Live data from Hacker News

The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

youtube.com

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#51
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, there's only so much these people can do on their own. But the point is -- there's no reason not to at least try to take them seriously.

For sure, you'd think even just paying everyone in a camp a small amount of money per bag of trash collected would be a short-term fix (yes, it could be gamed by taking trash from somewhere else, but that'd still be cleaning up town...) I have wondered if cities couldn't require that surface parking lots reserve a space or two for an RV or tiny house, and the residents could work as watchmen in exchange for living th…

I see I am reinventing the wheel[1], at least for the trash pickup.

1: https://komonews.com/news/local/tacoma-launches-program-to-p...

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#52
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even your crazed schizophrenic wants a home to sleep in. Actually, no. Some crazed schizophrenics simply are unable to live in a stable environment without being coerced, precisely because their affliction effects their ability to think and behave in a manner conducive to maintaining their own health and safety. And that's just one end of an entire spectrum of distorted thinking. At the opposite end of that spectru…

Have you talked to homeless people? A lot of them just don't have enough money to get a house. Have you ever met a schizophrinic before? Its not like they're off the loony bin / completely off their rocker, its actually pretty similar to QAnon-style conspiracy theorists. They have some delusions and have difficulty accepting which facts are real or not. But that's not enough of a reason to prevent them from holding a…

> Have you talked to homeless people?

Yes. And as a child I experienced homelessness on multiple occasions, though for all my mother's failings (alcoholism, poor choices in relationships) we never had to sleep rough. And in those types of social circles you also tend to meet all kinds of people, including people who regularly experienced homelessness (some occasionally by choice, if you call choosing alcohol or drugs over shelter a choice).

> Have you ever met a schizophrinic before?

Yes. Many times. Homeless and otherwise. And on several occasions as an adult I've endeavored to get to know them, if we crossed paths regularly. And also I've lived with adults who struggled with bipolar disorder. Indeed, one of the periods of homelessness was when my step father, lost in the bowels of severe depression, overdosed and killed himself. Not long afterward, I came home from school to the scene of the sheriff helping to toss all our belongings onto the curb.

One thing you learn growing up in circumstances that I did (and also something every decent economist would be quick to tell you) is that people say one thing but do another. (This is true of everybody, but even more so with people suffering from mental disorders.) Empathy to me means learning how to listen to people by watching what they actually do, not merely what they say. It was a skill I had to learn early on in order to make sense of my world. Learning how to "decode" adults kept me out of alot of trouble, yet also prevented me from becoming a resentful and angry person, something that happens to some people who grew up the way I did. We all struggle, some of us more than others; and specifically we struggle with competing and conflicting desires. But a just world doesn't require giving people a free pass to engage in anti-social behavior simply because they struggle and suffer. That's the sort of logic only the privileged could fashion.

No god or philosopher ever promised that figuring out how to thread the needle of treating people compassionately and humanely while maintaining a healthy social order would be easy or quick. We can't wait to "fix" social inequity or cure mental illness simply because we're too squeamish to recognize the truth of the human condition: that agency and rationality are largely fictitious, at least most of the time. Few people choose to be homeless in the normal meaning of the word. But the flip side to that coin is that exiting such circumstances (and the circumstances that led there) isn't a simple choice either. The choices that matter, good and bad, are made at moments often far removed from their consequences. For this reason, all people need to be incentivized (some more than others) to make the healthier choices. (For people who grew up in healthy homes and under secure financial conditions, these incentives are quietly inculcated as preferences.) Call it paternalism or condescension, but it's true all the same. Our society's obsession with individualism is at the root of many of our social pathologies. The very thing that induces economic inequality (individualism) is the same thing that makes us too squeamish to coerce people to obey the most basic and (for all but the most ideological) sane social norms. In both cases we simply throw our hands up because we're too wedded to the notion of individualism and "freedom".

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#53
post #22

So much of the discussion around homelessness these days essentially boils down to "How can we move these people to a place where we don't have to look at them" instead of "How do we build a society where homelessness doesn't happen in the first place." So many people also try to lay the blame at the feet of the victims here, but drug abuse, mental health problems, etc. are not the cause of homelessness, but rather s…

> How do we build a society where homelessness doesn't happen in the first place Pay people to get sterilized. Right now our current welfare system encourages homeless women to have children - since they are immediately granted public housing. Offering homeless men $5,000 and women $10,000 for vasectomies and tube tying will save a fortune in welfare costs and end the cycle of poverty.

