[HN Gopher] Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a stree...
___________________________________________________________________
Woman sues L.A. after being struck by car on a street where tents
block sidewalk
Author : Flatcircle
Score : 194 points
Date : 2021-08-04 20:50 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.latimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.latimes.com)
| Causality1 wrote:
| _Todd said she had gone to the overpass to distribute sandwiches,
| potato chips and water to people living at the freeway
| encampment._
|
| _Todd's lawsuit accuses the city of allowing the encampment at
| the 101 overpass on Gower to remain for a "substantial amount of
| time,"_
|
| Why is she distributing supplies to a group of people she wants
| the city to throw out?
| whymauri wrote:
| >Why is she distributing supplies to a group of people she
| wants the city to throw out?
|
| Article is paywalled, but presumably she doesn't want them
| thrown out. There are, in fact, other solutions to homeless
| encampments...
| tigertigerbb wrote:
| > There are, in fact, other solutions to homeless
| encampments...
|
| Seriously, every time I read something like this I wish I was
| truly rich.
|
| I'd hand whymauri a billion dollars and let them loose on the
| homeless problem. The postmortem on the crash 'n burn would
| be a priceless thing to listen to down at the men's club.
| rhacker wrote:
| I seriously don't know what the solution is. Enlighten us?
| AngryData wrote:
| Providing a better and safer living environment?
| oblio wrote:
| Social housing.
| xeromal wrote:
| This is just a personal take but
|
| * House the ones that are functional/capable of taking care
| of themselves to an extent
|
| * Mandatory rehab for the ones are strung out pm
| debilitating opiates
|
| * Asylum for the ones are mentally disabled.
| SrslyJosh wrote:
| > * Mandatory rehab for the ones are strung out pm
| debilitating opiates > * Asylum for the ones are mentally
| disabled.
|
| Wow. You've got some opinions about homeless people,
| don't you?
| thatguy0900 wrote:
| Are you saying the homeless don't have these issues?
| xeromal wrote:
| There is a subset, no matter how small, that has lost
| control due to their drug habits and they need to get on
| their feet. Drug habits can grow beyond anyone's strength
| to beat and the best way to combat that is through a
| rehab program that prevents you from stopping the
| process.
|
| Drug addiction runs in my family and we had to do the
| same for my uncle. Several weeks of keeping him on a
| short leash impacted the rest of his life and he was able
| to take care of his family unlike before. It's not
| pleasant and it requires a tremendous amount of willpower
| and people under that spell need every bit of help that
| can get.
| [deleted]
| lwansbrough wrote:
| Believe it or not you can feed the homeless and also want the
| city to do more for them without turning your streets into a
| slum.
| SrslyJosh wrote:
| Hard to see how the net impact of this lawsuit is going to be
| anything other than more state violence directed at homeless
| people.
| the_optimist wrote:
| Perhaps it's hard for you to envision. You may not have
| seen this before. It has not always been the case that
| losing your way in life consigns you to living under a tarp
| on the overpass, while the $1B borrowed by the city to care
| for you disappears to cronies. Let me paint a picture of a
| different world where people engage with their local
| organizations, neighbors, and their colleagues to provide
| and care for those who are unable to care for themselves.
| Causality1 wrote:
| She's not suing the city to make it provide them with better
| housing. She's suing the city to make it force them off of
| the sidewalks. Whatever her motivations are, that will be the
| immediate result if she wins the lawsuit.
| scoofy wrote:
| Beyond that, it is arguable that allowing people to live in
| squalor yield the worse welfare outcomes these people than
| limiting their agency. Thus, you can both want to provide
| them with fresh, clean food and prevent them from living in
| areas that spread diseases like typhus.
|
| https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/03/typhus-
| tu...
| code_duck wrote:
| I thought it seemed odd or hypocritical at first but I believe
| she is actually attempting to force the city to improve
| conditions for the homeless, more than seeking to enforce clear
| sidewalks for the sake of accessibility.
|
| Whatever the motivation of the lawsuit, the blocking of
| sidewalks is a legitimate complaint that has come up in other
| cities such as Portland. Disabled people can't easily just go
| around a blocked sidewalk, and anyone else blocking a sidewalk
| like a homeowner or construction firm would be fined a great
| deal (like the city did to the federal government last year
| over fences by the courthouse, up to $500 a day).
| function_seven wrote:
| I think it's consistent to both not want encampments in a
| particular location, and to also care about those who occupy
| them.
|
| I agree it's a bit weird though. She's definitely not a
| pedestrian who just happened to be inconvenienced by the tents,
| but actually sought them out. Should make for some interesting
| legal arguments.
| aeternum wrote:
| It seems very consistent. Many people are also pro-bike but
| generally agree it is not in the public interest to allow
| bikes to be ridden on crowded city streets.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| I think it's not in the public interest to allow cars on
| crowded city streets. After all, sometimes there isn't room
| on the sidewalk and cars send people to the hospital.
| hbosch wrote:
| >Why is she distributing supplies to a group of people she
| wants the city to throw out?
|
| She would probably prefer them to be housed, not "thrown out".
| standardUser wrote:
| Or just offered a designated area where they can set up
| encampments without blocking sidewalks or disrupting people's
| homes. It seems like a no-brainer and also the least the city
| can do.
| the_optimist wrote:
| Very few people want to "throw out" homeless people.
|
| The reductionist vitriol is common, but unhelpful for a
| productive discussion.
| thinkcontext wrote:
| Really? I'd say a large percentage of people would want that
| if an encampment appeared next to their house.
|
| In fact, that's probably the reason the homeless were living
| by a freeway. Anywhere near where people live would see them
| hassled by police or exposed to violence and harassment.
| quacked wrote:
| It would see _them_ exposed to violence and harassment?
| smhost wrote:
| > Very few people want to "throw out" homeless people.
|
| you clearly haven't met californians
| [deleted]
| octopoc wrote:
| That would be weird if that's what she was wanting, but I don't
| think that's a fair assumption. Nowhere in the article does it
| say she's trying to force the city to throw the homeless out.
| It does say:
|
| > Todd's lawsuit accuses the city of allowing the encampment at
| the 101 overpass on Gower to remain for a "substantial amount
| of time," creating dangerous conditions for pedestrians and
| drivers. The city also did not post signs warning drivers that
| there would be "excessive foot traffic" in the street due to
| the encampments, the lawsuit said.
|
| She might be hoping that the city will move the homeless people
| elsewhere, put up signage, or possibly even come up with their
| own solution.
| arenaninja wrote:
| Maybe they would move elsewhere if people stop catering their
| food? I agree the city has a problem, but to me she
| exacerbates it (and OP on this thread seems to agree)
|
| ahh the downvotes with no reply have begun, is this reddit
| now?
| JadeNB wrote:
| > Maybe they would move elsewhere if people stop catering
| their food? I agree the city has a problem, but to me she
| exacerbates it (and OP on this thread seems to agree)
|
| What is an appropriate response? As an individual who cares
| about the homeless, you can want, and seek to force, the
| city to address the problem, but the large-scale remedies
| that can be pursued by local government are not available
| to you personally. Do you really think one would occupy a
| moral high ground by doing nothing, compared to trying at
| least to alleviate the suffering of the people who are
| stuck in this position that they don't want either?
|
| (To put it differently, do you think that the homeless are
| there because it's the best possible place?)
| arenaninja wrote:
| > What is an appropriate response?
|
| I like that you're asking this question and we should all
| be asking it but I'm no expert and my opinion on the
| matter is uneducated at best. We should be demanding this
| of elected officials
|
| > Do you really think one would occupy a moral high
| ground by doing nothing, compared to trying at least to
| alleviate the suffering of the people who are stuck in
| this position that they don't want either?
|
| Thinking that ALL of these people don't want to be in
| this position is a dangerous assumption. To me there's
| different kinds of homeless people form those who have
| serious mental issues (thank you Reagan!) to those who
| are undergoing economic hardship (who should make their
| way to a shelter), drug addicts who will rob you for
| their next fix, etc. If you can't stand walking by and do
| nothing consider becoming a social worker and address the
| problem expertly
|
| > (To put it differently, do you think that the homeless
| are there because it's the best possible place?)
|
| I have moved around plenty but at every city I've lived
| in homeless shelters are available. The conditions were
| usually a curfew and no drugs; it seems fair to me
|
| I hope my message isn't heartless, I just think there's
| nuance to helping people
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| You're not supposed to admit this, but homeless friendly
| people and polices tend to attract and sustain homeless
| folks.
| justanotherguy0 wrote:
| Even wild animals change their behavior when they get
| free stuff. Why do you think the zoo has big signs that
| say "do not feed the animals"?
| arenaninja wrote:
| Not just the zoo! Plenty of restaurants have similar
| signs for birds. Humans behavioral patterns aren't that
| different
| [deleted]
| jimmygrapes wrote:
| Regardless of noble intent, "don't feed the wildlife" signs
| exist for the primary reason of preventing recurrent gathering.
| Humans aren't so different.
| emodendroket wrote:
| I would imagine she wants the city to provide them shelter
| rather than just "throw them out" (to where? Eventually the
| game of musical chairs has to stop somewhere).
| [deleted]
| metric10 wrote:
| Presumably the City of Los Angles isn't confronting the problem
| due to an unwillingness to spend funds. If she is successful,
| the cost of doing nothing will increase. So her goal isn't to
| throw them out, it's to force the city's hand.
| the_optimist wrote:
| They "spent" a $1B bond issuance that somehow simply
| disappeared. The bezel in the homeless industry is probably
| 80-90%.
| mark242 wrote:
| The encampment underneath the 101 on Gower is extremely
| dangerous. There is a stop sign at the end of the exit from the
| highway, and cross-traffic does not stop. When you want to go
| south on Gower and there is any amount of traffic, you need to
| hustle to make the left.
|
| The encampment has taken over one of the lanes of southbound
| traffic, and when you hustle to make that left, unless you
| overcorrect on the turn and slow down, you are going to run
| into the encampment. It was a very difficult turn to make pre-
| pandemic when there was maybe 1 or 2 tents on the sidewalk
| underneath the highway; now that it's the sidewalk plus a lane
| of traffic, it is only a matter of time before someone gets run
| over.
|
| As a very-short-term fix, the city needs to move some of those
| people to the encampment on El Centro, a couple of blocks away.
|
| On edit: Google streetview from February, you can almost see
| how the encampment takes over a lane of traffic --
| https://goo.gl/maps/dySMxTxFmgx43uNj7
| vmception wrote:
| Larry Elder has a real chance of winning the Governor recall
| election at this point. I was going to ignore it as just
| opposition party flailings, but now that the opportunity is there
| its not so far fetched.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| That is true, little as I like him. As of yesterday polling for
| the recall was 46% for-48% against, which is tight enough to
| make things very uncertain. Not sure why you're being downvoted
| for factual statements, Elder is the leading Republican
| candidate at present and only a plurality is required in the
| event that the recall vote passes. California coul din theory
| be governed by someone who only had the support of 20% of the
| voters.
| [deleted]
| NonContro wrote:
| If you want to solve homelessness in the USA, then properly
| enforce border security of the country (including walls) and halt
| the refugee intake. The same low-income housing and entry-level
| work which is needed for homeless americans is being taken up by
| these immigrants.
|
| In my homeland of Ukraine, incomes are a fraction of the USA but
| still there is no homelessness because the country's population
| is not growing due to mass immigration, and so the existing
| housing stock is sufficient to cover everyone's needs.
| standardUser wrote:
| I've almost been hit by cars in SF for the exact same reason.
| Cities need to designate places for encampments to stop them from
| blocking sidewalks or disrupting residential areas. And they need
| to rapidly remove any that do block public access or disrupt
| residences.
| slickrick216 wrote:
| They have they're called homeless shelters. Cities shouldn't
| actively endorse camping by marking areas and if you think they
| should would you like to volunteer the streets outside and
| surrounding your house.
|
| Homeless people should be interviewed and those with mental
| illnesses treated by the state as they are objectively sick
| people in need of help. Homeless people under 18 should be
| taken into care. Homeless people over 65 showing senile ageing
| conditions should be asked if they want to go into retirement
| homes.
|
| Outside of this homeless people should be treated with decency
| and respect as adults capable of full agency. They should face
| the consequences of their disregard of the rules. Punishments
| should be scaled but society should not feel sorry for drug
| addicted homeless people and actively enable them to keep
| ruining theres and others lives. This provides an easy
| scapegoat for homeless people who have nothing wrong with them.
