91–100 of 108 posts
Something that balanced empowering participants and protecting their privacy, while also protecting them from financial abuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Social programs are definitionaly nonpublic. That is, they do not provide nonrivalous and nonexcludable benefits. The proper method to administrate social benefits is via charity. In this way, there is no deadweight loss through unnecessary taxes.
> The proper method to administrate social benefits is via charity. In this way, there is no deadweight loss through unnecessary taxes. We've tried this for years, it doesn't work at scale. And the end result is that you and I are still taxed, just more expensively and differently. We pay more for cops, prisons, healthcare etc because we're unwilling to solve it at scale.
This isn't a problem that needs solving at scale. It's a problem that needs local/hyperlocal solutions with very strict strings attached. If we're not able to monitor the outcomes of each participant and ensure not a single drop of benefits aren't spent on no essentials (self improvement allowable), then we are wasting dollars on lazy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much would you have to pay to no longer enjoy the benefit? I think that's the major question. I wouldn't much mind 1% in income tax for that, for example, but when you start pushing 10% it's an entirely different story.
The thing really irking me is seeing how I pay much more taxes than the megarich and their corporations. Don't get me wrong, I can understand why this happens: they don't give a rat's ass on my safety concerns because they are very happy to live on their gated islands or travel between expensive resorts. But that we, the people (ha, ha) construct our society basically for them also basically holds me back from even d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> most straight male homeless individuals are homeless because of substance abuse Do you have a citation for this?
You're welcome to walk yourself down to Skid Row or your nearest homeless camp and conduct a detailed survey if you want the specifics. Or, a simple Google search will provide several studies including demographic details.
What country is the subject of this discussion? I assumed the US because the article was about Oregon. Most homeless people in the US do not live in camps.[1]
> Or, a simple Google search will provide several studies including demographic details.
Simple searches found researchers couldn't agree how many homeless people used drugs. Never mind abused. Never mind abused before becoming homeless. Never mind became homeless because they abused drugs.
Simple searches found citations for the claim substance abused caused most homelessness failed to support the claim. A survey cited frequently asked mayors what they thought were the top causes of homelessness in their cities.
Simple searches found studies which said homelessness was economic primarily.
[1] https://aibm.org/research/homelessness-in-the-united-states/
> 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…
I like the idea of helping people out of poverty. But the problem with government funded charities is they are so ripe for fraud, they almost never get managed properly.
that's a pretty big (and likely untrue) claim
Libertarians who want the impoverished to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" don't realize what that takes. Nobody deserves to live without a home. We need successes like these so that as many people as possible can get assistance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't all homeless people estranged from families? I assume family would help if it was a possibility.
That's a gigantic, optimistic assumption. Don't assume. Your life is nothing like theirs. You have no idea what it's like. I know some of them; I have no idea what they face on the daily. Not fearing being kicked in the middle of the night while you sleep is part of the privilege that keeps you from understanding what they live in.
What are you meaning here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hold on - what exactly do you think they're lying about? Whether they're currently housed? Because, imo, that's the headline result - 94% is a great success rate.
What I got from the article is that 94% reported being housed at the end of the period where they were receiving money. But the real question for me is what happens 6 months to a year after the funding ends.