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

The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 340 posts

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#301

Post by ryanwaggoner »

accelerateruina wrote: post #238

Homeless hacker chiming in. Throw away acct for pseudo anonymity. I been homeless in LA for 2 years now. Previously, I worked as a developer for 15 years. The closest I ever got to touching "success" was that one time standing before the porcelain King in the Men's Room right next to Bezos at Amazon. It's rather surreal to see where I am now and think that I once pissed into the same hole in the ground as the Richest…

Not going to lie, this was genuinely thought-provoking. I'm curious about a few things though:

1. The second part of your comment makes it sound like you're homeless by choice, but the beginning makes it sound like you've just fallen on some very rough times. I'd like to hear more about your story and how you came to be where you are.

2. The middle part of your comment about Trump and what comes next really does concern me. I think we're at a crossroads right now, but I'm a lot less convinced than you that we're going to go down the wrong road. If I look back at points in America's history like the Civil War, Great Depression, World War II, Vietnam, etc, this doesn't seem like we're at our most dysfunctional. We managed to pass through those eras without societal collapse. Doesn't mean we will this time, but what makes you so sure we won't?

3. The final couple paragraphs of your comment remind me of what I've read of stoicism. I commend you for realizing how little of our modern creature comforts are truly necessary, and being willing to honestly weigh them against their costs, both to you and to broader society. But you seem convinced that those who currently live a more "normal" existence will be paralyzed and helpless in the event of societal collapse. Why can't they adapt if you have?

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#302

Post by 6cd6beb »

hedvig wrote: post #292
ArchTypical wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is just provably false Utah is not an example that proves anything. It's a fairly unusual area when talking about this problem. Utah's entire population is less than Los Angeles. The claim that 91% of Utah's homeless population was abated is somewhat suspicious, given the remaining 14k would mean they had a previous 155k+ - which outstrips the homeless count of most major cities (including Los Angeles). This i…

Does it make sense that they get the same number of senate seats as California?

That's why we have the house of representatives.

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#303

Post by all2 »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #202
vikeri wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In comparison to SF/LA/NY etc. we have very few homeless people in Scandinavia. If I were to speculate then I think our extensive social security systems (free healthcare & education etc.) is the reason why. But then we all pay 30-55 % tax on our income to fund that social security.

People of Scandinavian descent in the US have much lower levels of homelessness as well, so I think it's far more likely a socio-cultural cause, rather than political.

You work hard, your family works hard, and you help people out. Its sort of unspoken, but I've seen it in action a few times.

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#304

Post by all2 »

thoughtexplorer wrote: post #230
cco wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Science and psychology, for example, are not political. Could you clarify? Do you mean to say that these fields of study don't yield results that have political implications? Or that these fields are impervious to political influence because...well I don't know, they aren't performed by humans?

I mean they aren't political by definition. They exist at a lower layer and are apolitical by default. They can be used or corrupted by politics - and are.

But people do science. We bring our bias, limited vision, and our politics and opinions.

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#305

Post by CryptoPunk »

AngryData wrote: post #87
exogeny wrote: post #2

I will go to my grave not understanding why this is so complex and difficult for people to understand and politicians to fix. Wages are stagnant, save for a handful of sectors, in which they're growing quickly. Housing prices are rising due to limited supply and backward policies towards new construction. Inequality therefore expands exponentially, creating a city of haves-and-have nots. Either reduce inequality thro…

Because then people would have to confront challenges to their highly propagandized views of economics and political standards. People would have to admit that the 'free market' isn't some catch-all solution to problems and that sometimes it is the cause of problems. They would have to admit capitalism itself isn't some naturally occurring and self-maintaining phenomenon and realize how easily it can be, and is, arbi…

What "free market" are you talking about? The US has been moving rapidly towards being a highly regulated social democracy over the last 50 years. Central economic planning by local, state and federal government has steadily replaced the right to private contract and property.

I recommend you look at the raw statistics on:

1. The absolute level of inflation adjusted social welfare spending per capita.

2. The percentage of GDP consumed by social welfare spending by the government.

3. The number of regulations in force.

Between 1960 and 2018.

It seems like the more social democracy fails, the more the alleged dominion of the free market is blamed. You would think from hearing all these laments about "neoliberalism" that we're in a free market paradise, when exactly the opposite is the case.

>>They would have to confront the idea that much of what they are told is highly influenced advertising and propaganda purposefully created to mislead them into one action or another.

You can start by taking your own advice.

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#306

Post by CryptoPunk »

cazum wrote: post #296
CryptoPunk wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>But the reality is that saying poor people should "just move someplace cheaper" is basically a classist assumption that lack of adequate income is the only thing that matters in their life and their life can be boiled down to that one detail and that one detail should be the sole deciding factor in all their life choices. You would never suggest such a thing for someone who wasn't destitute. Like the saying goes, b…

Your idea that these laborers are victims of "homeless crack addicts manipulatively employing the victim narrative" is such an extreme miscalculation that I wonder if you even looking at the data honestly. The amount of money that actually goes to homeless people is extremely low, and most of those meager funds are used to give them food and temporary shelter so they don't literally die outside. And even then, the am…

>>Your idea that these laborers are victims of "homeless crack addicts manipulatively employing the victim narrative" is such an extreme miscalculation that I wonder if you even looking at the data honestly.

