[HN Gopher] Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)
___________________________________________________________________
Finland's zero homeless strategy (2021)
Author : zdw
Score : 76 points
Date : 2025-01-10 15:53 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (oecdecoscope.blog)
(TXT) w3m dump (oecdecoscope.blog)
| Carrok wrote:
| > In the United Kingdom, for instance, people who had been living
| on the streets or in shelters were housed in individual
| accommodations in a matter of days.
|
| So it was always possible. We just didn't care to do so.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| it was striking to see Hong Kong in the British-law phase..
| there used to be social layers including homeless and "boat
| people" but the British changed that .. under the British law,
| every single person and every single place to sleep was
| counted, numbered, licensed and taxed.
| mmooss wrote:
| Didn't the British control Hong Kong from the mid-19th
| century until the 1990s?
| ipaddr wrote:
| When they refuse to go inside do you jail them? Some cities
| with big hearts have been through this before.
| Carrok wrote:
| Everything won't be perfect immediately, so let's do nothing
| instead! /s
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Depends on circumstances. IE, if someone's camping in the
| woods, who cares. But, if someone is camping in a public
| park, or on someone's doorstep, or in a tunnel, than that's a
| different story.
| kelseyfrog wrote:
| And then we told ourselves it wasn't possible so we could sleep
| at night.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| I get the impression "individual accommodations" were hotel
| rooms; and the goal was _also_ to subsidize hotels that had no
| business due to the pandemic.
|
| Housing homeless people in hotels is not sustainable. (It's
| also overkill, as adequate shelter doesn't need to be a motel
| with a queen bed. It can be a much smaller room and still be
| humane.)
| philip1209 wrote:
| Worth pointing out that Finland is one of the most ethnically
| homogeneous societies in Europe - only ~10% of the population is
| of foreign origin and background [1]. So, like Japan, it's easier
| to have a high-trust society if you eschew immigration.
|
| Edit: Just to be clear, I'm very pro-immigration. I just think
| that studying rich homogeneous societies doesn't result in many
| useful takeaways for countries like the USA.
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Finland#:~:tex....
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Controversial, but worth considering. I believe societies have
| different capacities for assimilation (changing immigrants) and
| appropriation (changing themselves), with the hallmark of any
| era's great societies being their ability to maximise both.
|
| That said, the evidence is mixed [1], with fairness and
| economic inequality [2][3] seeming to matter more than racial
| homogeneity. (Lots of tiny, racially-homogenous societies-high
| trust or not-bordering each other also have a one-way
| historical track record.)
|
| [1]
| https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/000169931772161...
|
| [2] https://www.jstor.org/stable/23324182
|
| [3] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7454994/
| 4gotunameagain wrote:
| A very often ignored fact is the _cultural_ homogeneity. I do
| not thing racial homogeneity is of any benefit whatsoever,
| but I do believe that cultural is.
|
| When someone raised in a culture where cheating to win by any
| means is acceptable (most of India) or where bartering,
| persuading and microfrauding in trade (most of Middle east
| and sup-sahara Africa) is not frowned upon, it is not a
| stretch to imagine that the introduction of such cultural
| elements will lead to dilution of the overall interpersonal
| trust in let's say, Swedish society.
| throwaway48476 wrote:
| Putnam found a linear correlation between diversity and
| social trust.
| 4gotunameagain wrote:
| Putnam indeed reported a correlation between the _mean
| herfindahl index of ethnic homogeneity_ and trust in
| societies (both own-race trust, other race trust &
| neighbour trust).
|
| If you had actually read the paper (which I have), you
| would realise that the relationship between ethnic
| diversity and social trust is inverse.
| smegsicle wrote:
| i think you've got it backwards- the xenophobia of so called
| 'high trust' bigots are holding back the global society of our
| future, and their low homelessness is in reality an unfair
| burden on other more troubled countries
| magixx wrote:
| Romania has very similar ethnically homogenous population at
| 89.3% [1] and I can definitely say that this factor does not
| directly lead to a high trust society. I suspect there are
| quite a few other countries with similar makeups that don't
| result in outcomes similar to Finland/Japan.
|
| While homogeneity may play a factor I think it's dwarved by
| other things. [1]
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Romania
| philip1209 wrote:
| Finland has almost 3x the GDP per capita as Romania [1]. I
| think being rich (i.e., good social programs) accounts for
| the trust gap.
|
| https://countryeconomy.com/countries/compare/finland/romania
| jltsiren wrote:
| Finland was traditionally a very homogeneous society, and
| immigration before ~1990 was negligible. But then there was a
| burst of immigration from the former USSR and Somalia, followed
| by a gradual increase over the decades. And in 2023 (and likely
| in 2024), net immigration was >1% of the population and
| exceeded births.
| morbicer wrote:
| No idea how it's relevant. For example in USA, I bet the
| overwhelming majority of homeless are citizens born in USA, not
| immigrants.
|
| In my central European country with high ethnic homogenity the
| unhoused are also stemming from majority population. There is a
| Roma minority who are often struggling with poverty but are
| rarely unhoused.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _in USA, I bet the overwhelming majority of homeless are
| citizens born in USA, not immigrants_
|
| Correct.
|
| "There was no significant difference in rates of lifetime
| adult homelessness between foreign-born adults and native-
| born adults (1.0% vs 1.7%). Foreign-born participants were
| less likely to have various mental and substance-use
| disorders, less likely to receive welfare, and less likely to
| have any lifetime incarceration." ("The foreign-born
| population was 46.2 million (13.9% of the total population)"
| in 2022 [2].)
|
| [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30739834/
|
| [2] https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-
| releases/2024/foreign-...
| barbazoo wrote:
| > it's easier to have a high-trust society if you eschew
| immigration.
|
| citation needed
| ipaddr wrote:
| You need a citation for you to understand people with similar
| customs/religious believes, similar dna have a higher trust
| society than a cities of unknown elements?
| itishappy wrote:
| Yes. It sounds right, but many subtly wrong things often
| do. At the very least, a measurement of the effect strength
| would be nice. For instance, is a homogenous society a
| stronger or weaker signal than GDP?
| throwaway48476 wrote:
| So you mean GDP per capita?
| itishappy wrote:
| I do indeed, thanks.
| mmooss wrote:
| Yes!
| jas39 wrote:
| This is extremely relevant. Finland is basically Sweden without
| mass migration. The cracks in our society that the multi-culti
| ideology has opened up is difficult for an American to
| comprehend, because you never experienced the benefits of a
| true monoculture.
| 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
| So are there other techniques for fixing homelessness that work
| in these so-called "low-trust" societies?
| justin66 wrote:
| > Worth pointing out that Finland is one of the most ethnically
| homogeneous societies in Europe - only ~10% of the population
| is of foreign origin and background
|
| Meh. They've got two different official languages. It's not as
| ethnically uniform as a lot of other European countries.
| rs999gti wrote:
| In the article, I did not see anything about mental illness or
| addicts. How did FI solve for those people?
|
| Both groups have people who want to be homeless, so they can be
| left alone.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| Probably close to zero people want to be homeless per se.
