Live data from Hacker News

Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

kcrw.com

201–210 of 376 posts

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#201
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe San Francisco is just not suitable any more? There's nothing magic about SF's geography that makes it a tech hub. It's not a mining town that needs to be next to coal or minerals, or a ski resort town that needs some mountains and snow. It's based on work that can literally be done anywhere. Hollywood, after all, was just a dusty desert town that became the hub of the movie business because it was easier to mov…

This is a questionable take on two levels. First, yes, yes there is something magic about SF's geography, it's the closest major city to the largest VC hub in the world. These companies thrive on young talent that prefers to live in a city. It's not dissimilar to the gold rush 170 years ago when you think about it. Second, what do you mean "San Francisco is just not suitable any more"? The tech companies and their em…

it's the closest major city to the largest VC hub

San Jose has entered the room. San Francisco is cute and that's why people like it and ignore San Jose.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transient homeless (those who have fallen upon hard times, and may still have a job, but no longer have a place for their family to live) make up around 80% of the homeless population. Solving that would be a huge win for society.

Sure, but not really the policy outcome that people are thinking of when they talk about solving the "homeless problem". The guy passed on in the subway car next to his own feces is not going to be helped in any way by these policies. There are no good solutions here that respect the rights of the individual and also our collective right to live in a civil society. Involuntarily detention through the criminal justice…

No reason why mental institutions cant be compassionate and devote time and effort to individuals. Much better than letting these people live in their own excrement in the subway.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#203
There are levels of homelessness.

The first level is one where you don't have permanent shelter. Maybe you're staying on a friend's couch or in your sibling's basemenet. But not long term. You may have several such situations and bounce between them. These arrangemenets tend to be temporary and are triggered by the loss of a job or rising rent or divorce or a number of other factors. These people are larely invisible.

The next level of homelessness is when you're exhausted your temporary options and you end up living in your car. You are likely still employed and need your car to get to and from work (because America). This too is a temporary situation. Towns and cities don't like people living in cars. You may get harassed by police. You may get towed. Your car may just stop working and you can't affrod to repair it. On top of that, you may have a bunch of parking violations you can't afford. You may have to deal with crime (eg people breaking into your car and stealing your stuff). These people are a little more visible but are still mostly invisible. Like I've seen cars people are clearly living in but my guess is that 95% of people don't see it.

The third level is where you've lost your car and now you're living on the streets. This is the first truly visible level of homelessness. This experience is traumatic and dangerous. This is where you may start self-medicating (eg drugs, alcohol). It's more difficult to hold down a job so you may lose that too. Crime will affect your daily life. You will be harassed by the police who will randomly move you somewhere else to get you temporarily out of sight. Such people will tend to find some form of community for self-protection, which is why you have encampments.

The last level is where you've been on the street so long that you have serious medical and mental health issues. You may well have substance abuse issues too. You likely will have suffered or at least witnessed serious violent crime. The self-medicating continues. At this point it is incredibly hard to come back from this.

My point here is that when people talk about homelessness they only talk about visible homelessness (ie the last 2 levels). But the problems begin way before then. It starts with a lack of housing security.

The most important thing to do for homeless people is to find them somewhere to live. It's not a shelter. Those have their own dangers and issues. This is what people mean when they talk about a "housing first" policy towards homelessness.

We, in the US, live in the richest country on Earth. There is absolutely no reason why we can't feed and house and provide medical care for every man, woman and child in this country. But we don't because some people don't want to give anything to other people. Some think it'll somehow "encourage" homeless people and stop them from being "lazy".

Instead we pour billions of dollars into an incredibly ineffective and highly militarized police force. Homelessness and poverty breeds crime. The only way to address that is to address the underlying cause. A lot of places simply ship their homeless to coastal blue states.

Just this week, NYC agreed to pay a man $135,000 in settlement after an NYPD officer decided to drag him out of a mostly empty subway car for having a bag on the seat and then lie about what happened [1]. That officer faced no disciplinary action and still works for the NYPD.

The worst thing to happen in the West is the financialization of the housing market. Everybody treats housing as an investment. We've created an incentive to make housing more expensive for the less fortunate. We create policies to make housing unaffordable. This is by design at this point.

[1]: https://pix11.com/news/local-news/man-dragged-from-train-by-...

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#204

The homeless debate, especially around housing, has become a nightmare of semantic creep and rising metricism [1]. Metricism is the tendency to focus on measurable things; in principle a noble goal, but more often than not you can't actually measure the thing you're interested in, so you measure something similar and then pretend you're measuring the thing you want, and when you're done, you've implemented solutions…

It's far easier to point at imaginary causes for imaginary problems than it is to talk about the real causes of real problems.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#205
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, just average people, who built the community over time into something desirable, that were promised with zoning laws that it would be the type of community (single family homes, etc) that they wanted, and that then dedicated the majority of their lifetime earning power to purchase a home there. No one was promised that the zoning laws wouldn't someday change. Maybe what's really needed is a complete repeal of p…

You are welcome to put a repeal of Proposition 13 on the next ballot. All it takes is a $2000 fee and some signed petitions. https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/how-qualify...

