No Toilets for the Homeless
January 26, 2016 8:33 AM Subscribe
Why we target the people who have the least to take away their most basic dignity, I have no effing clue.
Because those people cannot fight back while greedy and bumbling grifters take resources they did not earn and squander them.
I don't like bandaid solutions to dire problems, and homelessness is an absolute crisis. No one should be homeless. You cannot have multi billionaires running around and then shrug your shoulders and think people who have no homes is a normal thing. I get in knots when I see a homeless cat, never mind seeing someone without a home. We can blow billions on stupid things, but not pool those resources so all citizens have a minimum livable wage. Do we imagine ourselves to be civilized? These are the dark ages, without a doubt.
I know there are people desensitized to all of this and walk over people lying on the streets, but I refuse to reach that point. People without homes are on some sort of hamster wheel and take this new norm as normal and then talk themselves into thinking it is what they want or deserve.
Societies have a duty to deal with pain, mental health, and financial precariousness of all their citizens. People on the streets need more than a bathroom: they need to be given the tools to get out of their quagmire. Sometimes I wonder if societies allow it just so some petty people can feel better about themselves by being relieved that at other people have it worse than they do --or governments and corporations used it as a subliminal message of what can happen to you if you don't keep yourself in check.
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 9:00 AM on January 26, 2016 [67 favorites]
Because those people cannot fight back while greedy and bumbling grifters take resources they did not earn and squander them.
I don't like bandaid solutions to dire problems, and homelessness is an absolute crisis. No one should be homeless. You cannot have multi billionaires running around and then shrug your shoulders and think people who have no homes is a normal thing. I get in knots when I see a homeless cat, never mind seeing someone without a home. We can blow billions on stupid things, but not pool those resources so all citizens have a minimum livable wage. Do we imagine ourselves to be civilized? These are the dark ages, without a doubt.
I know there are people desensitized to all of this and walk over people lying on the streets, but I refuse to reach that point. People without homes are on some sort of hamster wheel and take this new norm as normal and then talk themselves into thinking it is what they want or deserve.
Societies have a duty to deal with pain, mental health, and financial precariousness of all their citizens. People on the streets need more than a bathroom: they need to be given the tools to get out of their quagmire. Sometimes I wonder if societies allow it just so some petty people can feel better about themselves by being relieved that at other people have it worse than they do --or governments and corporations used it as a subliminal message of what can happen to you if you don't keep yourself in check.
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 9:00 AM on January 26, 2016 [67 favorites]
Why we target the people who have the least to take away their most basic dignity, I have no effing clue.
And yet many, perhaps many of these same people, proclaim that the USA is a "Christian nation."
posted by Gelatin at 9:01 AM on January 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
And yet many, perhaps many of these same people, proclaim that the USA is a "Christian nation."
posted by Gelatin at 9:01 AM on January 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
I live in NYC. When I was in Japan a little while back, I was completely shocked by the municipal public restrooms, and how universally clean and well-maintained they were. And that shock made me feel pretty fucking ashamed of my own city and my own country, let me tell you.
posted by Narrative Priorities at 9:07 AM on January 26, 2016 [55 favorites]
posted by Narrative Priorities at 9:07 AM on January 26, 2016 [55 favorites]
Portland, Oregon's public toilet solution: The Portland Loo
posted by otherchaz at 9:07 AM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by otherchaz at 9:07 AM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
or governments and corporations used it as a subliminal message of what can happen to you if you don't keep yourself in check.
Yeah. I've had multiple friends in and out of homelessness, two of whom were actually street homeless for quite a while. Most of them lived with me for some parts of that time. And honestly, there have been nights when I lie awake worrying about ending up like them, because in general what happened to them was nothing that couldn't happen to me, and it sure does make me a more assiduous worker.
What gets me, too, is the way that criminalizing the homeless makes things worse for everyone, especially but not exclusively working class people. For instance, years ago we had bus shelters that actually kept out the wind and the rain, and that had benches. We can't have those anymore, because somewhere a homeless person might be in one. I took the bus plenty back when we had those shelters, and I only rarely encountered obviously homeless people hanging out. My bad interactions at bus shelters were not generally with homeless people.
And now all our bus "shelters" are basically one wall and a roof, or the hilarious one where I sometimes catch a particular bus to save a walk in winter, where it is so badly designed that when it's snowing outside the shelter, it is also snowing inside the shelter.
We used to have park benches and public garbage cans and bathrooms that you could use if you were out shopping, and water fountains, and community spaces that were open much of the time. Now we can't have any of those things, because it's better that no one has them than that homeless people use them or that we actually house the homeless.
posted by Frowner at 9:08 AM on January 26, 2016 [145 favorites]
Yeah. I've had multiple friends in and out of homelessness, two of whom were actually street homeless for quite a while. Most of them lived with me for some parts of that time. And honestly, there have been nights when I lie awake worrying about ending up like them, because in general what happened to them was nothing that couldn't happen to me, and it sure does make me a more assiduous worker.
What gets me, too, is the way that criminalizing the homeless makes things worse for everyone, especially but not exclusively working class people. For instance, years ago we had bus shelters that actually kept out the wind and the rain, and that had benches. We can't have those anymore, because somewhere a homeless person might be in one. I took the bus plenty back when we had those shelters, and I only rarely encountered obviously homeless people hanging out. My bad interactions at bus shelters were not generally with homeless people.
