Crime might be down, but homelessness is way up, or it at least feels that way. They’re everywhere these days, even in my sleepy suburb, loitering in parks and sleeping in public greenways, destroying the vegetation and often leaving piles of trash behind.
No, I’m not arguing they deserve to go to jail for that, but you have to agree that it’s difficult having empathy for people who keep turning every inch of public property into an eyesore. But I don’t think the problem will ever be solved by fingerpointing, because that’s just passing the blame around, which ultimately helps no one.
I think there needs to be a bigger discussion about what can be done to help these people regain a sense of purpose in life. It seems to me that most of them are simply severely disillusioned or even repulsed by how our current society works – go to work, pay your bills, rinse and repeat until you reach retirement age. They got tired of the rat race and the constant pressure to perform and are simply choosing to live a primitivist lifestyle instead, but without having any higher goals or ideals to strive for, it’s inevitable that they’re going to sink back into the mud.
Human beings need to have a sense of purpose, they need to feel useful and appreciated in some way in order to keep making an effort day after day. It’s not enough to house them and feed them because without purpose, most of them will still end up turning to alcohol and drugs simply in an effort to pass the time.
Giving them public lands unfortunately doesn’t solve anything. They did try that my city, and the result was that this land has basically turned into a huge garbage dump.
did your town actually do anything for them or just say “hey fuck you go to this hill and stay there”
like did they follow any of the recommendations scientists make or even make one effort to do it correctly? having studied this for years, the answer is usually no
Not sure, but I’m guessing likely not. There were a lot more encampments around here last year, but many of them were in places that were either unsafe (such as freeway greenbelts) or privately owned (but accessible to the public). Apparently they did tolerate this one camp, however, because it didn’t have any of those issues, but it’s still turning into a festering sore at this point.
I honestly don’t know what would help here, but all the solutions that I see being discussed on Lemmy always just seem to revolve around giving people free stuff, and I don’t think that’ll solve anything in the long term. Unless you show people a path to becoming self-sufficient, all you’ll ever accomplish is feeding or housing them for a day. While I realize that depending on how deep in the hole someone is, it might take a long time before they feel safe enough again to take risks, but ultimately, unlimited amounts of free stuff will only create dependency.
inadequate measures were inadequate; nobody surprised
The idea that you’re independent is an illusion. Independence and the aspiration to it are usually just lies we tell ourselves to justify this stupid cruel system we’re using.
What are you independent from? If your grocery store runs out of food you’re still as fucked as anybody else. And in the next few years it’s likely to. There’s no such thing as independence from food. We throw out so much fucking food in this culture, but if we gave it to those guys we’d be acknowledging that feeding people is supposed to be the point of food, rather than making money, and in this culture we cannot have that, that’s an unthinkable thought.
As far as I can tell the people in those encampments just tend to be people nobody gives a shit about. That’s true independence, in a sense, but I don’t think that should be an aspiration, do you? And isn’t that one of the only actual useful functions of government, to create systems to take care of those people? I mean it’s not like they’re regulating businesses properly… anyway that’s another discussion.
Thanks for providing an instructive example of the type of destructive mindset that keeps people stuck in homelessness and poverty. Username checks out I guess.
You see, if you blame and attack anyone who even considers offering help, all you’ll do is make sure no one will ever want to do that. It’s literally a sucker’s game — feign helplessness, wait for someone kindhearted enough to offer help, and then take them for everything they’re worth by guilt tripping them to hell for not doing enough. You might as well stalk someone in a dark alley and put a gut to their head, functionally it’s no different, just more obvious.
No, the people living in those camps are no more independent than anyone else, because they’re not self-sufficient either, are they? If they were, they’d be growing their own food instead of having to rely on donations to feed themselves. So all your criticism is just the pot calling the kettle black. In fact, if you think about it long enough, no human on earth is ever completely independent, because they didn’t give birth to themselves, they cannot reproduce without someone of the opposite gender, and even if they live completely off-grid somewhere and grow all their own food, they’re still dependent on the weather, or might require a doctor if they fall ill. No true Scotsman and all that.
Instead of complaining that others aren’t doing enough, consider why they would WANT to do anything at all. What’s the point of sharing food with people who are just going to be ungrateful? Why be kind to someone who won’t even consider returning the favor? That’s like pouring water into a bottomless bucket.