Categorizing 575k signatures as just "some signed petitions" is some unreal minimization of the cost and difficulty to get this done.

2022 ballot measures "Cost per required signature" was $16.18. [1]. Between $6.4m -> $18.8m to get a prop on the ballot.

1 - https://ballotpedia.org/California_ballot_initiative_petitio...

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#206
post #154
post #53

When people talk about "homelessness," they're often referring to street people. Most technically homeless people aren't street people, they're between jobs or living in their car or something like that. It seems clear that lower rent/housing prices would help with homelessness but I don't think it would help street people.

How long do these temporary displaced people stay in that state before eventually becoming "street people" themselves?

https://www.ssph-journal.org/articles/10.3389/ijph.2021.1604...

> Among the 44,197 homeless shelter stays, on average, a homeless shelter stay was about 77 days, with the median 30 days, and the maximum of 5,030 days (the entry date started in 2002 for this extreme case). ... 2,872 (∼6.5%) homeless shelter stays were just 1 day long, 6,726 homeless shelter stays (∼15%) were between 2 days and 5 days, and 34,695 homeless shelter stays (78.5%) were 10 days or longer. About 81% of all homeless shelter stays were by clients who have experienced recidivism.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing that you misunderstand the threats, and are much more likely to be hit by someone in an SUV. I've spent lots and lots of time in cities; I've never had a problem with a homeless person.

Would you count having to step over an active urine stream on your way to the grocery store as "a problem"? How about walking with your pregnant wife past someone who is splitting his time yelling at the sky and scratching his crotch from the inside of his pants? Sure, in both scenarios we weren't physically harmed, but it certainly made us feel unsafe and uncomfortable. It's not something that I think we should all…

Those are great opportunities to teach your children about the consequences of an apathetic voting base. It’s also a great time to nurture children’s empathetic abilities by teaching them to juxtapose indecent behavior, mental illness, poverty, and general despair.

Want more action? Try protesting and demanding solutions that include no questions asked housing, healthcare, food, water, and basic essential communication technology and interconnection.

Unless people want to misery murder homeless people en masse, the above is the solution. Hard stop. Don’t like it? That’s not my problem, I’m not complaining about desperate people from a place of immense privilege.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#208
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the thing I always say about the people who complain about tech workers and gentrification in a place like San Francisco is like, look, if you can't figure out how to gain from an influx of wealthy, highly-educated, low-criminality, nerdy tech workers, then that's really on you. What a gift! Any city would be lucky to have that "problem." You have to actively work to make that a negative (by, say, refusing to a…

> the people who complain about tech workers and gentrification in a place like San Francisco The people who are complaining about this are not the same people who are restricting housing access. A similar dynamic happens in Boston, where people are resentful of gentrifiers, and I can't blame them. They're not the ones voting to block housing, it's the already rich people in the area who do that.

People are of two minds: on the one hand they complain of "middle class flight" decimating the tax base. on the other hand they complain when the middle class "gentrify" a neighborhood.

The Mission is probably a decent example. It used to be more or less like Noe Valley many decades back. Then people moved out and was settled by people looking for affordability --then decades later, as housing in Noe Valley etc., was exhausted the Mission was "gentrified" in a slow cycle and people again complain.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the demand is literally boundless, but I think the idea that we could easily outpace demand with construction to dramatically increase affordability is wildly optimistic. I'd rather build new Dallases, or denser Dallases, than try to double the density of Manhattan, because it will both be easier to find/acquire un-utilized land to use, and because the amount of work required to double the density of Ma…

Of course density should be pursued wherever it's cheapest to do so. The point of thinking about the Manhattan case is that this is the natural endpoint of any sort of "more housing and higher density always leads to higher prices" argument. It clarifies to what extent that argument can possibly work, as a matter of basic logic.

As far as I can tell, the Manhattan case tells us that we aren't even close to the "building more will cause prices to fall" point anywhere in the US. And because of that, building more where it's cheaper is a better strategy for controlling costs than building more where it's already expensive.

Manhattan was brought up to mock the idea that construction could make prices worse for existing residents, I don't think it shows that at all.

Is it any wonder that "you're dumb, building more will lower prices" hasn't been a persuasive argument to people who've seen construction push up prices around them for decades without the promised lowering of prices yet? That's just asking for a leap of faith that this time will be different, we'll hit the magic tipping point, without any actual evidence for that.

Re: Rising rent, not poverty, is the real driver of homelessness

#210

I don't understand this thesis. In terms of visible homelessness a huge percentage are untreated mentally ill and/or drug addicted to such an extent that they won't be able to afford housing at any price level. The article offers no data to support the claim, just some anecdotal observations.

Cities like Milwaukee have very low homelessness. Is it because the people there are just less mentally ill? Less prone to drug addiction? Of course not. (In fact in a state with cold, dark winters and where there is a bar on every corner, you’d expect the opposite.)

No, it’s because of the low cost of housing and because of their Housing First initiative.

Housing First works and it’s only because of a lack of political will that it’s not being used in more places.

Post reply on HN