|
| What happens is that people are unwilling or unable to accept
| the terms of housing offered, like for example strict sobriety,
| or not allowing pets. Family housing is also rare, and I don't
| think it's fair to say someone choosing to be homeless with
| their spouse over housed separately miles away from each other
| "wants to be homeless."
|
| If people are consistently declining the aid we're offering,
| that's a problem we can address. It is our fault, not theirs.
| samspot wrote:
| "unwilling or unable" is extremely key. I recall a US Senator
| talking about his son who has schizophrenia. The father would
| pay for an apartment for his son, no strings attached, and
| still find him sleeping in the street.
|
| It may be possible to "solve" homelessness for some majority
| of people. But I doubt 100% is ever humanly achievable. At
| least, not without some massive breakthrough in understanding
| and intervention for mental illnesses.
| metalman wrote:
| So we build semi-automomous free zones, where the
| infrastructure is essentialy indistructable,anyone can get a
| lockable secure space, and the violent sociopaths, are picked
| off. Facets from other proven models could include, a work for
| drunks program, like in some german areas, they get to clean
| the streets they hang out on, and are a sort of invisible
| "watch". Free "heroine" , for any and all who check into a
| controlled access facility. The real ferrals are just a fact,
| but are very easy to spot so the threat level is lower, but as
| they dont have adequate shelter, see point #1, they congregate
| in more southerly areas, and or, get into trouble trying to
| survive in northern areas. I have lived on the edge, for most
| of my life, seen a lot of wild things, in a lot of different
| places, and the story is that people just want to be seen and
| accepted, there, in the moment. Those moments are impossible to
| predict or create with any kind of predictability or
| repeatability. All ww can do is build the places, where that
| can happen, or not, and its "even", everybody can walk away, If
| nothing works, then there is the road, and that needs to be ok,
| and no one is a "vagrant" as they got a place to go. nobody is
| stuck.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Both groups have people who want to be homeless, so they can
| be left alone_
|
| Why can't they be left alone in a home?
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| disruptive behavior
|
| A working mom with a 2 year old doesnt want to live next door
| to violent actors and drug dealers.
|
| More specifically, I think the US is unwilling to distinguish
| between lawful and unlawfully behaving poor, and segregate
| them accordingly when providing shelter.
| kansface wrote:
| They destroy it.
| mmooss wrote:
| > I did not see anything about mental illness or addicts
|
| Maybe it's not actually a problem. Maybe it's another way to
| promote fear, hate, division, and cynicism about social
| spending.
| octopusRex wrote:
| The US chooses not to end homelessness. We have the highest GDP
| in the world. We could end it if we wanted to.
|
| I was in Japan recently. A choice was made there as well.
| ipaddr wrote:
| The US could end homelessness but would need to stop
| immigration and change the constitution which could force
| people in shelter. Not sure it's the outcome we all want.
| barbazoo wrote:
| That's your assumption. Instead, mine is that it would
| require some kind of wealth transfer to pay for the social
| services.
| ipaddr wrote:
| Paying for the social services is possible. The difficult
| issue is some people don't want to go to a homeless shelter
| because they want to maintain a level of freedom while
| others fear they will be robbed/raped at the shelter.
|
| Do you force them inside?
| marssaxman wrote:
| Simpler than that: just roll back the restrictive zoning
| codes which have been making sufficient development
| infeasible for many years, thus creating a steadily growing
| housing deficit. When laws have turned the housing market
| into a game of musical chairs, _someone_ is guaranteed to be
| left outside.
| mywittyname wrote:
| I'm often skeptical of simple solutions like this. They
| tend to assume that the regulation causes the problem, but
| when looked at more critically, it's clear that the
| regulation is a formalization of a combination of consumer
| & business preference.
|
| For example, Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE)
| regulations. If you get into the gritty details, you'll
| find that they have a whole bunch ofloopholes that seem to
| favor larger trucks & SUVs. Many people will point to these
| regulation as _causing_ people to buy light trucks & SUVs,
| but the data seems to suggest consumers prefer to buy these
| vehicles and auto manufacture prefer to sell them (they are
| extremely profitable). I postulate that, if CAFE
| requirements were eliminated, the best selling vehicle in
| the USA would continue to be the F-series and other trucks
| and SUVs would continue to dominate the top 10, because the
| regulations are influenced by consumer preference, not the
| other way around.
|
| I think the same logic applies to zoning. People largely
| want to own single family homes (SFH) in the suburbs;
| builders largely want to build SFHs in the suburbs. There's
| no reason to believe that changes in zoning will cause a
| meaningful shift in consumer and business preference. In
| the handful of ultra expensive metro areas, sure it might
| move the needle because economics trump preference, but in
| most of the USA, there's plenty of space to build housing.
| It's hard to imagine a developer in Pittsburgh choosing to
| build housing in an industrial area in the city over some
| empty land on the outskirts.
| marssaxman wrote:
| I appreciate your skepticism! The proposition that rates
| of homelessness are primarily driven by housing costs has
| actually been well supported in research - this Pew
| article contains many useful references:
|
| https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-
| analysis/articles/...
|
| As per econ 101, high prices are a function of scarcity
| relative to demand: we can reasonably claim that
| regulations which restrict housing development, which by
| their nature _must_ increase scarcity and therefore
| housing costs, therefore also lead to increased rates of
| homelessness.
|
| > In the handful of ultra expensive metro areas, sure it
| might move the needle
|
| That's a good point, but those are exactly the places
| which have significant homelessness problems.
|
| In general, this is not a housing preference issue,
| because opposition to upzoning does not come from people
| who aspire to live in single-family homes, but from
| people who already own them. This is a typical example:
|
| https://www.change.org/p/whittier-neighbors-against-
| seattle-...
|
| As usual with these things, the complaints include a
| cloud of nitpicky nonsense surrounding a central concern
| over "neighborhood character", which is a polite way of
| saying "we don't want apartment-dwelling poor people
| coming to live near us".
| toss1 wrote:
| >>which is a polite way of saying "we don't want
| apartment-dwelling poor people coming to live near us".
|
| NO, it is most definitely NOT that.
|
| It is overwhelmingly exactly what people say it is --
| maintaining the character of a neighborhood that everyone
| there has paid higher cost of entry, cost of taxes, and
| cost and time of maintenance and upgrades to maintain.
| Don't make claims in areas where you have zero knowledge
| just because you think it helps your point.
|
| I'm in a small sub-/ex-urban town with a rural character
| which has zoning, and have been involved in local issues.
| I've never met a single person who feels the way you
| claim (although there are surely a few examples
| somewhere). No one looks down on the low income ppl who
| are here because their families were here before housing
| started to get tight and expensive. Most everyone either
| grew up here or came specifically because they _WANT_ to
| live in a quieter area, have some wildlife, maintain
| gardens, etc. No one is avoiding poor people, they are
| SEEKING quiet and green spaces where you can do outdoor
| activities.
|
| Moreover, saying that zoning in locales like this should
| be changed to accommodate low-income high-density housing
| is just stupid. Yes, the current homeowners could get
| rich subdividing their properties, razing the trees and
| putting up condos. Great, maybe you get a lower-income
| population. But getting ANYWHERE useful from here, even
| groceries or convenience stores, is a 5-10 mile car ride,
| and the rail station to the big city is 25min away by
| car. Any low income person is now condemned to replace
| housing expenses with car expenses, purchase/lease,
| maintenance, insurance, fuel, etc.. And, they now have a
| big commute reducing their time available.
