San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak • Hacker News Board

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#71

Post by FuriouslyAdrift » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 2:47 PM UTC

Mz wrote: post #10

ams6110 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true at all. These things are all provided. Welfare, public housing, food stamps, public education, Medicaid. That we still have a homeless problem indicates that the reason for long-term homelessness is something else.

There is a really huge shortage of genuinely affordable housing in the US. Public housing is generally pretty crappy and in short supply to boot. Having studied the problem in an actual college class and also spent the last 5.5 years on the street: It's complicated. But we need more solutions for people and fewer aimed at poor people specifically. Programs to help the poor are routinely craptastic. Affordable housing…

There are tons of Section 8 apartments in my city. While I work my butt off trying to make my rent and have leaky faucets and 50 yr old single pane windows, the section 8 across the street has new windows, min splits, and granite counter tops...

The landlord gets garaunteed income, huge waiting list of tenants, can VERY easily have them evicted for violations and actually get MORE than market rate brcause the govt pays better for the section 8.

It's driving up rents and drug related crime has already increased.

I'm currently looking at moving out of the city core and into a suburb.

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#72

Post by devmunchies » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 2:49 PM UTC

Frondo wrote: post #70

devmunchies wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that isn't achievable or sustainable in the US at a national level. The entire country Norway has a smaller population than the largest county in the US. Maybe the long term plan should be to give homeless people a one way ticket to Norway. (sarcasm)

Of course it's achievable, if you just look at the money. This is a vastly wealthy country, the money's there to provide for every social program imaginable. It's not culturally achievable because Americans buy into a just world fallacy for every social ill: all the wrongs in the U.S. are because whoever's suffering deserved it. For all the people who say capitalism is our national religion, I'd say this fallacy is o…

No, the American govt is too big and inefficient. That problems like this have never been solved by countries the size of the US is not a coincidence.

If power was transferred from the central govt to the states, then each state would be able to function like a small country and better manage local problems like homelessness much like Norway. Socialism nor capitalism function efficiently at this large of a scale.

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#73

Post by EGreg » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 2:53 PM UTC

paganel wrote: post #44

EGreg wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa whoa, who's talking about ending freedom of movement? To be clear we are talking about being eligible to receive free money from whichever local area agrees to issue it to you.

> we are talking about being eligible to receive free money from whichever local area agrees to issue it to you. This looks pretty similar to the English Poor Laws, which in the end proved to be quite despotic. It started like this, at the end of the 15h century: > In 1495, Parliament passed the Vagabonds and Beggars Act ordering that "vagabonds, idle and suspected persons shall be set in the stocks for three days an…

Once again, this is NOT about forcing anyone to do anything. This is about ELIGIBILITY FOR UNCONDITIONAL BASIC INCOME. You can move anywhere you want -- but you are not guaranteed benefits. Should be obvious!

If you don't allow communities to limit who can join, what is to prevent 50,000 people from various parts of California moving to Beverly Hills the next day and demanding enough UBI to live in a mansion and having private doctors?

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#74

Post by EdSharkey » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 3:19 PM UTC

Make living on the street a crime, take away people's freedom. Get them on a path back into society by placing them in work camps and reform them. Or, if they're mentally ill, properly hospitalize and care for them.

If you do this, the looming public health crisis can be averted. Otherwise, plague.

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#75

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 3:31 PM UTC

EGreg wrote: post #73

paganel wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we are talking about being eligible to receive free money from whichever local area agrees to issue it to you. This looks pretty similar to the English Poor Laws, which in the end proved to be quite despotic. It started like this, at the end of the 15h century: > In 1495, Parliament passed the Vagabonds and Beggars Act ordering that "vagabonds, idle and suspected persons shall be set in the stocks for three days an…

Once again, this is NOT about forcing anyone to do anything. This is about ELIGIBILITY FOR UNCONDITIONAL BASIC INCOME. You can move anywhere you want -- but you are not guaranteed benefits. Should be obvious! If you don't allow communities to limit who can join, what is to prevent 50,000 people from various parts of California moving to Beverly Hills the next day and demanding enough UBI to live in a mansion and havi…

[deleted]

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#76

Post by Mz » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 3:39 PM UTC

FuriouslyAdrift wrote: post #71

Mz wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a really huge shortage of genuinely affordable housing in the US. Public housing is generally pretty crappy and in short supply to boot. Having studied the problem in an actual college class and also spent the last 5.5 years on the street: It's complicated. But we need more solutions for people and fewer aimed at poor people specifically. Programs to help the poor are routinely craptastic. Affordable housing…

There are tons of Section 8 apartments in my city. While I work my butt off trying to make my rent and have leaky faucets and 50 yr old single pane windows, the section 8 across the street has new windows, min splits, and granite counter tops... The landlord gets garaunteed income, huge waiting list of tenants, can VERY easily have them evicted for violations and actually get MORE than market rate brcause the govt pa…

To be clear, I am not for more Section 8 housing. I am for market based solutions.

In the 60s and 70s, we tore down around 80% of the SROs we had because the Baby Boomers came from an unprecedentedly well off, large middle class and did not need minimal housing of that sort. Boarding houses used to also be common. Now, most housing is designed with a nuclear family in mind and our default expectation is that single adults should get one or more roommates to make such housing work for them. There is far too little market based housing aimed at singletons and childless couples. Meanwhile, our demographics have changed and we have drastically more singletons, childless couples or single parents, drastically fewer nuclear families.