That sounds like a distinction without a difference, unless you are saying that in addition to land, they should also provide infrastructure for them on top.
Also did you city try collecting their waste?
I don’t think so, at least the last time I passed by there it was still all there. But just so we’re clear what you’re asking, picture about an acre of medium density forest land with a good 100 or so people living in makeshift tents or huts. And there’s trash literally everywhere — some of it piled up in heaps, some strewn about in the bushes, and it smells like a landfill on a hot summer day.
You would probably need a hazmat team to get rid of all that because there might be used needles, rotten food, or who knows what else in there, and more likely than not, someone would end up making a scene because some of their belongings ended up in the trash because they looked virtually indistinguishable from refuse.
It simply isn’t reasonable to demand or expect that others should take the time out of their day and clean up your mess when they’re already doing you a favor by tolerating you being there in the first place. These are grown people, not infants. If there isn’t at least an indication of goodwill and demonstrated intent to collaborate (such as them perhaps getting together and organizing their own cleanup effort, for which the city could provide trash bags and a truck to pick them up), there’s no amount of free stuff you can give them that’ll ever make them self-sufficient.
We really need UBI. If people just had enough money to live without NEEDING to work these people would be able to live relatively (compared to how they’re living now) comfortable lives without making public spaces awful.
I think you missed the part of my comment where I said people need to feel useful. Giving them money for doing nothing will never achieve that. While it might help ease the burden of having to work an unfulfilling job just in order to stay alive to continue working, at best that’ll buy them some temporary breathing room. But without a sense of purpose, most people will still end up turning to drugs or alcohol simply to pass the time. It’s just far easier to distract yourself than it is to face the vast emptiness of living a meaningless existence.
Yes, I understand that, and I’m not trying to argue it would be better to try nothing at all. What I’m saying is that merely having a roof over your head and food on the table does not automatically translate into a willingness to give back to society by finding ways to contribute in some sort of meaningful way – it merely removes some obstacles and lowers the barrier to entry, but unless people are willing to make an effort to work on overcoming the challenges that still remain after that, they are still not going to ever get better.
Basically, I think it’s a mistake to assume that if you give someone free food and housing, they’ll just start going out there and look for a job. Some people might, perhaps even most, especially if they don’t have to worry about losing their benefits once they do, but some will still prefer to waste their time with drugs and alcohol, and that will foul things up for the rest, because it’s difficult to motivate yourself to make a consistent effort when you see others getting the same benefits as you do without doing anything to earn them.
No problem has ever been solved by throwing more money at it. While it certainly may help, it will never be a guaranteed solution.
Nobody is assuming every single person is going to go out and work… Hell I would argue that most people don’t want to work in general but hey… Capitalism…
However, I think that this argument is slowing down real progress that could be made. We both agree that housing and food is a great way to lower barriers and help people get stable. This will, at the very least, help every single one of those people regardless of if they decide to get a job after. So we should at least start here and get everyone stable first.
I agree, and I didn’t intend for this to be an argument to do nothing. But I do think it’s necessary to have a plan for this situation because few things are worse than setting out with the best intentions and being met with misfortune and failure anyways, since it can take a long time to pick yourself up again after that.
Basically what I’m saying is, if you go out into the forest, it’s a good idea to be prepared for running into a wild animal. Best case scenario, it will never happen, but if you keep going again and again, chances are that one day it will. And if you don’t have a plan for what to do in that situation, you might end up as their dinner.
It’s real hard to find a purpose when your basic needs aren’t met. And finding a purpose doesn’t need to mean working a job that pays you money. You can find purpose in so many different ways and Id argue finding purpose in something not related to monetary gain is more fulfilling than a job. If your basic needs are met by UBI you’re free to find purpose outside of the rat race.
I mean, if you find yourself in that kind of a situation, your purpose could be trying to find a way to sustain yourself without too much unnecessary suffering, no?
And I certainly agree that it doesn’t HAVE to come in the form of a job, because not everyone is cut out of that. Some people are made to be artists, for instance, and simply cannot stand being tied down to something like that. And yes, giving them some breathing room in the form of basic sustenance can certainly help by allowing them to use more of their time to practice their craft, but they still have to WANT to do that, and not everyone does. And the ones who don’t tend to try and find ways to sabotage those who do.
