Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless • Hacker News Board

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#31

Post by throwaway13337 » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:03 PM UTC

While food, clothing, tech, even a lot of services have gone way down as a portion of median income, housing has gone disproportionally up. The only thing to compare it to is healthcare costs.

Various government intervention that collude together to make this happen - mortgage interest tax deduction, building ordinances for areas, housing bubble bailouts. That is, it's mostly artificial.

Innovation in this area seems prime, therefore. This could mean forcing the rules to bend, or by allowing ways to opt out of housing all together as the man described in this article does.

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#32

Post by lagadu » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:10 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #30

gloves wrote: post #4

In this particular case, having read the article, it didn't seem as if the man in question really minded the lifestyle of homelessness. There is a perception that to be without a static home is a terrible, terrible thing, but really, I can imagine for someone who appears to have his life together in many other ways (and free from other issues that plight the homeless community such as addictions) - then it could poss…

I've significant amounts of time living without a static home. In 2014, the longest time I spent in one place was 2-3 months at one particular low end hotel, not really by choice (prepping and recovering from spine surgery). Significant chunks of my time were spent living in shared housing - 8-12 bunk beds to a room, no real privacy, shared baths. In the west, if such a living space were filled with crazy drug addict…

When people say "homeless" they generally refer to something akin to "not having a place with a roof to sleep in and don't have a choice to have one". If you are staying at a hotel or if you have a home you can go back to abroad you're not considered homeless in that sense.

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#33

Post by kirsebaer » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:11 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #10

buro9 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Second, a lot of homeless in NYC are that way by choice rather than by direct inability to get a room somewhere. Sometimes this is due to mental issues which are not caused by low income. I've been homeless, so perhaps you'll forgive me for being biased against thinking like that. I would never class mental illness as a choice, or of poor decisions whilst someone is suffering mental illness as a choice. It sounds t…

I'm moved by your story, but wonder what would you propose as a workable alternative for someone in your position? It seems like the requirement that you not share sleeping space makes your situation a very difficult one to address, no? No-cost private hotel rooms seems financially a non-starter.

Yes, just giving homeless people there own private rooms is a cost-effective solution. Having people live on the streets ends up being very expensive (emergency rooms, jail, etc). Shelters with shared rooms are scary and unappealing. Giving people stable, long-term, private homes helps them get their lives together and saves society money overall. It's important for these programs that people have privacy and automony to bring friends over and use alcohol and drugs in their home if they choose.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/housing-first-so...

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/09/22/home-free

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/04/housing-homeless-si...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/09/homeles...

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#34

Post by PythonicAlpha » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:16 PM UTC

That are just shocking pictures to me. Well educated (as it seams) and hard working people, that can not afford at least a small regular spot of living.

With the last big real estate deal in NY, the problem will be rising.

The federal poverty line does not consider the greed of investment companies. It also does not help, to count the number of breads you can (theoretically) buy.

Lets face it: Human labor is losing it's value. The reason plainly is, that more and more interest has to be drawn for the "investors". Somebody has to pay the bill for the parties held in the financial districts and for the money, the governments squander on the banks.

In the high-payed tech sector, this effect is not so much felt currently, but this will change in the future, when the low-income sector is so much bleed-ed out, that the interest for the big investors has to come from elsewhere.

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#35

Post by PythonicAlpha » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:22 PM UTC

throwaway13337 wrote: post #31

While food, clothing, tech, even a lot of services have gone way down as a portion of median income, housing has gone disproportionally up. The only thing to compare it to is healthcare costs. Various government intervention that collude together to make this happen - mortgage interest tax deduction, building ordinances for areas, housing bubble bailouts. That is, it's mostly artificial. Innovation in this area seems…

The reason (or at least one of them) is, that our money in the western countries has lost it's value much more, than we should believe. Costs for food and the like is kept low -- so we get the impression, that we get the same for the dollar as before. But in reality, the devaluation of the money is much higher, because of the masses of money that is pumped into the system since 2008 in the US and also in Europe.

The cost for food is kept low, because of different reasons, for example rationalization and also because worker-costs for low-cost work is not rising but falling. But, the discrepancy of our system, where a very small number of people have much much more money has to become manifest somewhere.