| austincheney wrote:
| None of this makes sense to me. In Fort Worth it is a misdemeanor
| to panhandle or sleep in a public space without a permit. As a
| result I almost never see homeless people, even downtown.
| Homeless encampments certainly don't exist or if they do they are
| places far away from residences or roads. I know there are
| numbers indicating there are homeless about though, so they just
| aren't visible in areas where people would walk, drive, or
| sightsee. This is the 12th largest city in the US.
|
| On the other hand look to our neighbor to the south, Austin which
| is almost numerically identical. They appear to have homeless
| people everywhere that non homeless walk and do business. The
| difference is striking. I don't understand why any city would
| allow homeless to congregate like this outside managed care.
| jdalgetty wrote:
| She'll get a nice settlement!
| legitster wrote:
| This is becoming such a frustrating issue. As an advocate of
| public spaces and parks, it's kind of heartbreaking that maybe
| 1/3 of public spaces in our town are no longer usable for all -
| they have more or less become private spaces for the homeless.
|
| I don't have much respect for communities that solve the issue by
| just "kicking them out" and passing the problem onto others, but
| it is almost becoming unacceptably common in America.
|
| It's a pity - this used to be a problem that was mostly solved by
| the private market. The rise of homelessness is almost equal to
| the decline of single occupancy housing (flophouses, chicken wire
| hotels, etc). But in our quest to eliminate slums and "bad
| neighborhoods" we ended up just spreading them across cities.
| bingidingi wrote:
| some small cities literally buy their homeless bus tickets to
| get rid of them, and their politicians point to the places they
| send them as liberalism run amok... how do you even undo such
| callousness
| Qub3d wrote:
| While this is true (my mother works as a homeless community
| outreach nurse in a "destination" state and has talked to
| individuals who show up as a result of this) its only a tiny
| trickle of the torrent.
|
| A huge, _huge_ number of your local homeless population is
| just that, local. A plurality of them are homeless due to
| unaddressed mental health issues. Solving homelessness
| completely may be impossible, but better mental health
| treatment infrastructure would get us a lot closer.
| foxpurple wrote:
| IMO the city should provide enough homeless shelters for
| everyone and then just make homelessness illegal. So if you are
| found sleeping in a tent you get referred to the nearest
| shelter and if you refuse you get arrested.
|
| We can not allow homelessness to exist because it makes public
| spaces unsafe like you mention. Homeless shelters can also help
| by making it hard for them to continue their drug addictions.
| xnyan wrote:
| Even in the best case, homeless shelters have serious
| downsides (to put it mildly) that you may not have
| considered.
|
| -Have a pet? Not coming with you. A stint at the pound,
| likely followed by euthanization due to overcrowding.
|
| -How about a family? If you can even get into a shelter, odds
| are it's going to be male or women and children.
|
| -Shelters are often unsafe and filled with people who have
| untreated problems. Violence is a real risk.
|
| -Very little space for personal possessions, high incidence
| of theft.
|
| >Homeless shelters can also help by making it hard for them
| to continue their drug addictions.
|
| I would strongly encourage you to volunteer at a homeless
| shelter. Not only do they need the help, you'll learn that
| while drugs are restricted at the shelter, it's a fantastic
| place to meet people who use drugs and find new sources of
| drugs.
| golemiprague wrote:
| Those people should not get arrested, they should be in a
| mental hospital. It used to be like that in the old days but
| then some legalisation stopped the practice of putting mental
| people into mental asylums so now they roam the streets.
| Maybe it was because those asylums were horrible but it
| doesn't have to be like that, we can just improve those
| places. There are enough shelters for homeless people but you
| can't force them, we need to force them into something, but
| not into a prison.
| drewrv wrote:
| I agree in principle that if there's a safe bed available,
| setting up a tent in a park should be illegal. But reality is
| complicated and there are lots of edge cases.
|
| Theft and assaults happen at shelters, so maybe there's a bed
| available but do people feel safe? If you were assaulted at a
| shelter would you want to return the next night? Forcing
| people to chose between two unsafe options (shelter or jail)
| feels cruel.
|
| Addiction also complicates things. Should a shelter allow
| substance abuse? If so it can be a really bad place for
| recovering addicts. If shelters do not allow substance abuse,
| then addicts have no place to legally exist. If locking them
| up actually helped their addiction that might be ok, but it
| does not.
|
| There are other problems with shelters. Many of them have
| weird hours and capacity limits. Many are gender segregated.
| What people need is a space where they feel safe, they can
| store their belongings, they can come and go as needed to get
| to appointments and services, they can live with a partner or
| on their own. These are the things that will help people get
| back on their feet, overcome addiction, etc, and "shelters"
| are totally inadequate.
| danans wrote:
| > Homeless shelters can also help by making it hard for them
| to continue their drug addictions.
|
| They do, and this is sometimes why homeless people avoid the
| shelters. You cannot hold someone in a shelter against their
| will.
| crooked-v wrote:
| Also, more than a few of those chronic drug addictions are
| self-medicating for other conditions that are only
| tangential to housing itself and aren't going to get any
| better if you take the drugs away without offering other
| support.
| bperson wrote:
| > Homeless shelters can also help by making it hard for them
| to continue their drug addictions
|
| Many homeless choose the street over the shelter for this
| reason
| slimsag wrote:
| Homelessness is already illegal in most places. They are
| already often referred to the nearest shelter. They are
| already frequently arrested.
|
| Homeless shelter's don't help, they're ridiculously dangerous
| to be in.
|
| You need to do more research on the topic. VICE has some
| decent documentaries on the issue.
| awsthro00945 wrote:
| >Homeless shelter's don't help, they're ridiculously
| dangerous to be in.
|
| Then solve this problem.
|
| The problem I constantly see with homelessness in America
| is that municipalities constantly half ass every attempt to
| fix it, and then throw up their hands and say "well that
| didn't work, I guess there's nothing we can do!" Building
| homeless shelters without making them safe places to be is
| the perfect example of half-assing. I mean ffs, it's in the
| name: _shelter_. A homeless shelter not being safe doesn 't
| mean that homeless shelters don't work, it just means your
| execution was shit.
| Overton-Window wrote:
| Do yourself a favour and volunteer at your nearest
| shelter for an afternoon.
| awsthro00945 wrote:
| Do yourself a favor and don't make assumptions about me.
| I've volunteered at homeless shelters before. At a
| previous company, I was in charge of working directly
| with a homeless shelter to organize volunteer events for
| my colleagues. I have firsthand experience at homeless
| shelters that have successfully become _shelters_ where
| people really want to be there rather than on the street
| because of the services and environment they provide.
| cloverich wrote:
| it would be constructive to provide some examples of
| concrete things municipalities can do, and that we can
| learn about so we can hold them accountable.
| slg wrote:
| > The rise of homelessness is almost equal to the decline of
| single occupancy housing (flophouses, chicken wire hotels,
| etc).
|
| This has specifically been a huge problem in cities with
| expensive real estate like Los Angeles and San Francisco. It is
| why the free market approach to fixing the housing crisis
| doesn't work. The land is so expensive that it doesn't make
| financial sense to waste it on low margin affordable housing.
| Developers realize this, snatch up the current options for
| housing of last resort like SRO buildings, knock them down, and
| build luxury condos. Supply of the bottom of the market is
| decreased in favor of supply at the top of the market and this
| new construction often is less dense than the housing it
| replaces. People argue that the new supply will eventually
| trickle down, but that new supply is always snatched up by
| people moving into the city leaving the people who used live
| there with no place to go.
|
| There needs to be regulation to force the construction of
| affordable housing in these markets as the free market has
| shown it won't be built otherwise.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| With millions facing eviction, it is really sad that many people
| still see the homeless as needing drug counseling to fix their
| homelessness. It couldn't be that the cost of housing has
| skyrocketed and now in many places it costs upwards of $1500 a
| month for rent in a small apartment and the punishment for losing
| a job and falling behind on debt is having to pay even more for
| rent or just not being able to have a safe place to live. Makes
| you wonder if drugs is the cause of homelessness or if the way
| people treat those facing economic hardships often results in
| drug usage.
| dhbanes wrote:
| Come to LA and talk to the people who live in these
| encampments. It will become very obvious to you that these
| aren't people who were living in a 2 bedroom apartment a couple
| months ago and just couldn't swing the rent.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Yeah, those people are mostly still inc ars or on sofas. Once
| someone is down to being in a tent they've usually been
| homeless for a while.
| aeternum wrote:
| It's likely there is not just a single factor. Drugs,
| evictions, mental illness, housing supply are all factors.
| Humans love to simplify to fit a narrative but that is rarely
| the case in practice.
| kazinator wrote:
| > _Because of the encampment, you couldn't walk on the sidewalk.
| You had to walk on the street," she said._
|
| Does not logically follow. LA is a big place; you can choose to
| walk completely elsewhere, unless someone is telling you to go
| the unsafe route at gunpoint.
|
| > _she and another person, a homeless man with whom she was
| walking_
|
| So she is knows the blockaders. Effectively, her friends blocked
| the sidewalk, leading to the alleged problem and incident.
|
| Wow, good friggin' luck with the suit, lady.
| dyingkneepad wrote:
| As a non-American person living in the US, I fail to understand
| one thing about its society. When I walk around town I see tons
| and tons of places advertising jobs, for simple stuff like
| kitchen, moving stuff around, etc. I even recently saw a store
| with a "talk to the manager and start working right now" sign.
| And then I walk around the streets and see all these homeless. It
| seems like a paradox to me, but I am obviously missing some
| important detail here.
|
| Of course I understand some drug addicts may not want a job or
| simply know they can't last more than a few days in one, but I
| would imagine a lot of these homeless people I see on the streets
| would actually like to have an income and be able to live
| anywhere that's not the streets. How do you reconcile that with
| the fact that there are so many simple jobs with open positions
| everywhere?
|
| This is not supposed to be a sarcastic or politically loaded
| question. Where I come from, jobs are simply unavailable and at
| the moment you advertise it, even if it's just flipping burgers,
| there are lines and lines of people competing for it. I fail to
| understand why the US is so different. Anybody would please be
| able to point me at what I'm missing?
|
| Edit: also, people who can't afford housing usually live with
| their families for a long time (or the whole life). Tiny houses
| with entire generations of families living in it are common. I
| guess this is still miles better than living in the streets.
| daenz wrote:
| You're going to get a lot of replies indicating that the
| problem belongs squarely on society's shoulders (healthcare,
| capitalism, drugs).
|
| One cause that you will probably not see highlighted is the
| devaluation of autonomy and personal responsibility, and it's
| absolutely devastating effect on the human spirit to progress.
| AngryData wrote:
| I would argue that the US pushes autonomy and personal
| responsibility much much farther than most developed
| countries.
| throwhome2 wrote:
| Yes it does, yet at the same time many people here do not
| follow that advice relative to many other countries. It
| seems to me lack of personal responsibility is almost a
| side effect instead of a root cause in of itself.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| I think that is the reason for very few homeless cases. Drugs
| and mental illness are the big two. And that says nothing
| about society.
| xnyan wrote:
| > One cause that you will probably not see highlighted is the
| devaluation of autonomy and personal responsibility
|
| Besides the fact that not everyone agrees with this argument,
| it's not highlighted because it's not useful. Let's say your
| right, the reason people sleep under a highway underpass is
| because they have not taken so called "personal
| responsibility" for their situation. Done.
|
| What's the plan now? Extending various forms of assistance is
| the both the moral as well as personal and social best
| option. Leaving these problems unchecked always exerts a cost
| on both society and individuals, and the use of solutions
| like violence and imprisonment have unwanted knock-on effects
| that are best avoided if possible.
|
| First, when you can stop homelessness before it happens via
| widely available emergency rent assistance. It's a cheap no-
| brainer that would save tax dollars from the expensive work
| of helping (or jailing, if feel lack of personal
| responsibility warrants incarceration) people who have lost
| housing. Then, provide the already homeless who are willing
| and able to work with housing, life coaching and training to
| get back on track. Then, safe communities and residence
| programs for those who are physically or mentally incapable
| of supporting/taking care of themselves. I'm sure there will
| also be people who are a danger to others and may need to be
| imprisoned.
| thereisnospork wrote:
| They can survive without having a job (food, water, shelter)
| and either cannot hold down a job[0] or prefer not to.
|
| [0]Either illness/addiction, or accumulation of factors e.g.
| car broke down, fired, then evicted, then no address, etc.
| emodendroket wrote:
| Do you think if a visibly homeless person walks in and asks for
| a job the average business owner is going to hire them?
| throw149102 wrote:
| That's a good question, and I'm born and raised in the US!