I want market based solutions, not more government interference of this sort. There are good things done by the government, but most programs to help the poor only entrench poverty and the problems that lead to it.

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#77

Post by pkaye » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 3:53 PM UTC

WillPostForFood wrote: post #31

laurencerowe wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same is said of San Francisco, but it's just not accurate: "The majority - 71 percent in the last count - became homeless while living in San Francisco." http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Questions-about-San-Franc... Despite being one of the richest places in the world, California does a terrible job at providing affordable housing and accessible mental health care for its residents. This lack of provision is a…

That question doesn't capture the full picture. A high school dropout who arrived in SF w/$250 dollars and lived in a SRO for a year could qualify as becoming homeless while living in SF. I'm looking for more recent numbers, but in the past the number of homeless in SF that had been there more than 5 years was ~33%. For a variety of reasons, SF attracts people living on the margin, and prone to fall into homelessness…

There is a homeless survey that SF does every few years which is comprehensive you can try searching for. In my recollection a majority of the homeless were longterm residents by any reasonable definition but I'm going off memory.

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#78

Post by marvin » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 4:18 PM UTC

Shivetya wrote: post #65

marvin wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Norway has practically zero homelessness, since everyone who are incapable of providing for themselves are paid a living wage by the state (and are also provided free housing). There are probably a few people who fall between the cracks in the system, e.g. illegal immigrants who are on the run from the authorities or people who are mentally ill and actively resist medical care or help from the government. But there a…

practically zero is 1.4 per 1000, the US is only at 1.7 per 1000. Norway might be able to lay claim to practically zero because the nations population is so small. A smaller number does not indicate it is solved, the per 1000 is the number to watch. the majority of conditions you give for people falling through the cracks applies to the vast majority of Western countries. The world has a need to better mental health…

It's not quite as simple as "persons per 1000 without a fixed address". _Yes_, strictly speaking this is the definition of homelessness (and this number was indeed around 1.2 at the last count in Norway), but the debate is in reality about the misery of the poorest in society.

No one will debate that a person without a fixed domicile that receives $800/month[0] by the state and is regularly encouraged to seek free mental health care, is much better off than someone that receives no financial aid and is forced to beg or eat trash in order to stay alive.

The situation with begging in Norway is complex and not a direct proxy for extreme poverty[1]. Do agree that better mental health treatment is required in large parts of the world, and that homelessness and poverty are complex and cannot be solved by simply paying someone to fix things.

What I was trying to say was that it is a problem that can to a large extent be mitigated, if there is a cultural will to do it. It is by no means a phenomenon that will always be unacceptably bad if some moderate measures are taken to alleviate it.

[0]: https://www.nav.no/no/NAV+og+samfunn/Kontakt+NAV/Utbetalinge...

[1]: https://tv.nrk.no/serie/brennpunkt/mddp11000617/18-04-2017, documentary following beggars in Bergen for two years. A large proportion is found to be part of specific human trafficking schemes.

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#79

Post by Animats » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 6:07 PM UTC

tallanvor wrote: post #54

Gustomaximus wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And remember Hep B is 2 shots several months apart.

4 shots. The first 3 given in one month intervals, and the 4th a year later.

Then you're done for maybe 25 years.

At one time, the US did mass inoculations in schools, using air injectors. Just lined everybody up and zapped them.

Re: San Diego Declares Health Emergency Amid Hepatitis A Outbreak

#80

Post by paganel » Mon, Sep 04, 2017, 7:08 PM UTC

EGreg wrote: post #73

paganel wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we are talking about being eligible to receive free money from whichever local area agrees to issue it to you. This looks pretty similar to the English Poor Laws, which in the end proved to be quite despotic. It started like this, at the end of the 15h century: > In 1495, Parliament passed the Vagabonds and Beggars Act ordering that "vagabonds, idle and suspected persons shall be set in the stocks for three days an…

Once again, this is NOT about forcing anyone to do anything. This is about ELIGIBILITY FOR UNCONDITIONAL BASIC INCOME. You can move anywhere you want -- but you are not guaranteed benefits. Should be obvious! If you don't allow communities to limit who can join, what is to prevent 50,000 people from various parts of California moving to Beverly Hills the next day and demanding enough UBI to live in a mansion and havi…

> You can move anywhere you want -- but you are not guaranteed benefits. Should be obvious!

You're not explicitly forbidding them to stay, you're doing that implicitly, by correlating their getting financial assistance with them remaining in a specific place. It's the same thing with saying "you're free to leave your job anytime you want!" when you're full of financial responsibilities (rent/mortgage, kids, older relatives you have to take of) which means that you are not in fact "free" to leave that job.

> If you don't allow communities to limit who can join, what is to prevent 50,000 people from various parts of California moving to Beverly Hills the next day and demanding enough UBI to live in a mansion and having private doctors?

The way I understand UBI (I may be wrong) is that whenever and especially if it would be implemented then exclusive places like Beverly Hills will have to go, i.e. the society would have to become more equal.