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

Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

oecdecoscope.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 660 posts

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#331

Post by DrewADesign »

bdowling wrote: post #325
epistasis wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they not scale? We have more people, more capacity to build, and greater opportunities for economies of scale. Every homeless person, regardless of mental state, still needs housing. It is the one unifying aspect of homelessness.

Homeless people want to live in cities, for all the reasons other people want to live in cities. In cities, affordable housing is extremely expensive. For example, in Santa Monica, California, an affordable housing project can cost over $1 million per unit. https://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/Ne...

They’re not just trying to be close to museums, hip bars, and top notch ethnic food. Homeless people want to live in cities because if they can’t afford an apartment, they probably can’t afford a car, suburban areas rarely have any resources for them, there’s safety in numbers, and most bored suburban and rural cops wouldn’t let people camp even 5 minutes on public land, let alone tolerate it long enough to be tenable. Cities are the only place a significant homeless population can feasibly exist in the US.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#332

Post by 14 »

tlogan wrote: post #318

I wanted to point out that the approach adopted by Finland may not be suitable for the United States. Finland has a population of only 5.6 million—less than two-thirds of the Bay Area—so their solutions, unfortunately, may not scale effectively in a larger, more complex environment. The other - even more important issue with all these approaches, however, lies in treating all homeless individuals as a single category…

You make great points and yes there are definitely many causes and they might need different approaches. But it is bullshit in this day and age that as a society we have people living in the cold and on the streets. Elon Musk has billions of dollars, good for him. But if he was to spend $500k each day it would take him around 2200-2400 years to spend it all. Ridiculous. There is no reason that kids have to come to school hungry or wear one set of clothes in this day and age. It’s sad. Capitalism for the win. But sorry to the child who goes hungry. I don’t think everything should come easy but having seen a kid steal free food from the breakfast club at school then when asked hey how come you are hiding food you don’t need to it’s free and he says because his little brother not yet in school is at home and has no food your heart fucking breaks. I pray I live long enough to see money and capitalism fail.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#333

Post by epistasis »

tlogan wrote: post #323
epistasis wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they not scale? We have more people, more capacity to build, and greater opportunities for economies of scale. Every homeless person, regardless of mental state, still needs housing. It is the one unifying aspect of homelessness.

> Why would they not scale? Due to the complexity and diversity in economic, cultural, and social value networks. For example, the approach which is working for Modesto will probably not work for San Francisco.

That has less to do with the size of the US but everything to do with the lack of size in the US. We make it impossible to do things by making each city small independent, and having a lack of unity.

Our government is not more complex than Finland's because we have more people, it's because we chose to make it inefficient and complex.

Removing local cities' power to be different for the sake of complexity would solve the issue quickly. If the Bay Area had a regional government rather than tiny fiefdoms devoted to allowing wealthy people to extract the maximum economic value from shared business interests, while willing away their own tax dollars in tiny enclaves that are protected by minimum lot sizes and apartment bans, not only would we have far less homelessness to begin with, but we could solve the leftover homelessness much better, refuse crime and poverty, and have a far better functioning society.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#334

Post by anon291 »

dyauspitr wrote: post #70
nostromo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how every westerner visits Japan and comes home thinking we can "solve crime" or "solve homelessness" or "have clean subway stations." Japan's culture is why those things are the way they are. It's not due to funding. It's because people raise their children differently than we do in the west. The family's obligations are also greater. And, yes, there are homeless people in Japan. But they typically are in…

It’s definitely cultural. I’ve been to every major city in the US and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a homeless Indian. Some groups have broken familial cultures that does not churn out good citizens. Did the US in the past play a major role in breaking down those groups and surrounding them with abject poverty that makes it hard to escape from? Absolutely.

I mean... even within India, the poor act nothing like they do here. I've been to India several times and witnessed abject poverty (getting better now supposedly). But the poor people in india still go home to their families (they had families!), have dinner together, and are deeply invested in educating their children to set themselves up for success.

I'm shocked when politicians in America blame our homelessness problem on poverty. Poor people do not behave this way. This is a breakdown in culture.

It's weird growing up in the 90s as an American and visiting India and thinking that America was better than that because we are so rich and no one is that poor, but 30 years later, it no longer seems that way. While India is still very poor, I think even the homeless there might have a more stable life than what I physically see on the streets of west coast America. I mean.. it may be a slum, but at least they have a permanent house, their kids are in school, etc.

Meanwhile, in Portland, I see human feces on many streets, and the homeless are drugged out zombies (Portland has enough beds for all homeless but no ability to force usage of shelter beds, and few homeless person accepts the offer).