|
| Perhaps it's due to the difference between CoL and working
| wages in a given city. Even if someone who is homeless does
| start working, that doesn't mean they can afford rent in the
| city. That also doesn't mean they'll get healthcare or other
| necessary benefits for their continued survival. You also have
| close to no protections in the US, so you don't really have
| stable employment in the same way other countries do. So at the
| end of the day, they may think "whats the point?".
|
| I've also seen a fair number of homeless people who are
| disabled, mentally or physically. Perhaps that bars them from
| some jobs. (The ADA disallows barring people from jobs if their
| disability does not impair them from doing essential work, but
| I'm unsure about what is considered essential and what isn't.)
|
| These are just my 2 cents. I imagine there's at least some
| research on the topic.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| You should look into this more because although you have some
| info, you're misinformed too. For example when you are
| severely mentally ill you often have 2 choices:
|
| 1. Take daily medication that makes you so lethargic or
| nauseated (or both) that you certainly can't work.
|
| 2. Don't take medication and deal with delusions or
| hallucinations, or both, which again prevents you from
| working. When you're talking out loud to voices only you can
| hear, no one wants to work with you.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| In the U.S. there is a law that says if you want to hire
| government-subsidized indentured servants from overseas, you
| need to the advertise the job to U.S. citizens first. Just
| because there is a sign advertising the job doesn't mean
| they're actually going to hire an American.
| emodendroket wrote:
| I don't think people are sponsoring visas for dishwashers.
| nradov wrote:
| Actually they do. Seasonal resorts typically hire a lot of
| their kitchen staff on H-2B visas.
| emodendroket wrote:
| That's true, but if he's talking about walking around LA
| it's not really seasonal resorts that are in question.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Here is one take by the Economist:
|
| https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2018/12/10/...
| oneplane wrote:
| As far as I know this is mainly because most 'jobs' aren't
| really jobs in the sense that you can support yourself with it.
| In the US there isn't much of a requirement to pay people
| enough to survive.
| TedDoesntTalk wrote:
| A lot of homeless are mentally ill or, as you mentioned, drug-
| addicted. There's a very small percentage who can keep a job
| once hired.
| paulddraper wrote:
| > How do you reconcile that with the fact that there are so
| many simple jobs with open positions everywhere?
|
| A lot of people simply don't want to work.
|
| Would rather spend the day on the sidewalk than have
| obligations.
|
| A lot of homeless have mental illness (bipolar, depression,
| drug addiction, etc.).
|
| This isn't necessarily more common in the US than any other
| country; the US in general provides fewer public services. So
| you'll see more of them on the street.
|
| (And of course SoCal has excellent weather; there's more
| homeless there than in Maine. LA is kinda extreme.)
| simonsarris wrote:
| First please note that America has fewer homeless people than
| many European nations or Canada. Per 10K:
| Germany......79 UK...........46 Sweden.......36
| Canada.......36 Netherlands..23 France.......21
| USA..........17
|
| (via Wikipedia, stats for differing years unfortunately but
| gives a sense of magnitude)
|
| It's mostly that the US homeless population concentrates in
| very few areas.
|
| > How do you reconcile that with the fact that there are so
| many simple jobs with open positions everywhere?
|
| I have friends who have tried to hire homeless for help with
| moving because her movers did not show up. The experience did
| not go well. She basically had to babysit them to the effect of
| "Ok, pack up that box. Now take it and come with me. [he
| follows without box] No, lets go back and get the box..." But
| for everything.
|
| Even among the set of homeless who want to do jobs, many need
| _extraordinary_ supervision, and most places are not staffed
| well enough to handle that.
| coding123 wrote:
| One thing that people should consider is that CA,
| specifically has a massive homelessness problem. the worse in
| the US.
|
| https://www.usich.gov/tools-for-
| action/map/#fn[]=1300&fn[]=2...
|
| No one really knows why, but the probable reason is a mix of
| people moving their while already homeless and that housing
| prices in CA are the worst in the country.
| Overton-Window wrote:
| Those stats are misleading, e.g. Germany's figures include
| unsheltered refugees. Excluding refugees the number of
| homeless people in Germany sits at 335,000 to 420,000.
|
| https://homelessworldcup.org/homelessness-statistics/
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > unsheltered refugees
|
| So... homeless people?
| Overton-Window wrote:
| The path from refugee to homelessness is an obvious one
| and points to an over-admission by the German government.
|
| The path from native born citizen to homelessness is less
| obvious and points to complete social dysfunction.
| paulddraper wrote:
| "I have friends who have tried to hire homeless for help with
| moving because her movers did not show up."
|
| That....sounds terrible.
| diamondo25 wrote:
| You should compare US states with European countries.
|
| California has around 161,000 homeless people, of 39.5
| million people. That is about 161000/3950 = ~40 per 10k.
|
| For germany, that number includes "around 375,000 asylum
| seekers and refugees in temporary accommodation", which is
| more than 50% of total homeless people (see wikipedia).
| rezendi wrote:
| This is wildly incorrect. As of Dec 2019, there were 5,000
| "unsheltered" / "sleeping rough" people in the UK, population
| ~65,000,000, according to The Economist (cite:
| https://www.economist.com/britain/2019/12/18/on-any-one-
| wint...) which was fewer than the number in San Francisco,
| population ~800,000 (cite: https://hsh.sfgov.org/wp-
| content/uploads/2020/01/ExecutiveSu... ).
| spiderice wrote:
| You completely changed what is being talked about. GP said
| nothing about "unsheltered/sleeping rough". GP said
| "homeless", so I'm not sure why you're suggesting that your
| statistics disprove what GP said. A homeless person in a
| shelter is still homeless.
|
| I have no idea if GP's statistics are accurate, but nothing
| you said proves they aren't.
| asteroidbelt wrote:
| For UK the statistics is skewed.
|
| Their definition of homeless people include people in
| temporary accommodations (like in council houses).
|
| From wikipedia:
|
| > The UK homeless charity Shelter estimated in 2019 that the
| number of people in the UK who were entirely homeless or in
| temporary accommodation was 280,000. Rough sleepers are only
| a small proportion of the homeless.
|
| Note the last sentence.
|
| 280K / 66M gives roughly 46 per 10K.
|
| So, don't just to conclusions too quickly when reading
| statistics.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > First please note that America has fewer homeless people
| than many European nations or Canada
|
| Wow that's a real reality check right there. I would have
| never guessed that Sweden had 2x the homeless of the US.
| Thank you.
| baby wrote:
| Same with France. Lived there for most of my life and the
| US is a culture shock when it comes to homelessness. I'm
| confused by these numbers.
| mfer wrote:
| In some cities there are large concentrations of homeless
| people while in other parts of the country they are rare
| to encounter. Those large concentrations are regularly
| talked about by activists and the news media.
| axaxs wrote:
| I think this is probably correct. The last time I've even
| seen an obviously homeless person was in SF, and I
| haven't been there in 2 years.
| handrous wrote:
| I live in a purplish city in a reddish state that never
| makes national news for homelessness, and _something 's_
| gotten way, way worse about homelessness in this city
| over the last decade. Even out in the 'burbs, where you
| _never_ used to see homeless people. All over. I hear
| there are some long-term tent camps in parts of the city,
| too, which are new in the last couple years.
| nradov wrote:
| There have long been migrant camps around Calais filled
| with people trying to reach the UK. I don't know if
| they've ever been accurately counted.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-
| calais-id...
| gwright wrote:
| I don't know how valid those stats are but those are per
| capita numbers not absolute numbers, so not twice as many
| total homeless:
|
| Sweden: 10,230,000/10,000*36 = 36,828 homeless
|
| US: 328,200,000/10,000*17 = 649,740 homeless
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > those are per capita numbers not absolute numbers
|
| Of course they are. Why would you use anything else to
| compare countries?
| mistercool wrote:
| I think the comment was in response to your phrasing:
|
| > 2x the homeless of the US.
|
| to me that reads as total homeless population, not a
| function of population.
| Overton-Window wrote:
| For comparison: there are single neighbourhoods in
| California with >36k homeless. Congregation is the real
| issue.
| cscurmudgeon wrote:
| We can flip that around and say US has much more housed
| people when you use absolute numbers.
| OlleTO wrote:
| I think presenting it like this is misleading since the
| definition of homelessness is different per country.
|
| Breaking down the Swedish stats, of the reported 34000, the
| source says:
|
| "4 500 people were in acute homelessness, of which 280 were
| sleeping rough. 5 600 people received institutional care or
| lived in different forms of category housing. 13 900 people
| lived in long-term housing solutions (the secondary housing
| market), provided by the social services in the
| municipalities. 6 800 persons lived in short-term insecure
| housing solutions that they had organized themselves."
|
| Unfortunately the original source isn't archived so I haven't
| checked the exact definitions used here.
|
| For the US numbers, we have:
|
| "On a single night in 2018, roughly 553,000 people were
| experiencing homelessness in the United States. About two-
| thirds (65%) were staying in sheltered locations--emergency
| shelters or transitional housing programs--and about one-
| third (35%) were in unsheltered locations such as on the
| street"
|
| I'll assume you'll get similar discrepancies for all of the
| other countries.
| fabian2k wrote:
| Are you sure those stats are right? It does not seem
| plausible to me that Germany has 4-5 times as many homeless
| as the US.
|
| I looked a bit, and the numbers really don't match my
| expectations, I'm pretty sure they're not counting the same
| things. I found one paper that compares the US and Germany
| and they got a lifetime prevalence of homelesness of 6.2% in
| the US and 2.4% in Germany (https://sci-
| hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.724).
|
| I know it's dangerous to rely on my own expectations and
| biases here, but the numbers are too far off for me. And I
| think it is very likely that the criteria for homelesness
| vary greatly between countries.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| The OECD HC3.1. HOMELESS POPULATION has a note that says
| the German numbers also include people who inhabit
| temporary government-provided housing.
|
| "Germany: Includes three main groups: i) Homeless refugees
| with an international protection status of more than one
| year (and eligible for job seeking allowance and renting
| regular housing in Germany, but still in temporary
| accommodation because they could notfind regular housing),
| ii) Homeless people without such a background who are
| provided with temporary accommodation by municipalities,
| and iii) Homeless people who are provided by NGOs with some
| type of temporary accommodation or are known as homeless
| users of their advice centres (without permanent housing
| and in contact with the advice centre at least once in the
| preceding months"
|
| So it's "homeless" people that were "provided with
| temporary accommodation by municipalities", meaning it is a
| different type of homelessness than camping in LA.
| Overton-Window wrote:
| They are misleading as they include hundreds of thousands
| of unsheltered refugees.
|
| Anyone who has ever walked around SF or LA and Berlin knows
| this implicitly. The US cooks the books.
|
| https://www.feantsaresearch.org/download/germany24116929861
| 4...
| nine_k wrote:
| Neither LA nor SF nor even Washington, DC are
| representative of the US in this regard. Say, NYC does
| have homeless people, but you'll have hard time finding a
| tent camp with them. In many smaller towns they may be
| basically unheard of.
|
| It takes a certain legal regime, law enforcement regime,
| economic situation, climate, etc to make a place
| attractive to the homeless. I suppose that neither
| Vermont nor Texas have a lot of homeless people.
|
| I also heard of the practice of buying a Greyhound bus
| ticket to the homeless and luring them to go to warmer,
| more abundant places, thus physically removing the
| problem.
|
| Also it's usually noted that many US homeless would be in
| a mental institution elsewhere; they are not homeless by
| conscious choice to be anti-social.
| [deleted]
| bogomipz wrote:
| You should realize that California has the overwhelming
| majority of the homeless population in the US with almost
| a quarter of the entire homeless population living
| there[1][2]. You should also realize that SF and LA are
| two of most expensive cities in the US for housing -
| either renting or buying. As such Berlin is hardly a
| meaningful comparison. The homeless crisis in these two
| places is very well-known. Nobody is "cooking the books."
| Lastly California is not at all representative of the
| rest of the country.
