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

51–60 of 660 posts

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#51

Post by 4gotunameagain »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #42
4gotunameagain wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A very often ignored fact is the cultural homogeneity. I do not thing racial homogeneity is of any benefit whatsoever, but I do believe that cultural is. When someone raised in a culture where cheating to win by any means is acceptable (most of India) or where bartering, persuading and microfrauding in trade (most of Middle east and sup-sahara Africa) is not frowned upon, it is not a stretch to imagine that the intro…

Putnam found a linear correlation between diversity and social trust.

Putnam indeed reported a correlation between the mean herfindahl index of ethnic homogeneity and trust in societies (both own-race trust, other race trust & neighbour trust).

If you had actually read the paper (which I have), you would realise that the relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust is inverse.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#52

Post by itishappy »

EA-3167 wrote: post #46
JamesLeonis wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are 10 million empty homes [0] and ~700,000 homeless. No matter how you slice those numbers you still have more empty housing stock than homeless right now. [0]: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf (page 4)

You're assuming that the major challenge is the lack of a home, because the term we choose to use as an umbrella implies that. For some people it's even true, but they tend not to be CHRONICALLY homeless, and that's the population of major concern. Chronically homeless people have extremely high rates of mental illness and substance abuse; depending on how you slice it, a third or more are schizophrenic or something…

Chronically homeless make up about a quarter to a third of the US homeless population.

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2023-...

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#53

Post by itishappy »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #43
itishappy wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It sounds right, but many subtly wrong things often do. At the very least, a measurement of the effect strength would be nice. For instance, is a homogenous society a stronger or weaker signal than GDP?

So you mean GDP per capita?

I do indeed, thanks.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#54

Post by marssaxman »

mywittyname wrote: post #48
marssaxman wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simpler than that: just roll back the restrictive zoning codes which have been making sufficient development infeasible for many years, thus creating a steadily growing housing deficit. When laws have turned the housing market into a game of musical chairs, someone is guaranteed to be left outside.

I'm often skeptical of simple solutions like this. They tend to assume that the regulation causes the problem, but when looked at more critically, it's clear that the regulation is a formalization of a combination of consumer & business preference. For example, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations. If you get into the gritty details, you'll find that they have a whole bunch ofloopholes that seem to favor…

I appreciate your skepticism! The proposition that rates of homelessness are primarily driven by housing costs has actually been well supported in research - this Pew article contains many useful references:

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/...

As per econ 101, high prices are a function of scarcity relative to demand: we can reasonably claim that regulations which restrict housing development, which by their nature must increase scarcity and therefore housing costs, therefore also lead to increased rates of homelessness.

> In the handful of ultra expensive metro areas, sure it might move the needle

That's a good point, but those are exactly the places which have significant homelessness problems.

In general, this is not a housing preference issue, because opposition to upzoning does not come from people who aspire to live in single-family homes, but from people who already own them. This is a typical example:

https://www.change.org/p/whittier-neighbors-against-seattle-...

As usual with these things, the complaints include a cloud of nitpicky nonsense surrounding a central concern over "neighborhood character", which is a polite way of saying "we don't want apartment-dwelling poor people coming to live near us".

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#55

Post by EA-3167 »

itishappy wrote: post #52
EA-3167 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming that the major challenge is the lack of a home, because the term we choose to use as an umbrella implies that. For some people it's even true, but they tend not to be CHRONICALLY homeless, and that's the population of major concern. Chronically homeless people have extremely high rates of mental illness and substance abuse; depending on how you slice it, a third or more are schizophrenic or something…

Chronically homeless make up about a quarter to a third of the US homeless population. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2023-...

That's true, but they make up a disproportionate number of the "visible homeless" that people encounter in camps, taking drugs on the street, etc. A lot of homeless people are at a low point in their lives, but use the systems offered to them and dig themselves back out. That's why they aren't CHRONICALLY homeless.

They don't represent the same kind of societal problem that poor students, broke divorcees, and people moving through rough patches do. They also don't represent a single population that needs help they aren't provided with already, unlike the chronically homeless.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#56

Post by stevenicr »

JamesLeonis wrote: post #37
ipaddr wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US could end homelessness but would need to stop immigration and change the constitution which could force people in shelter. Not sure it's the outcome we all want.

There are 10 million empty homes [0] and ~700,000 homeless. No matter how you slice those numbers you still have more empty housing stock than homeless right now. [0]: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf (page 4)

My first read of this document leads me to believe that there are only about 341,000 housing units available for rent, there are some for sale at an average price of $373,000.. but many or most of the empty housing units are like second homes and such and not 'available'.

So we have 350k open units and 700k people without homes, average rent is around $1500..

just looking at the data my guess is that we have about 700k people who don't have an extra 2 grand every month to put into housing. (and I think it's way higher personally, maybe not counting the couch surfing relatives who can't afford their own place, and others who are living in over crowded situations of basements )-

I'm sure there is much more to it than the averages, like a lot of the homeless are in areas where the average rent is much higher and 1500 - and the few places where rent is $800 likely has less homeless, (and also has less other things like jobs and public transit) -

and really if it is 10 million or a quarter a million empty places, I don't see how that matters if no one can afford any of them.

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#57

Post by s1artibartfast »

JamesLeonis wrote: post #37
ipaddr wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US could end homelessness but would need to stop immigration and change the constitution which could force people in shelter. Not sure it's the outcome we all want.

There are 10 million empty homes [0] and ~700,000 homeless. No matter how you slice those numbers you still have more empty housing stock than homeless right now. [0]: https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf (page 4)

What does that mean for the next steps?

Does the government eminent domain the houses, arrest the homeless, and then ship them out to Detroit or wherever the surplus houses are?

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#58

Post by johnea »

So, they reduced homelessness by giving people a permanent place to live?

Inconceivable! Who would have ever thought of that?

Those commonist Scandinavians, they just don't understand the "power of the market"...

Why would anyone even live indoors if it mitigated investor ROI?

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#59

Post by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF »

johnea wrote: post #58

So, they reduced homelessness by giving people a permanent place to live? Inconceivable! Who would have ever thought of that? Those commonist Scandinavians, they just don't understand the "power of the market"... Why would anyone even live indoors if it mitigated investor ROI?

I thought building houses was a skill lost to history, like Damascus steel!

Re: Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)

#60

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

octopusRex wrote: post #8

The US chooses not to end homelessness. We have the highest GDP in the world. We could end it if we wanted to. I was in Japan recently. A choice was made there as well.

How could the United States end homelessness? It is a mix of federal government, state governments, and local/county/municipal governments. The level of government best suited to do the actual work is hamstrung... if any one city fixes homelessness (somehow), more homeless will show up. If they do that again for the new arrivals, more homeless show up.

The first to solve it is punished with tens of thousands of newly arriving homeless who, as you might imagine, will find a way to get there if it means not being homeless anymore. But budgets are finite and the cost per homeless must he higher than zero, but in a practical sense the number of homeless aren't entirely finite.

If you start from the other end, with the feds, then you might as well hold your breath. Homelessness is so far down the list of priorities, that even if it somehow did bubble to the top, the polarization in Congress will sabotage any effort, and we'll end up with boondoggles that both sides can criticize and that won't really help any homeless at all.

This isn't a choice being made, it's just the complexity of the real world that some are still blind to even after graduating college and (theoretically) turning into grownups.

There's actually a technical solution too, but since it's dry and boring, most leftists (and quite a few of the rightists) find it too boring to ever want to try. Obviously the solution is either love and compassion (from the left) or maybe "pulling themselves up by their bootstraps" (from the right).

Post reply on HN