dickblack12
59466
750
20
It would be great if these people could just stop being poor.
Nov 9, 2023 2:21 AM
dickblack12
59466
750
20
It would be great if these people could just stop being poor.
PicassoCT
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_concentration_camp#Auschwitz_III ? Solving society by dissolving humanity. The ultimate in private-public partnership against homelessness.. Brought to you by Ford, BASF, Hoechst and Bayer
Zeddicuszull
If every church in America housed just two people then no more homeless. Two per. That's like what, 10 bucks a day? Churches are a fucking scam.
darkchiron
We could put them in all those houses that just sit empty if society didn't have this insane idea that it's better to let the houses rot than to let a person stayt there and not pay insane rent.
Welyn104
Drugs, alcohol, music, mental illiness… ajam, houses.
thereisnodarknessbutignorance
Funny Fun Fact: China has built TWICE as much housing than they have citizens. That automatically ruins the national real estate market to collapse levels, which is even worse if real estate is a big back bone of your national economy, but then again it can solve theoretically all homelessness - probably for the whole world.
robincaid
We have a greed based society. Create as much suffering as possible, then find ways to charge people to try to escape it.
alwaysupvoteprincessbride
AyatollahBahloni
Salt Lake City, about 20 years ago, tried the "Housing First" approach. It was wildly successful and made SLC the poster-boy for homeless reduction. Then the "fiscally responsible" bean counters decided it was too expensive and cut the program. Homelessness rebounded like a brakeless freight train.
mynamespaul
The problem with just one city doing it is homeless people all over the country try to flood there to get help, and suddenly one city is dealing with the entire countries homeless problem and, obviously, will fail. It needs to be a National effort.
imtiredboss
The majority of homelessness in an area are home grown.
mynamespaul
Well yes of course - but if a single city in a state is treating homeless people like, well, people, and the rest are treating them with active hostility, it’s obviously going to drive long-term homeless folks towards those areas. I wouldn’t be surprised if neighbouring cities starting bussing them to more homeless friendly cities free of charge.
VibratingNipples
homeless need more then just a place to stay. They also need help with mental health and finding a job. And be able to keep that job, getting them back on their feet
imtiredboss
People with mental illness or drug problems account for less than half of the homeless.
CrazedDrifter
It is SO hard to find a job without a fixed address. Get a driver's license, insurance, etc etc etc
OffTheGrid99
This attitude is why housing never gets done
PubMed12927120suckssobad
Right... soooo... housing first?
channelranger
You know what's good for your mental health and for having a job? Having a place to stay. Having somewhere to sleep unbothered is very important to your ability to function, and having an address to put on job apps is important to actually getting a job.
VibratingNipples
it like a catch 22. You can do one of those things easily, but you can't function without the other 2. So you just end up failing and back where you started. I was homeless once and it was a nightmare to get out of
channelranger
I've never been but I am perpetually closer than I'd like due to debt and high rent. If it weren't for family bailing me out now and then I'd've been homeless more than once by now.
EverNotRelevant
Giving housing to the homeless costs less than leaving them homeless. We just... Don't do that.
imtiredboss
The threat of homelessness keeps people in line. You know when bosses say "you're lucky to have a job"? That's what they mean.
EverNotRelevant
/gallery/NBevHCF/comment/2361286869
CarpoolTunnelSyndrome
It doesn't make any sense!
EverNotRelevant
It makes perfect sense when you realize capitalism uses the implied threat of homelessness to keep us in line, and that denial of housing raises the demand, increasing the price.
CarpoolTunnelSyndrome
Not having to work anymore would be pretty sweet.
WellBehavedZombie
If the people down on their luck don't serve as an example to keep people in line and working for their corporate overlords then the system crumbles.
CatHair
So, when are America gonna start up the Soylent green production?
Cutwail
Such a reductionist take, the homeless dude that shit his pant and scream at you in the street need more than just a house.
dickblack12
The stated goal of the requestor was about ARCHITECTURE, if the question was about anti-homlessness in general, you'd have a point.
Cutwail
True.
imtiredboss
You call this reductionist yet haven't so much as done a quick Google search to read on how 1) the mentality ill or drug addicted account for a minority of the homeless population 2) housing first is proven to work.
Cutwail
Yes it happen when your homeless definition start at every people who couchsurf after 60days.
Shit like that don't happen on the same scale here because you get basic universal income and parents don't yeet 18 yrs old from their household(if it happen, parents are legally forced to pay for welfare until 25 yrs old)
Cutwail
Also, like someone elde pointed out, the meme is about hostile architecture, wich main goal is to "fight" against the most extrem type of homelessness.
TonawandaBlue
The US Department of Housing and Urban Development counted around 582,000 Americans experiencing homelessness in 2022. According to the US Census Bureau, there were approximately 15.1 million vacant homes nationwide in 2022.
carrotsonfire
A lot of those vacant homes aren't where the homeless are.
CarpoolTunnelSyndrome
Incredible! That's almost 30 houses per homeless person. They should do a giveaway. Not all of them, just one per person.
ThePastmaster
600K homeless seems kinda low. Great that it's that low but it seems kinda low for a country of 331 million.
5cX469Nit9JuI1MAZG5c3AdA
Hightower840
So you're telling me that not only is there enough housing for all the people in the US, but there is so much empty housing that all current homeless people could all have a vacation home as well, and there would still be almost half a million empty houses?