I didn't say the homeless crack addicts are manipulatively employing the victim narrative. It's the taxpayer funded social support network around them that does that.

>>The amount of money that actually goes to homeless people is extremely low, and most of those meager funds are used to give them food and temporary shelter so they don't literally die outside.

Social housing and shelters are extremely expensive. All the federal assistance programs like Social Security Disability Insurance are a massive expense. And a lot of these non-profits who work with the homeless are funded by government. About half of the funding for non-profits comes from government, and the aggregate amount of funding is massive.

>>And even then, the amount of taxes that "low wage laborers" earn is slim.

The point is they're supporting themselves through back breaking work while crackhead and his buddies are loitering around and smoking crack every day with no one forcing them to start paying their own way.

>>Why can't those with vast excessive wealth give some of it to services that can rehabilitate the homeless, or create unskilled or low skill jobs that pay enough to keep people indoors?

What rehabilitation are you referring to? There is no discipline or order imposed on these drug addicts. They live a completely unstructured life, with no strings attached to the aid they receive.

They don't want to work, or abide by the basic rules of society, and their poverty activist supporters will ensure that any effort to change that is met with exasperated calls of fascism, lack of compassion, "criminalizing the poor" or some other items from the set of manipulative victim narrative talking points.

And any way, it's not the responsibility of those whose wealth ideologues deem to be "excessive" to pay for the living costs of those who do drugs every day.

>>If a homeless addict is smoking crack outside, what he needs is a shelter that can rehabilitate him, get him off drugs and get him employed somewhere where he can make meaningful contributions and connections to his society.

They don't want to get rehabilitated or work. This idea that they're all well-meaning people down on their luck is propaganda. The reality is that many of the most irresponsible people in society are among the homeless, and that they won't take any responsibility unless forced to.

>>To assume that the homeless are homeless because of "responsibility and consequence" is to totally ignore any systemic circumstance outside of their control that may have led them to become homeless or jobless in the first place.

Some are homeless and jobless because they'd rather do crack and party with their friends than take up responsibility.

There are countless government programs they can avail themselves to. They don't want to. They don't want to listen to any authority, or control their impulse in any way.

You don't seem to understand and/or care that you can't fix someone who doesn't want to get fixed, unless you take control of their lives over their objections.

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#307

Post by CryptoPunk »

maconic wrote: post #294
CryptoPunk wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>But the reality is that saying poor people should "just move someplace cheaper" is basically a classist assumption that lack of adequate income is the only thing that matters in their life and their life can be boiled down to that one detail and that one detail should be the sole deciding factor in all their life choices. You would never suggest such a thing for someone who wasn't destitute. Like the saying goes, b…

We were all a burden on our family since day one weren't we? It takes a few takes decades to repay that burden, if ever. > "Seeing the homeless gather with their buddies to smoke crack, and loiter all day on some street corner, while living and buying drugs at the taxpayers' expense, while people I know work back-breaking jobs at low wages, strikes me as a total injustice, brought about by people who manipulatively e…

Our families chose to have us. In the vast majority of families, children are biological progeny of the parents, and so carry their parents genes into the future.

The fact that you're trying to compare disjointed people within a nation to a family where parents support their own children really shows the amount of non-voluntary collectivism you want to impose on society.

>>I assume you live in SF and have generalized all homelessness to what you see in certain parts of SF?

I realize that not all homeless are loitering drug addicts, but they form a significant percentage of the chronically homeless, and a situation where no-strings-attached aid is provided to them at the expense of the taxpayer, while others make the sacrifices to be independent through back-breaking work, is unjust.

It's not just a matter of competence. It's also a matter of choice. Some people choose to take responsibility. Some don't.

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#308

Post by CryptoPunk »

jahaja wrote: post #295
CryptoPunk wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an excerpt from the executive summary: >>Over the past three decades, local barriers to housing development have intensified, particularly in the high-growth metropolitan areas increasingly fueling the national economy. The accumulation of such barriers – including zoning, other land use regulations, and lengthy development approval processes – has reduced the ability of many housing markets to respond to grow…

Thanks. But as I suggested above, the same is happening in other countries, including mine, without these restrictions. And just as here, the report speaks of various tax and cash incentives etc, basically profit guarantees, needed to get private companies to build affordable housing. So to suggest that zoning restrictions are the core issue doesn't seem to hold water, even though I won't deny that it may increase th…

Stockholm has a severe housing shortage due to government restrictions like rent control:

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/19/why-stockholm-...

Zoning seems to be the biggest problem in the US. I don't know how much it contributes to housing shortages in other countries.

Re: The Homeless Crisis Is Getting Worse in America’s Richest Cities

#309

Post by conanbatt »

com2kid wrote: post #288
GabrielBen wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really, housing is where capitalism breaks down.

Zoning screws with the free market. Look into how Japan does zoning[0] to see evidence that weak zoning laws and strong enforcement of individual property rights work together to keep property prices low. [0] https://www.ft.com/content/023562e2-54a6-11e6-befd-2fc0c26b3...

I was being sarcastic :)
Post reply on HN