All I’m saying is, without a plan for dealing with that problem, no amount of money will ever do the trick.
I think part of that larger discussion needs to include the array of reasons that people become homeless in the first place, cause it’s not just that they lack motivation like your comment suggests. There’s mental health reasons, financial reasons, drug addiction, alcoholism, etc. And once you become homeless, it can be difficult to get out of - jobs require that you have reliable transportation, and an address for mailing stuff to you, that you look presentable, and that you don’t smell.
A fair amount of homeless people have smartphones nowadays, so I think a system in place where temporary residence can be set up, a bank account set up, access to therapy, and priority access to remote jobs can take place will be a huge step forward in reducing the homeless population. That and also capping interest rates and market values for houses/condos/apartments so that they’re actually affordable to the common person.
Right, that discussion certainly needs to happen, because you simply cannot hope to ever solve a problem without knowing what’s causing it, no matter how much resources you throw at it. And perhaps that needs to be a public discussion, because I do think a lot of people out there are willing to help at least in principle, but are often unsure how to go about it. That definitely used to be the case for me because no one ever wanted to talk about it, but after a few very negative experiences where my help wasn’t appreciated or even made things worse, I gave up on it for a long time and focused on myself instead, and I have a feeling that this is in fact rather common.
Of course, that did not make the problem go away. In fact, it seems to be getting worse, and clearly we cannot expect any help from the boomers, so it appears to be left to the younger generations to find more effective ways of dealing with it. Sadly, it often seems to devolve into political trench warfare, with people constantly arguing about their preferred strong-arm solutions rather than attempting to find middle ground.
Ultimately, I think it will require much more than political solutions, because those are always temporary and suboptimal. Lasting results will likely require a complete change in culture – meaning a society built on values that people are actually willing to sacrifice for, and that can only happen at the grassroots level.
Crime might be down, but homelessness is way up, or it at least feels that way. They’re everywhere these days, even in my sleepy suburb, loitering in parks and sleeping in public greenways, destroying the vegetation and often leaving piles of trash behind.
No, I’m not arguing they deserve to go to jail for that, but you have to agree that it’s difficult having empathy for people who keep turning every inch of public property into an eyesore. But I don’t think the problem will ever be solved by fingerpointing, because that’s just passing the blame around, which ultimately helps no one.
I think there needs to be a bigger discussion about what can be done to help these people regain a sense of purpose in life. It seems to me that most of them are simply severely disillusioned or even repulsed by how our current society works – go to work, pay your bills, rinse and repeat until you reach retirement age. They got tired of the rat race and the constant pressure to perform and are simply choosing to live a primitivist lifestyle instead, but without having any higher goals or ideals to strive for, it’s inevitable that they’re going to sink back into the mud.
Human beings need to have a sense of purpose, they need to feel useful and appreciated in some way in order to keep making an effort day after day. It’s not enough to house them and feed them because without purpose, most of them will still end up turning to alcohol and drugs simply in an effort to pass the time.
Kinda like we need to change how society works and have public lands and more dignity and space for not being Capitalist.
Giving them public lands unfortunately doesn’t solve anything. They did try that my city, and the result was that this land has basically turned into a huge garbage dump.
did your town actually do anything for them or just say “hey fuck you go to this hill and stay there”
like did they follow any of the recommendations scientists make or even make one effort to do it correctly? having studied this for years, the answer is usually no
Not sure, but I’m guessing likely not. There were a lot more encampments around here last year, but many of them were in places that were either unsafe (such as freeway greenbelts) or privately owned (but accessible to the public). Apparently they did tolerate this one camp, however, because it didn’t have any of those issues, but it’s still turning into a festering sore at this point.
I honestly don’t know what would help here, but all the solutions that I see being discussed on Lemmy always just seem to revolve around giving people free stuff, and I don’t think that’ll solve anything in the long term. Unless you show people a path to becoming self-sufficient, all you’ll ever accomplish is feeding or housing them for a day. While I realize that depending on how deep in the hole someone is, it might take a long time before they feel safe enough again to take risks, but ultimately, unlimited amounts of free stuff will only create dependency.
inadequate measures were inadequate; nobody surprised
The idea that you’re independent is an illusion. Independence and the aspiration to it are usually just lies we tell ourselves to justify this stupid cruel system we’re using.
