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

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

#201

Post by sremani » Fri, May 05, 2023, 1:34 PM UTC

piva00 wrote: post #186

cvwright wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we pay to defend Europe from Russia, and we do it for free. We should stop doing that, and invest more in domestic needs.

No, you pay to continue having hegemony over multiple continents. Don't call American military spending in any sense some kind of altruism, it's done to keep the USA power and money floating around.

The early reasoning was to not repeat the mistake of the two world wars -- where American kids had to bleed in a European conflict. Of course, US got involved because so much money was lent to allies etc. There is a reason -- why Algeria is not there in "North Atlantic" treaty Organization but Estonia is. Let us not pretend here, America treats Europe differently and with in Europe, UK differently.

There are cultural and institutional bonds -- of course layers of Geopolitical and strategic interests.

But the boys, who are dreaming Americans picking their marbles and going home should really be careful what they wish for, because it might actually come true.

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

#202

Post by redeeman » Fri, May 05, 2023, 1:54 PM UTC

dazc wrote: post #152

redeeman wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you do not have to be happy with something to not want to personally be responsibility. and to everyone here who thinks otherwise. there are millions of malnutritioned people, including children, in many parts of the world. And i put fourth that you are happy they starve and get sick and die. After all, you arent spending all your money and effort trying to fix it? is it not your problem? I would prefer that nobody i…

It is your responsibility, which is part of the reason why you pay taxes in the first place. The fact that so much of your money is misappropriated is another story though.

I pay taxes because a regime with guns says I have to or they will take me away and put me behind bars. This is a crime against me

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

#203

Post by redeeman » Fri, May 05, 2023, 1:55 PM UTC

m000 wrote: post #165

redeeman wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to my sibling comment, so what you're saying is, mob rule? this is probably defacto how it is, but it does not make it right. Nobody else has any rights to what I own, and I dont have rights to them. this kind of thinking that the "society" can just set rules that violates other people is a sick and disgusting development, this form of communist cancer has to be destroyed.

> Nobody else has any rights to what I own Nobody else, except perhaps your local HOA [1]. So much about your "property". /s [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrizmAo17Os

no gang has ever considered themselves to be doing things that shouldnt be done, whether it be the mafia, government, or HOA. They are all illegitimate

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

#204

Post by redeeman » Fri, May 05, 2023, 1:56 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #158

redeeman wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to my sibling comment, so what you're saying is, mob rule? this is probably defacto how it is, but it does not make it right. Nobody else has any rights to what I own, and I dont have rights to them. this kind of thinking that the "society" can just set rules that violates other people is a sick and disgusting development, this form of communist cancer has to be destroyed.

Look, there are two possible definitions of "ownership" and "property". One is, you own whatever you can physically keep. If you have a pretty stone, and I come to you, and bash your head in, and take your stone, guess what, it's mine now. If I scoop your brains out of your half-broken skull, I'll have a new ashtray too, so I profit off this exchange! The second definition is, whatever set of rules the society enforc…

your right ends where it takes away others. Forcing taxes on people is not that. I cannot violate others, and anyone who would give themselves the rights to do so, are bandits, oftentimes having formed a gang

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

#205

Post by sremani » Fri, May 05, 2023, 2:00 PM UTC

scotty79 wrote: post #175

sremani wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The scale of social problems in the US is on a whole other level. True. Just for some comparison, if Finland was a metropolitan in US, it would be ranked 10th. Above Phoenix metro and Below Atlanta Metro. I understand the good intentions of people trying to show case 'Scandinavian countries' as a model. They miss many things including Scale.

Do you mean that Phoenix Metro and every other place smaller should have fixed their homelessness as well as Finland or better already?

That is not the point. But I will assume good faith here, Alaska is the one state that has similarities with Scandinavia. In terms of both weather and resource extraction. Is Alaska doing worse than Scandinavia when dealing homeless?

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

#206

Post by Gamemaster1379 » Fri, May 05, 2023, 2:09 PM UTC

ddoolin wrote: post #21

pavlov wrote: post #8

This Guardian story gives more detail on how the program works: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle... Common objections to applying this policy elsewhere seem to be “We’re bigger than Finland” and “We’re not ethnically homogenous like Finland.” On the first point, 5M people isn’t really that small. It’s roughly the median population of an American state. On the second point, well… It does so…

Just IMO, many Americans probably don't think homeless people deserve free housing, because they have (the taxpayers) have to pay for their own housing and also contribute to homeless housing via taxes. "Fuck you got mine" is real here. Just see the nauseating argument against discharging student loans.

Student loans argument is not 1:1 at all.

Every student loan forgiveness proposal I see suggests that taxpayers foot the bill and the counterargument is why should those who did not attend and/or those who paid off have to foot the bill.

I agree with that counterargument and will never vote for forgiveness.

However, send put a proposal in front of me that seizes assets from the universities selling these degrees that apparently can never pay for themselves and sell off their assets to pay down student loan debt? You'll get my vote.