|
| It is really simple to just blame other people and yell
| "they're just greedy!", and it surely makes you feel
| better and more righteous.
|
| It is much harder to actually figure out complex problems
| and create solutions that work.
| JamesLeonis wrote:
| There are 10 million empty homes [0] and ~700,000 homeless.
| No matter how you slice those numbers you still have more
| empty housing stock than homeless right now.
|
| [0]:
| https://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf
| (page 4)
| EA-3167 wrote:
| You're assuming that the major challenge is the lack of a
| home, because the term we choose to use as an umbrella
| implies that. For some people it's even true, but they tend
| not to be CHRONICALLY homeless, and that's the population
| of major concern. Chronically homeless people have
| extremely high rates of mental illness and substance abuse;
| depending on how you slice it, a third or more are
| schizophrenic or something similar.
|
| Those are not people you can just stick into a house and
| wish them well, they need serious help for many years. In
| most cases that help isn't there, or comes with strings (no
| drugs, no alcohol) that they refuse to accept. Homelessness
| in the US is in many respect a mental health and substance
| abuse issue, exacerbated in the post-Reagan era when our
| mental health system was gutted and weakened.
|
| If you want to reach those people and keep them off the
| streets, you need more than just empty houses.
| itishappy wrote:
| Chronically homeless make up about a quarter to a third
| of the US homeless population.
|
| https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/20
| 23-...
| EA-3167 wrote:
| That's true, but they make up a disproportionate number
| of the "visible homeless" that people encounter in camps,
| taking drugs on the street, etc. A lot of homeless people
| are at a low point in their lives, but use the systems
| offered to them and dig themselves back out. That's why
| they aren't CHRONICALLY homeless.
|
| They don't represent the same kind of societal problem
| that poor students, broke divorcees, and people moving
| through rough patches do. They also don't represent a
| single population that needs help they aren't provided
| with already, unlike the chronically homeless.
| erehweb wrote:
| If you're saying that "homeless" means something other
| than not having a home, that seems unnecessarily
| confusing. Re strings - I believe there has been some
| success in providing no-strings housing and then working
| on the other problems.
| EA-3167 wrote:
| It's a broad term, just like "Sick" can mean anything
| from having a seasonal cold, to terminal cancer. The
| causes vary, the prognoses vary, the treatments vary.
| Talking about "Sickness" without specifics is profoundly
| unhelpful.
|
| Same with homelessness.
| stevenicr wrote:
| My first read of this document leads me to believe that
| there are only about 341,000 housing units available for
| rent, there are some for sale at an average price of
| $373,000.. but many or most of the empty housing units are
| like second homes and such and not 'available'.
|
| So we have 350k open units and 700k people without homes,
| average rent is around $1500..
|
| just looking at the data my guess is that we have about
| 700k people who don't have an extra 2 grand every month to
| put into housing. (and I think it's way higher personally,
| maybe not counting the couch surfing relatives who can't
| afford their own place, and others who are living in over
| crowded situations of basements )-
|
| I'm sure there is much more to it than the averages, like a
| lot of the homeless are in areas where the average rent is
| much higher and 1500 - and the few places where rent is
| $800 likely has less homeless, (and also has less other
| things like jobs and public transit) -
|
| and really if it is 10 million or a quarter a million empty
| places, I don't see how that matters if no one can afford
| any of them.
| segasaturn wrote:
| Those houses sitting empty with no-one in them is exactly
| why the price of rent is so high. The supply is there but
| it's being hoarded by 1% of the population. Write laws
| that would force people to rent out their secondary
| houses, condos and apartments (with the threat of having
| it seized if they don't) and watch the prices immediately
| start to fall.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| What does that mean for the next steps?
|
| Does the government eminent domain the houses, arrest the
| homeless, and then ship them out to Detroit or wherever the
| surplus houses are?
| throw_pm23 wrote:
| The "surplus houses" are not just in Detroit but also
| around Central Park, NY, where people buy them as
| investment.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| so what is the operational theory then?
| throw_pm23 wrote:
| one can describe the situation and its causes without
| prescribing solutions
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _US could end homelessness but would need to stop
| immigration and change the constitution which could force
| people in shelter_
|
| Immigrants are a tiny fraction of the homeless [1]. And we've
| tried criminalising homelessness; incarceration is forced
| shelter and incredibly expensive.
|
| [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30739834/
| stevenicr wrote:
| according to that 'adults participating in the National
| Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions' ..
| It also says foreign born is 1% vs native at 1.7% - so they
| are both 'a tiny fraction'
|
| Whether or not a large percentage, or a large number or
| small number of immigrants are homeless or not,
|
| one must assume that if 11 million people left the US next
| month, the price of rent in many places may go down a bit,
| and some currently unhoused people might be able to afford
| a cheaper place.
|
| Of course another side is that wages in some industries
| will rise, and that may put more people into a position
| where they can afford an apartment.
|
| What I'd like to see is how inexpensive optional housing
| can be made.
| ipaddr wrote:
| In Canada the majority of shelter beds go to refugee
| claimants. I believe it is highly like many illegals in the
| US are homeless and make up the majority of homeless
| people. They are not part of the numbers you provided.
| mmooss wrote:
| > In Canada the majority of shelter beds go to refugee
| claimants.
|
| Is there data someplace that shows it?
|
| > I believe it is highly like
|
| I believe that angry gods cause rain. What does it
| matter?
| NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
| How could the United States end homelessness? It is a mix of
| federal government, state governments, and
| local/county/municipal governments. The level of government
| best suited to do the actual work is hamstrung... if any one
| city fixes homelessness (somehow), more homeless will show up.
| If they do that again for the new arrivals, more homeless show
| up.
|
| The first to solve it is punished with tens of thousands of
| newly arriving homeless who, as you might imagine, will find a
| way to get there if it means not being homeless anymore. But
| budgets are finite and the cost per homeless must he higher
| than zero, but in a practical sense the number of homeless
| aren't entirely finite.
|
| If you start from the other end, with the feds, then you might
| as well hold your breath. Homelessness is so far down the list
| of priorities, that even if it somehow did bubble to the top,
| the polarization in Congress will sabotage any effort, and
| we'll end up with boondoggles that both sides can criticize and
| that won't really help any homeless at all.
|
| This isn't a choice being made, it's just the complexity of the
| real world that some are still blind to even after graduating
| college and (theoretically) turning into grownups.
|
| There's actually a technical solution too, but since it's dry
| and boring, most leftists (and quite a few of the rightists)
| find it too boring to ever want to try. Obviously the solution
| is either love and compassion (from the left) or maybe "pulling
| themselves up by their bootstraps" (from the right).
| wormlord wrote:
| This argument is so lame. "Actually the overall structure of
| the USA is designed so that its basicalyl impossible to solve
| the crisis".
|
| You're not wrong in the fact that America is a shit country
| designed to intentionally to use homelessness as an implicit
| threat against the working class. You are wrong in the sense
| that all the things you listed aren't reasons, just excuses
| to cover up the intentionality of homelessness, and that
| homelessness could be solved if there was the political will
| to do so. Which there will never be in the USA because again,
| the homelessness crisis is intentional.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha.
| ..
| segasaturn wrote:
| Create a federal jobs program to build apartments in large
| quantities, not just in cities but in rural, suburban and
| exurban areas as well. Anybody who's an American citizen and
| able bodied (including ex-convicts and felons) can apply and
| get a good paying job with health insurance. Use the federal
| government's power of eminent domain to override zoning laws
| and seize land that's being sat on, and finally pay for it by
| heavily taxing the tech giants, cutting military spending and
| legalizing (and taxing) cannabis.
|
| Will politicians ever do it? No, they're in the pocket of the
| military and the 1%. Will voters ever vote for it? No,
| they're fed a steady stream of propaganda that tells them
| that this would be "socialism". But that's how the problem
| would be solved.