What are you independent from? If your grocery store runs out of food you’re still as fucked as anybody else. And in the next few years it’s likely to. There’s no such thing as independence from food. We throw out so much fucking food in this culture, but if we gave it to those guys we’d be acknowledging that feeding people is supposed to be the point of food, rather than making money, and in this culture we cannot have that, that’s an unthinkable thought.
As far as I can tell the people in those encampments just tend to be people nobody gives a shit about. That’s true independence, in a sense, but I don’t think that should be an aspiration, do you? And isn’t that one of the only actual useful functions of government, to create systems to take care of those people? I mean it’s not like they’re regulating businesses properly… anyway that’s another discussion.
Thanks for providing an instructive example of the type of destructive mindset that keeps people stuck in homelessness and poverty. Username checks out I guess.
You see, if you blame and attack anyone who even considers offering help, all you’ll do is make sure no one will ever want to do that. It’s literally a sucker’s game — feign helplessness, wait for someone kindhearted enough to offer help, and then take them for everything they’re worth by guilt tripping them to hell for not doing enough. You might as well stalk someone in a dark alley and put a gut to their head, functionally it’s no different, just more obvious.
No, the people living in those camps are no more independent than anyone else, because they’re not self-sufficient either, are they? If they were, they’d be growing their own food instead of having to rely on donations to feed themselves. So all your criticism is just the pot calling the kettle black. In fact, if you think about it long enough, no human on earth is ever completely independent, because they didn’t give birth to themselves, they cannot reproduce without someone of the opposite gender, and even if they live completely off-grid somewhere and grow all their own food, they’re still dependent on the weather, or might require a doctor if they fall ill. No true Scotsman and all that.
Instead of complaining that others aren’t doing enough, consider why they would WANT to do anything at all. What’s the point of sharing food with people who are just going to be ungrateful? Why be kind to someone who won’t even consider returning the favor? That’s like pouring water into a bottomless bucket.
I didn’t mean give them public lands, but more recreate large common spaces for people to be able to be somewhat sufficient.
Also did you city try collecting their waste?
That sounds like a distinction without a difference, unless you are saying that in addition to land, they should also provide infrastructure for them on top.
I don’t think so, at least the last time I passed by there it was still all there. But just so we’re clear what you’re asking, picture about an acre of medium density forest land with a good 100 or so people living in makeshift tents or huts. And there’s trash literally everywhere — some of it piled up in heaps, some strewn about in the bushes, and it smells like a landfill on a hot summer day.
You would probably need a hazmat team to get rid of all that because there might be used needles, rotten food, or who knows what else in there, and more likely than not, someone would end up making a scene because some of their belongings ended up in the trash because they looked virtually indistinguishable from refuse.
It simply isn’t reasonable to demand or expect that others should take the time out of their day and clean up your mess when they’re already doing you a favor by tolerating you being there in the first place. These are grown people, not infants. If there isn’t at least an indication of goodwill and demonstrated intent to collaborate (such as them perhaps getting together and organizing their own cleanup effort, for which the city could provide trash bags and a truck to pick them up), there’s no amount of free stuff you can give them that’ll ever make them self-sufficient.
We really need UBI. If people just had enough money to live without NEEDING to work these people would be able to live relatively (compared to how they’re living now) comfortable lives without making public spaces awful.
I think you missed the part of my comment where I said people need to feel useful. Giving them money for doing nothing will never achieve that. While it might help ease the burden of having to work an unfulfilling job just in order to stay alive to continue working, at best that’ll buy them some temporary breathing room. But without a sense of purpose, most people will still end up turning to drugs or alcohol simply to pass the time. It’s just far easier to distract yourself than it is to face the vast emptiness of living a meaningless existence.
A big problem related to this is that a LOT of jobs require you to put a home address on the application.
UBI/just getting people housed would not only make it possible for people to have a place to live but also give them way more access to way more jobs.