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_California
|
| [2] https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-
| rankings/homeless-po...
| slg wrote:
| >Anyone who has ever walked around SF or LA and Berlin
| knows this implicitly.
|
| The easy explanation for that is the social programs that
| care for the homeless are stronger in Germany. You don't
| see Berlin's homeless as a problem because they don't
| have to result to literally sleeping on the street. The
| people living in shelters are no less homeless, they just
| aren't as visible.
| nicoburns wrote:
| If you're living in a shelter then you're not just less
| visble, you're also much better off. Obviously it's a
| problem to be solved too, but a less severe one than
| people who are literally living on the street.
| slg wrote:
| >If you're living in a shelter then you're not just less
| visble, you're also much better off.
|
| Usually, but not universally. Even when shelter space is
| available in a city like LA, it is not always easy to
| convince people to stay there. Lots of shelters have
| problems ranging from crime to forcing draconian rules
| onto the people staying there. In a place with a
| relatively comfortable climate like Los Angeles, some
| people legitimately prefer to be on the street. Their
| personal agency matters and we can't just round them up
| to throw them in a shelter. We need to improve the
| shelters until they are the obvious choice over the
| street.
| Overton-Window wrote:
| Although social programs are better in Germany, that
| isn't the entire story. You'll see thousands of homeless
| strewn through the parks and along the banks of the Spree
| in the summer and U-Bahn stations in the winter. The
| major difference is the authorities dismantle and move
| any tent cities before they become endemic, unlike
| California. Belligerent behaviour is usually dealt with,
| meaning those that remain on the streets are
| predominantly harmless.
| [deleted]
| AnotherGoodName wrote:
| I'll point out that the situation is different too. I've
| lived in Australia and the USA. Australia has more homeless
| but you will never see 3 miles of tents on major roads or
| encampments under bridges.
|
| Other countries count them as homeless but often they will be
| cared for and have shelter. The USA is lacking there.
| bwship wrote:
| These tent camps are quite new in the US. About 5 years
| ago, there started to be a tent camp in Seattle, but when I
| moved to LA there was not tents anywhere (except maybe a
| few on Skid Row), flash forward to about 2 years ago, and
| there are now literally miles and miles of tent camps all
| over Los Angeles. It is one of those things that once it is
| allowed at all, it quickly becomes overwhelming.
| mdorazio wrote:
| What part of LA are you in? I've lived on the west side
| for the last 13 years and tent camps have been an issue
| for at least the last 10. They started getting noticeably
| worse about 5 years ago in line with a rapid rise in the
| unsheltered population [1].
|
| [1] http://www.laalmanac.com/social/so14.php
| bwship wrote:
| I was on the west side. Yea, there were a few tents on
| 3rd street in Venice, but I used to play golf at Penmar
| for like the least 8 years, and there were never tents
| there, and in the past couple years it became about 1.5
| miles of tents along holes 1 and 3. It has just grown
| leaps and bounds.
| akira2501 wrote:
| > It is one of those things that once it is allowed at
| all, it quickly becomes overwhelming.
|
| I believe this is mostly due to the effect of the ruling
| in the landmark "Martin v City of Boise" [1] case.
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_v._Boise
| mc32 wrote:
| IIRC the tents started right after the occupy Wall Street
| movement. Often they'd camp next to homeless or homeless
| would join their camps and it morphed. There have also
| been drives to deliver tents to homeless...
| Gimpei wrote:
| I don't think wikipedia is a good source of data in this
| case. For one German homelessness includes Syrian refugees.
| Second, it appears as if the definition of homelessness
| varies wildly across countries, making these numbers not
| really useful for cross-country comparison.
| https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-
| population.pd...
| backtoyoujim wrote:
| What ethic background can the United States subtract from
| its total homeless population ?
|
| Because that reads _to_me_ like you are saying "homeless
| Syrians don't count".
|
| To which I would ask you, "Why not ?"
| fxtentacle wrote:
| What I believe he meant is that Syrians who live in a
| temporary refugee camp are counted as "homeless" by the
| German statistics office because they live in temporary
| housing and, hence, do not have a permanent place to live
| yet. And that statistic counted Germany in 2018, back
| when ~180000 refugees arrived.
| awsthro00945 wrote:
| That still leaves the same question, though. In the US,
| many municipalities designate certain areas as
| government-sanctioned camping grounds where "economic
| refugees" can stay while they don't have a permanent
| place to live. Does that count as "temporary housing" and
| can we exclude them from the homeless numbers as well?
|
| Massaging the numbers seems silly to me. At it's core,
| we're talking about how to solve the issue of unhoused
| people that require government assistance. Syrian
| refugees were/are an unhoused population that required
| government assistance. US tent-livers are unhoused
| populations that require government assistance. It's
| perfectly acceptable to include them in the same
| conversation. If the strategies that were applied to
| helping Syrian refugees find housing can somehow be
| helpful when helping LA tent-livers find housing, then it
| _should_ be part of the same conversation.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| If I understand things correctly, the LA tent-livers are
| homeless and also unhoused, but the German syrian refuges
| are only homeless, but not unhoused. They have an
| apartment with shower, wifi, and a shared cooking area.
|
| They are counted as homeless because they cannot afford
| to pay for their own home yet, which makes sense if you
| just ran away from a war. But they can apply for jobs
| online and they can shower for the job interview to nail
| that crucial first impression. The LA tent-livers can
| have internet and showers, too, but it requires a lot
| more effort.
| awsthro00945 wrote:
| I dunno the last time you went and visited a homeless
| encampment in the US, but many of them do indeed have
| showers and internet, too (sometimes provided by the
| government, other times just because these tent cities
| are legitimate cities).
|
| I've seen a lot of tents with cooking areas too, and some
| even with portable generators, TVs, and fridges.
|
| So can we exclude them from the homeless statistics yet?
| fn-mote wrote:
| I do feel like immigrants (refugees, not citizens) living
| in official refugee camps should be accounted for
| differently than citizen homeless living in the streets
| of (say) Berlin.
|
| Now perhaps this is not how the statistics were made, but
| I think some consideration or further investigation
| should be made.
|
| For reference: Syria is the #1 source of people displaced
| due to violence, and Germany is the #5 host of such
| people. https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/
|
| [I see a sibling comment makes the same point.]
| Gimpei wrote:
| Normally when people talk about homelessness in the US,
| they mean people living on the street without any sort of
| shelter. Of course Syrian refugees count, it just seems
| like they are their own distinct case, as, for one thing,
| they are sheltered.
|
| My grandparents on both sides, by the way, were refugees
| from Iraq under very similar conditions to today's
| refugees from Syria. I say that only because you seem to
| be very quick to judge others. A little bit of
| introspection might be in order.
| booleandilemma wrote:
| If a person arrives at a country as a refugee _of course_
| they're going to be homeless.
|
| It would be more interesting to see stats on people who
| have been living in the country, because these are people
| who _shouldn't_ be homeless, but they are.
| Swizec wrote:
| How are "homeless" defined in different countries? There was
| an eye-opening 99pi series of podcasts around homelessness in
| USA where I learned that the definition is ridiculously
| strict.
|
| Something like "If you slept anywhere other than the street
| _last night_ , you do not qualify as homeless". I can't
| remember if tents count, but sleeping on a friend's couch,
| squatting a derelict building, or staying in your car
| disqualifies you from the definition of homeless.
| mfer wrote:
| You can find the legal definition at
| https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/11302
|
| Squatting in a derelict building counts as homeless per the
| US definition. It's not just people living on the street.
| wahern wrote:
| That definition is not necessarily applicable to actual
| research studies, homeless counts, or even government
| programs. You have to look to the actual study or program
| details. Unfortunately, the applied definition is rarely
| reported in the media.
| kbelder wrote:
| One study I saw of the local schools that breathlessly
| reported huge homeless rates of schoolchildren counted
| every child that didn't have a dedicated bedroom.
| Sleeping on Dad's couch? Homeless.
| mfer wrote:
| The numbers being talked about earlier (17 per 10k
| people) come from HUD. The US legal definitions matter to
| their reporting
| wahern wrote:
| See column 5 in table Table HC 3.1.1a, page 5, of the OECD
| report linked elsethread
| (https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC3-1-Homeless-
| population.pd...).
| ceilingcorner wrote:
| This seems counterintuitive but it actually does make sense.
| Most of the populated urban areas in the US are too cold or
| too politically hostile to have large homeless populations.
| It's primarily an issue in a handful of regions and cities.
| mfer wrote:
| In the US 27% of the total homeless population are those who
| are chronically homeless. That's about .05% of the US
| population.
| throwhome2 wrote:
| Nobody wants to admit this, but probably more so here on HN and
| specially those who will downvote this reply to oblivion and
| have 10k+ karma points. They will find any excuse to sidestep
| this as a legitimate issue, here are some to watch out for: a.
| other countries have a worse homeless problem b. it's because
| we closed mental health institutions in the 80s c. I was
| homeless you don't know what you're talking about d. war on
| drugs is the cause e. you shouldn't judge others maybe they
| chose this... the list goes on and on and I'm not going to
| respond to any of them here, just something to be on the look
| out for when this topic comes up.
|
| In the US people don't find the same solidarity with their
| fellow citizens unless you belong to the same club or same
| sociopolitical spectrum you basically think you're better than
| everyone else and there is a deep rooted superiority complex
| among people here. This is in stark contrast to countries even
| in Europe including Italy and others where there is a strong
| sense of community and for example Italianess that supersedes
| petty political and idealogical beliefs that many in the US
| cling to almost religiously.
|
| I don't think Americans want to admit this specially the closer
| to the coastal cities you get the less sense of solidarity with
| fellow citizens and belongingness prevails rather than more
| community driven even religious South.
| scoofy wrote:
| If you take the problem in good-faith. That is, that even if
| these people wanted to engage in pro-social behavior, it's
| essentially nihilist at this point to assume anyone in this
| position can achieve this without years of support. I think a
| lot of it comes from policies that have in America that have
| effectively destroyed the housing supply. This goes triple for
| California.
|
| For folks living on the street, you absolutely cannot earn
| enough from a minimum wage to house yourself. At best, you
| could barely get by sharing housing with a few folks. Assuming
| you have addiction issues that lead to anti-social behavior,
| you will have difficulty maintaining relationships in share
| living spaces and maintaining your employment.
|
| I think we would have a dramatically different situation with
| our homeless, if someone could reasonably afford a small one-
| bedroom or studio apartment at 25%-40% of the prevailing
| minimum wage. As it stands, in Los Angeles, median one-bedroom
| seems to be about $2,362/month, and a minimum wage job there,
| _before taxes_ only pays $2,462 per month.
|
| Thus, a minimum wage job, even if the person magically paid
| nothing in taxes cannot even come close to covering the median
| unit, by a factor of 2-4. In addition, that median unit likely
| requires further assets like a vehicle in order for a person to
| be able to access employment.
|
| Because of this American development pattern, it is nearly
| impossible for people to even begin to earn enough money to
| maintain any sense of private living space.
| joshmaker wrote:
| These jobs almost certainly also want someone who is clean and
| reliable.
|
| If you are homeless, you might not have access to a shower or
| laundry facilities. You might have to rely on public transit
| (which is unreliable in many American cities), or you might not
| be able to afford public transit, so it might be hard to arrive
| on time. All of which will put you at a strong disadvantage
| compared to any other applicant.
|
| If you do go to a job interview you might have to leave all
| your positions in the street where without you watching over
| them, they could be stolen. If you have a pet or a child, there
| might not be anyone trustworthy willing to take care of them
| while you are away.
|
| If you pass the first round of interviews, you might need a
| phone number where they can call you for a follow up. But what
| happens if you can't afford a phone plan? Or if you have a
| phone, but don't have easy access to a location where you can
| charge it?
|
| Finally day after day of living on the street, having very poor
| nutrition, not getting enough quality sleep, dealing with
| extreme stress, can all cause mental health issues.
|
| There are lots of obstacles to getting a job when you are
| homeless. And the longer you go without a job, the harder it is
| to get a new job.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| There isn't a social safety net for men, by design.
|
| If you're not a custodial parent, you get food benefits and
| Medicaid potentially, but are effectively locked out of housing
| and long term benefits.
|
| If you have a child, you'll get a subsistence level of living.
| If not, you hang in for awhile until you get hurt, and
| eventually fall off the path.
| shadowoflight wrote:
| > Anybody would please be able to point me at what I'm missing?
| Wages well below a living wage, untreated mental illness and
| substance addiction, and general villainization of the
| homeless. There's a good chance that homeless people couldn't
| even get many (or most) of those jobs if they tried because the
| owners/managers wouldn't give them the time of day.
| AngryData wrote:
| Because those jobs don't pay enough for the people to afford
| housing and all the other necessities. And if the ONLY thing it
| affords you is housing, then you just sleep, wakeup, work, eat
| plain rice, sleep, repeat, without progressing anywhere. Whoops
| got sick for 3 days with some terrible shit, fired, lost
| apartment, car repoed, back to being homeless. Why spend the
| effort in moving nowhere?
|
| And the hiring processes themselves are usually absolute shit.
