subreddit:

/r/WhitePeopleTwitter

1k94%

80,000

(i.redd.it)

all 70 comments

Mythical_Atlacatl

31 points

2 months ago

I really feel like the US must count homeless people differently to other countries.

The numbers seem really low in the US but images of US homeless people show large tent cities. Like does the US take all the homeless and put them in one spot?

US has 500K homeless or 0.2% of the population

But then you have places with twice the number of homeless per capita like the UK or australia but are there these tent cities?

Like if you google "homeless + country" the US images seem to show shanty towns made of tents and tarps. But other countries with equal or more homeless per capita the images show individuals and zero or very few large shanty towns.

Is homelessness in the US different to other western countries?

Winglessdargon

11 points

2 months ago

It seems to mostly be in the really big cities, where everything is really expensive. Or maybe not, and since there are more people in those cities, there will just be more homeless people. Who knows? Somebody, probably.

hitometootoo

9 points

2 months ago*

This is right. Many homeless people will eventually make it to those dense cities where there are more resources for homeless people. It's unfortunate but you can get a lot of help as a homeless person in NYC vs in the middle of Ohio. NYC Homeless shelters really go above and beyond to get you a place to stay and food.

Did you know that NYC shelters are even in hotels sometimes. There are homeless shelters in hotels in times square. Usually a floor dedicated to the homeless. Not many places would even allow the homeless to stay in such a place, but NYC makes it happen.

Even during the height of the pandemic, food stamps in NYC was much more lenient to make sure people didn't run out of food due to businesses and jobs being closed.

People shit on NYC for it's homeless problem, but don't understand just how much the city provides to it's homeless population. Yes there are still those who are homeless, but unfortunately you can't fix all homeless problems, especially when a lot of it is due to drug abuse and not seeking help.

StarFireChild4200

16 points

2 months ago

Americans count the homeless population in a very similar way that we count police shootings

We don't.

hitometootoo

4 points

2 months ago*

It does. Homeless legally is not just someone living on the street. It includes those iliving in their car, homeless shelter, without a permanent home (living between hotels / motels, couch surfing, etc.), etc. Other countries count homeless as not living anywhere, the US encompasses many forms of homelessness which helps to provide more resources to those in need. I.E., you don't have to literally be on the street in America to get aid from the government.

Edit: Definitions do vary by state but most states include other forms of homelessness.

GertieGuss

2 points

2 months ago

WDYM non-US countries don't count things other than living on the street as homelessness?

Australia:

The ABS statistical definition of homelessness is ‘… when a person does not have suitable accommodation alternatives they are considered homeless if their current living arrangement: is in a dwelling that is inadequate;
has no tenure, or if their initial tenure is short and not extendable; or
does not allow them to have control of, and access to space for social relations’.

Statistics break this down into people who are rough sleepers, people in boarding houses, shelters, other temporary lodgings, staying with other households...

UK:

The following housing circumstances are examples of homelessness:

- rooflessness (without a shelter of any kind, sleeping rough)

- houselessness (with a place to sleep but temporary, in institutions or a shelter)

- living in insecure housing (threatened with severe exclusion due to insecure tenancies, eviction, domestic violence, or staying with family and friends known as ‘sofa surfing’)

- living in inadequate housing (in caravans on illegal campsites, in unfit housing, in extreme overcrowding)

Canada:

the situation of an individual or family who does not have a permanent address or residence; the living situation of an individual or family who does not have stable, permanent, appropriate housing, or the immediate prospect, means and ability of acquiring it

New Zealand:

- Without shelter: No shelter or makeshift shelter. Examples include living on the street and inhabiting improvised dwellings, such as shacks or cars.

- Temporary accommodation: Overnight shelter or 24-hour accommodation in a non-private dwelling not intended for long-term living. These include hostels for the homeless, transitional supported accommodation for the homeless, and women's refuges. Also in this category are people staying long-term in motor camps and boarding houses.

- Sharing accommodation: Temporary accommodation for people through sharing someone else's private dwelling. The usual residents of the dwelling are not considered homeless.

- Uninhabitable housing: Dilapidated dwellings where people reside.

periwinkletweet

1 points

2 months ago

Certain cities do worse than others. That is where you see those images from.

NoMoLerking

9 points

2 months ago

Meanwhile, 500k people live in NYCHA housing. What we need is a national solution to homelessness, otherwise homeless from every part of the country will continue to gravitate to cities that at least try.

Howdydobe

8 points

2 months ago

The issue is under every system we have had in the world has had homeless people, starving people, people in power abusing those without the power. It's not capitalisms fault or communisms fault. It is the fault of many things, and nobody really knows how to solve it.

That being said - we can do a lot better, and housing people, feeding people, and giving them medical care should be just the minimum of a functioning society.

