Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Used to Be Homeless

yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 320 posts

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#171

Post by dredmorbius »

canhascodez wrote: post #127
twblalock wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Markets are not a solution for all problems: market failures are quite real, and no, they are not all caused by government. This particular market failure is definitely caused by government.

Homelessness never existed before government regulations?

Not answering your question directly, but the homeless crisis in the US seems to have hit the radar in the early 1980s.

Part of that may be changing terminology -- earlier use of "homeless" tends to focus on "people made homeless" (or "... left ...") after some calamity: structure fire, flood, hurricane, etc. In the 1980s "homeless" became a chronic condition. Other terms may have existed for the long-term unhoused. I'm not aware of them.

What specifically changed, I'm not certain, though circumstances leading to the role of real estate as an asset rather than a utility may be part of that.

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=homeless%2C%20...

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#172

Post by seanmcdirmid »

badpun wrote: post #165
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How big is a Tokyo 1 bedroom renting for $500/month? Are you sure it isn’t a < 50sqm micro-studio with shared bathrooms?

> Ah, the spoiled Americans. Here in Poland I live in a 1br appartment (two rooms, kitchen, bathroom) that's 37 sqm. Perfect for one person, livable for two or even two and a child.

I lived in something that small in Switzerland. They even had immigrant families sharing that space. My only point was that we should compare apples to apples, not oranges.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#173

Post by conanbatt »

megaman8 wrote: post #160
alistairSH wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even losing half the bureaucracy, that leaves 35k/year for actual aid. Toss half of that at misc care and other programs. 17.5/year left for housing. Not much, but should still be enough for group home type arrangements. Or, at least I would hope so. I've never been involved in these programs on either side, but it's amazing that $70k/year might not be enough to house somebody.

1/2 for bureacrazy? that sounds like a lot for just overhead

Well, whatever money you spend to provide a service goes straight into someones pocket first, before a homeless person gets anything in return.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#174

Post by chaostheory »

TallGuyShort wrote: post #76

Question for the author or anyone else with similar background: I've previously done a lot of work with homeless and poverty-stricken people, and one of my biggest remaining difficulties is people who won't accept help, or are offended when people only do little things to help. Part of that certainly could come from any drug or mental issue that contributed to their homelessness in the first place, but I'm sure it's…

I was homeless for less than a year. In my experience, it was easy to meet basic needs when you have friends, government programs, and non-profits i.e. strangers will not realize that you are homeless. It wasn't pleasant, but it was also not impossible to no longer be homeless relatively quickly due to the same sources of help. Past research backs up my experience. Most homeless people (approx 80-90% of the homeless population) are only homeless on average for 4-8 months. Depending on the study, only 10-20% of the homeless population is chronically homeless. In the majority of cases, the underlying issue is either mental illness, drug abuse, or a combination of both. imo chronic homelessness will be extremely hard to solve unless the federal government steps in because the states just play "hot potato" with the chronically homeless, shipping them away to another state or even country, instead of trying to address the root of the problem

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/...

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#175

Post by dredmorbius »

virmundi wrote: post #78
codydh wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of your "regulation free zone" will likely be measured in human lives. Does that seem like an acceptable risk?

Ah, the “you just want people to die” argument. I wondered when that would show up. How about a largely deregulated area where you can mix housing and business zoning. Like we use to with downtowns. At the same time get rid of the caps on building height. Tokyo has tall buildings and earthquakes. Allow SF to modernize. A 60 story apartment building neutralize the cost of the property. Another option is to make SF a s…

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#176

Post by seanmcdirmid »

jaredklewis wrote: post #133
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How big is a Tokyo 1 bedroom renting for $500/month? Are you sure it isn’t a < 50sqm micro-studio with shared bathrooms?