This comment has to be one of the most vile things I have read in a long time. Even surpasses the hermaincain and coronavirus subreddits in horrific commentary. You think homeless people only come from other homeless people? Even if this is just a bot or troll account. If anyone reading this actually has this thoughtprocess as a solution. Please, volounteer. Soup kitchen for example. The homeless are not a substandard human race meant to be exterminated. Has the dehumanization of unvaccinated westerners started to set this kind commenters of commenters to think they are mainstream enough to actually post things like this?

This would have been unheard of in 2019.

You DO NOT under any circumstances enforce invoulontary medical procedures on a living human being. EVER!!!! No exceptions. What the hell are we becoming?

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do we build a society where homelessness doesn't happen in the first place Pay people to get sterilized. Right now our current welfare system encourages homeless women to have children - since they are immediately granted public housing. Offering homeless men $5,000 and women $10,000 for vasectomies and tube tying will save a fortune in welfare costs and end the cycle of poverty.

This comment has to be one of the most vile things I have read in a long time. Even surpasses the hermaincain and coronavirus subreddits in horrific commentary. You think homeless people only come from other homeless people? Even if this is just a bot or troll account. If anyone reading this actually has this thoughtprocess as a solution. Please, volounteer. Soup kitchen for example. The homeless are not a substandar…

"You DO NOT under any circumstances enforce invoulontary medical procedures on a living human being. EVER!!!! No exceptions. What the hell are we becoming?"

Well, in fairness, paying people to do it is hardly involuntary.

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#55
post #13
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say that many of the homeless are homeless because they could not live in the society. This is why they ran out of money and housing, not the other way around. What could help them is psychological / psychiatric treatment, rehabilitation from addictions, and offering some better prospects in life than to get wasted every day. This is not a (purely) money distribution problem.

American investors who swing liberal try very hard to deal with the cognitive dissonance of "I'm a good person who cares about homeless people" and "I want my portfolio to really excel". The two are not compatible, though. This is very much reflected in American investor owned media (all media, pretty much). This is, realistically, why Americans perceive the cause and effect of homelessness and poor mental health to…

You see the same with a lot of rich conservatives and Jesus' statements on whether rich people can go to heaven. A lot of mental gymnastics. Rich people want to feel like good people, even if it's nearly impossible to actually square that circle.

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#56
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you talked to homeless people? A lot of them just don't have enough money to get a house. Have you ever met a schizophrinic before? Its not like they're off the loony bin / completely off their rocker, its actually pretty similar to QAnon-style conspiracy theorists. They have some delusions and have difficulty accepting which facts are real or not. But that's not enough of a reason to prevent them from holding a…

> Have you talked to homeless people? Yes. And as a child I experienced homelessness on multiple occasions, though for all my mother's failings (alcoholism, poor choices in relationships) we never had to sleep rough. And in those types of social circles you also tend to meet all kinds of people, including people who regularly experienced homelessness (some occasionally by choice, if you call choosing alcohol or drugs…

Be that as it may, the median home in Oakland is $749,000.

That's far in excess of what an average person can be able to afford, let alone someone who is struggling with mental illness.

---------

That's why I'm saying the first step here is to make $50,000-ish housing units as a first step. It doesn't matter if they're low-end high-density condos or trailer parks, you need something cheap to solve the problem of homelessness.

The lack of money + the expensive houses cause homelessness directly. The issue of mental health is a diversion. Mental health complicates things but its certainly not the end-all / be-all of this situation. Its not even the most important issue.

Oakland's problem is fundamentally the the number of housing units available. If you don't have enough homes at low enough prices, homelessness will come around. You don't need to be mentally sick to become unable to live in a $749,000 home.

-------

This is a city completely devoid of low-income housing units (ie: trailer parks). Is it really that big of a surprise that people can't afford a home to degrees far greater than other cities?

I've seen autistic people, schizophrinic people, and bipolar individuals hold their own homes and be productive members of society. Mental health is no "excuse" for becoming homeless. I've also seen perfectly rational, 100% healthy people lose their homes and become homeless.

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#57
post #7

I remember seeing favelas in Brazil next door to ultraluxury apartments 10 years ago thinking that this is probably what the future of the US was going to be like if wealth inequality steadily kept climbing. And here it is. r > g in the flesh - the other side of "the magic of compounding".

