russia being a possible threat in Europe. I do in the US. Which is funny because it really is much bigger problem for Europeans to have guys like Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at their door steps. Never happens. The US bases and military spending is taken for granted. They prefer to talk about universal healthcare and help for the poor instead. As security is non-issue with the US soldiers deployed to this continent. The thing that really gets on my nerves is that some politicians even want the US bases to be moved out from Europe. They simply don't understand the world in which they are living. Talking distances Syria is closer to Greece than Greece to Germany. Nobody thinks about it that way though. The US pays the military bills for the whole of Europe and this amounts to money that can and is spent on social services.
rythie 14y ago
Europe isn't all the same. In the U.K. you get various benefits if you are unemployed and that includes accommodation normally - though there is a waiting list (and people with children are top of the list) and job seekers allowance. Health is free (NHS) for everyone it doesn't matter if you have a job are rich/poor, have a job etc. There are some people who are homeless - though it's not particularly common due to government support. [However, I don't claim to be an expert on benefits system here, as I've never used them - fortunately]
digitalWestie 14y ago
I think a few things mainly answer your question about Europe: - More social housing than the US - Higher minimum wages (so fewer homeless) - This is just a personal impression but Europeans are less mobile than Americans. Therefore there is more likely to be the family / friends safety net to catch you.
- tobinfricke 14y ago
  And health care that's not tied to your employer.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
DanBC 14y ago
> is where do people live in Europe if they have no personal funds to buy or rent housing? Do they live in housing operated by some unit of government, or where? The English benefit system is complex. Here's an attempt to describe some of it. We pay a national insurance. Some of our benefits are based on contributions you make. Other benefits are income related (means-tested.) If you have a mortgage and lose your job you get the interest on the mortgage paid, but not the capital. If you're renting there's something called the Local Housing Allowance - that's a list of property types (one room; one bed; two bed; etc) and maximum prices for those properties. You get all your rent if you're under the limit, but you have to pay anything over the limit yourself. Actually, it's a lot more complicated than that. You cannot be "over accommodated" (more on this later, with the 'bedroom tax'). You cannot have savings over a certain amount (£16,000?). It has to be a real rental situation; renting off family becomes tricky. There are rules about living with people as if you're married, etc. Housing benefit is paid by the local council, using money they get from central government. It's a horrifically inefficient system, and has a lot of fraud. Then there's "social housing". This is provided by companies providing it, or by local councils. Council houses tend to be high quality buildings in not-good areas. Rents are very cheap. There are very long waiting lists. Recently there's something people are calling the bedroom tax - if you're in a house that has extra bedrooms the rent for those rooms is not paid. This has always been the case with private renting. There's a bunch of reasons why this is horrible, and those exceptions should be baked into the new law. Some people need emergency accommodation. Local authorities should provide bread and breakfast accommodation, or hostel accommodation. There are pretty strict rules about what counts as "homeless". And if you're found to be 'intentionally homeless' it's going to be very hard to get help. Apologies for the garbled text. It is a complex, large, bit of law with many overlapping bits of legislation.
- porker 14y ago
  Thanks, that's the clearest explanation I've seen of our system. And what a mess it is! I am personally in favour of the bedroom tax, so it'd be good to hear why this is horrible (I'm sure there are edge cases I've not thought of). Completely agree about housing benefit being a horrifically inefficient system. I was talking to a person who deals with people on housing benefit yesterday, about the number who lie about not cohabiting (so they get higher payments for being 'single'). Not sure any way round that.
temphn 14y ago
Places with good weather have huge visible homeless populations Singapore has great weather and no visible homeless population. The government there generally keeps mentally ill people off the streets.
- bmmayer1 14y ago
  And one of the freest (read: least regulated) economies in the world. Makes you think.
run4yourlives 14y ago
One massive difference is healthcare.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