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| 70-80% of homeless people are local. Fixing homelessness in
| your community does not attract large numbers of additional
| people.
| mmooss wrote:
| > The first to solve it is punished with tens of thousands of
| newly arriving homeless
|
| I've seen nothing to support this claim. It does fit the
| right-wing disinformation pattern of demonizing people,
| encouraging division and hate between people, undermine
| social programs, and making baseless claims to put others in
| the defensive position of having to disprove them.
|
| Can you support that claim?
|
| Here's some evidence to the contrary, from another comment:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30739834/
| nostromo wrote:
| It's funny how every westerner visits Japan and comes home
| thinking we can "solve crime" or "solve homelessness" or "have
| clean subway stations."
|
| Japan's culture is why those things are the way they are. It's
| not due to funding. It's because people raise their children
| differently than we do in the west. The family's obligations
| are also greater.
|
| And, yes, there are homeless people in Japan. But they
| typically are invisible by choice because of their cultural
| norms around discretion.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| It's definitely cultural. I've been to every major city in
| the US and I don't think I've ever seen a homeless Indian.
| Some groups have broken familial cultures that does not churn
| out good citizens. Did the US in the past play a major role
| in breaking down those groups and surrounding them with
| abject poverty that makes it hard to escape from? Absolutely.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Mental illness is a major factor that makes it hard to help
| people. A majority of homeless people don't have mental
| illness, but a large fraction do, but those are the hardest
| to help.
|
| I have a friend right now who is in a precarious housing
| situation who has schizophrenia but does not have a DX and
| has no insight into her condition. If my wife tries to set
| a time to pick her up and take her out to our farm, odds
| are 1/10 that she will really be there, will really get in
| the car, will not get out of the car for some hare-brained
| reason or otherwise not make it out. You've got to have the
| patience of a saint to do anything for her.
|
| If she had some insight into her condition she could go to
| DSS and get TANF and then get on disability and have stable
| housing but she doesn't. No matter how I try to bring up
| the issue that she does have a condition she just "unhears"
| it.
|
| Indians and other people from traditional cultures have
| stronger "family values" and won't wash their hands of
| intractable relatives the way people who grew up in the US
| monoculture will. (Or if they do it, they'll do it in a
| final way)
| brendoelfrendo wrote:
| > I've been to every major city in the US and I don't think
| I've ever seen a homeless Indian.
|
| 1) I have.
|
| 2) There are plenty of homeless or impoverished people in
| India, they just don't come to the US. Immigrants need a
| visa or permanent residency, and that usually comes with a
| requirement to maintain a job or have some level of
| financial security. Later generation Indian-Americans are,
| hopefully, kept out of poverty by the work their parents
| and families put in to establish a foothold in the US. But
| none of this is guaranteed; homelessness can happen to just
| about anyone if they have the right run of bad luck, and
| one's culture is only a small part of that equation.
| m2024 wrote:
| That's because it's very affluent Indians who have been
| granted citizenship historically.
|
| Homelessness goes down in places where housing is cheap and
| also in places where the government intervenes sensibly.
| mmooss wrote:
| India is overwhelmed with poverty far beyond anything I've
| seen in the US.
|
| The people of India started from even worse poverty and
| have generally made progress (especially since recently-
| deceased PM Singh). I'm not criticizing. But holding forth
| India's culture [1] as a model of preventing homelessness
| is pretty incredible.
|
| [1] India may have the largest, most diverse collection of
| 'cultures' within one national border in the world, so
| which one are we talking about?
| nineplay wrote:
| Have you ever seen a homeless Indian in India? I would
| assume not, since evidently Indians have intact familial
| cultures that churn out good citizens.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Homelessness in Japan and the invisibility thereof is a theme
| in this game
|
| https://store.steampowered.com/agecheck/app/1235140/
|
| I can't help but think that homelessness in downtown San
| Francisco is a spectacle.
|
| For one thing, there has been a decision to concentrate
| people there, which is why people think homelessness is worse
| in SF than LA, whereas I understand there are more homeless
| per capita in LA. If you tried to "live outside" in a
| residential area I think the authorities would deal with you
| as harshly they would deal with anyone who tried to build
| more housing.
|
| The messages are: (1) you'd better not stand up to your
| jackass boss because this could be you, (2) you'd better not
| ask politicians for a more generous welfare state (especially
| in the bluest state in America) because we'll never give it
| to you.
| peab wrote:
| Even if it's cultural, it can be fixed. Culture can change
| and can be changed by choice
| thfuran wrote:
| Culture changes, but it's very hard to deliberately effect
| specific changes.
| mmooss wrote:
| Not really. People deliberately persuade the public of
| things all the time. Some persuade them of absolutely
| false, awful things with regularity.
| nostromo wrote:
| I hope you're right.
|
| It's very difficult to address culture in the US without
| being accused of victim blaming or bias.
|
| But the uncomfortable truth is that some cultural practices
| simply do produce better neighbors and coworkers and
| compatriots than do others.
| wesselbindt wrote:
| The US just spent 8 billion on continuing a certain genocide
| in the middle east. Spend such expenditures on housing, and
| homelessness is solved. It costs about 200k to build a house.
| The US has 600000 homeless people. If you do the math, the US
| could've solved 5% of homelessness instead of bombing more
| children. But they chose not to.
| Aunche wrote:
| Geopolitical commentary aside, the city of San Francisco
| has spent billions of dollars on homelessness and it has
| only gotten worse. I'm not opposed to paying higher taxes
| to house people less fortunate than me, but I expect the
| government to get their money's worth. If I wouldn't want
| to spend a million on a shoebox, then the city shouldn't
| either.
| mmooss wrote:
| What is the point? Not everything has worked, so do
| nothing? If we read the OP, we can find out about some
| things that have worked.
| nostromo wrote:
| The US does spend tens of billions fighting homelessness
| though. The US is very generous in this regard.
|
| The problem is it's not solvable by building homes. It's
| about addiction and mental illness. And because of the US
| constitution, it's very difficult to help Americans that do
| not want to be helped.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| How do you end homelessness, when some percent of homeless
| people will, if you give them a place to stay, smoke meth all
| day and make their apartment and nearby apartments health
| hazards?
|
| Many drug addicts don't want to be addicted, and would try to
| go through treatment if provided. But some are inveterate, and
| don't want to quit. What do you do with them?
| yard2010 wrote:
| Not all homeless people are dangerous drug addicts.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| Notice how I never said they were.
| Groxx wrote:
| You do however seem to be implying "this won't work
| because some won't go along with it, _therefore we should
| not do it_ ".
|
| In which case you're essentially saying "meth users
| decide everyone's housing status".
