3 ms·

Your reply rubbed me the wrong way, as it implies that being poor, unemployed, or homeless are by definition failures. Perhaps you didn't intend that (or perhap

by jat850 11y ago

Your reply rubbed me the wrong way, as it implies that being poor, unemployed, or homeless are by definition failures. Perhaps you didn't intend that (or perhaps you do believe it). Not looking for a philosophical argument - just stating my opinion contrary to what yours comes across as.

viraptor 11y ago
How is being homeless not a failure on multiple levels? You can be poor by choice and happy with it, I agree. But is any sane person homeless by choice? Not traveling, hermit, not able to function in society, or many other cases. Just wanting to live somewhere and able to do work, but not having a home. To me that seems like a failure on multiple levels: country - global situation that allows people to be homeless, local - no community support or path to employment or investment into people, self - well... unless we give some income to everyone, and you can't claim benefits for not being able to work, you're expected to work for a place to live. Unemployed is an artifact of the economy. I'd like to be successful enough to be unemployed, but rich and not homeless.
- jat850 11y ago
  It is a failure on many levels - systematic ones, mostly. But if you read OP's post as not singling out the failure as being personally and solely responsible for their plight, rather than as a systematic failure, then we might simply differ on reading it. Donating money to combat homelessness at a systematic level is (in my opinion) probably a good thing. I just didn't get that sentiment in what I saw, though I allow for the (frequent and possible) chance that I am wrong in my interpretation.
- robotresearcher 11y ago
  Empathy failure. I hope if you ever screw up really badly there is someone else to give you a hand.
  - viraptor 11y ago
    This is exactly what I wrote. Not having a community-level support for cases of "you screwed up badly" is a failure. Same for no benefits when "life screws you up badly". Not sure where you see the empathy failure.
    - robotresearcher 11y ago
      Sorry - replied to wrong comment - should have been the top-level comment by ams6110. Absolutely not aimed at you.
zo1 11y ago
If one takes a very mechanical world-view, then yes, you could say that those properties are a signal of failure. Failure to plan, keep a job, save money, etc. Being very risk-averse myself, I would constitute all of the above under normal situations to be a failing on my part. Abnormal circumstances obviously change the dynamic a bit as they're almost always unavoidable. E.g. natural disasters, war, large-scale riots, etc.
- jat850 11y ago
  I agree that risk aversion, planning, and other factors are good preventative measures to avoiding homelessness. The contrary case I can think of is the child who is homeless because the parent is. I cannot rightfully view them as having failed.

by jat850 11y ago

viraptor 11y ago

How is being homeless not a failure on multiple levels? You can be poor by choice and happy with it, I agree. But is any sane person homeless by choice? Not traveling, hermit, not able to function in society, or many other cases. Just wanting to live somewhere and able to do work, but not having a home. To me that seems like a failure on multiple levels: country - global situation that allows people to be homeless, local - no community support or path to employment or investment into people, self - well... unless we give some income to everyone, and you can't claim benefits for not being able to work, you're expected to work for a place to live. Unemployed is an artifact of the economy. I'd like to be successful enough to be unemployed, but rich and not homeless.

jat850 11y ago
It is a failure on many levels - systematic ones, mostly. But if you read OP's post as not singling out the failure as being personally and solely responsible for their plight, rather than as a systematic failure, then we might simply differ on reading it. Donating money to combat homelessness at a systematic level is (in my opinion) probably a good thing. I just didn't get that sentiment in what I saw, though I allow for the (frequent and possible) chance that I am wrong in my interpretation.
robotresearcher 11y ago
Empathy failure. I hope if you ever screw up really badly there is someone else to give you a hand.
- viraptor 11y ago
  This is exactly what I wrote. Not having a community-level support for cases of "you screwed up badly" is a failure. Same for no benefits when "life screws you up badly". Not sure where you see the empathy failure.
  - robotresearcher 11y ago
    Sorry - replied to wrong comment - should have been the top-level comment by ams6110. Absolutely not aimed at you.

zo1 11y ago

If one takes a very mechanical world-view, then yes, you could say that those properties are a signal of failure. Failure to plan, keep a job, save money, etc. Being very risk-averse myself, I would constitute all of the above under normal situations to be a failing on my part. Abnormal circumstances obviously change the dynamic a bit as they're almost always unavoidable. E.g. natural disasters, war, large-scale riots, etc.

jat850 11y ago
I agree that risk aversion, planning, and other factors are good preventative measures to avoiding homelessness. The contrary case I can think of is the child who is homeless because the parent is. I cannot rightfully view them as having failed.