| "Give us your resume, then type your entire resume into these
| boxes, then randomly 6 months later after you have done that to
| 100 different places you get a call to interview the next day
| on short notice, come in with a paper copy and looking clean
| and fresh, pass a drug test since you certainly wouldn't have
| dared smoke some weed while being poor or homeless, "Okay
| thanks we might call you but probably not because we are
| interviewing 60 people for this position", ect.
| handrous wrote:
| If you talk to people hiring for very bottom-of-the-market
| workers, you'll find their #1 problem is finding people who
| _actually show up_ , and also aren't (bluntly) crazy,
| dangerous, or frequently drunk/high. There's no shortage of
| candidates for $12/hr jobs who _are not_ worth $12 /hr of
| labor, since they don't show up half the time and are space-
| cases when they do.
|
| The "actually show up" part is a combination of the fact that
| people who, as a personality trait, have trouble showing up to
| work, tend to cluster at the bottom of the employment market,
| _and_ people without steady, fairly high income have a lot more
| challenges securing reliable transportation and otherwise
| arranging their lives so they can get to work on time and
| consistently (childcare, for example, or unexpected, sudden
| needs to care for or assist other relatives, or illness of
| their own) even if they have the best intentions and are
| reasonably responsible.
|
| Part of this is probably that minimum wage needs to go up quite
| a bit and/or these employers just need to pay more, but I don't
| think that would entirely solve the problem.
|
| [EDIT] source: I once worked on an app in this space, and had
| some visibility into the feedback & concerns of employers of
| this sort (not with the app, but generally with hiring in that
| market) and that was _consistently_ something they talked
| about, at length, usually with tons of sad or amusing
| /surprising anecdotes--hire someone, then they just never, ever
| show up, or they come for their first shift then ghost after
| that, or you call them 30 minutes after their shift is supposed
| to start and they're like "oh yeah, that, I'm not coming in
| today, I might be in tomorrow, I dunno yet", or their car's
| always broken, obviously-high candidates in interviews, all
| that sort of thing.
| rvn1045 wrote:
| Another thing you have to understand about the us are weak
| family ties.
|
| If you are unemployed in another country you could easily stay
| with some family member - cousin, uncle etc
|
| This is not the case in the U.S
| yarky wrote:
| > Where I come from, jobs are simply unavailable and at the
| moment you advertise it, even if it's just flipping burgers,
| there are lines and lines of people competing for it.
|
| I can think of two reasons:
|
| 1. I doubt those people lining up to flip burgers fall under
| the same definition of homelessness. I don't doubt they need a
| job and might not have enough/any income, but that's not a
| "choice" as evidenced by the line up.
|
| 2. Homelessness in developed countries is not necessarily due
| to a lack of job opportunities but a lot more about a lack of
| _basic_ job /communication skills sometimes associated with
| mental health issues.
|
| At least that's what I've realized when comparing the poor/rich
| countries where I've lived.
| jerrac wrote:
| As others have said, I'm not sure this is a good forum to get a
| good answer on this subject. I have some ideas, but nothing I'd
| share without learning a lot more about the subject.
|
| So, my suggestion would be to look up your local rescue
| mission, or homeless shelter, and ask there. While you're at
| it, take some time or money to support them.
|
| I know my local rescue mission has some very effective programs
| that get people off the streets permanently. So I'm sure they'd
| know what they're talking about if you ask them.
| asciimov wrote:
| You are missing all the things you need to have to get that
| job.
|
| First that guy offering the job is choosy, so he wants someone
| showered, with clean clothes, who doesn't look like they have
| major health problems or drug habits, they need to have an
| address, and transportation to get to work.
|
| So for the homeless, they need: a place to stay, an address,
| access to a shower and laundry, they need clothes in good
| condition, they need some money to buy their first uniform,
| they need someplace safe to store their belongings, and access
| to enough food to get through their shifts.
| [deleted]
| michaelt wrote:
| As I understand it, there are multiple factors:
|
| 1. Places like San Francisco have temperate climates, and cops
| not under orders to actively chase homeless people out. A good
| place to move if you're homeless, right? But San Francisco
| _also_ has ruinously expensive housing, so the money one can
| make in an entry-level job won 't go very far.
|
| (American cities have a long tradition of "solving"
| homelessness by putting homeless people on buses to other
| cities. Officially, this is to "help them reunite with their
| families" but we all know what's really going on)
|
| 2. A bunch of things when you're poor are self-compounding.
| Lost your access to a stove and a fridge? You're going to be
| spending more on food. When you lost your home, probably you
| fucked up your credit rating too. Now the landlord wants a
| bigger deposit, and the electricity company wants you on their
| prepaid tariff which happens to be the most expensive one - and
| so on.
|
| 3. I've heard it said you don't become a rough sleeper when you
| spend your last dollar; you become a rough sleeper when you
| exhaust your last social connection. If you've lost your home
| but you still have sympathetic friends and family members you
| can become part of the 'hidden homeless' sleeping on a couch.
|
| If factors like drug addiction or untreated mental illness,
| have exhausted the hospitality of friends and family, those
| same factors will also make employers reluctant to hire you.
| leetrout wrote:
| You're seeing second and third order effects of our poor
| healthcare system. Especially the complete lack of appropriate
| mental health.
| throwhome2 wrote:
| Nobody wants to admit this, but probably more so here on HN and
| specially those who will downvote this reply to oblivion and
| have 10k+ karma points. They will find any excuse to sidestep
| this as a legitimate issue, here are some to watch out for: a.
| other countries have a worse homeless problem b. it's because
| we closed mental health institutions in the 80s c. I was
| homeless you don't know what you're talking about d. war on
| drugs is the cause e. you shouldn't judge others maybe they
| chose this... the list goes on and on and I'm not going to
| respond to any of them here, just something to be on the look
| out for when this topic comes up. In the US people don't find
| the same solidarity with their fellow citizens unless you
| belong to the same club or same sociopolitical spectrum you
| basically think you're better than everyone else and there is a
| deep rooted superiority complex among people here. This is in
| stark contrast to countries even in Europe including Italy and
| others where there is a strong sense of community and for
| example Italianess that supersedes petty political and
| idealogical beliefs that many in the US cling to almost
| religiously.
|
| I don't think Americans want to admit this specially the closer
| to the coastal cities you get the less sense of solidarity with
| fellow citizens and belongingness prevails rather than more
| community driven even religious South.
| belval wrote:
| The base issue is usually mental illness worsened by substance
| abuse, without a strong social net and with readily available
| street drugs these people are pretty much unfit for any kind of
| work.
| goshx wrote:
| This has been what I've seen personally volunteering at a
| homeless outreach. Mental illness seems to be the major
| factor.
| api wrote:
| AFAIK the homeless problem exploded when the US shut down
| its institutional mental health system in the 1980s.
|
| The shutdown wasn't just to cut costs. Many institutions
| had terrible records that included abusive treatment of
| patients. But we pulled the plug on that system with no
| replacement, so major cities became open air psychiatric
| wards.
| AngryData wrote:
| Yeah the system was terrible at the time, what they did
| however is sort of like seeing a bad performing school
| and closing it down permanently and then just leaving
| people completely uneducated. And then people complaining
| about how many illiterate people we got running around.
| jhgb wrote:
| "Without readily available street drugs"? I suspect that
| wasn't about medication?
| edoceo wrote:
| Without net. And easy access to drugs.
| dragontamer wrote:
| There's a difference between chronic homelessness (which is
| probably caused by mental illness or drug abuse), and
| "typical" homelessness.
|
| "Typical" people are homeless for only a few days before
| someone in their social circle rescues them (and its not a
| happy story either: it could be that they tried living on the
| streets but ultimately decided that living with their
| alcoholic and abusive husband is superior to living on the
| streets). A lot of effort should probably be made at helping
| these individuals and providing support here.
|
| We shouldn't give up on Chronic homelessness either. Not
| everyone is mentally sick or a druggie. But a substantial
| number of them are clearly sick. And even if they are
| mentally sick, a pathway should be figured out to try to find
| a way to make them productive members of society.
| pengaru wrote:
| > a pathway should be figured out to try to find a way to
| make them productive members of society.
|
| I think this attitude is a major component of the
| fundamental problem.
|
| Why not just accept that some proportion of society is
| unproductive for whatever reason, and spend tax dollars to
| keep them minimally housed, bathed, and clothed. Period.
| It's not extravagant, it's not spacious, it's just a
| cramped SRO any citizen can get a room in.
|
| So much of "productive" employed society is just
| inefficient borderline pointless busy work anyways, and
| automation will be increasingly decimating these jobs, it's
| not something we can continue ignoring and treating as a
| "homeless problem".
|
| Admit it, most of modern society already isn't productive,
| get over it. I can't honestly say all my colleagues in the
| tech industry were net productive. There was a whole lot of
| pissing money down the drain on insignificant
| contributions, aka warm chairs, aka plants. If tech
| companies can afford to pay tech salaries for nothing in
| return, they can pay more taxes to keep the streets, parks,
| sidewalks, and beaches clean and those down on their luck
| bathed and groomed enough to interview for a fake job.
| parineum wrote:
| I think your view of "productive" is too narrow. It
| doesn't just have to mean "produced tax revenue".
| foobarian wrote:
| The mental illness factor is a part of it, but what's
| different about the US is that there seems to be less will to
| "put away" the homeless. You don't see them in more
| authoritarian societies where the powers that be are less
| cavalier about grabbing them off the street and depositing
| who knows where (even if it does end up being some nice
| universal-healthcare provided institution).
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Do those jobs pay enough for housing + commute?
| kazinator wrote:
| Some of them probably do. But if you're a homeless person who
| has lived without "housing + commute", the equation may seem
| different. Why the fuck do I want to spend most of my day in
| some shitty job, so that I can cover "housing + commute",
| whose main purpose is to uphold this identity built around
| the shitty job?
| goshx wrote:
| Do those jobs pay so little that it is better to not have a
| job at all?
| sudosysgen wrote:
| What's the incentive to get a job if you're still going to
| be homeless? If you stay homeless you're eventually going
| to get fired too.
| goshx wrote:
| I don't know, maybe being able to buy food is an
| incentive?
| shadowgovt wrote:
| Generally, no. Buying whatever one wants to eat may be an
| incentive, but in most US cities soup kitchens and/or
| access to the SNAP program are available. Malnutrition
| can be a real problem. and 10% of the US experiences food
| insecurity each year, but starvation is extremely rare.
|
| In the US at least, hunger / food insecurity is a cross-
| cutting issue; people who own homes also run into it.
| AngryData wrote:
| But food is so abundant and cheap here that even pocket
| change can get you enough calories to live on. Yeah
| eventually you might develop deficiencies, but that is
| likely years down the road, cheap food is fortified to
| prevent common deficiencies. That discounted day old box
| of donuts costs almost nothing and that cheap cereal
| lasts near forever if it is kept dry.
| Kaytaro wrote:
| Homeless in the US are not really struggling for food.
| danans wrote:
| Most homeless folks can find a way to get food, even if
| it's not great food, via a network of public and private
| support organizations. So having enough food not to
| starve isn't necessarily an incentive to work, and that's
| a good thing because if they were literally starving we'd
| have even bigger problems.
| 50 wrote:
| The revolution which would feed all the starving people
| of this planet is the only thing that matters. And it's
| easy to see that you've never been hungry if you don't
| think this is so.
| edoceo wrote:
| Yes.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Panhandling can be decently lucrative. The homeless in my
| area have told me they make $10/hr+ panhandling which isn't
| much worse than any job they can get.
| paulddraper wrote:
| Indeed. Reporter goes "undercover" to investigate how
| much you can make.
|
| https://youtu.be/IHoiVnID8vY
| tigertigerbb wrote:
| >Anybody would please be able to point me at what I'm missing?
|
| I strongly suspect that this is absolutely the wrong place to
| ask.
|
| I do remember a time without homeless people however.
| JadeNB wrote:
| > I do remember a time without homeless people however.
|
| It seems more likely that you remember a time in which you
| weren't aware of, or weren't exposed to the presence of,
| homeless people. Homelessness is a serious problem that gets
| worse as its handling is abysmally bungled, but it is not a
| new problem.
| paulddraper wrote:
| > I do remember a time without homeless people however.
|
| Oh, you are a bold one.
| Sebguer wrote:
| There were millions of unhoused during the great depression,
| and homelessness didn't magically disappear after that (and
| obviously existed before it, too), so I have no idea how you
| could possibly remember a 'time without homeless people'.