LeSethX
It has also been proven that building new cheap housing for the homeless is cheaper than city services (health costs, jail, etc) and still not done
SavageDrums
Ditto UBI to help people stave off homelessness
jayman0123
because there's not profit in it and lots of regressive politicians enjoy being cruel to "lessers"
IUpvoteEveryNicholasCageGIF
before they would climb up to your walls and suck your blood, sometimes donkey blood, now they're in power, they just suck your life right out of you.
gtotherizzle
Yep, we don't have a housing crisis. We have an affordable housing crisis. There's plenty of housing, the prices are just being increased irrationally.
ontarioOT
It's only irrational if you think of housing as a need instead of another market to maximize profits for shareholders.
kevinbaken
THIS! I sold my house in July due to a workplace move. Sold in 1 day no conditions. Now I can't find anything in my budget and I'm well paid!
jayman0123
I looked up a house in my hometown just a minute ago and what I can afford looks like this
at $109k
gtotherizzle
Artificially* the term I was going for is Artificially. Not irrationally. Where the value/cost has nothing to do with the actual economy
nclu
Remember, the artificiality in the restricted supply of housing mostly comes from zoning. All those suburbs designed to make sure no undesirables will ever be able to afford to live there was a choice. Government restricting the ability of property owners to make new apartments was a policy decision. It's by legal design there is a shortage
lovehandlesmessiah
Ironic that the banks and businesses bought all that residential property to re-zone for commercial at a time when companies are doing massive layoffs for losing millions over empty office buildings from post-COVID remote workers. For supposedly being so shrewd for profit, they know fuck-all about long-term planning.
nclu
I'm begging people not to be captured by the vacancy truther narrative. The vast, vast majority of those vacancies are not really available units. They are already rented and awaiting move-in. Someone just left and are being renovated or prepared to go back on market. Or are condemned units. The straight up fact is that rental prices are very, very, very strongly negatively correlated to vacancy rates. Since the advent of zoning and discretionary review the constructed number of units 1/
nclu
absolutely cratered relative expected construction. Jurisdictions that have told NIMBY's "no, you don't get a say" have been the most stable markets for housing prices in the nation. We cannot redistribute our way out of a shortage. We need more units, short term, long term, emergency, all types. Hell, institutional investors specifically cite local opposition to expanded capacity (NIMBYism) as to why buying housing is a *safe* investment. Undercut them by allowing dense growth. 2/
nclu
Dense growth is how we make mass transportation feasible. Dense growth is how we make walkability and bike infrastructure feasible. The IPCC has specifically named dense in-fill housing as a top priority for fighting climate change. Playing the WhAtAbOuTiSm game that is the vacancy angle plays only into feeding the status quo and burning the environment down while feeding sprawling environmental destruction. Raise your hand if your old enough to remember a time before "fire season"? /3
gtotherizzle
I don't believe any of that hoopla. Sounds like quitter talk. We need to organize squatting again
SheepySleepySmuggler
This statistic is repeatedly brought up and it fails to acknowledge (a) not all vacant homes are liveable due to either being in need of maintenance or undergoing renovation (b) it includes homes that are being sold on behalf of others or to finance a recent home purchase and (c) places where there is very little demand for accommodation due to lack of jobs or location. Most western countries have a 8-9% surplus of homes for these reasons
UltraHellboy
You’re leaving out the part about corporations and foreign investors buying houses and leaving them vacant.
Badprenup
Yeah but do you really think that over 96% of those vacant houses meet those 3 categories? Actually higher than that considering how many homeless are family or would be able to share. Plus, C becomes less of an issue if you take the threat of homelessness out of the equation in regards to if a job pays enough.
SheepySleepySmuggler
In short - yes I do believe 96% match those three broad categories because census and other statistics very closely match that data. For (c) I think we are considering different types of properties - it's seasonal or rural accomodation where there is very little chance of employment. Giving someone a home a long distance from any friends or family, with no local connections or employment rarely addresses this issue.
SheepySleepySmuggler
The solution to homelessness has always been building more affordable accommodation where people are rather than pretending the problem can be passed onto another town or city. And large towns/cities attack people because of the facilities and employment they offer.
drousnavat
Yeah, but homeless people cannot pay for those houses. It's better to have worthless assets than to help people apparently.
PicassoCT
Pokerchipstackcity
cambriago13
One less F-35....
Crowlands
If you have absolutely no morals, then yes. The harder it is to have a home, the more you can steal from people. I mean, the higher you can set rent.
Idonotbelievewehavecompany
Tax write offs in the millions
EverNotRelevant
More importantly, it drives up the value of real estate currently on the market. Artificial scarcity.
drousnavat
Yeah but that is more paperwork
Idonotbelievewehavecompany
Those folks have people for that
drousnavat
Yeah but they gotta get paid
wingweaver415
So if you had ab empty home you inherited from a relative, you would just let someone move into it? Or would you give them ownership of the house?
Rogahar
Hardly fair to ask that of an individual and you know it. An overwhelming number of the empty homes arent owned by individuals who only own one other property, they're owned by corporations who own hundreds if not thousands of them and are either holding out until they can buy the neighboring lots to flatten for an apartment complex or until local property values inflate enough for them to want to sell it.
wingweaver415
I know it is. But your excuse is a generalization. Plenty of family members die and leave thier house to thier next of kin. What do you think happens to it?