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

This is Real, That's Not

streetlifesolutions.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 364 posts

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#271

Post by scotty79 »

fastball wrote: post #263
reificator wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's the truly amazing thing: the net budget effect on federal and state funded interventions was probably better, and they STILL unwound the programmes. > Collective failure of imagination. > Homelessness exists because we let it. You're listening to the words and not understanding the actual motivation. Budgets are a convenient objection but not actually important. Like you observe there are people who would gl…

Citation needed that there is a significant cohort of people who effectively believe that homelessness is some sort of divine wrath that shouldn't be interfered with.

Do you doubt that plenty of people think that threat of homelessness is necessary motivation for people to work?

Those people also think that some people being homeless is acceptable trade off given the motivational value of the threat and cost of paying for everyone's accommodation.

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#272

Post by scotty79 »

kelnos wrote: post #140
tehjoker wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homelessness exists because the landlords and business people prefer it. Homelessness is a demonstrated threat of what not paying the rent and having a job will do to you. If you remove that dire threat, the housing market and job market becomes far more competitive for the workers and the owner class is disadvantaged. In the US, we have many more vacant houses than we have homeless people. The market system is incap…

That's an interesting theory. I think there are competing interests, though. Landlords and businesses generally won't want homeless people in their areas, though, because their presence alone will decrease property values and rent (landlords), and drive away customers (businesses). But for what you suggest to work, homeless people need to be visible. Do you have any data on this? This doesn't really pass the smell te…

> But for what you suggest to work, homeless people need to be visible.

Not necessarily physically visible. Just mentally visible.

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#273

Post by b0rsuk »

I absolutely believe this person because I had periods of unemployment in my life. Many people around here treat you like shit if you don't have a job. And that was just a job.

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#274

Post by antiterra »

studius wrote: post #256
bberrry wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is literally no tuition in Sweden. The loans are for rent and general cost of living. You can have literally zero means and still go to university in another city.

When you say literally, what do you mean? Almost or absolutely? Because I get confused, since, literally, literally doesn't mean literally with some people, literally.

Do you encounter similar confusion with ‘really’, ‘very’, and ‘truly’?

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#275

Post by scotty79 »

nlh wrote: post #253
tehjoker wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Homelessness exists because the landlords and business people prefer it. Homelessness is a demonstrated threat of what not paying the rent and having a job will do to you. If you remove that dire threat, the housing market and job market becomes far more competitive for the workers and the owner class is disadvantaged. In the US, we have many more vacant houses than we have homeless people. The market system is incap…

I think your sentiment is in the right direction but I don’t think it’s as explicit as you’re proposing. Landlords don’t “prefer” homelessness to exist. Their position, as capitalists, ends with their interests. Many (not all!) landlord are quite simple: “Pay rent or I will evict you and find someone else”. That’s it. After an eviction, they don’t care whether the person moves elsewhere or is homeless. In fact I’d ar…

If someone would end homelessness by providing homes to all of the homeless free of charge and then some more empty ones then landlords would mind very much because this oversupply would make their prices drop. They would accuse homelessness solver of dumping prices.

Landlords "prefer" homelessness exist because that the surplus demand over the supply that they provide.

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#276

Post by timeeater »

tchaffee wrote: post #262
timeeater wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wrote the reason MIGHT be spare money and mild climate, and in that context my question is an actual question, not rhetoric. "It implies that you've thought through all the possible reasons and you've come up with the obvious answer." No, me writing "MIGHT" literally implies the opposite of that. It is also an aspect to consider, in any case - it is a valid question of why there are many homeless in a rich place. M…

> In theory, the rich place should offer more job opportunities than poor places elsewhere. Which theory? Because trickle down doesn't have much support in terms of evidence. Often it's actually the wealth that causes the homelessness. As wealthy people move into an area and rents skyrocket, people who once could afford to live there end up on the street. And where are homeless people getting all this money to reloca…

Is there any evidence for people becoming homeless because of skyrocketing rents?

Are there no renter protections in the USA, anyway?

The theory is simple that where the area is rich, there are more jobs - catering to the rich people, but also the jobs that make the rich people rich.

As for relocating, in the old days, you could hitchhike or jump on trains.

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#277

Post by tehjoker »

fastball wrote: post #265
Synaesthesia wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They certainly collaborate to keep rent high, its known that property developers in the US don't rent out property in manhattan to keep prices high. Why would they want to solve homelessness? They're motivated by profit in their role at the institution.

This is just nonsense. Right now, homeless people are not customers, meaning they are not making money off of those people, when they could be if those people were actually renters.

The argument is that would be penny-wise and pound-foolish. It also isn't penny-wise: homeless people don't have cash.

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#278

Post by headmelted »

throwaway2245 wrote: post #255
OJFord wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Back of envelope calculation suggests income tax collected from a median family would be £50 per year. Back of envelope calculation is definitely wrong. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, I'm just saying that £50 figure is definitely not right, without doing any calculation. (OK sure - 50/0.2 = £250 taxed at basic rate above personal allowance. Which this year I think is £12k5, and median household income is…

Ah apologies, I was answering my own question: I meant marginal tax required to pay for university level education in place of current student loans system.

this, but also that:

“ What £ of tax would the working class family contribute towards university education”

Is not really fair to the issue. It’s not a cost for university education, because it’s not open to all - there are gatekeepers - and those from underprivileged backgrounds have very little chance of being accepted to the most prestigious institutions, so it’s unfair to expect them to pay for it, is essentially my point.

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#279

Post by mplanchard »

fastball wrote: post #263
reificator wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's the truly amazing thing: the net budget effect on federal and state funded interventions was probably better, and they STILL unwound the programmes. > Collective failure of imagination. > Homelessness exists because we let it. You're listening to the words and not understanding the actual motivation. Budgets are a convenient objection but not actually important. Like you observe there are people who would gl…

Citation needed that there is a significant cohort of people who effectively believe that homelessness is some sort of divine wrath that shouldn't be interfered with.

See the prosperity gospel: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology

Re: This is Real, That's Not

#280

Post by DubiousPusher »

Aunche wrote: post #234
DanBC wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What alternative do they have? If we don't provide adequate public loos, or addiction treatment, or injection rooms, or mental health care, we should expect to experience the problems that are caused.

I don't understand why it's so frowned upon in cities like LA to arrest someone for disposing used needles on the ground, and sending them to jail. I'm not going to pretend that it's doing the homeless any favors. However, the alternative of letting them poison themselves with drugs, and I don't see how that's any more humane. I think the real reason America fails the homeless is not a lack of empathy, but a "it's yo…

> I'm not going to pretend that it's doing the homeless any favors.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are simply ignorant of what jail or prison does to a person. Because I cannot see otherwise how you can possibly believe your right to a clean sidewalk should be enforced at the expense of another person's rights and freedom.

Post reply on HN