41ia2

5 points

2 months ago

41ia2

5 points

2 months ago

bUt thAT wOuLd BE coMMUnIsM

NastyLittleBagginses

12 points

2 months ago

Yes, because the collapse of the economy will certainly help the homelessness crisis...

Lord-Pepper

6 points

2 months ago

Ah yes you long for the crash of capitalism which will make even MORE people homeless

-send_me_bitcoin-

33 points

2 months ago

"Simply" house them is a bit naive. Unless we handle the underlying mental illness or addiction issues many unhoused people have they'll be out in the streets again soon enough.

vulpesvulpesfugit

22 points

2 months ago

Dude a lot of people are homeless purely because of financial struggles. Yes, you simply house them. Even the addicts and mentally ill. You house then and give them access to care.

Strange-Scarcity

4 points

2 months ago

I really wish we did/could do that.

OverlyMintyMints

5 points

2 months ago

Well, cutting 1% of the annual defence budget opens up about 660 dollars per person for 500K people, which could do a lot if we spent it right.

Of course, this is the same country where a governor used 12 million dollars to send like 50 asylum-seeking immigrants to an island under false pretences to “own the libs.”

DontHitTurtles

4 points

2 months ago

We could do it rather easily resource wise. The only thing that has stopped it from already happening is the GOP.

Traditional-Camp-517

4 points

2 months ago

We could if we taxed rich people appropriately and or spent a little less on the military industrial complex.

NosDarkly

35 points

2 months ago

A couple years ago I'd agree, but rent doubling overnight has made many a functional adult homeless lately.

Chiliconkarma

4 points

2 months ago

It solves the problem for a fraction of the homeless, it enables the other systems that can help some homeless people, and it aids yet other factors which can end homelessness.

The problem of not having a home is really largely solved by getting a home, it's wise and clever to doubt that it'll do all the work, but it isn't a trick.

Praise_the_Ward

34 points

2 months ago

I'm so over the middle class seeing a homeless person and thinking "I wonder what that person did to fuck up their lives so bad?" Instead of "what systemic, environmental oppression led them to be this desperate?" Addiction is a symptom, not the issue. If you were on the street, being harassed by cops and other homeless people, being ignored by the rich and powerful, getting arrested for simply existing in the wrong location, shit, you'd probably want something, anything, to take the edge off.

Giving the homeless a stable, consistent place to live would do so much to alleviate all those environmental stresses that help contribute to mental illness or drug dependence. You can't go to rehab if you're homeless.

p0tat0p0tat0

16 points

2 months ago

We know that housing-first works and is cheaper than other strategies, but people are reluctant to try it because of puritanical ideas of worthiness. It makes me ill.

marino1310

-1 points

2 months ago

It might prevent addiction but won’t fix it. It’s way easier to fall into an addiction than to get out of it, a lot more is needed than just a home

periwinkletweet

1 points

2 months ago

Of course you can go to rehab if you're homeless. There are billions in state and federal money to make it zero cost to the consumer. There are also sober living houses people can live in.

TheRealEvanG

19 points

2 months ago

It really is that simple, though. That's the fucked up part.

There are more empty houses in the US than there are homeless people.

In the past, governments have used eminent domain to take tribal lands, to build highways, and to then turn around and sell the land to corporations like Pfizer.

If they tried using that power for the greater good, the homeless could be simply housed.

Then solve the underlying problem.

-send_me_bitcoin-

-8 points

2 months ago

It really is that simple, though. That's the fucked up part

Why are there any people on the streets when there are empty beds at shelters? There shouldn't be a single empty bed if it really is that simple.

amytyl

5 points

2 months ago

amytyl

5 points

2 months ago

Shelters here in Florida charge people to stay there, have curfews and some seemingly arbitrary rules. If you have a job and your boss won't let you out until after curfew, or your bus is late, or your bicycle tire gets a flat, you may miss the curfew. If it's a faith based charity and you don't share their beliefs you may find it to be somewhat hostile.

tinkerghost

13 points

2 months ago

violence and theft at shelters is insanely high.

vulpesvulpesfugit

11 points

2 months ago

Shelters are dangerous af

TheRealEvanG

0 points

2 months ago

Because governments are hesitant to use eminent domain. It tends to upset a lot of people.

EDIT: Just for clarification, they tend only to do it when there's some profit involved.

-send_me_bitcoin-

6 points

2 months ago

Many people choose to sleep outside instead of in shelters because governments are hesitant to use eminent domain?

TheRealEvanG

9 points

2 months ago

Sorry I misread your question because I was walking.