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| No, that is not what I'm saying. Notice, I never said we
| shouldn't do anything.
|
| I'm saying reaching the state of "no homelessness" is
| dependent upon finding something to do with the worst of
| the homeless.
|
| For a tech analogy, imagine you've architected a system
| that has 99.5% uptime. You might be able to imagine a way
| to get to 99.9% up time.
|
| With enough resources, you might even be able to get to
| 99.99% uptime. With laser focus and a giant dedicated
| team and an immense budget, maybe you can get it to
| 99.995%.
|
| But what would you do if some exec came in and said we
| need 100% uptime, and we are a failure as a company
| unless we reach that?
| cwillu wrote:
| "[...] if you give them a place to stay, smoke meth all day
| and make their apartment and nearby apartments health
| hazards"
|
| You skipped a step or two in there, but I will note that if
| you had real health care, the homeless adhd and such would be
| on their vyvanse prescriptions rather than self-medicating
| with meth.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Jail: At this point 2nd and 3rd chances have been burned up.
|
| And, to be quite blunt: If someone wants to be a meth-head,
| there's plenty of ways to consume it that don't create
| hazards for other people.
|
| Edit: I think it's perfectly acceptable, in guaranteed
| housing situations, to say "If you create a hazard you will
| go to jail."
| skirge wrote:
| US and Europe have different reasone for homelessnes. Give free
| houses in US and next day you will have +400mln people from
| South America. In EU (I can speak for Poland) most homeless
| have alcohol _and_ violence problems - people removed from
| homes for domestic violence by court (divorce). You must be
| quite bad person if no one takes care of you, in a country with
| a) strong family tights and b) many people owning a home.
| mmooss wrote:
| > Give free houses in US and next day you will have +400mln
| people from South America.
|
| I don't know that at all. People in public housing that I
| know and see are not especially from South America.
| tencentshill wrote:
| Note this is a country where you cannot survive without shelter
| for most of the year. It's much "easier" to remain unhoused
| somewhere like California.
| jltsiren wrote:
| There used to be homeless alcoholics living in shacks and WW1
| bunkers in the forests around Helsinki. Many (most?) of them
| were WW2 veterans. Older kids still told stories about them in
| the 80s, but most of them had actually died or found shelter by
| then.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| The winter climate is comparable to, even milder than, large
| parts of the US including large cities like Boston, Chicago,
| Minneapolis that have significant homeless populations.
|
| Homeless people are not necessarily completely shelterless, in
| a survival sense. They're associated with tents for a reason.
| ge96 wrote:
| It's funny I've considered going there when my life imploded.
| Just get dropped off and live there Venice beach but yeah I get
| how annoying that would be to a non-homeless.
|
| I have family who are poor (3rd world) and I think about how
| it's fair for me to b here and they are over there but yeah etc
| etc idk. Why does it feel bad to be. I do help (virtue signal)
| donate but I'm also in a shit ton of debt but I'm not
| technically poor/homeless. I have a car/apt/toys. Still
| thinking about it.
|
| Oh yeah giving money isn't a fix it turns out because people
| fight over it/demand more. Next thing you know everyone is your
| relative hunting you down online. My personal gmail chat pops
| up "hey man..."
|
| It does piss me off when I pull up to a light and there's a guy
| right there with a sign. How do I know he's homeless? I'm
| coming out of a grocery store at night somebody's like "sir,
| sir, sir..." trying to get my attention. I guess it shouldn't
| be a problem to just hand em a dollar. But then they say
| "that's it?".
|
| Again I donate to a local food shelter, NHA, etc... just funny
| is altruism real idk why do I feel annoyed (greed?). I can't
| even ask people for money without feeling shame but other
| people don't care. Alright rant over I am privileged I know.
|
| I'm gonna live a life though, mid sports car, land, not give
| up. I'll continue to donate too whether in cash or open source
| work but first I have to get out of debt, been in debt for 15
| years now crazy. That's why I have my tech job, drive for UE,
| donate plasma and freelance to speed run my debt off.
| Thankfully I'm single so it's only my own life I gotta worry
| about.
| barbazoo wrote:
| > a "Housing First" approach, which provides people experiencing
| homelessness with immediate, independent, permanent housing
|
| Could timing have something to do with it? Maybe if the cycle is
| broken right at the start, when one becomes homeless, it prevents
| some of the mental health issues and addiction issues that come
| from living without support for too long. People here in NA often
| have lived on the streets for years or decades. That's so much
| trauma, many say it's impossible to heal at that point.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _Maybe if the cycle is broken right at the start, when one
| becomes homeless, it prevents some of the mental health issues
| and addiction issues that come from living without support for
| too long_
|
| What fraction of the homeless addicts or mentally ill started
| out that way?
| lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote:
| Suffering from mental trauma does not mean that one cannot
| suffer from additional mental trauma.
| motohagiography wrote:
| Comparing the homlessness chart in the article to Finland's net
| immigration chart
| (https://stat.fi/en/publication/cl8n2ksks2yau0dukaxe3it75) the
| country's net negative immigration created much of the housing
| availability to house people immediately. Next door in Sweden,
| the situation is different.
|
| Their approach of building flats and committing to getting
| homeless people into them absolutely worked and should be an
| example, but not without a relatively fixed homeless rate. This
| is the general issue with the nordic social model. it was the
| model of functioning social programs, but in a vacuum of relative
| isolation and homegeneity.
| thePhytochemist wrote:
| This issue is very relevant for me since I have been homeless
| since May. It's been a bad run of being a target of criminal
| activity, unemployment and just running out of money during my
| job search. I cope with a mix of volunteering, overpriced housing
| (think $1200/month for a room in a rural area before I ran out of
| money for that), catsitting, house-sitting, staying with family
| and sleeping in my ancient car. Although I'm a citizen I don't
| qualify for any government support or programs, even though we
| have employment insurance here which I paid into for years.
|
| I'm from Ottawa where the cold is obviously deadly, as it is in
| Finland. I do feel that we need to take shelter more seriously in
| public policy compared to warm areas because of that. Last week
| someone froze to death overnight a few blocks away from where I
| was crashing on a couch with family. Walking through downtown
| Ottawa and seeing the huge empty, lit, warm buildings with people
| freezing to death right outside is striking. Any practically
| minded person can see the problem is political and philosophical,
| not practical.
|
| I can tell all the posters who think people choose to be homeless
| that I'm certainly not one of them. The comments about the
| importance of avoiding a downward spiral are certainly correct.
| Searching for work is hard enough normally and becomes
| increasingly difficult without access to things like a kitchen
| and toilet.
|
| What I see in this Finnish policy is the starting assumption that
| doing nothing is not a good option. After reaching that point
| there can a rational discussion about what to do with whatever
| money is being spent - do you pay more people to hand out
| blankets and conduct surveys or just use it to buy housing units?