If you define “next door” by time to reach, then NYC had that contrast ever since the street car/subway was available. Extreme wealth, spend a nickel (or walk a block) and then see wretched poverty. So nothing really new…it was/is the reality of Manhattan since the late 1800s.

And the future of “the US” is actually your projected future for a fairly tiny geographic region of densely urban US, something the other 95+% of Americans look at with a combination of bemusement and amazement. It’s been a few decades since those dense urban areas have been considered any sort of default desired social or cultural target for most Americans or American culture as a whole. It was different 70 years ago…

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#58
post #22

So much of the discussion around homelessness these days essentially boils down to "How can we move these people to a place where we don't have to look at them" instead of "How do we build a society where homelessness doesn't happen in the first place." So many people also try to lay the blame at the feet of the victims here, but drug abuse, mental health problems, etc. are not the cause of homelessness, but rather s…

> "How do we build a society where homelessness doesn't happen in the first place."

This is impossible. Scarcity is not a solved problem, but on top of that, some people choose to be homeless. That their choice seems miserable and irrational doesn't make it less of a choice — people choose all sorts of unpleasant things.

Example: https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2021/rescuing-jessica-s...

(If addiction in particular didn't involve a component of choice, nobody would be able to choose to escape, with or without help, and thankfully some people do.)

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#59
post #3

The burden is falling on fair-weather states as the down-and-out from cold states find their way to coastal states to avoid freezing to death. There are plenty of empty houses in the rust belt. We need to find a way to get the homeless into those.

The lived experience of the Okies in California in the 1930s might be worth investigating before developing any grand schemes restricting internal migration.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-10-18-me-622-st...

https://www.sidmartinbio.org/how-were-the-okies-treated-when...

https://www.legendsofamerica.com/ca-bumblockade/

Does the Pacific Coast want to reinstitute “bum blockades”?

Past Pacific Coast strategies for managing the unwanted included offering a reward for scalps of the unwanted, like the State of California had implemented for First Nations peoples in the 1850s

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2008/8/14/567667/-

The Pacific Coast States in the US era have made some really bad missteps in addressing problems like this over the years. May just be a case of taking the “good” (weather) with the “bad” US citizens (that just aren’t as socially or economically desirable). The homeless/van life are living a lifestyle that, for hundreds of years prior to the Anglos/RR, was perfectly acceptable in that/your part of the country. Not an easy problem to address.

Re: The Oakland homeless problem is beyond belief

#60
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you talked to homeless people? Yes. And as a child I experienced homelessness on multiple occasions, though for all my mother's failings (alcoholism, poor choices in relationships) we never had to sleep rough. And in those types of social circles you also tend to meet all kinds of people, including people who regularly experienced homelessness (some occasionally by choice, if you call choosing alcohol or drugs…

Be that as it may, the median home in Oakland is $749,000. That's far in excess of what an average person can be able to afford, let alone someone who is struggling with mental illness. --------- That's why I'm saying the first step here is to make $50,000-ish housing units as a first step. It doesn't matter if they're low-end high-density condos or trailer parks, you need something cheap to solve the problem of home…

It seems apparent that your experience with this subject is dwarfed by wahern's. It's funny how you just papered over their entire response to you with "be that as it may".

Couple of questions for you, since you seem to be expert on refractory homelessness:

- How do you propose to prevent severely mentally ill and drug addicted people from destroying the $50,000 homes they're allowed to live in free of charge?

- Are you aware of the strict screening and eligibility requirements that homeless applicants undergo to qualify for existing housing-first programs? Why do you suppose things are done this way? Are you familiar with the cost of maintaining the housing in these programs, even with the strict screening in place? What solutions do you propose for many homeless folks who don't pass these screenings? Or for the many others who do pass initially, but relapse into the addictions, illnesses, and crimes that brought them here to begin with, and bring those problems into the communities you've put them in?

- Exactly how do we go about building your $50,000 dwellings near any big city in California, let alone the bay area? Detailed steps, please. Keep in mind that your super affordable housing must actually be in these cities, enough to provide even remotely affordable intensive mental health and addiction treatment services and high frequency wellness and maintenance checkups that these folks will require, often indefinitely. So... where will the land come from? What's your budget for that land, and for the necessary improvements like grading, sewer, water, and electric? What is your budget for condemning or buying out existing housing in the most expensive cities in the country?

Post reply on HN