Yes, I understand that, and I’m not trying to argue it would be better to try nothing at all. What I’m saying is that merely having a roof over your head and food on the table does not automatically translate into a willingness to give back to society by finding ways to contribute in some sort of meaningful way – it merely removes some obstacles and lowers the barrier to entry, but unless people are willing to make an effort to work on overcoming the challenges that still remain after that, they are still not going to ever get better.
Basically, I think it’s a mistake to assume that if you give someone free food and housing, they’ll just start going out there and look for a job. Some people might, perhaps even most, especially if they don’t have to worry about losing their benefits once they do, but some will still prefer to waste their time with drugs and alcohol, and that will foul things up for the rest, because it’s difficult to motivate yourself to make a consistent effort when you see others getting the same benefits as you do without doing anything to earn them.
No problem has ever been solved by throwing more money at it. While it certainly may help, it will never be a guaranteed solution.
Nobody is assuming every single person is going to go out and work… Hell I would argue that most people don’t want to work in general but hey… Capitalism…
However, I think that this argument is slowing down real progress that could be made. We both agree that housing and food is a great way to lower barriers and help people get stable. This will, at the very least, help every single one of those people regardless of if they decide to get a job after. So we should at least start here and get everyone stable first.
I agree, and I didn’t intend for this to be an argument to do nothing. But I do think it’s necessary to have a plan for this situation because few things are worse than setting out with the best intentions and being met with misfortune and failure anyways, since it can take a long time to pick yourself up again after that.
Basically what I’m saying is, if you go out into the forest, it’s a good idea to be prepared for running into a wild animal. Best case scenario, it will never happen, but if you keep going again and again, chances are that one day it will. And if you don’t have a plan for what to do in that situation, you might end up as their dinner.
It’s real hard to find a purpose when your basic needs aren’t met. And finding a purpose doesn’t need to mean working a job that pays you money. You can find purpose in so many different ways and Id argue finding purpose in something not related to monetary gain is more fulfilling than a job. If your basic needs are met by UBI you’re free to find purpose outside of the rat race.
I mean, if you find yourself in that kind of a situation, your purpose could be trying to find a way to sustain yourself without too much unnecessary suffering, no?
And I certainly agree that it doesn’t HAVE to come in the form of a job, because not everyone is cut out of that. Some people are made to be artists, for instance, and simply cannot stand being tied down to something like that. And yes, giving them some breathing room in the form of basic sustenance can certainly help by allowing them to use more of their time to practice their craft, but they still have to WANT to do that, and not everyone does. And the ones who don’t tend to try and find ways to sabotage those who do.
All I’m saying is, without a plan for dealing with that problem, no amount of money will ever do the trick.
I think part of that larger discussion needs to include the array of reasons that people become homeless in the first place, cause it’s not just that they lack motivation like your comment suggests. There’s mental health reasons, financial reasons, drug addiction, alcoholism, etc. And once you become homeless, it can be difficult to get out of - jobs require that you have reliable transportation, and an address for mailing stuff to you, that you look presentable, and that you don’t smell.
A fair amount of homeless people have smartphones nowadays, so I think a system in place where temporary residence can be set up, a bank account set up, access to therapy, and priority access to remote jobs can take place will be a huge step forward in reducing the homeless population. That and also capping interest rates and market values for houses/condos/apartments so that they’re actually affordable to the common person.
Right, that discussion certainly needs to happen, because you simply cannot hope to ever solve a problem without knowing what’s causing it, no matter how much resources you throw at it. And perhaps that needs to be a public discussion, because I do think a lot of people out there are willing to help at least in principle, but are often unsure how to go about it. That definitely used to be the case for me because no one ever wanted to talk about it, but after a few very negative experiences where my help wasn’t appreciated or even made things worse, I gave up on it for a long time and focused on myself instead, and I have a feeling that this is in fact rather common.
Of course, that did not make the problem go away. In fact, it seems to be getting worse, and clearly we cannot expect any help from the boomers, so it appears to be left to the younger generations to find more effective ways of dealing with it. Sadly, it often seems to devolve into political trench warfare, with people constantly arguing about their preferred strong-arm solutions rather than attempting to find middle ground.
Ultimately, I think it will require much more than political solutions, because those are always temporary and suboptimal. Lasting results will likely require a complete change in culture – meaning a society built on values that people are actually willing to sacrifice for, and that can only happen at the grassroots level.