| As a homeless person I would really like to see Canada have a
| policy like I'm reading in this article instead of what we are
| doing now. The crappy temporary shelters and bureaucratic
| spending strategy obviously isn't working.
|
| Even just economically, to have a government pay for years of
| schooling and subsidize advanced degrees then just be ready to
| let that person die on the street when they are ready to work but
| can't happen to find something seems like a waste. I'd rather see
| a functioning "social safety net" as described in this article.
| peab wrote:
| The housing situation in Canada is insane and is so obviously
| due to not building enough housing and bringing too many people
| into the country via immigration. The fact that it costs
| 1200$/month for a room in a rural area is incredibly damning.
|
| I went to college in Ottawa, and now I live in Austin Texas.
| It's similar in size, although Austin has been growing more
| lately. Curiously, they are also both capitols, college towns
| and they have a river flowing through them.
|
| A major difference is that Austin has a new development with
| 200-400 unites on every block it seems. Cranes are everywhere
| downtown, and even in random neighborhoods they have huge new
| developments. Ottawa has no shortage of land, there's a huge
| amount of available land to develop in either direction, but
| they evidently aren't building nearly as much.
|
| The result? I'm looking at 2 bedroom apartments, and they are
| 1000$ cheaper than they were 3 years ago when I first moved
| here. Rent has gone down and continues to go down. I'm seeing
| studio apartments in the middle of the city renting out for
| 800$ now!
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| With all due respect, why volunteer? I notice this with a lot
| of homeless people I chat with (there's a lot here in Boulder)
| - many of them volunteer their time at various charities while
| being homeless.
|
| Wouldn't it be better devoting 100% of your spare time to
| getting back on your feet, and _then_ volunteer, or donate?
| thfuran wrote:
| Why do most people have only one job? Wouldn't it be better
| to spend evenings at a second job and then have leisure when
| you retire?
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| I guess you're trying to make some point, but I don't
| really see it.
| johnmaguire wrote:
| I think the point is that one can only devote a finite
| amount of time and energy searching for a job each day
| before they hit diminishing returns, due to both mental
| fatigue and physical limitations. Though as another
| commenter pointed out, volunteer work is a common resume-
| building and networking tactic.
| beedeebeedee wrote:
| Volunteer work can come with benefits other than payment,
| such as food, access to facilities, etc. It can also provide
| a support network and contacts for finding work.
|
| With that knowledge (despite not knowing specific
| circumstances), it sounds like a highly effective way to cope
| with the situation as an individual.
| justlikereddit wrote:
| While I'm not homeless, the existence of USB(powerbank) heated
| clothes have been a very comfy discovery of mine recently. A
| bit fiddly at times sure but having hours of comfy warmth
| available at the press of a button is worth it.
|
| I've wondered if this is something adopted by the homeless
| already? and if not, look into it.
|
| You still need proper insulating layers on top of the heating
| ones, and many of the cheapest chinese varieties might have
| undersized heat pads that might not use the quick charge
| ability and merely provide warmth as opposed to heat. But I'm
| welcoming every extra watt of heat whenever cold.
| mmooss wrote:
| Stay warm! And thank you for stepping forward to share your
| story and perspective. HN needs much more of it.
| johnea wrote:
| So, they reduced homelessness by giving people a permanent place
| to live?
|
| Inconceivable! Who would have ever thought of that?
|
| Those commonist Scandinavians, they just don't understand the
| "power of the market"...
|
| Why would anyone even live indoors if it mitigated investor ROI?
| 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
| I thought building houses was a skill lost to history, like
| Damascus steel!
| deanc wrote:
| Helsinki, at least is an interesting place. Much like any other
| capital if you go to certain neighbourhoods you can see drug
| dealers, drug users (many which are living in shelters) - even in
| downtown. They kind of blend in, are part of the scenery and on
| the whole only interact with their "own kind". You might hear
| some grumbling, shouting, smelly folk on the tram - but they
| aren't treated with the same contempt at existing as I've seen in
| other countries.
| rossdavidh wrote:
| "Building flats is key: otherwise, especially if housing supply
| is particularly rigid, the funding of rentals can risk driving up
| rents (OECD, 2021a), thus reducing the "bang for the buck" of
| public spending."
|
| So, yes, if you want low homelessness, you build a lot of housing
| and make sure that rents are low. This is true, and a good
| strategy.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| And don't "fix" the problem at the expense of the paycheque-to-
| paycheque lower-working class.
|
| Otherwise it's zero sum and you create a homeless for every
| homeless you remove and disincentivize work.
| TinyBig wrote:
| How would it be possible to fix the problem at the expense of
| the lower working class?
| markus_zhang wrote:
| For example just add tax to shoot at the target, eventually
| salary owners get hurt while riches can get away with an
| army of lawyers and accountants.
| fooker wrote:
| If you force owners to artificially reduce rent for a
| single class of properties (here: cheap flats made for the
| homeless) the rent for others go up a bit.
|
| This has happened in several US cities.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| > How would it be possible to fix the problem at the
| expense of the lower working class?
|
| Not sure if you intended to phrase your question as you
| did, but if you give cash to the unhoused to rent housing,
| that takes supply from the bottom of the rental market if
| you don't build any more.
|
| Builders tend to build for those that can afford to pay and
| don't target the bottom of the market.
|
| Most stock of low-cost housing is due to building neglect
| or depopulation rather than being purpose-built, in a free
| market anyway.
| enaaem wrote:
| People hate om commie blocks but it was an excellent solution
| to mass produce affordable housing in war torn Europe. The free
| market is full of cheap mass produced stuff. Why can't housing
| be mass produced? Why are there not more economic options? It's
| almost always restrictive regulations that stops these
| solutions from happening.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| It helps to have a winter.
| emh68 wrote:
| 1. Build a house for each homeless person
|
| 2. Remove them from the homeless count, because they now have a
| house.
|
| 3. Reach zero homelessness!
|
| 4. There are still people living on the streets... But we don't
| call them homeless!
| erehweb wrote:
| I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. From the article,
| basically no one was sleeping on the streets in Finland in
| 2020.
| eesmith wrote:
| I don't know where the #4 is from, but I can point to
| https://kritisches-
| netzwerk.de/sites/default/files/homelessn... with a more
| complete breakdown: Types of homelessness |
| Living Alone | Long-term homeless
| ----------------------+--------------+-------------------
| Temporarily living | 2 773 | 522 with
| friends and | | relatives
| | |
| ----------------------+--------------+-------------------
| Outside, in | 721 | 186
| stairwells, in | | temporary
| | | shelters, etc. | |
| ----------------------+--------------+-------------------
| In dormitories | 489 | 195 or
| hostels | |
| ----------------------+--------------+-------------------
| In institutions | 358 | 151
| skirge wrote:
| at least now they can't say there's no home for them, it's just
| choice - some prefer that way.
| 127 wrote:
| Also -40C winters might have something to do with it.
| pyuser583 wrote:
| If you're going to use -40, why include the "C"?
| pinkmuffinere wrote:
| It's a fun fact that -40 c == -40 f, but if you leave off the
| units people who aren't 'in the know' would be confused. Also
| they might (adversarially) wonder if the units are in a
| lesser known scale like romer
| pyuser583 wrote:
| I use nerdy in-jokes a bit too much.
