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

251–260 of 320 posts

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#251

Post by throw-far-away »

frk1206 wrote: post #116
ryanmercer wrote: post #22

>You can start by not judging the homeless. Instead of flying out the gate accusing people of judging homeless, consider this: Not everywhere is like San Francisco where you have actual homeless people living in tent/tarp hovels on sidewalks in busy neighborhoods, come to downtown Indy and many of the 'homeless' people you find randomly around are absolutely not homeless and simply know they can make much easier mone…

I was born/raised in a poor-ish place in south asia and you are generally trained by your parents to believe that most of the homeless/panhandlers are 'fakers'. This myth was quickly destroyed once I spoke to like 5 of them including some people that worked for me who panhandled in their free time (even when they had a job!). They would quickly lay the math out for you and it becomes clear very quickly that these fol…

It's a pervasive cardinal sin for "working really hard yet still poor" people to hate on homeless people: to say they're faking, using drugs, crazy, lazy, etc. It's mean and evil, but unfortunately very common.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#252

Post by scabarott »

ryanmercer wrote: post #131
scabarott wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy smoke, talk about reinforcing stereotypes about Indiana

> talk about reinforcing stereotypes about Indiana Because I think the author is unfairly JUDGING people claiming they're 'judging' homeless people? I imagine most of the population of the United States has never had an interaction with someone they would describe as homeless. Not everyone is judging people for being homeless, most just don't have context for actual homelesness. The bulk of their encounters are peopl…

>What I'm saying in this thread is, the author seems to be incredibly myopic using his own limited experience as a way to judge others for judging.

This is quite a judgemental statement to make about someone who says he's been homeless for almost 20 years from someone who (I assume) has not been homeless before. Do you have less limited experience to make you less myopic? Also except we're reading different articles I don't know what you're talking about when you say the author is 'judging'. The article says homeless people don't always live on the street, have no education, do drugs or have no jobs, and you say "don't be judgemental, that's myopic". Does that really make any sense to you?

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#253

Post by mullingitover »

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…

> Homelessness != Substance Use Disorder

An officer of the Commissioned Corps of the Public Health Service told me that in the greater Boston area, he estimates ~90% of the homeless population has a substance use disorder. I agree that not all homeless are in their condition because of substance use disorders, but I suspect it's a clear majority who are in this condition.

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

Everyone, really? That's a bold claim, where is the evidence?

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#254

Post by dragonwriter »

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…

> Homelessness != Substance Use Disorder

True, but a very large portion of the homeledd population has such a disorder, and an overlapping very large portion has at least one mental health disorder; they are deeply intertwined problems.

> The reality is that people want to receive treatment

The reality is that they often don't.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#255

Post by kakarot »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #222
marnett wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's discriminatory against the poor, not the homeless

I've been poor most of my life. It's not discriminatory against the poor at all. I lived in a van with my wife, and we didn't steal. There were people in the parks that would steal, and the police would come after them, not us. I speak from life experience. You are helping spread a deadly lie. I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. Go be genuinely poor, it's really easy to do. Just use a tiny amount of money to live o…

I've been extremely poor most of my life. I've been homeless. And neither of our personal anecdotes have any bearing on the reason why the drug war began.

I suggest checking out The Emperor Wears No Clothes for a background behind the start of drug prohibition as a new way to discriminate and make use of bolstered police forces after the failure of alcohol prohibition, as well as prevent the disruption of several entrenched industries.

It's a short read, extremely informative, and it's available freely online here: https://jackherer.com/emperor-3/

> Go be genuinely poor, it's really easy to do. Just use a tiny amount of money to live off of. And see if it causes you to commit crimes.

That's not the correct way to look at it.

We are artificially creating crimes from things which shouldn't be illegal and which infringe upon basic freedoms, and then creating the conditions that lead to people committing those "crimes".

"Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime," as Beria says. The Drug War is a tool to, among other things, benefit the new tax-supported slave trade disguised as a private industrial prison system. Affluent citizens are usually able to circumvent the system, as designed, and thus these laws are able to discriminate against the poor while seeming "fair".