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

#207

Post by emodendroket » Fri, May 05, 2023, 2:16 PM UTC

lordloki wrote: post #198

emodendroket wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would encourage you to wade into commentary on the man strangled to death on the NYC subway if you think it’s outlandish that some people see the lives of the homeless as essentially disposable. Or you could just scroll down to the person in this very discussion thread who more or less argues for deaths from exposure. Or we could look at preferences revealed by policy demands, which often take more of an "out of si…

The guy who was threatening people on the train? That's a dishonest comparison along with a dishonest assertion. First you are asserting that a lot of people supported his death,which is not the case. They supported someone doing something to stop him threatening others on the train, with his death being an unfortunate consequence of his own actions. Then you falsely use this violent individual to represent all homel…

All this “violent individual” did was yell. Choking him to death is an extreme escalation. And I assure you it’s quite easy to log on to Twitter and read many comments that either outright cheer for the death or, more commonly, treat it with the same indifference you’d treat accidentally stepping on some ants.

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

#208

Post by dazc » Fri, May 05, 2023, 2:18 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #194

dazc wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Sounds to me like the reason you became homeless was exactly because of housing prices, like the parent said.

The reason I became homeless was because I had to find another home whilst suffering from depression. To cut a long story short, I put off doing what I should have done until it was too late and then made a series of poor decisions.

The cost of housing was nothing to do with it, I didn't have a lot of cash available at the time but I know plenty of people who did. My landlord even offered me another place for the same rent but I turned it down.

When you are depressed you avoid making decisions, and then when you eventually do, those decisions can turn out to be the wrong ones.

I would say that making a series of poor decisions is the most likely way to end up on the streets. This may be a result of mental health issues, pure stupidity, simple bad luck or a combination of the three.

The cost issue may be a factor but the majority of people manage to cope with this somehow. As I said, I became homeless when housing was still considered to be easily affordable.

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

#209

Post by toss1 » Fri, May 05, 2023, 2:23 PM UTC

deanc wrote: post #99

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…

This is a nuanced issue and I agree with what you wrote. I live in Finland. Some additional thoughts: - The scale of social problems in the US is on a whole other level. More people requires bigger solutions. - The state vs government system in the US means it's every state for themselves when solving social issues. This is seen in states actively shipping homeless people to warmer climate states in order to make the…

>>The scale of social problems in the US is on a whole other level. More people requires bigger solutions.

Bigger country also has far more available resources.

From TFA: >>So, more than a decade after the launch of the “Housing First” policy, 80 per cent of Finland’s homeless are doing well, still living in the housing they’d been provided with — but now paying the rent on their own.

>>This not only helps the homeless, it turns out to be cheaper.

That bears repeating: it turns out to be cheaper

The solution can be found in the common refrain of conservative ideologues fighting against social programs —— it isn't the government that knows how to best spend the money, it is the people.

The really simple solution to homelessness and poverty is: Literally house the homeless and give UBI to everyone at a poverty level.

It turns out that the individual people really often do know how to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, as long as they have bootstraps.

A tiny house with a fixed address, bed, toilet, shower, and cooktop eliminates enormous classes of problems both for the unfortunate people, and the rest of society. A basic income is most commonly used by people to improve themselves. Yes, there will always be sad examples of people who fail and use it to drink/drug themselves to death, but every actual study I've read shows that these are vastly outnumbered by those who use the minimal resources to get out of their personal hell; this is just another in those long series of studies.

And to those who scream "moral hazard - you're rewarding bad behavior! Welfare queens!!" — bullsh^t. The richest societies in the world can afford to provide basic housing, food, and medical care to all their residents (but not the entire world, immigration controls are needed). No one wants to be in the dregs of homelessness and poverty. And, the objective results are better outcomes, more people overcoming their problems and becoming self-supporting.

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

#210

Post by seanmcdirmid » Fri, May 05, 2023, 2:25 PM UTC

toss1 wrote: post #209

deanc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a nuanced issue and I agree with what you wrote. I live in Finland. Some additional thoughts: - The scale of social problems in the US is on a whole other level. More people requires bigger solutions. - The state vs government system in the US means it's every state for themselves when solving social issues. This is seen in states actively shipping homeless people to warmer climate states in order to make the…

>>The scale of social problems in the US is on a whole other level. More people requires bigger solutions. Bigger country also has far more available resources. From TFA: >>So, more than a decade after the launch of the “Housing First” policy, 80 per cent of Finland’s homeless are doing well, still living in the housing they’d been provided with — but now paying the rent on their own. >>This not only helps the homele…

> It turns out that the individual people really often do know how to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, as long as they have bootstraps.

The Finnish case study finds that most of these people never really recover, just that with housing and state support, they still require fewer resources than if they remained unhoused. So this is more like: these people are never going to solve their problems, but at least with housing and a on site social work (to prevent the housing from being destroyed), they won’t burden society more otherwise.