|
| What you probably mean is a time when they were brutally
| beaten and forced to live in even worse conditions than now,
| which based on your other comment about "having to be mean to
| some of them" is probably the system working as you'd like.
| JadeNB wrote:
| tigertigerbb's other comments on this post, including the
| one referenced by Sebguer, for anyone who thinks, as I did
| at first, that they were coming from a position that was
| merely uninformed, rather than actively hostile to the
| homeless:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28066347
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28066377
| hackeraccount wrote:
| I'm not of the Left. So you know where I'm come from.
|
| That said people who are living on the street are frequently
| deeply alone in way that can be hard to understand. Substance
| abuse problems. Mental problems. Sure all of that. No place to
| live too.
|
| All of that's a huge burden. On top of that the jobs that get
| listed are frequently not going to be offering 30 hours or less
| a week.
|
| So the way to think of people in that place is that they've got
| a job. - getting alcohol or drugs. They might have another job
| - having an incomplete view of reality. On top of that and I
| would say this most of all, they are frequently alienated from
| any friend or family.
|
| It's hard in that place to say find 20 or 30 hours (if you're
| lucky) a week to bring in extra cash. It's doubly hard when
| your expenses are basically everything you have and everything
| you can get your hands on.
|
| As I said earlier I'm not on the Left. I think there's an
| established view that says the problem here is mental problems
| of one sort or another leading to homelessness and
| unemployment. It's not that I think that's untrue but that the
| description is incomplete. It looks at a profound loss and
| describes a physical situation - even when talking about
| substance abuse and mental problems there's a clinical view
| that will help no one. In my opinion at least. Certainly I'm
| out of step.
| emodendroket wrote:
| It's only like a third of homeless people with mental
| illness, so while it's a major contributor it cannot totally
| explain the problem.
| paulddraper wrote:
| 45% have mental illness.
|
| 25% have "serious" mental illness.
| https://www.bbrfoundation.org/blog/homelessness-and-
| mental-i...
|
| 38% are alcoholic.
|
| 26% abuse drugs.
| https://www.banyantreatmentcenter.com/2020/07/01/a-look-
| at-h...
|
| I suspect they tend to be the more visible ones, as opposed
| to the ones in shelters or assistance programs.
| emodendroket wrote:
| I imagine there are multiple methodologies to measure
| this because it's hard to even get a handle on how many
| people are homeless. The point still stands: "they're all
| just so mentally ill they like to live on the streets"
| won't wash as an explanation.
| duped wrote:
| The people you're talking about are usually referred to as
| the "chronically" homeless and are a minority (but highly
| visible) section of the overall homeless population. We know
| that the best way to help these people that's been found so
| far are the so called "housing first" policies, which save
| taxpayer money in law enforcement and medical bills by
| finding permanent supportive housing for the people that need
| it.
|
| A majority of people who are homeless are not drug addicts or
| mentally ill. They're just fucked over by an economy that has
| no floor with too few places for too many people to stay.
| Most people who find themselves homeless are only homeless
| for short stretches, and often have jobs and pay their taxes
| while they live out of tents, cars, and RVs.
| gwright wrote:
| I don't want to discount the challenges and pain associated
| with being homeless but your observations don't really
| explain the explosion of homelessness in some places.
|
| Something else has changed in the last 4-5 years to make this
| problem much worse.
| pauldickwin wrote:
| In America, welfare is designed in such a way in which it
| actually prevents the jobless from wanting to enter the
| workforce. They actually make more by panhandling and
| collecting welfare than simply getting an entry level job. The
| jobless understand this basic economic tactic well, so they end
| up permanently living off welfare and not trying to get a job.
| The government does not want to fix welfare to actually work
| (for example, with a negative income tax instead) because it
| would result in the firing and unemployment of many government
| welfare office workers.
| spiderice wrote:
| The idea that the government not wanting to fix welfare in
| order to protect the jobs of the welfare workers seems like a
| tad bit of a stretch
| gumby wrote:
| There are many different reasons, some articulated already by
| other replies. There are also some practical/pragmatic
| barriers.
|
| One is that if you are living on the street, any possessions
| are likely with you at all times. What do you do with them
| while working?
|
| Another is that if you are living on the street you may have
| involuntary hygiene issues relating to lack of access to water,
| clothes washing etc which may make you unhireable.
|
| There are real phase changes between "couch surfing", "living
| in your car" and "utterly homeless" and hysteretic effects that
| often mean that if you cross a threshold "downstream" it
| becomes almost impossible in many cases to move back.
|
| There are other issues in the US as well, e.g.: unlike
| countries like Japan or most EU countries, a lot of people with
| psychiatric issues are homeless (converse isn't true -- most
| homeless people do _not_ have psychiatric issues, but the ones
| that do exacerbate the problem). Also because of weather and
| services, the homeless population is concentrated in a few
| discrete areas. Ironically that makes it harder to get support
| for them as most people don 't actually encounter truely
| homeless people except in the movies.
| emodendroket wrote:
| > Ironically that makes it harder to get support for them as
| most people don't actually encounter truely homeless people
| except in the movies.
|
| I can't think of any major city I've been to that doesn't
| have homeless panhandlers all over, though the large camps
| you see in LA are extreme.
| paulddraper wrote:
| > What do you do with them while working?
|
| Well, someone did try building better-than-tents shelters,
| but LA shut him down for violating code.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6h7fL22WCE
| mc32 wrote:
| I don't know, honestly. When I travel overseas and see people
| who don't look down upon menial jobs but see them as a source
| of sustenance I have to admire them.
|
| I'll see people doing lots of things like picking up
| recyclables, selling drinks, handyman type jobs, knife
| sharpener, shoe repair, mobile tailor, etc. Very seldom see
| homeless in Asia or Mexico (I don't stay in tourist areas).
| People there hustle one way or another (I mean the positive
| hustle, not the negative hustler type hustle). But we seem lazy
| in contrast.
|
| Sadly, I saw this attitude in a relative. Out of a job, this
| one would refuse to take a job at the Home Depot or the like.
| No, that was not their kind of work. They would rather mooch
| off friends till one of the friends gave them an easy job they
| could drag their feet at all day. This relative is perfectly
| healthy and has no physical problems. But would actually rather
| sleep on the street on occasion rather than get up and show up
| to work on time on a schedule. Amazing!
| emodendroket wrote:
| > Very seldom see homeless in Asia or Mexico (I don't stay in
| tourist areas).
|
| What on earth are you talking about? Even in Japan, famous in
| the Western imagination for societal cohesion and lack of
| crime, you can easily spot homeless people sleeping rough in
| Tokyo. I suppose they do a better job than American cities of
| keeping the problem out of sight but the idea that there are
| _no homeless people at all_ in Asia is simply risible.
| mc32 wrote:
| Seldom doesn't mean never. Yes, on occasion you come across
| a homeless person sleeping on the subway steps. But it's
| not all urinated over and smelly. And, importantly many
| will engage in menial jobs, keep up appearances and try to
| be presentable.
| emodendroket wrote:
| But "seldom" isn't really true either. The subway being
| cleaner probably has more to do with much higher levels
| of investment in keeping it clean than with the superior
| character of their homeless people.
| pineconewarrior wrote:
| In the US, that job may not offer the person any net quality-
| of-life improvements. Flipping that burger for 30 hours a week
| does not give them enough money to find housing. Now they're
| still broke but they're also tired, smelly, and angry.
| temp8964 wrote:
| What kind of life you can get by just flipping burger for 30
| hours a week in Europe? Honest question.
| shadowoflight wrote:
| I don't know about flipping burgers or all of Europe, but
| entry-level pay at Aldi in Switzerland is around $65k USD.
| scotty79 wrote:
| In Poland you could rent a studio apartment for 1/3 of
| McDonalds fulltime initial salary. The other 1/3 should be
| sufficient for food if you cook yourself.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| The typical student lifestyle, I'd say. 20m^2 room 5-10km
| from the city center with combined toilet+shower and
| internet flatrate.
| cduzz wrote:
| How do you cash a paycheck if you are without an address or a
| bank account?
|
| How do you establish that you are a citizen and are legally
| able to take a job if you are unable to safely store your
| documents?
|
| How do you get health care, inclusive of mental health care,
| if you are unable to pay for it?
|
| If you are without a secure residence, how do you know when
| to wake up, how do you clean up, put on fresh clothing, and
| get to work?
|
| If you rely on public transit, how do you reliably get to
| work?
|
| How do you establish residence if you have no reasonable
| credit or references?
|
| How do you save your deposit, first month's rent, and last
| month's rent, if you are unable to even get a bank account?
|
| For any complex problem there is an obvious, simple, and
| totally incorrect answer.
|
| "The homeless should just get a job and get a place to live"
| tdfx wrote:
| You're right, their situation does prevent them from
| jumping into a white collar, professional life with a good
| credit score and personal references. But I don't think
| that's what anyone is suggesting.
|
| Most of the problems you stated are not problems for the
| type of labor that is offered to homeless people. Jobs for
| construction, landscaping, moving etc. with a truck that
| picks you up and drops you off. Usually done by illegal
| immigrants so cash pay is not a problem. From the business
| owners I know who have tried to hire homeless people to do
| daily labor, none of them are interested.
| cduzz wrote:
| I would ask you to think through the logistics of
| managing any of your proposed solutions when you don't
| have a safe place to sleep or store your stuff.
|
| Instructions like
|
| 1) leave your stuff some place out of your control
|
| 2) somehow get to a parking lot where people pick up day
| workers
|
| 3) hang out with day laborers hoping to get a job
|
| 4) get in a random truck on the promise that someone will
| pay you
|
| 5) get driven some place to do a job
|
| 6) do the job
|
| 7) assume they'll take you back where they got you
|
| 8) assume they'll pay you what they promised in cash
|
| 9) get back to my stuff, hope it is still there
|
| 10) hope that I can store my cash some place safe
|
| 11) of course, don't forget you're doing this with
| basically no sleep, unhealthy food, no good place to
| poop, no reliable place to wash, etc. For months at a
| time.
|
| And of course do that for a couple months or years
| without having anything terrible happen to you until you
| save up enough to rent a place?
|
| That doesn't seem like a realistic plan.
| tdfx wrote:
| I can only speak to the situations I've encountered, but:
|
| (1) There's churches nearby that offer lockers for the
| homeless (2) They don't need to go anywhere, these jobs
| drive around looking for them (3) see 2 (4) Illegal
| immigrants do this every day, and they often don't even
| speak the same language (5) Seems OK. (6) Seems OK. (7)
| Seems reasonable the business operator will want to
| continue the arrangement if they did a good job, so this
| seems very likely. (8) See #7 (9) See #1 (10) This is
| probably the most difficult part (11) Shelters in my city
| are underutilized almost all of the year except during
| inclement weather. They offer showers, cot beds, and
| basic food.
| spfzero wrote:
| You can cash a paycheck at the bank listed on the paycheck,
| without any account. You can save up the cash without a
| bank account. Lots of people do that.
|
| There are plenty of people who will hire you without asking
| for proof of citizenship.
|
| In CA, you get Medi-Cal. And food stamps.
|
| Waking up, I guess you're on your own.
|
| Not trying to say it's easy, but those obstacles you
| mentioned are of the convenience variety.
| sokoloff wrote:
| You can cash paychecks at the issuing bank.
|
| Plenty of people use public transit to get to work. (If
| public transit can't reliably move people, that's much more
| than a homeless problem.)
| User23 wrote:
| The answer is you address each of those issues in order of
| dependencies. Pragmatically speaking, since these persons
| have a demonstrated incapacity for participating in our
| society in the usual way, that will have to happen in some
| kind of institutional setting or it won't happen at all.
| parineum wrote:
| >How do you cash a paycheck if you are without an address
| or a bank account?
|
| You simply sign the back and take it to the bank and they
| will give you cash.
|
| >How do you establish that you are a citizen and are
| legally able to take a job if you are unable to safely
| store your documents?
|
| I honestly have no idea.
|
| >How do you get health care, inclusive of mental health
| care, if you are unable to pay for it?
|
| The answer is to get a job which is an obvious catch 22.
|
| >If you are without a secure residence, how do you know
| when to wake up, how do you clean up, put on fresh
| clothing, and get to work?
|
| I think there are a variety of viable answers here ranging
| from family, church, charity, shelters and gyms that this
| is a challenge but not insurmountable for a motivated
| individual.
|
| > If you rely on public transit, how do you reliably get to
| work?
|
| By using public transit? I don't understand the question.
|
| > How do you establish residence if you have no reasonable
| credit or references?
|
| This is a huge issue, imo. The only real option is paying
| in advance but that is obviously much more difficult.