tobinfricke 14y ago

Having moved from the U.S. to northern Germany, I have to say: the difference is shocking. Here, mentally unstable homeless people are not a daily sight on the city streets. In fact, I have seen only one San Francisco-style lunatic: and he was, indeed, raving in English. Saying that "United States social policy is [not] a model for anywhere" must be an understatement. I would ask: what social policy? Any aid from the government ("welfare") is heavily stigmatized, except perhaps for retirees. From homelessness to health care to public transportation to to education to racial tension to gun violence, the U.S. appears a mockery of itself. Regarding the homelessness situation in California, I learned in school that it had something to do with Governor Ronald Reagan dismantling the state's mental health system. Have you seen skid row in Los Angeles? I can't imagine that such a scene exists anywhere in western Europe. This article looks relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_the_United_Stat...

tokenadult 14y ago
Having moved from the U.S. to northern Germany I'd really love to learn about what is actually done in Europe. Where is a "mentally unstable" person to be found in Germany? If a "San Francisco-style lunatic" (like the one you saw in public in Germany) is encountered out in public in Germany, where is he put? P.S. I have adequate reading knowledge of German to be able to read German-language links about what is done for such people in Germany, if anyone here has any such links to share.
- tobinfricke 14y ago
  I'd guess that easy access to health care plays a big role. Regarding the raving lunatic: presumably it's not a matter of "where to put" him, but that, with access to care, fewer people end up in that situation. In that particular case, everyone just kind of steered clear of the guy and let him go about his (crazy) business. Bystanders appeared shocked and fearful of his behavior, which in San Francisco would have been completely mundane.
- DanBC 14y ago
  England: If you're a danger to yourself or to other people there are various powers to detain you under section of the Mental Health Act. If you're in public a police officer will use a section 136 - that's to take you to a place of safety and have you assessed by doctors. If you're in a hospital nurses and doctors have powers to detain you for short times for you to be assessed. If you're in your home your "nearest relative" (that person is defined in law) can ask the community mental health to consider assessing you. They must consider your request, but they don't have to do an assessment. Or you can ask for an assessment. Or you could ask for a visit from your crisis[1] team, and they'll suggest an assessment. In general it is much better to be an informal patient (someone who goes into hospital voluntarily) rather than someone detained under section. In theory there should be a bunch of checks and measures. But, well, it's an imperfect world. If you are ever detained you should ask for the Code of Practice (they have to have a copy available for patients. They have to help you read it if you're having trouble reading) and for an advocate. (They must make advocacy available for you.) make a record of everything that is said to you. (http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Mental_Health_Act_1983_Code_Of_Practice_for_England http://www.mentalhealthlaw.co.uk/Mental_Health_Act_1983_Code...) (http://www.mind.org.uk/mental_health_a-z/8052_mental_health_act http://www.mind.org.uk/mental_health_a-z/8052_mental_health_...)

onemorepassword 14y ago

There is no Europe. I can only speak for my country, the Netherlands, and there is no such thing as people not having the personal funds to buy or rent housing. That's why we have minimum wages, social security, rent subsidies and regulated rent. The homeless here are people mostly people with mental health issues that reject or don't respond to treatment. It's by far not a perfect utopian system, but to have people being homeless just because they can't afford it would be considered an unacceptable failure of a civilized society. Decent housing, like healthcare, is considered a human right, not something people have to be able to "afford".