I hate to say it, but maybe just allowing a 'proper' slum would be a better option.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#335

Post by anon291 »

mmooss wrote: post #155
dyauspitr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s definitely cultural. I’ve been to every major city in the US and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a homeless Indian. Some groups have broken familial cultures that does not churn out good citizens. Did the US in the past play a major role in breaking down those groups and surrounding them with abject poverty that makes it hard to escape from? Absolutely.

India is overwhelmed with poverty far beyond anything I've seen in the US. The people of India started from even worse poverty and have generally made progress (especially since recently-deceased PM Singh). I'm not criticizing. But holding forth India's culture [1] as a model of preventing homelessness is pretty incredible. [1] India may have the largest, most diverse collection of 'cultures' within one national bord…

No... homeless people in India behave nothing like homeless in America. Their situation is easily fixed with money.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#336

Post by anon291 »

nineplay wrote: post #164
dyauspitr wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s definitely cultural. I’ve been to every major city in the US and I don’t think I’ve ever seen a homeless Indian. Some groups have broken familial cultures that does not churn out good citizens. Did the US in the past play a major role in breaking down those groups and surrounding them with abject poverty that makes it hard to escape from? Absolutely.

Have you ever seen a homeless Indian in India? I would assume not, since evidently Indians have intact familial cultures that churn out good citizens.

The 'homeless' in India live in slums. They have relatively stable housing, even if it's a hovel. They do not behave like American homeless. America's homeless problem has little to do with money or accessibility of housing.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#337

Post by wslh »

tlogan wrote: post #318

I wanted to point out that the approach adopted by Finland may not be suitable for the United States. Finland has a population of only 5.6 million—less than two-thirds of the Bay Area—so their solutions, unfortunately, may not scale effectively in a larger, more complex environment. The other - even more important issue with all these approaches, however, lies in treating all homeless individuals as a single category…

It’s also about cultural homogeneity. Countries like Finland, Denmark, and Norway often have relatively uniform cultural frameworks, which can make it easier to implement broad social policies. The U.S., by contrast, is among the most multicultural nations in the world. This isn’t a critique of diversity, but an acknowledgment that diversity often leads to more complex social dynamics and outcomes than homogeneity.

An interesting case might be Israel. While it has a Jewish majority, there’s significant diversity within that cultural framework: religious, ethnic, and ideological [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Israel

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#338

Post by spauldo »

nineplay wrote: post #162
cousin_it wrote: post #106

I think governments should offer free housing to everyone who asks, in their city of choice. "But why should taxpayers pay for that? It's expensive!" Yes, it would be very expensive. But you know what's even more expensive? The sum of everybody's lowered wages, bad bosses, fear for the future, fear of having kids and so on, due to the threat of homelessness. Yes, building housing is expensive, but the removal of fear…

I'd like to live in Honolulu.

Lotsa homeless in Honolulu.

Funny story, I was sitting in a pizza place in Spain talking with a coworker about the high cost of rent in Hawaii and the homeless people who wander around Waikiki. Some guy (also an American) overhears us and butts in, blaming the Liberals for all the social programs that make homeless people want to move there. My response: how'd the homeless people buy tickets to Hawaii? He didn't have a good answer for that one.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#339

Post by hshshshshsh »

tlogan wrote: post #323
epistasis wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they not scale? We have more people, more capacity to build, and greater opportunities for economies of scale. Every homeless person, regardless of mental state, still needs housing. It is the one unifying aspect of homelessness.

> Why would they not scale? Due to the complexity and diversity in economic, cultural, and social value networks. For example, the approach which is working for Modesto will probably not work for San Francisco.

Disagree. Due to the complexity and diversity in economic, cultural, and social value networks it's actually easier to build housing.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#340

Post by anon291 »

wesselbindt wrote: post #108
nostromo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how every westerner visits Japan and comes home thinking we can "solve crime" or "solve homelessness" or "have clean subway stations." Japan's culture is why those things are the way they are. It's not due to funding. It's because people raise their children differently than we do in the west. The family's obligations are also greater. And, yes, there are homeless people in Japan. But they typically are in…

[flagged]

Portland (population 622k) spent $531 million (https://www.koin.com/news/portland/shocking-amount-spent-on-...) which is 1/16 of the $8 billion that will fix homelessness according to you.

By your reckoning, Portland, which is 0.15% of the American population should have been able to fix homelessness for its entire population for $12 million. Portland spent 45 times that so we ought to be able to house the homeless in the Ritz Carlton, if your calculations are correct.

But they're obviously not. And your argument is childish.

Post reply on HN