|
| > How do you save your deposit, first month's rent, and
| last month's rent, if you are unable to even get a bank
| account?
|
| The answer is cash but the next question is how does a
| homeless person keep thousands of dollars in cash safe.
|
| I think you've gone out of your way to add solvable
| problems to your list to make the issue seem insurmountable
| but you've definitely included two issues which I think are
| massive and one that's less difficult but also easily
| solved.
|
| Starting with the solvable problem, banking, add basic
| banking services to post offices. It makes a lot of sense,
| imo.
|
| The healthcare problem is a big one and I think the most
| popular answer to that question would be socialized
| medicine, which I support, but I'd also be open to hearing
| other solutions.
|
| The biggest problem, I think, is housing. Not just because
| of cost but, as you mentioned, credit and rental history
| are going to be a major problem. Perhaps some sort of
| temporary (but long term enough to allow a history of
| payments to be shown, like 12 months or so) housing that
| could be offered to those in need to get back on their
| feet. Possibly even a requirement that apartment buildings
| make a unit available for this kind of renter.
| spfzero wrote:
| They shouldn't be that tired working only 30 hours per week.
| Lots of people work 50-60 hours a week. I would even say, if
| you could only get 30 hours that frees you up for a second
| job, assuming the commute is reasonable (which I'm aware it
| might not be, except it seems these jobs are everywhere.)
|
| You do need to be a person who views working productively to
| better themselves, as net positive quality of life.
|
| And to be fair, they need a place to shower and wash clothes.
| Those services should be provided, and certainly in LA and SF
| plenty of money has been set aside to provide that.
| gruez wrote:
| >Flipping that burger for 30 hours a week does not give them
| enough money to find housing. Now they're still broke but
| they're also tired, smelly, and angry.
|
| But now they still have $420 (based on CA's minimum wage of
| $14) more in their pocket?
| daenz wrote:
| Panhandling can earn more than minimum wage, and you have
| no boss or responsibilities.
| gruez wrote:
| see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28066652
| sudosysgen wrote:
| Yeah, but they're still homeless, and unless you can find a
| place eventually you'll get fired. It may also be that you
| can get more than 400$/week panhandling. That's only
| 57$/day.
| gruez wrote:
| >It may also be that you can get more than 400$/week
| panhandling. That's only 57$/day.
|
| Are we comparing the upper end of what you can earn via
| pan-handling with the lower end of what you can earn via
| a minimum wage job here? That might be responsible for
| the apparent disparity. Apparently LA has around 65k
| homeless people. I'm skeptical that even half of that
| (32.5k) can all earn an average income of $400/week
| panhandling.
| SrslyJosh wrote:
| Good luck getting and keeping a job when you have nowhere
| to shower and may be forced to relocate at any time. Oh,
| and the cops may come and smash or steal all of your
| belongings.
| dcolkitt wrote:
| Gym memberships can be had for $20/month or less, and
| provide a full bathroom facility for showering and
| grooming.
|
| I'm not trying to be pedantic. I'm just pointing this out
| for anybody reading this who may find themself in a
| situation like this in the future.
| [deleted]
| skeeter2020 wrote:
| good luck getting a gym membership without an address,
| cell phone, credit card or sizeable deposit - forget
| about the fact that you look & smell terrible.
| leesalminen wrote:
| I did it in Boulder , CO for a few months. I didn't have
| an address but I did have a cell phone and debit (not
| credit) card. I did look and smell like a campfire. I've
| never heard of a deposit for a gym- those must be some
| fancy gymnasiums.
| endisneigh wrote:
| which gym was it? the cheapness gym I know of (Planet
| Fitness - $10/month) requires a bank account.
| leesalminen wrote:
| I just checked because it's been a few years. The
| building is now occupied by 24 Hour Fitness, but I don't
| think that was the name of it when I used it.
|
| If gyms are cracking down on this use case then that is a
| shame.
|
| I wonder if you could retro-fit a 53' tractor trailer
| into shower(s) + laundry stall(s) on wheels and bring it
| close to the "customer"? I wonder how that could work.
| leesalminen wrote:
| When I was 21, our house of 4 was evicted because 1
| didn't pay rent and lied about it until we got notice to
| vacate. Luckily it was summer in Colorado so we decided
| to camp for a while. Unfortunately, I had just gotten a
| new (awesome) job and couldn't go into the office
| smelling like campfires so I got a membership at the gym
| and showered there every morning. Never ended up
| exercising there though, ha.
| JohnTHaller wrote:
| > Gym memberships can be had for $20/month or less, and
| provide a full bathroom facility for showering and
| grooming.
|
| The gyms near me in NYC all require a permanent address,
| NY state ID, and a credit card.
| Igelau wrote:
| I suspect the strict dress code requirements at mine are
| secretly an anti-homeless measure.
| gruez wrote:
| even ones like YMCA?
| JohnTHaller wrote:
| I'm not sure offhand. Looking at the local YMCA site it's
| $66/mo for a single location, asks for an address to sign
| up, and can do credit/debit as well as drafts from
| checking/savings account, so it appears you have to be
| "banked".
| grimgrin wrote:
| talk to a homeless person. see the depression. imagine?
|
| it is v sad
| edoceo wrote:
| "net quality-of-life improvements" from the parent. You are
| counting Gross. IE: its not worth it.
| gruez wrote:
| There's a lot of quality-of-life improvements you can buy
| with $420. food, access to a gym, a better tent, PO
| box/locker to store your stuff, etc. Multiply that by 4
| weeks, and you get $1680, which seems almost enough to
| rent a unit with roommates.
| asciimov wrote:
| Closer to $280 once tax and social security is taken out.
| dcolkitt wrote:
| At $420/week, federal FICA taxes are about $45. Federal
| income tax would be zero at this level. (Actually
| probably negative once you add back in the EITC)
| asciimov wrote:
| That all depends on how you fill out that w2. While you
| might get that money back, more if you qualify for the
| EITC, most people are still going to have their taxes
| removed from their paycheck.
| sokoloff wrote:
| > depends on how you fill out that w2.
|
| W-4 is the payroll withholding form (from employee to
| employer). W-2 is provided by an employer to the employee
| (and the IRS) at the end of the year.
| dralley wrote:
| If you're sleeping in the street or in a homeless shelter,
| the only thing that amount of money is going to do for you
| (in California at least) is make you a target for thieves.
| gruez wrote:
| Good thing that many employers (typically the ones that
| employ minimum wage workers) allow you to take your
| paycheck on a prepaid debit card.
| Arrath wrote:
| Have the near usurious transaction fees typically
| associated with those cards been regulated away, or are
| they still yet another way for financial conglomerates to
| nickel and dime more profits from the most vulnerable,
| while masquerading as a better option?
|
| I last had my pay deposited onto a prepaid card in 2009,
| so the laws may indeed have changed. Back then those fees
| were overly restrictive and quickly ate into my meagre
| take home (unless, ironically, I withdrew as much as I
| could with my single allotted fee-less cash withdrawal
| per pay period)
| plorkyeran wrote:
| California requires that whatever an employer pays you
| with be convertible to cash without paying a fee, but it
| doesn't appear to require that you be able to do so
| incrementally. As such it appears that you could still be
| forced to choose between transaction fees and cashing it
| all in one shot.
| Arrath wrote:
| A further problem I found was being limited by the
| denominations the ATM gave out. Sure 20's only works in
| most cases, but when I'm trying to stretch my check and
| have to leave $17 of my $217 in there, it hurts.
|
| Getting to a teller window when they were open, or
| searching down an ATM that gave out 10's just wasn't in
| the cards considering my schedule at the time.
| gruez wrote:
| > Have the near usurious transaction fees typically
| associated with those cards been regulated away, or are
| they still yet another way for financial conglomerates to
| nickel and dime more profits from the most vulnerable,
| while masquerading as a better option?
|
| I'm having trouble finding the source, but my
| recollection from a planet money podcast is that they're
| free to withdraw if you use their network of ATMs, but
| otherwise charge you a few dollars per transaction. As
| for whether it's better, maybe? It's certainly worse than
| a no-fee banking account at a local credit union (but
| with limited ATM access) or a big bank (but with a fee
| and/or minimum deposit requirements), but it's better
| than holding a wad of cash on your body.
| Arrath wrote:
| >it's better than holding a wad of cash on your body.
|
| I can't argue with that!
| 8note wrote:
| It's still something that can be stolen
| spiderice wrote:
| I feel like at this point people are just trying to come
| up with problems for the sake of it.
|
| Debit cards have pins. You can't just steal someone's
| debit card and go drain all the money. Sure there are
| other really hard issues to solve with homelessness. But
| their debit card getting stolen isn't one of them.
| woodruffw wrote:
| My debit card has a contactless pad. I think there's a
| transaction limit on it of a few hundred dollars, but
| someone could very easily tap it and drain my account if
| that was all I had.
|
| But even that misses the point: not everybody has the
| means to wait 5-7 days for their bank to mail them a
| replacement card, even if no money is actually taken from
| the account. This is compounded when you consider that
| most of the companies that offer cheap banking accounts
| don't have great branch service.
| gruez wrote:
| it significantly cuts down on the incentive, though.
| woodruffw wrote:
| Which, of course, is predicated on having the appropriate
| documentation for opening and maintaining a bank account.
| In most states (although not NY), that means a federally
| valid ID.
|
| I've also reviewed some of these accounts and payroll
| apps, and many are downright predatory: extraordinary
| fees for a no-frills debit account, tie-ins to payday
| loan companies, and connections to "micro investing"
| (read: gambling) are rampant.
| [deleted]
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Likely the homeless people, for obvious reasons beyond their
| control, do not have the hygiene standards to work in basic
| service jobs.
| spfzero wrote:
| Some do, but I'd expect the majority are in the "don't want to
| work" category. A lot of people are under the impression that
| these are people that, if only given a chance, would want to
| get back on their feet and re-integrate with the rest of
| society. I'd say that the evidence, such as what you've
| observed, argues against that.
| [deleted]
| neom wrote:
| This is a good book: https://www.amazon.ca/2-00-Day-Living-
| Nothing-America/dp/054...
|
| From my spending time with homeless people in the US (I lived
| on the streets for a while) it's a combination of mental
| health/checked out/drugs, or more often, a feeling that being
| of the bottom of the social totem pole is no better/actually
| worse than taking part in "the system" (per the book I
| recommended).
| kazinator wrote:
| One factor is that employers don't want some scruffy, stinking
| homeless person anywhere near their business.
|
| Basically, it's a problem of hygiene and grooming. To apply for
| just about any job, a given homeless person would have to take
| several baths, get a haircut, shave, and get into clean
| clothes.
|
| Somehow, that is an insoluble problem.
|
| Secondly, some of these jobs pay so shitty that if you've
| figured out how to live homeless, they are not worth your time.
| Your life won't be any better.
|
| Can you imagine the hassle? Okay, now you have a job and have
| to come clean there everyday, and stay there for hours. Where
| do you clean up if you don't have a home? Who will guard your
| unsecured belongings while you are away from them? Suppose you
| get a home: oops, there goes all the pay. So now you live in
| some shitty home that sucks up most of your pay just so you
| have a place to take a shower to go to your shitty job. Man
| things were so much better with no boss, no landlord, under the
| fresh, open sky! The streets are calling your name, ...
| jdavis703 wrote:
| I would urge you to do some volunteer work with homeless
| people. Most aren't scruffy and stinky. I think what's
| happening is the scruffy and stinky people are the ones that
| get your attention while the homeless security guard or
| homeless Uber driver escapes your attention.
| AngryData wrote:
| Even if they aren't scruffy and stinky, if someone finds
| out you are homeless many of them will judge you like you
| are scruffy and stinky regardless. Which unless you are
| very charismatic is going to be a hard social situation to
| overcome at work and could easily get you fired.
|
| They could come in one day with a bit greasy hair and get
| fired on the spot because co-workers or boss will assume
| 'unshowered bum" rather than "woke up a little late this
| morning"
| Spivak wrote:
| Just because you're homeless doesn't mean you don't also have a
| job. There's a long way from first paycheck to actually getting
| an apartment.
|
| Employers will never post it publicly but basically everywhere
| screens for the homeless.
|
| Landlords also screen for the homeless so even if you have
| money you'll have trouble finding a place.