dominostars 14y ago
> The homeless here are people mostly people with mental health issues that reject or don't respond to treatment. I would speculate that this is true for San Francisco, especially in the downtown (tenderloin) area.
- pyoung 14y ago
  The lack of universal health care probably exacerbates the homelessness situation in the U.S. With that said, what you see in San Francisco is largely a product of the combination of homeless friendly policies and tolerable weather. Many of the 'homeless' you see during the day don't actually sleep on the street (although a decent number do) and actually reside in SRO's, subsidized housing, and shelters (One complaint I have heard about SF, you can only afford to live here if you are really rich, or if you are really poor). Fact is the homeless situation may be a bit ugly, but it exists everywhere, it just may not be as visible. At least in SF, it's harder to ignore.
  - LekkoscPiwa 14y ago
    European nations would not be able to afford universal healthcare and all the welfare if they had to pay for their security. US bases in Europe are great financial aid. I never hear discussions about Iran or Russia being a possible threat in Europe. I do in the US. Which is funny because it really is much bigger problem for Europeans to have guys like Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at their door steps. Never happens. The US bases and military spending is taken for granted. They prefer to talk about universal healthcare and help for the poor instead. As security is non-issue with the US soldiers deployed to this continent. The thing that really gets on my nerves is that some politicians even want the US bases to be moved out from Europe. They simply don't understand the world in which they are living. Talking distances Syria is closer to Greece than Greece to Germany. Nobody thinks about it that way though. The US pays the military bills for the whole of Europe and this amounts to money that can and is spent on social services.

rythie 14y ago

Europe isn't all the same. In the U.K. you get various benefits if you are unemployed and that includes accommodation normally - though there is a waiting list (and people with children are top of the list) and job seekers allowance. Health is free (NHS) for everyone it doesn't matter if you have a job are rich/poor, have a job etc. There are some people who are homeless - though it's not particularly common due to government support. [However, I don't claim to be an expert on benefits system here, as I've never used them - fortunately]

digitalWestie 14y ago

I think a few things mainly answer your question about Europe: - More social housing than the US - Higher minimum wages (so fewer homeless) - This is just a personal impression but Europeans are less mobile than Americans. Therefore there is more likely to be the family / friends safety net to catch you.

tobinfricke 14y ago
And health care that's not tied to your employer.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

DanBC 14y ago

> is where do people live in Europe if they have no personal funds to buy or rent housing? Do they live in housing operated by some unit of government, or where? The English benefit system is complex. Here's an attempt to describe some of it. We pay a national insurance. Some of our benefits are based on contributions you make. Other benefits are income related (means-tested.) If you have a mortgage and lose your job you get the interest on the mortgage paid, but not the capital. If you're renting there's something called the Local Housing Allowance - that's a list of property types (one room; one bed; two bed; etc) and maximum prices for those properties. You get all your rent if you're under the limit, but you have to pay anything over the limit yourself. Actually, it's a lot more complicated than that. You cannot be "over accommodated" (more on this later, with the 'bedroom tax'). You cannot have savings over a certain amount (£16,000?). It has to be a real rental situation; renting off family becomes tricky. There are rules about living with people as if you're married, etc. Housing benefit is paid by the local council, using money they get from central government. It's a horrifically inefficient system, and has a lot of fraud. Then there's "social housing". This is provided by companies providing it, or by local councils. Council houses tend to be high quality buildings in not-good areas. Rents are very cheap. There are very long waiting lists. Recently there's something people are calling the bedroom tax - if you're in a house that has extra bedrooms the rent for those rooms is not paid. This has always been the case with private renting. There's a bunch of reasons why this is horrible, and those exceptions should be baked into the new law. Some people need emergency accommodation. Local authorities should provide bread and breakfast accommodation, or hostel accommodation. There are pretty strict rules about what counts as "homeless". And if you're found to be 'intentionally homeless' it's going to be very hard to get help. Apologies for the garbled text. It is a complex, large, bit of law with many overlapping bits of legislation.

porker 14y ago
Thanks, that's the clearest explanation I've seen of our system. And what a mess it is! I am personally in favour of the bedroom tax, so it'd be good to hear why this is horrible (I'm sure there are edge cases I've not thought of). Completely agree about housing benefit being a horrifically inefficient system. I was talking to a person who deals with people on housing benefit yesterday, about the number who lie about not cohabiting (so they get higher payments for being 'single'). Not sure any way round that.

temphn 14y ago

Places with good weather have huge visible homeless populations Singapore has great weather and no visible homeless population. The government there generally keeps mentally ill people off the streets.

bmmayer1 14y ago
And one of the freest (read: least regulated) economies in the world. Makes you think.

run4yourlives 14y ago

One massive difference is healthcare.