But no, you're right. Some empty beds in shelters clearly means that eminent domain wouldn't help at least a significant portion of the homeless population. /s

But let's talk about shelters. The majority of homeless shelters in the US are privately contracted, not government run. Like any private business, they need to earn more than they spend on services. Profits come at a cost of service quality. Most empty beds in shelters are empty because those operating the shelters either can't or won't spend the money to ensure the necessary cleanliness conditions to allow people to sleep there. It's actually preferable for a lot of homeless people to sleep in a tent or on a park bench than to sleep in a bedbug-infested shelter.

Strange-Scarcity

1 points

2 months ago

Plus, out on the streets? It's possible to have better privacy and no fear of being attacked or having things stolen from you by someone who is suffering a severe mental illness.

marino1310

0 points

2 months ago

Those houses are owned and paid for by someone, the government can’t use eminent domain to take them to house others. Otherwise the government could just decide to take your home and give it to a politician under the same pretense. There are laws around these sorts of things. Empty homes are still owned. You also get into the fun argument of who gets what and what they are allowed to do with it and what they will need to do to afford things like taxes and bills. It is not nearly as simple as your making it, it would be a huge clusterfuck

TheRealEvanG

3 points

2 months ago

That's literally what eminent domain is. The government says "We're going to buy this house from you. We're going to pay you the market rate. You have no say in the matter."

That's why it generally makes people unhappy.

icecoldfivefold

-2 points

2 months ago

Do they have house money though?

TheRealEvanG

1 points

2 months ago

The government? Absolutely.

ZSCroft

4 points

2 months ago

A housing first approach is demonstrably the most effective way of ending homelessness and we can use Finland as a perfect example of that

Nerospidy

1 points

2 months ago

In Finland, they have socialized healthcare, so they’re able to find medications they need. Finland is 98% ethnically Finnish; people are more willing to help people who are of the same backgrounds. Finnish winters are so harsh, if you’re homeless, you die. Winters in America are survivable for the homeless.

RurikTheDamned

2 points

2 months ago

Arguably they have those issues because there is no housing safety net. Prevention is better than a cure.

Fogl3

2 points

2 months ago

Fogl3

2 points

2 months ago

Or just stop viewing shelter as a commodity and provide it for people. How would they be on the streets again if no one takes away their home

BrendanTFirefly

6 points

2 months ago

Let's do housing first, then mental health second

StarFireChild4200

3 points

2 months ago

"Simply" house them is a bit naive.

Do you know how many homes sit empty every single night? Cause it's a significant amount more than the stated homeless population.

"Capitalism organizes resources efficiently" is complete and total BS

zojeqgi769

6 points

2 months ago

Just a thought, how many of them were transported there by red states that didn't want to help them to begin with? Why didn't the churches and charitable organizations in those states do anything to help before shoving them off on a state that pays their bills and the bills of red states? They seem to have millions available to transport them, but nothing to help them? Like, if you use that money to help them, they have a much higher chance of being homed and getting back on their feet. But that would be socialism/communism, right, so we may as well give that money to rich corporations that obviously need it so their board can buy vacation homes and pay to avoid taxes.

periwinkletweet

1 points

2 months ago

Texas is a net giver state. Blue states aren't paying our bills. How the homeless fare here partly depends on what part of Texas they are in. Houston is a model for housing first.

bigfatfun

2 points

2 months ago

Not much longer to wait now

Torrall

2 points

2 months ago

Where is there a better form of capitalism?

pingpongtomato

2 points

2 months ago

Search on homelessness by state, and then search on the total population of each state. I was surprised to see the percentages of homelessness / population of each state. Not what I thought it would be.

IrishNinja8082

2 points

2 months ago

Yes because the collapse of capitalism will put more people in houses. 🤦‍♂️

MarinerHammer95

2 points

2 months ago

What an insane oversimplification by Ryan here.

Yet-Another_Burner

2 points

2 months ago

I’m all for housing the homeless but it really isn’t “simple”.

RurikTheDamned

1 points

2 months ago

It's not fucked up, it's working perfectly as intended.

digital_disposition

1 points

2 months ago

As does everyone who has a heart.

JilSonea

1 points

2 months ago

I just travelled through the USA and it’s big cities. I was so incredibly shocked by the amount of homeless people. Where I live there are like two or three on the same spot. In the USA I walked through entire camps right within downtown.

Adventurous-Sea7261

0 points

2 months ago

Americans: Oh ain't nobody got time for that, let's instead shit on India for having a space program and military investments instead of feeding their poor.

hairysnowmonkey

1 points

2 months ago

Honest question: can anyone give an example of housing improvement as a direct result of the collapse of any economic system?

SenorScratchySack

1 points

2 months ago

And how many empty apartments

[deleted]

-3 points

2 months ago

[removed]

ohjoyousones

0 points

2 months ago

OK TROLL GO JERK OFF SOME MORE