| padastra wrote:
| What you're seeing in this thread about how is a person by
| themselves supposed to be clean for an interview, have an
| address for a check, get housing on minimum wage in San
| Francisco, etc. is missing the point. 70%+ of people who are
| homeless climb out it, proving that it is possible (despite the
| aforementioned resource challenges -- that's almost
| tautological to what being poor is). Those who don't and remain
| chronically homeless have some combination of reduced
| functional ability, reduced physical or mental health
| (including stress from poverty contributing to drug use and
| vice versa), or other more fundamental issues. These people
| also exist in other countries.
|
| What's more unique to the U.S. is that for large swathes of
| people, their family has totally washed their hands of their
| responsibility. Compared to poor authoritarian countries that's
| probably because in those countries, families know their loved
| ones will die if they are left out on their own with no help.
| Compared to Europe, it's because large segments of the
| population have broken family units (e.g. 72% of black babies
| are born to unmarried mothers, who by nature have much more
| difficulty providing resources / shelter to an adult child who
| moved away to another city and is homeless there. And this is
| definitely impacted by historic racism, and even modern-day
| racism, but is independently now a self-perpetuating cycle of
| poverty and broken families and crime).
|
| I'm going to be downvoted but I've worked in homeless shelters,
| for public outreach, for jobs programs, and the problem is
| incredibly challenging. The idea that society can replace
| family is inane. What you see on HN is some white liberal dude
| who grew up in an upper-middle-class family, makes $300K a year
| waving their fingers over a keyboard but thinks they're
| financially oppressed so votes for Bernie Sanders, and just
| repeats some stuff they read on reddit or some shitty NPR
| story, but who has never bothered to truly spend time doing
| public health outreach, has never truly interacted with the
| homeless for an entry-level job, has never really assessed
| their ability to complete even basic tasks. They think it
| should be an easy problem to solve with just a few more
| resources, which they vote for (obviously without getting
| themselves dirty in the process), and then see it as evidence
| of an unjust society while wondering why SF is getting shittier
| every year.
| mlinsey wrote:
| Mental health is a large part of the issue, but sometimes cause
| and effect can be murky.
|
| It's important to note that even the very large visible
| encampments in cities like SF and LA are the tip of the
| homelessness iceberg, there's a much larger group of people who
| are living on friends/relatives couches, in their cars, or in
| shelters. A lot of these people have some level of employment,
| but housing affordability (a result of ~50 years of very
| restrictive land-use policies making it hard to build new
| housing) means that this level of employment can't afford them
| their own permanent home. For example, prior to 1970 it was
| much more common to see "boarding houses" where you'd share a
| room or share a bathroom, and especially unmarried low-wage
| workers would live there, but these are illegal to build in
| most cities these days.
|
| Most of this homeless-but-not-on-the-street population is
| transient - it is common eg to be temporarily living in your
| car after a job disruption or sudden emergency expense, then to
| find another job and find a place to live after some time. In
| other words, they will do exactly what you are suggesting and
| lock down a new job quickly. And this group is a majority of
| the group of people who spend any time homeless in a given
| year.
|
| But a portion of of this transiently-homeless population
| doesn't solve their job situation quickly, will wear out their
| welcome with friends, or will lose their car for a variety of
| reasons -- and end up falling into street homelessness. Once
| you are homeless and living on the street, you are at extremely
| high risk for developing a mental health and/or substance abuse
| problem even if you didn't start out with one. It also becomes
| much harder for you to get one of those available jobs, for a
| number of reasons, some as basic as not having transportation
| to work or not being able to present yourself well for an
| interview.
|
| In short: land-use policies cause homelessness, the majority of
| the people who experience any amount of homelessness do get a
| job quickly, the street-homeless you see are the small fraction
| (of the frighteningly-large homeless population) that got stuck
| for some reason, and their situation is a feedback loop making
| them even more stuck.
|
| (also: the 'we will hire you on the spot!' thing is a weird
| 2021 artifact of the pandemic, it taking time to ramp back up,
| and the super-generous unemployment benefits program that will
| be expiring very soon. the hiring market won't be like that
| next year)
| Forge36 wrote:
| Many jobs require an address. Without a mailing address getting
| the job becomes MUCH harder.
| jeffbee wrote:
| The proximate cause of homelessness in California is lack of
| housing. The majority of homeless, when surveyed, say they were
| employed at the time they most recently became homeless. The
| main cause of homelessness is cost of housing.
| throwhomeee wrote:
| Nobody wants to admit this, but probably more so here on HN and
| specially those who will downvote this reply to oblivion and
| have 10k+ karma points. They will find any excuse to sidestep
| this as a legitimate issue, here are some to watch out for: a.
| other countries have a worse homeless problem b. it's because
| we closed mental health institutions in the 80s c. I was
| homeless you don't know what you're talking about d. war on
| drugs is the cause e. you shouldn't judge others maybe they
| chose this... the list goes on and on and I'm not going to
| respond to any of them here, just something to be on the look
| out for when this topic comes up. In the US people don't find
| the same solidarity with their fellow citizens unless you
| belong to the same club or same sociopolitical spectrum you
| basically think you're better than everyone else and there is a
| deep rooted superiority complex among people here. This is in
| stark contrast to countries even in Europe including Italy and
| others where there is a strong sense of community and for
| example Italianess that supersedes petty political and
| idealogical beliefs that many in the US cling to almost
| religiously.
|
| I don't think Americans want to admit this specially the closer
| to the coastal cities you get the less sense of solidarity with
| fellow citizens and belongingness prevails rather than more
| community driven even religious South.
| vondur wrote:
| Most of these people are mentally ill, in addition to most
| likely being addicted to drugs. They can probably never hold
| down a steady job.
| emodendroket wrote:
| Just not true.
| 1270018080 wrote:
| Many Californians are struggling with the ultimate internal
| battle: Posturing about caring for the homeless while doing
| everything in their power to prevent housing from getting built.
| Because density "hurts the vibe of the neighborhood."
|
| Outsiders make fun of California for being overly progressive,
| but it's entirely surface level. Most are conservative beyond
| performative actions.
| fumar wrote:
| How much housing would need to be built for homelessness
| resolution?
| mdorazio wrote:
| In LA alone we would need over half a million units of
| affordable housing [1]. Good luck with that when communities
| fight new development of any kind every chance they possibly
| can.
|
| [1] https://www.lahsa.org/news?article=726-2020-greater-los-
| ange...
| coding123 wrote:
| ? That article shows 66K homeless people, not half a
| million?
| jimbob45 wrote:
| +1
|
| I've seen nothing to indicate that Californians wouldn't pay
| exorbitant sums of money to the first sensible plan to
| eradicate homelessness in their major cities. There just
| doesn't appear to be a surplus of comprehensive and adequate
| solutions.
| Fellshard wrote:
| The issue isn't solely lack of housing.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Abundant housing is a necessary condition for solving
| homelessness.
| coding123 wrote:
| There is also an abundant number of second houses that
| people own that are not rented that could house every
| single homeless person 25 to 40 times over.
| jeffbee wrote:
| This is fallacious thinking. It would be a huge effort,
| practically and legally, to increase the occupancy rate
| of existing dwellings from its already extremely high
| level of over 97% to something like 99%. It is way
| easier, cheaper, and more practical to attack the
| denominator instead.
| rtkwe wrote:
| It'd help with the working homeless but you need way more
| than just cheap housing to help all types of homeless
| people.
| thepasswordis wrote:
| Have you spent much time working with the homeless?
| jeffbee wrote:
| Yes, I worked to create the most recent census of
| homelessness in my county. That's why I am aware of the
| fact that an overwhelming supermajority of current
| homeless express a wish to live in independent,
| affordable rental homes, like the rest of us. But you
| don't have to personally conduct the census to know this;
| you can just go read the results.
| mdorazio wrote:
| It's by far the #1 cause. People lose their job or get priced
| out of their home and then either can't afford to move
| elsewhere or don't want to leave their support network, so
| they just... stay. LAHSA tends to provide good data via their
| annual surveys:
|
| https://www.lahsa.org/news?article=726-2020-greater-los-
| ange...
| knownjorbist wrote:
| Lack of housing is perhaps the most important piece of the
| puzzle.
|
| https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2021/7/13/housing-
| scarci....
| jeffbee wrote:
| Governments in California are immune from liability for failure
| to enact or enforce any law, so good luck.
| travoc wrote:
| "It is a desperate man who engages his own government in a
| legal dispute."
|
| -Unknown
| travismark wrote:
| interesting, thanks. for related reference, this year in
| Minneapolis some residents sued their city and showed that it
| had too few police officers. The ratio of police officers to
| residents is right there in the charter. A county judge ruled
| for the plaintiffs last month https://kstp.com/news/hennepin-
| county-rules-minneapolis-must...
| [deleted]
| keewee7 wrote:
| Why do homeless people in the US concentrate in a few big cities
| with good weather?
|
| In Denmark there are fewer of them and they are more spread out
| and you can also find them in rural areas.
| [deleted]
| throwhome2 wrote:
| Nobody wants to admit this, but probably more so here on HN and
| specially those who will downvote this reply to oblivion and have
| 10k+ karma points. They will find any excuse to sidestep this as
| a legitimate issue, here are some to watch out for: a. other
| countries have a worse homeless problem b. it's because we closed
| mental health institutions in the 80s c. I was homeless you don't
| know what you're talking about d. war on drugs is the cause e.
| you shouldn't judge others maybe they chose this... the list goes
| on and on and I'm not going to respond to any of them here, just
| something to be on the look out for when this topic comes up. In
| the US people don't find the same solidarity with their fellow
| citizens unless you belong to the same club or same
| sociopolitical spectrum you basically think you're better than
| everyone else and there is a deep rooted superiority complex
| among people here. This is in stark contrast to countries even in
| Europe including Italy and others where there is a strong sense
| of community and for example Italianess that supersedes petty
| political and idealogical beliefs that many in the US cling to
| almost religiously.
|
| I don't think Americans want to admit this specially the closer
| to the coastal cities you get the less sense of solidarity with
| fellow citizens and belongingness prevails rather than more
| community driven even religious South.
| ffggvv wrote:
| non paywall https://ktla.com/news/local-news/woman-struck-by-car-
| on-stre...
| gogopuppygogo wrote:
| Kevin Paffrath has some ideas for solving this. The Democratic
| Party seems bent on preventing him from having a fair shot.
| tigertigerbb wrote:
| Looking at his website:
|
| "We will immediately house the unhoused. It's simple. No house?
| We will provide a roof over their head."
|
| Well, that was easy.
|
| Obviously there are homeless and there are homeless. Looking
| back in time, any plan that doesn't involve being mean to some
| of them won't work.
| Smoofer wrote:
| Re: " Looking back in time, any plan that doesn't involve
| being mean to some of them won't work.", History and Public
| Policy researchers at UCLA seem to disagree with you:
|
| https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/history-homelessness-
| new-...
| anigbrowl wrote:
| Reminiscent of Monty Python's 'How to do it'
| sketch...'Playing the flute, well you just blow through here
| and move your fingers up and down, that's it really.'
| anigbrowl wrote:
| I downvoted because this reeks of astroturfing. The candidate
| in question seems not to be serious (based on the wildly
| impractical/implausible policy proposals) and I really wonder
| if this run is just a stunt to promote his youtube channel.
| Novelty candidates are often publicity seekers.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Paffrath
|
| I could be wrong, of course. Perhaps you'd care to explain how
| you see his National Guard deployment or other proposals
| working.
| void_mint wrote:
| > Kevin Paffrath (born 1992, also known as Meet Kevin),[2] is
| an American YouTuber, landlord, and real estate
| broker.[3][4][5]
|
| When your #1 qualification is YouTuber, you probably ahve no
| businesses holding public office.
| SrslyJosh wrote:
| > landlord, and real estate broker
|
| That's a double dose of "fuck no"
| ceilingcorner wrote:
| Just the modern version of actor and bodybuilder...
| baby wrote:
| The alternative is the Trump party?
| benjohnson wrote:
| No - on a local level, people of goodwill from both parties
| can do meaningful good for all our citizens.
|
| This doesn't have to be a R vs D issue.
| bpodgursky wrote:
| Trump isn't running for CA gov, not sure what you're
| referencing.
| anigbrowl wrote:
| baby is referencing the party headed by Trump, that seems
| pretty obvious.
| unthethered wrote:
| This morning there was a tent on the 2/Santa Monica 101 off-ramp
| not just taking up the entire sidewalk but IN the street. I had
| to swerve to not hit it.
| Fellshard wrote:
| Meta: Do not use single-factor analysis when examining the
| homelessness problem. It will get you into trouble every time.
| RealityVoid wrote:
| I think that stands for all but the most trivial social
| problems.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-08-04 23:02 UTC)