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

Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

oregonlive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 108 posts

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#61

Post by pseudalopex »

gamblor956 wrote: post #57
threethirtytwo wrote: post #16

> More than half of participants were women, while 30% were male and 18% identified as transgender or gender inclusive. Why were the ratios not representative of actual homeless demographics? Most homeless people are biological men by an overwhelming majority. Maybe transgendered people and women seek more help? Or the people conducting this study were biased themselves? As a result, I don’t think the results univers…

True, but most straight male homeless individuals are homeless because of substance abuse, so giving them money doesn't address the cause of their homelessness in any way. The targeted populations were primarily homeless for economic reasons, so the point of the experiment was to demonstrate that the simplest/most efficient solution was just to give them some money.

> most straight male homeless individuals are homeless because of substance abuse

Do you have a citation for this?

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#62

Post by newAccount2025 »

qingcharles wrote: post #48
gameman144 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also wild just how cost-effective interventions like this can be. You can pay a thousand here and there, or a few hundred thousand incarcerating these people when they turn to crime out of desperation.

We're paying ~$50K for every person that's incarcerated, BUT nobody takes into account the income we're losing from their taxes and spending if they were living a sane life in the free world. It is exceptionally difficult to move people from a life of crime and addiction back into society, though. And I have insane respect for the people that do it full time. I've worked in that space and it's a world of absolute une…

100%. Even beyond the direct incarceration costs and the opportunity cost of their lost contributions, there is also the cost of the whole apparatus for arresting and charging folks with crimes and trying them. The police department alone is more than 1/3 of our budget in Austin. Add courts and forensics and it’s 40%. And that’s still just the money part, to say nothing of the moral impact and humanity we throw away.

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#63

Post by yunnpp »

jmward01 wrote: post #47
yunnpp wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't want to pay taxes for social programs as opposed to...what? Military and defense spending? What is there better than a social program?

There are several reactions to the 'I don't want to pay taxes' so I'll pick this one and respond. I hope you read the rest of the comment. I don't want to pay taxes because who does? Ever? But we -need- to pay taxes for programs that work because the alternative, massive social costs and damage to society, are far worse. So, sure, I don't want to pay taxes for social programs but I admit the need to and therefore I w…

You realize existing roads need maintenance, i.e. fixing, too, right? Your approach towards taxes is absurd and reflects a lack of understanding of how anything works. And why, of all things, should taxes send us to the moon? Subsidizing private enterprise is the worst use of taxes.

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#64

Post by jmward01 »

yunnpp wrote: post #63
jmward01 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are several reactions to the 'I don't want to pay taxes' so I'll pick this one and respond. I hope you read the rest of the comment. I don't want to pay taxes because who does? Ever? But we -need- to pay taxes for programs that work because the alternative, massive social costs and damage to society, are far worse. So, sure, I don't want to pay taxes for social programs but I admit the need to and therefore I w…

You realize existing roads need maintenance, i.e. fixing, too, right? Your approach towards taxes is absurd and reflects a lack of understanding of how anything works. And why, of all things, should taxes send us to the moon? Subsidizing private enterprise is the worst use of taxes.

I'm not sure if you are intentionally missing the point or not. I'll try one last time. I have very clearly not said 'this shouldn't be done'. I haven't said 'we shouldn't pay for social services or roads'. In fact, I clearly said we should pay for social services, now twice. What I have clearly said is 'I don't want to', but I do a lot of things I don't want to because they have to be done. I don't want to go to work. I don't want to pay taxes. Most days I don't want to go to bed at a reasonable time, but I do it because the alternative is worse. We -should- do something doesn't me I -want- to do something. Yes. We will pay for roads because they are needed. Hopefully things are very clear now and if not, oh well.