Re the $500 per month friend; 1 kitchen/dining, bathroom, 1 separate bedroom, no living room. So nothing shared. Not sure the exact square meters, but it is very small. The secret to the cheap price is simple: the building was built in the 1970s (ancient by Tokyo standards). Edit: no need to take my word for it. A quick search on suumo.jp will show the abundance of Tokyo apartments available for under $900 (~¥100k).…

I’ve seen some pretty shabby housing in Japan. Some lacked indoor heating even (well, Japan did invent the kotatsu for a reason). I don’t think it is very comparable to housing in say Sam Francisco. They get affordability through various means that wouldn’t be allowed in the states.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#177

Post by wjossey »

nyghtly wrote: post #71
wjossey wrote: post #25

I live in Central LA (near LACMA / La Brea Tar Pits), and share my neighborhood with dozens of homeless. Most of the homeless in my area are what I would deem "regulars", as they tend to sleep / hang out in the same spots day in and day out. I can't tell you how they landed in the situation they are in, but I can safely say that 9/10 appear (and I'm not a doctor, so I can't obviously say for certain) to have at minim…

Homelessness != Substance Use Disorder Moreover, why does treatment have to come at the expense of self-determination? The reality is that people want to receive treatment--if they don't, it is because they encounter a barrier to treatment. Barriers to treatment include: lack of treatment facilities (hospitals do not count), poor quality of existing treatment facilities, unwillingness of treatment facilities to take…

>The reality is that people want to receive treatment--if they don't, it is because they encounter a barrier to treatment.

While I agree that there are huge barriers to treatment, I'll respectfully disagree that people with substances abuse regularly want to receive treatment. Getting someone to just admit they have a substance abuse problem is remarkably challenging (the story of my father is just one of many in my family). Then, it's another hurdle to get them to recognize they can't do it on their own. Then, it's another hurdle to get them to stick with a program. Then, it's another hurdle to get them back into a program once they relapse.

So, I'm right there with you that we need to improve access dramatically. But, just improving access won't open the floodgates, sadly.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#178

Post by virmundi »

dredmorbius wrote: post #175
virmundi wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the “you just want people to die” argument. I wondered when that would show up. How about a largely deregulated area where you can mix housing and business zoning. Like we use to with downtowns. At the same time get rid of the caps on building height. Tokyo has tall buildings and earthquakes. Allow SF to modernize. A 60 story apartment building neutralize the cost of the property. Another option is to make SF a s…

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The OP literally made the argument that, in the extreme, people must have to die if regulations are relaxed. OP did not assume good faith. OP pushed the argument to the extreme. I responded by pointing out that out. I appreciate civility, but won’t assume good faith when the other participant has shown bad faith.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#179

Post by wjossey »

david-gpu wrote: post #43
wjossey wrote: post #25

I live in Central LA (near LACMA / La Brea Tar Pits), and share my neighborhood with dozens of homeless. Most of the homeless in my area are what I would deem "regulars", as they tend to sleep / hang out in the same spots day in and day out. I can't tell you how they landed in the situation they are in, but I can safely say that 9/10 appear (and I'm not a doctor, so I can't obviously say for certain) to have at minim…

Sorry for your loss and thank you for sharing your story.

Thank you, David! I know for many, there's a stigma and shame around substance abuse, particularly involving family members. My hope is that by sharing my story, others will feel more comfortable seeking help for themselves, or their family members, knowing that they aren't alone in what they are going through.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#180

Post by jawnv6 »

megaman8 wrote: post #79
closeparen wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may work when the concentration is low. I’d estimate 15-20 homeless people on the daily walk between my front door in SOMA and the Muni Metro. Often in relatively dense tent encampments. I’d feel pretty weird giving to one and not the others on the same block. Especially since it’s probably the same people day in and day out. It’d take some serious preparation before going out the door to pack enough for everyon…

SF just passed 300 million/year measure that's supposed to help the homeless and that's in addition to the 240 million/year of funding that's already there. Both of those combined exceeds the budgets of most cities. First I would say, let's figure out how to use that money so that it's actually working. 540 million/year is enough to give the 7000 homeless in SF 77,000$ per year. Let's put that to good use and make su…

Using the point-in-time count as a divisor for the entire budget is so ridiculously asinine I'm shocked so many folks are engaging with it in good faith. "Let's figure out how to use that money" might begin with understanding how it's already spent. Here's a more in depth article correcting this fallacy: http://beyondchron.org/sfs-homeless-spending-myth/

“Since the 1980’s, the media has created an impression—now shared by the public and some supervisors—that you can simply divide homeless spending ($165 million) by the homeless numbers (7000) and then give that amount of money (over $20,000 per homeless person) to get them off the streets. But most of SF’s “homeless budget” is spent on people already housed. The city is not spending $165 million on 7000 reported homeless, but on thousands more living in supportive permanent housing.” - same author, from 2014

This is dangerously ignorant analysis and I'd hope you would take some time to research where that money is spent before sharing your opinion again.

Post reply on HN