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#256

Post by toasterlovin »

Nomentatus wrote: post #245
toasterlovin wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a preferred term for the people I am trying to refer to? Specifically, the people who live in public spaces and visit mayhem upon the surrounding community? I am asking honestly. Such a term would be very useful in furthering the discussion around the “homeless”. That was my intention in using the term “street people”. Also, “street people” is a class that is defined by behavior. They are people who live…

Just say "some of." Location isn't behavior and certainly isn't objectionable be itself, nor were you making that objection. At this point at least one of us is cavilling, so I won't reply further.

JFC. In my original post, I was specifically pointing out that people mostly have a problem with behavior and, specifically, behavior other than merely taking shelter in a tent in a public space (aka their location).

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#257

Post by kakarot »

lliamander wrote: post #244
bllguo wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be taking this personally. I don't see how your personal experiences address the claim that the poor are disproportionately inclined to commit petty crimes

I don't think he's disputing that crime and poverty are correlated. I think he's disputing both the idea that poverty causes crime and the idea that cracking down on petty crime hurts the poor. There are many people who are poor due to unfortunate circumstances, but more than likely, if a poor person commits crimes, it has less to do with their poverty and more to do with other factors that caused both their poverty…

You're telling me that if I was rich I would still have risked my freedom to steal food from the supermarket during the time when I was homeless and extremely sick and unable to work?

And conversely, that I should have just starved instead of stealing food in order to maintain my moral standing? That is arguably an illogical position.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#258

Post by kakarot »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #249
lliamander wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he's disputing that crime and poverty are correlated. I think he's disputing both the idea that poverty causes crime and the idea that cracking down on petty crime hurts the poor. There are many people who are poor due to unfortunate circumstances, but more than likely, if a poor person commits crimes, it has less to do with their poverty and more to do with other factors that caused both their poverty…

I would add that sometimes, getting really in trouble is what helps some younger people straighten up in life. It's a disservice to the poor to ignore their crimes against others.

It's a disservice to the poor to allow them to become unfairly entrenched in the legal system. No one is ignoring crimes wholesale. This argument is about which of these "crimes" are legitimate and which aren't.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#259

Post by smileysteve »

rbanffy wrote: post #220
smileysteve wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of a fine for doing something illegal is supposed to be corrective. If a person can not pay the fine, if they're not further inconvenienced by being arrested and sent to hours until jail; the effective corrective action is being applied to the judge, police; They can arrest the same homeless, mentally ill, drug addicted person each day; or put them in prison where they don't belong -- or they can fine/arr…

It's a good point. Punishment in the form of losing something does not work on someone who lost everything.

You're correct. deterrent is the correct word.

Re: I Used to Be Homeless

#260

Post by jawnv6 »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #233
jawnv6 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 shar…

A vital figure is missing from the article, how many people are actually being housed with that budget? If it's 10k people, that is $16,500 per person (ignoring administrative costs). So that is pretty damn effective budgeting. (roughly) But, it's 1k people that is $165,000 a person, which is piss poor. So just shouting down someone else that is missing a few numbers is pointless without all the numbers. You may end…

I'm sorry, taking a budget for homeless and homeless assistance and dividing by point-in-time count is destined for asinine useless territory no matter what information I lack. 50% of the budget is housing assistance. 10% is eviction prevention. 20% is medical care. So just napkin math and 2/3rds of the 77k/y figure is for folks outside the point-in-time count. His "sentiment" is wholly based in steadfast ignorance over what those numbers pay for. Pretending to have a firm enough grasp to _direct_ future spending when whiffing on those basics isn't as endearing as you'd think.

I'm thrilled by the success of the Navigation Centers pioneered by Ed Lee. But it's really, really hard to talk about those specifics with people who just want a numerator and denominator to talk about per-person abstract figures as if policy can drop out of an equation. This may shock the HN crowd, but I live in SF and have awareness of this issue not gleaned from the immediate article.

If you're going to baselessly insinuate that "rich landowners" are pocketing funds, I'd appreciate if you could name the organization you suspect? Hamilton Families? Community Housing Partnership? C'mon, lets rat out those fat cats!

Post reply on HN