| yard2010 wrote:
| I for one have no idea how much is -40f, is it colder or
| hotter than -40c?
|
| I do remember -32 or something is the same?
| andrewla wrote:
| Without digging too deep into the nature of the statistics they
| use, I'm a little skeptical of this.
|
| The transition to using the word "homeless" has resulted in
| transforming something we can't easily measure -- "drug addicted
| or mentally ill people being a public menace" -- into something
| that we can measure -- "people without a good living
| arrangement".
|
| Sure, the latter is important in a lot of ways too. And there
| housing is a tolerable solution.
|
| But the former is the actual problem that we care about. It's
| nearly impossible to measure. It's nearly impossible to fix. The
| horrors of involuntary commitment vs. the horrors of not having
| involuntary commitment vs. the horrors of using the criminal
| justice system vs. the horrors of not using the criminal justice
| system.
|
| The fact is that we have no real model for treatment of severely
| mentally ill people. We have a number of effective drugs, but
| they rapidly become ineffective if not taken. Our ability to
| treat or "cure" people in these conditions is essentially non-
| existent.
|
| The question I would ask of Finland before considering this data
| or analysis to be interesting is what is their state of
| involuntary indefinite commitment.
| wesselbindt wrote:
| Have you ever considered that it may be the other way around?
| That the horrors of living on the street (and "horrors" is an
| appropriate term here, you are fighting for survival every day;
| it is beyond the realm of comprehension of the housed) might be
| causing the mental illness and drug use, rather than the other
| way around?
|
| If I want to get a homeless person off of drugs, it sure as
| crisps is not going to happen until they have a roof over their
| head. The core issue is the lack of affordable housing. That
| should be priority number 1.
| mmooss wrote:
| In fact, that's one thing the article talks about. Finland's
| successful plan focuses on 'housing first'.
|
| _" Finland's success is not a matter of luck or the outcome
| of "quick fixes." Rather, it is the result of a sustained,
| well-resourced national strategy, driven by a "Housing First"
| approach, which provides people experiencing homelessness
| with immediate, independent, permanent housing, rather than
| temporary accommodation (OECD, 2020)"_
| Xortl wrote:
| I'm happy to read evidence I'm wrong (I _want_ to be wrong -
| it would make me much more optimistic about a fix), but my
| own life and everything I 've read suggests the opposite -
| once someone develops a serious drug or alcohol addiction it
| leads to them destroying everything good in their lives and
| inevitably they either sober up or end up homeless. Nearly
| all of the people who stay homeless in the long term have
| some severe mental illness (including addiction). Short of an
| involuntary commitment which is its own kind of hell, helping
| these people is incredibly difficult.
|
| I have multiple family members who fit this pattern and it's
| absolutely godawful. The addiction literally rules them. They
| will perpetually ask for money for "needs" then spend it on
| drugs. If another family member houses them, they will
| sneakily maintain their addiction and steal from family to
| support it when necessary. If you offer them housing on
| condition of getting sober, they will choose addiction and
| homelessness. If you offer them housing without condition,
| they will use it to stay an addict in perpetuity, who
| everyone else is paying for. I don't think this last is a
| remotely viable solution with the number of addicts out
| there, which is only growing.
|
| I'm not saying this to condemn addicts/mentally ill people. I
| just want to give an idea of just how hard this problem is to
| fix.
| kibwen wrote:
| _> Nearly all of the people who stay homeless in the long
| term have some severe mental illness (including addiction)_
|
| The problem is that people can end up homeless for all
| sorts of reasons, and even if that reason is some sort of
| mental illness, being homeless an often-traumatic
| experience that easily exacerbates and worsens a person's
| mental condition.
|
| There was a period of my life where I slept rough (long
| story) and I can personally confirm that a lack of sleep
| security (not to mention "stuff security", the fear of
| having my meager possessions stolen) will start someone on
| the path to mental illness; some amount of paranoia and
| mental fog seems almost inevitable in those conditions.
| m2024 wrote:
| A lot of words to say that doing anything at all must be
| impossible.
|
| Not understanding how homelessness (or poverty generally) leads
| to mental illness is remarkably disconnected.
| Aunche wrote:
| > "drug addicted or mentally ill people being a public menace"
|
| Finland also is rather aggressive with involuntary detention of
| those deemed to be a potential danger to themselves or others.
| annzabelle wrote:
| My understanding is that Northern Europe has a much more robust
| system of using Long Acting Injectable Antipsychotics (under
| court order if nessecary) and various group home options or
| Assertive Community Treatment teams that have nurses visit
| patients daily. They are also quicker to use lithium and
| clozapine when indicated. They also do much longer hospital
| stays when needed than our revolving door policies here. Also
| they don't have meth and fentanyl epidemics yet.
|
| We know that the longer psychosis goes untreated/the more times
| someone goes off the meds, the harder it is to treat, and that
| what happens in the first few years of someone developing a
| psychotic disorder makes a huge difference in long term
| outcomes.
|
| An American might develop psychosis in their mid 20s, end up
| committed for a few weeks and placed on antipsychotic pills
| until they're no longer floridly psychotic, and then go home,
| not follow up with doctors/refill meds, and end up on a cycle
| of this with more and more brittle symptoms until they're
| homeless and have no real chance of recovery.
|
| The same person in Northern Europe would likely be hospitalized
| for longer initially, started on an injectable that only needs
| to be given once a month, and they leave the hospital with
| fewer residual symptoms. They're then followed by an ACT team
| with a nurse visiting to check on them and make sure they're
| eating and keeping housing, and ensuring that shot goes in
| their arm every month. They don't necessarily fully recover,
| but a lot of them end up being able to do some kind of
| schooling/employment/volunteering and they are either stable
| enough to keep housing without being evicted for disruption, or
| are shuffled into staffed group homes.
| andrewla wrote:
| Do we have any numbers on the number of people that are in
| this system? I'm frankly curious if the numbers in the
| original article can effectively be completely explained by
| this system rather than the policies listed in the article.
|
| In the US the system broke down in the 50s and 60s and
| collapsed completely in the 70s and 80s due to bad treatment
| options and often very inhumane conditions and cases of
| misdiagnoses. The widespread misdiagnosis problem only
| stretched the system further and compounded the existing
| problems. I would be curious to see where Finland's
| trajectory in this regard lies.
| singleshot_ wrote:
| > due to bad treatment options and often very inhumane
| conditions and cases of misdiagnoses.
|
| I thought that it broke down due to a Supreme Court
| decision (O'Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975)) but
| perhaps they were interrelated.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| That's a wrong chronology. Before the 1950s we did not have
| effective treatments for schizophrenia other than
| incarceration.
|
| In old books you read about
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catatonia
|
| being intractable, now it usually clears up in 15-30
| minutes with benzodiazepine medication. In the 1950s we got
| the Phenothiazines which were the first hope for many
| patients, there has been a huge amount of progress since
| then and managing most of these people outside the hospital
| is possible. People also came to see involuntary commitment
| as immoral as described by Thomas Szasz, depicted by the
| movie "One Flew out of the Cuckoo's Nest" and shown by this
| experiment
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment
|
| The trouble isn't that we tore down the old system but that
| we didn't completely build a new system to replace it.