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#36

Post by yummyfajitas » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:32 PM UTC

lagadu wrote: post #32

yummyfajitas wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've significant amounts of time living without a static home. In 2014, the longest time I spent in one place was 2-3 months at one particular low end hotel, not really by choice (prepping and recovering from spine surgery). Significant chunks of my time were spent living in shared housing - 8-12 bunk beds to a room, no real privacy, shared baths. In the west, if such a living space were filled with crazy drug addict…

When people say "homeless" they generally refer to something akin to "not having a place with a roof to sleep in and don't have a choice to have one". If you are staying at a hotel or if you have a home you can go back to abroad you're not considered homeless in that sense.

Who said I had a home abroad? And the hotel was just my longest stay, mostly for medical reasons. My primary accommodation was youth hostels and PGs, which are (materially) more or less homeless shelters.

(Of course they are much higher status. Is this discussion really just about status?)

The premise of gloves' comment (which I'm accepting for the purpose of my comment) is that the person described in the article is also homeless by choice. He certainly seems functional enough to get and hold a job at Chipotle and rent a flat in distant Brooklyn if he wants.

The suggestion is that - much like me - his lifestyle is a choice. Just like you want to compartmentalize my experience with a different label, maybe we should do the same with him and similarly situated folks.

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#37

Post by eli_gottlieb » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:36 PM UTC

throwaway13337 wrote: post #31

While food, clothing, tech, even a lot of services have gone way down as a portion of median income, housing has gone disproportionally up. The only thing to compare it to is healthcare costs. Various government intervention that collude together to make this happen - mortgage interest tax deduction, building ordinances for areas, housing bubble bailouts. That is, it's mostly artificial. Innovation in this area seems…

The basic issue is that food, clothing, and technology are treated as consumer goods, if sometimes durable consumer goods. Housing is treated as an investment asset, and the economy currently runs on asset bubbles.

Housing won't become affordable until we shift the growth-engine of the economy back to sustainable, wage-driven consumption.

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#38

Post by gloves » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:37 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #30

gloves wrote: post #4

In this particular case, having read the article, it didn't seem as if the man in question really minded the lifestyle of homelessness. There is a perception that to be without a static home is a terrible, terrible thing, but really, I can imagine for someone who appears to have his life together in many other ways (and free from other issues that plight the homeless community such as addictions) - then it could poss…

I've significant amounts of time living without a static home. In 2014, the longest time I spent in one place was 2-3 months at one particular low end hotel, not really by choice (prepping and recovering from spine surgery). Significant chunks of my time were spent living in shared housing - 8-12 bunk beds to a room, no real privacy, shared baths. In the west, if such a living space were filled with crazy drug addict…

Agreed - how was your experience? Maybe it's just not a thing yet!

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#39

Post by lagadu » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:39 PM UTC

cubancigar11 wrote: post #6

"I never wanted my problem to be someone else's by asking for charity or living on someone's couch for free," he said. Brave. Men don't get anything for free anyway.

> Brave. Men don't get anything for free anyway.

What? Did I travel back to 1940 and nobody told me? What's wrong with caring for everyone in society, whether they be man or woman or anything else?

Re: Homeless model: New York's hidden homeless

#40

Post by dazc » Tue, Oct 27, 2015, 12:39 PM UTC

noja wrote: post #25

dazc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been homeless. Counting people in shop doorways,etc would be a poor measure anyway. And, someone 'who worked with the homeless' would be unlikely to spot the majority of people who were homeless. It's not something you go around advertising unless you're in a certain outlying subset. To my mind, in the UK at least, many of the 'people who work with the homeless' are often part of the problem.

> many of the 'people who work with the homeless' are often part of the problem. How so?

They spend much of their time and budget helping people with problems that can not be easily solved. For instance, someone with a dependence on alcohol or drugs gets priority over someone who doesn't.

A lot of homeless people could have their lives turned around with a timely and cost effective intervention but they are often ignored at the expense of those who are deemed to be 'more vulnerable'.

I was helped by a total stranger who offered me a place to stay. Within a few weeks I was working, back on my feet and paying taxes.

Many of the people I saw drinking in the park every day 4 years ago are still there, with the well meaning support of the local homeless charity.

When I asked for help I was told there was nothing they could do for me.

I'm not saying people with drug and drink issues shouldn't be helped. They should but not under the limited remit and resources of the homelessness agencies.