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#65

Post by thompsonparker »

threethirtytwo wrote: post #53
luafox wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > The program prioritized underrepresented populations. That includes young parents, who made up 43% of participants by the end of the period. Homeless parents are almost always women with very few exceptions. Now, in my personal opinion, "underrepresented populations" in this kind of environment refers to people who are at greater immediate risk while homeless, which obviously include women & gende…

>The program prioritized underrepresented populations. Do you know why they did this? Transgenderism or being a woman is an orthogonal concept to homelessness. Whatever demographic you're in, if you are homeless, you are suffering and I assume are exposed to the same gender neutral dangers that arise from being homeless. What exactly is the greater danger that would need such prioritization?

Also, transgender people are more likely to experience violence on the streets.

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#66

Post by threethirtytwo »

Kuraj wrote: post #56
threethirtytwo wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The program prioritized underrepresented populations. Do you know why they did this? Transgenderism or being a woman is an orthogonal concept to homelessness. Whatever demographic you're in, if you are homeless, you are suffering and I assume are exposed to the same gender neutral dangers that arise from being homeless. What exactly is the greater danger that would need such prioritization?

Queer people are at a greater risk of being estranged from their families, if nothing else.

Aren't all homeless people estranged from families?

I assume family would help if it was a possibility.

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#67

Post by Der_Einzige »

lux-lux-lux wrote: post #50
qingcharles wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're paying ~$50K for every person that's incarcerated, BUT nobody takes into account the income we're losing from their taxes and spending if they were living a sane life in the free world. It is exceptionally difficult to move people from a life of crime and addiction back into society, though. And I have insane respect for the people that do it full time. I've worked in that space and it's a world of absolute une…

It’s exceptionally difficult because we largely do not try; recidivism rates in the US are multiples of other countries.

Maybe because the people getting arrested here really do commit more crime:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLwKFGjE2zY

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#68

Post by pseudalopex »

threethirtytwo wrote: post #53
luafox wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > The program prioritized underrepresented populations. That includes young parents, who made up 43% of participants by the end of the period. Homeless parents are almost always women with very few exceptions. Now, in my personal opinion, "underrepresented populations" in this kind of environment refers to people who are at greater immediate risk while homeless, which obviously include women & gende…

>The program prioritized underrepresented populations. Do you know why they did this? Transgenderism or being a woman is an orthogonal concept to homelessness. Whatever demographic you're in, if you are homeless, you are suffering and I assume are exposed to the same gender neutral dangers that arise from being homeless. What exactly is the greater danger that would need such prioritization?

They said parents received priority. Homeless people whose children live with them are women mostly. Giving parents priority aided their children.

The report said the programs prioritized groups that are overrepresented in national youth homelessness counts, including LGBTQ+ and BIPOC youth, as well as those who were pregnant or parenting status, formerly incarcerated, undocumented, or had a history of domestic violence or trafficking, populations that are continually overrepresented in national youth homelessness counts.[1] Underrepresented was the journalist's description seemingly.

Some dangers to homeless people are gender neutral. Some are not. Sexual assault is not. But the portions of the report I read did not say immediate danger was considered.

Being transgender is a more polite way to describe being transgender.

[1] https://static1.squarespace.com/static/60418acae851e139836c6...

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#69

Post by stevenwoo »

nkrisc wrote: post #12
themafia wrote: post #2

So if you give people money they'll endeavor to tell you precisely what they think you want to hear. I would be much more impressed if this wasn't based solely on self-reported results.

I agree, further study is warranted. They should do it again with a larger cohort for longer and with more objective measures.

We already know just based on the limited amount from the annual payment to all residents of Alaska from their state wide oil and mineral fund over the past 40 some odd years, there are a lot of studies - off top of my head some study found people who were unemployed were in aggregate slightly more likely to get work, because the money enabled them to look farther for jobs instead of just surviving, it also increased demand for goods and services provided by other Alaskans. Here's one of many that breaks things down from economist point of view https://home.uchicago.edu/~j1s/Jones_Alaska_2022.pdf

Re: Oregon gave homeless youth $1k/month with no strings

#70

Post by kelseyfrog »

hubber wrote: post #59
kelseyfrog wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Larger and larger until we're just flat out testing UBI is fine by me. If you want to test UBI, there's no better way than implementing UBI.

[flagged]

Ok? Sorry, I don't understand the point you're making.
Post reply on HN