| There are deep issues involving people's agency. Right now
| we are in a society that thinks it is wrong to make people
| to take drugs they don't want to take, a different society
| (maybe even ours in N years) will think is it wrong to not
| make people take drugs for serious mental illness.
| annzabelle wrote:
| I was responding to the commenter above me discussing the
| phenomenon of mentally disturbed people sleeping rough and
| I think that's been a small phenomenon in Finland the
| entire time due to their different history with mental
| health, with economic homelessness being most of what
| they've reduced via housing first.
|
| To clarify, I don't know much about Finnish mental health
| in particular as opposed to the general trends in Northern
| Europe.
| teractiveodular wrote:
| Sleeping rough has always been rare in Finland for the
| simple reason that it gets down to -20 quite often in
| winter. Freezing to death is not an uncommon fate for
| alcoholics.
| mmooss wrote:
| You're assuming others share your perspective and
| understanding.
|
| > The transition to using the word "homeless" has resulted in
| transforming something we can't easily measure -- "drug
| addicted or mentally ill people being a public menace" -- into
| something that we can measure -- "people without a good living
| arrangement".
|
| > the former is the actual problem that we care about
|
| The word homeless is pretty old, not something people have
| 'tranistioned' to any time recently.
|
| I haven't seen anyone trying use 'homeless' as a euphemism;
| they are actually concerned about people without housing. That
| is the big problem.
|
| You apparently believe "drug addicted or mentally ill people
| being a public menace" is a comparable problem, but your
| comment is the first time I've heard that. Nobody is conspiring
| to hide it; they just don't think about it like you do.
|
| I spend a lot of time in cities and know others who do too.
| None feel menaced by people who are unhoused - why would that
| be menacing? - or high. High people generally don't know you
| are there, and are easily avoided. I've had zero problems; I
| don't know of anyone else who has.
|
| Also, the subtext is about eroding human rights. You have no
| more rights than a homeless or high person. Feeling 'menaced'
| is not sufficient to compromise someone's freedom. That's what
| freedom means - of course people can always do things that
| others don't mind; freedom means doing things other people
| don't like. I find your comment menacing; who decides who gets
| locked up?
| kiba wrote:
| It is more painful to treat someone who is homeless and
| mentally ill as opposed to just mentally ill.
| t-3 wrote:
| Finland is cold. People without adequate housing will freeze to
| death. Not finding bodies in the spring thaw is probably
| actually important to them.
| pavlov wrote:
| What is the question you're asking here?
|
| I'm Finnish and I have a close family member with a severe
| mental illness, so I should be reasonably well positioned to
| answer your question. But it doesn't make any sense to me.
|
| How does any of this relate to homelessness?
|
| To get people off the streets, you give them a place to live.
| Then you can start solving their other problems. It's common
| sense.
| dp88 wrote:
| The Pandremix issue has lots of issues to fix as well that will
| probably never see the light of the day. Essentially those few
| hundred with Pandemrix-induced narcolepsy are now a permanently
| disabled minority without organized legal advocacy. The party-
| opposing party, that should not be opposing them,
| Pharmaceutical Injury Insurance Pool (LVP) has significant
| financial and legal resources. LVP has substantially broader
| access to archives and expert knowledge. The impaired
| functional capacity and financial position of those affected
| makes it difficult to advocate for their rights.
|
| The state implemented the vaccination program and transferred
| responsibility to the insurance pool system with its own
| financial interests. The pool system determines assessment
| criteria and makes evaluations without external oversight.
| Initially, there was talk of "million-euro compensations." The
| government guaranteed to finance the remainder if pool funds
| were depleted.
|
| Legal cases have been fought against LVP regarding time limits
| of confirmed cases. Compensations have remained a fraction of
| original expectations. Narcolepsy patients are too small a
| minority to influence Parliamentary politics or re-enter public
| discourse. This special group has been left alone to defend
| their rights within the pool system.
|
| The compensations were based on Kaypa Hoito Guidelines for
| accident injuries, which are unsuitable for narcolepsy:
| narcolepsy doesn't necessarily cause clear cognitive deficits
| despite its severity, and comparison to brain trauma is not
| medically possible. The drafters would probably agree if asked
| that it wasn't intended for this use. A person with narcolepsy
| can be formally capable of work, but this might consume all of
| their alert hours & energy, leaving nothing for actually having
| a life. The system may equate narcolepsy, in permanent damage,
| with injuries similar to a broken finger in workplace
| accidents, hence the permanent disability compensations are
| insufficient for dignified life.
|
| The wage compensation issue is more significant. The
| determination basis for loss of earnings compensation is
| problematic as it's based on achieved education and work
| history, although the illness has impaired these opportunities.
| The same neurological illness produces different compensations
| depending on onset timing, as those with established careers
| may fare better than those who couldn't compete for university
| placement. This particularly affects those who became ill in
| childhood/youth, as it doesn't account for lost opportunities.
| In practice, even those from educated backgrounds with academic
| potential (e.g. top grades or plans for university before
| narcolepsy) may receive compensation based on average or low
| income.
|
| Opportunity cost compensation appears unlikely. The state has
| not promoted reassessment of applicability of Kaypa Hoito
| criteria.
|
| There is insufficient monitoring of equality in compensation
| decisions and appeals, inadequate communication about
| compensations (the question whether all victims are even aware
| of their rights seems open), and questionable document
| management and decision-making transparency. LVP defines
| compensation terms, makes compensation decisions, and handles
| appeals, creating a conflict of interest as LVP has financial
| incentive for strict interpretation.
|
| Permanent damage compensations are treated as earned income by
| Kela, requiring their use for basic living expenses, though
| they're meant as lifetime compensations for an incurable
| neurological illness.
|
| (this is partly machine-translated from personal notes)
| cousin_it wrote:
| I think governments should offer free housing to everyone who
| asks, in their city of choice. "But why should taxpayers pay for
| that? It's expensive!" Yes, it would be very expensive. But you
| know what's even more expensive? The sum of everybody's lowered
| wages, bad bosses, fear for the future, fear of having kids and
| so on, due to the threat of homelessness. Yes, building housing
| is expensive, but the removal of fear will pay for it many times
| over.
| skirge wrote:
| Everyone wants to live in the centre of Helsinki, because why
| not?
| cousin_it wrote:
| I'm not saying give everyone the nicest center flat. Let's
| say an acceptable commute distance away, up to 30min by
| public transport.
| skirge wrote:
| Why not? Am I worse than others?
| cousin_it wrote:
| Yes, or just unlucky. The goal of my proposal is not to
| create equality, but to establish a minimum below which
| people cannot fall.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Who gets to determine the minimum threshold? And how will
| they enforce it?
| wklm wrote:
| Quite an interesting perspective, sadly it'll likely never get
| implemented in any capitalistic economy
| mmooss wrote:
| That rumor is the biggest obstacle. If you believed it was
| possible, and instead told others it was possible, it might
| actually be.
| nineplay wrote:
| I'd like to live in Honolulu.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-01-10 23:00 UTC)