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

Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

thestar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 254 posts

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#81

Post by Jedd »

throwaway45631 wrote: post #47
arcticbull wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does size have to do with anything? Nobody's saying you spend the same amount or provide the same number of houses - you can scale it up to meet the larger population eh?

Of course size matters. Finland’s homelessness likely coalesces around its largest urban areas, as they provide the most foot traffic and anonymity (and homeless services) with the least annoyed population. Like in every country. So most likely Helsinki. If your pool of possible homeless is 5M and they gather in a city the size of 600k it is a hugely different situation than say San Francisco, which is 800k and draws…

> If your pool of possible homeless is 5M and they gather in a city the size of 600k it is a hugely different situation than say San Francisco, which is 800k and draws from 330M possible homeless

I'm struggling to follow your logic here.

The 'possible homeless' would not be total population of a country - if it is, you've got more urgent problems.

I think in the USA the number's around 500,000, or about 0.2%, yeah?

There's more than one city in Finland, but even if there wasn't (but there really is!) there's definitely more than one big city in the USA, so I don't understand that extrapolation to 'all the homeless will move to San Fran'.

And even if they did, you've still got the considerable resources of the USA [0] that could be brought to bear on the problem. The fact that the problem is distributed quite widely, and definitely not exclusive to large urban centers[1] should make it easier.

[0] https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/category/military...

[1] https://www.security.org/resources/homeless-statistics/#regi...

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#82

Post by vladvasiliu »

riffraff wrote: post #29
SanderNL wrote: post #9

I don’t know about Finland, but Dutch people already can’t find places to live. If you are unlucky financially and need government housing you will wait years if not a decade or more for something. If you can rent something you will pay €1000 for a modest place in a bad neighborhood. Given that a fair chunk of the population earns in the €1500-2000 range, that’s not a good prospect. Housing is not just something you…

Worth noting: population density for all of the Netherlands 532/km^2. The highest density in Finland, in the Greater Helsinki area, is 421.8/km^2. Finland does have a lot more space. Still, Paris has a density of 690/km^2 and is not a hellscape, so the choice of not having more housing (and pushing down RE prices) is political, not a deity-given rule.

But Paris absolutely has the housing issues described by GP.

More and more "middle-class" people are moving out of the city, especially those with children. Schools are starting to close classes for lack of pupils.

There is a lot of government-subsidized housing, but it's very tough to get any if you actually make some money. They mostly go to the poorest, of which there are many. Waiting lists are long (think multiple years).

Private sector housing is very expensive and landlords won't rent to you if you don't make three times the rent and have a long-term contract. 1000 € a month would get you a studio apartment, yet require you to make 3000 € a month. That's "a good salary".

Want to buy? Nah. With 3000 € a month, you better have a serious down payment (rich parents, I guess?), or banks won't lend you a cent.

You figured being freelance would net you a better income? Sure, but guess what? That's not "stable employment", so banks will laugh you out the door. You also won't qualify for the landlord insurance scheme if you resign to rent, so better know someone with a stable contract who'll cosign for you.

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#83

Post by dazc »

bcherny wrote: post #63
01100011 wrote: post #33

Does Finland have a problem with Mexican cartel meth and fentanyl being dumped by the truckloads into its communities? To be clear, there are many types of homeless in the US. But the ones that get the most attention and seem to cause the most problems are those pushed into mental illness by drug use. And, yes, drug use does not always cause mental illness and many mentally ill are not on drugs, but as those of us wi…

Homelessness in the US is driven by cost of housing, not by drugs or mental illness [0]. [0] https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/everything-you-think-you-k...

Well I became homeless when my landlord decided he needed to sell up and gave me notice to leave (much more than legally required, I should add). He eventually sold the house at auction for a sum 3 times smaller than I currently have sitting in a bank account.

This was over ten years ago and, obviously, house prices have increased a lot and I eventually got back on my feet but, the point is that you can find yourself in a situation that you're not mentally equipped to deal with at that moment in time regardless of all other external factors.

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#84

Post by misja111 »

mach1ne wrote: post #78
misja111 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The houses which are given to homeless are mostly concentrated in certain area's. So if they cause problems, which of course they do, they don't bother 'normal' families. Those area's are pretty bad, but they're not as dangerous as e.g. in the US. I guess it's because the addicts are mostly alcoholics and they get just enough government money to buy their daily booze.

I’m Finnish and this is not my understanding. Finland has a specific policy that every time a new neighbourhood is constructed, a percentage of those houses are allocated for the municipal government, who then rent them for these less fortunate folk. This means that the problems aren’t concentrated but distributed. It’s part of the larger ideology of equality in Finland, which is that the extremes in both good and ba…

Thanks, I didn't know that. I'm not Finnish but have stayed in the Helsinki area a lot. There were certain area's in e.g. Tikkurila and Jakomaeki which were pretty bad, and Finnish people told me it was because many alcoholics lived there in state housing. So I supposed that state housing was concentrated in certain area's.

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#86

Post by sph »

01100011 wrote: post #33

Does Finland have a problem with Mexican cartel meth and fentanyl being dumped by the truckloads into its communities? To be clear, there are many types of homeless in the US. But the ones that get the most attention and seem to cause the most problems are those pushed into mental illness by drug use. And, yes, drug use does not always cause mental illness and many mentally ill are not on drugs, but as those of us wi…

No, Finland isn't waging a ridiculous War on Drugs, doesn't have long ties between its three letter agencies and sponsoring drug lords in the more tropical neighbours, nor a broken and corrupted police, justiciary and political system.

The drug issue in the USA is not the problem. It is just a symptom of a more systemic and substantial disease.

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#87

Post by kstenerud »

silisili wrote: post #59

I've lived all over the US. Sometimes, homeless are down on luck. These are mostly the invisible type, that you may not even know exist. Then you have the crazies. Mostly harmless, but not productive in society so much, so kinda outcast. Then you have the grifters. Harmless mostly, enterprising folk. They're out there playing fake violins in parking lots with their family. And staking out busy offramps with their sig…

Any solution not currently being employed couldn't work because the local issues are different in some nebulous way, and it would require careful study before making a hasty move, and there are all these special cases that are different, and it just couldn't work so we should give up because nothing will ever work even if it has worked elsewhere, and just club them all to death instead.

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#88

Post by ricardobayes »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #19

I lived in Finland for a while. Being homeless in that country is pretty hard core in the winter. Which is a reason that sheltering people there is not a nice to have; you either shelter them or you collect their dead bodies in the morning. It's that simple. Places like Helsinki never had a large community of homeless people to begin with (natural selection). But it has plenty of social issues of course. Alcoholism i…

Spain also has relatively few homeless, at least compared to some other European countries. They have made it "de facto" legal to break in to an empty, unused home. If you squat a home, proceedings can take years to get you out of there. The only way to get an express eviction is if the owner reports it in the first 72 hours of people moving in. So no wonder you see bars on every single house window and alarms.

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#89

Post by timonoko »

As luck would have it, I took pictures of last ever homeless abode in Helsinki 2005. It was destroyed soon after. It is totally functional all-year-round, with good sleeping bag and oil-lamp quite comfortable. https://photos.app.goo.gl/MqwRWdgkN0oynyTw1

I personally would not move from this abode to Helsinki Mäkelänkatu homeless shelter, full of creepy drugheads and violent drunks.

Re: Given a place to live, Finland’s homeless were better able to deal with problems

#90

Post by silisili »

kstenerud wrote: post #87
silisili wrote: post #59

I've lived all over the US. Sometimes, homeless are down on luck. These are mostly the invisible type, that you may not even know exist. Then you have the crazies. Mostly harmless, but not productive in society so much, so kinda outcast. Then you have the grifters. Harmless mostly, enterprising folk. They're out there playing fake violins in parking lots with their family. And staking out busy offramps with their sig…

Any solution not currently being employed couldn't work because the local issues are different in some nebulous way, and it would require careful study before making a hasty move, and there are all these special cases that are different, and it just couldn't work so we should give up because nothing will ever work even if it has worked elsewhere, and just club them all to death instead.

This is so dismissive. We have to admit and analyze the reasons for homelessness before we attempt a solution.

Sometimes, people who do everything right end up homeless due to illness, rising rents, death in the family, or any multitude of reasons. If we gave these people free housing and resources, they'd likely bounce back and be fine.

If we mix in folks who are drugged out beyond belief, who are violent, who have no desire to improve, it taints the entire project. Do you want to put a family of 4 trying to get by next door to some shirtless guy with a machete who constantly threatens to stab everyone? Why? Now all the neighbors complain, crime goes up, etc.

It's time to admit some people either aren't worth helping, or at least can't be helped in the way that others can.

Post reply on HN