And now all our bus "shelters" are basically one wall and a roof, or the hilarious one where I sometimes catch a particular bus to save a walk in winter, where it is so badly designed that when it's snowing outside the shelter, it is also snowing inside the shelter.
We used to have park benches and public garbage cans and bathrooms that you could use if you were out shopping, and water fountains, and community spaces that were open much of the time. Now we can't have any of those things, because it's better that no one has them than that homeless people use them or that we actually house the homeless.
posted by Frowner at 9:08 AM on January 26, 2016 [145 favorites]
What gets me, too, is the way that criminalizing the homeless makes things worse for everyone, especially but not exclusively working class people.
I would criminalize homelessness, but the homeless are the victims of that crime, not the perpetrators. I would fine city officials for every citizen they let fall through the cracks.
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 9:12 AM on January 26, 2016 [39 favorites]
I would criminalize homelessness, but the homeless are the victims of that crime, not the perpetrators. I would fine city officials for every citizen they let fall through the cracks.
posted by Alexandra Kitty at 9:12 AM on January 26, 2016 [39 favorites]
I don't like bandaid solutions to dire problems, and homelessness is an absolute crisis. No one should be homeless. You cannot have multi billionaires running around and then shrug your shoulders and think people who have no homes is a normal thing. I get in knots when I see a homeless cat, never mind seeing someone without a home. We can blow billions on stupid things, but not pool those resources so all citizens have a minimum livable wage. Do we imagine ourselves to be civilized? These are the dark ages, without a doubt.
What's worse is we know how to pack people in into small volumes of living space. How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
posted by Talez at 9:12 AM on January 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
What's worse is we know how to pack people in into small volumes of living space. How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
posted by Talez at 9:12 AM on January 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
And yet many, perhaps many of these same people, proclaim that the USA is a "Christian nation."
Many people see homelessness as a moral judgement visited upon the person who is homeless. There is a long long history in the US of "Christian" judgements of this kind pervading how we provide (or don't) social services in this country. In this history, it is precisely the pervasive religiosity that militates against simply helping people. Even when people are helped, frequently the indignities offered alongside the help are pretty demeaning.
Walter Trattner presents a good overview of some of this in From Poor Law to Welfare State.
posted by OmieWise at 9:22 AM on January 26, 2016 [18 favorites]
And yet many, perhaps many of these same people, proclaim that the USA is a "Christian nation."
Many people see homelessness as a moral judgement visited upon the person who is homeless. There is a long long history in the US of "Christian" judgements of this kind pervading how we provide (or don't) social services in this country. In this history, it is precisely the pervasive religiosity that militates against simply helping people. Even when people are helped, frequently the indignities offered alongside the help are pretty demeaning.
Walter Trattner presents a good overview of some of this in From Poor Law to Welfare State.
posted by OmieWise at 9:22 AM on January 26, 2016 [18 favorites]
The Pioneer Square district of Seattle is located at the physical Venn intersection of places where tourists visit, places near sports stadiums, places near bars and clubs, and places where people without homes assemble.
Between Jan. 1 and May 5 (2015), Pioneer Square accounted for 3,496 of 11,120 human- and animal-waste cleanups by the Metropolitan Improvement District (MID), which patrols every neighborhood downtown, according to MID statistics.
Granted, being willing to face the hard questions of how we as a society permanently solve the systemic causes of homelessness is laudable. However, when time comes you gotta go poo, there's no question you're gonna go; the only question is where.
posted by otherchaz at 9:31 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Between Jan. 1 and May 5 (2015), Pioneer Square accounted for 3,496 of 11,120 human- and animal-waste cleanups by the Metropolitan Improvement District (MID), which patrols every neighborhood downtown, according to MID statistics.
Granted, being willing to face the hard questions of how we as a society permanently solve the systemic causes of homelessness is laudable. However, when time comes you gotta go poo, there's no question you're gonna go; the only question is where.
posted by otherchaz at 9:31 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
previously!
-Million-Dollar Murray
-Best way to solve homelessness? Give people homes
-Giving housing to the homeless is three times cheaper than leaving them on the streets
How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
flophouses :P
posted by kliuless at 9:33 AM on January 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
-Million-Dollar Murray
-Best way to solve homelessness? Give people homes
-Giving housing to the homeless is three times cheaper than leaving them on the streets
How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
flophouses :P
posted by kliuless at 9:33 AM on January 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me.
-- Matthew 25:40
posted by RolandOfEld at 9:35 AM on January 26, 2016 [17 favorites]
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me.
-- Matthew 25:40
posted by RolandOfEld at 9:35 AM on January 26, 2016 [17 favorites]
Even when people are helped, frequently the indignities offered alongside the help are pretty demeaning.
Oh, goody, another chance to cite Orwell's Down and Out in Paris and London! As the title implies, Orwell spent some time living rough in both France and England; his book is in part a study in the contrasts of being poor in the two nations. Due to the laws at the time, England's homeless were forced to tramp from one shelter to another, and Orwell has a few things to say about the Salvation Army mission where he and some companions rented beds for the night.
He also provides a contrasting example:
It never ceases to astonish me that Down and Out in Paris and London is close to a century old, and yet the problems of poverty and homelessness continue to defy solution.
posted by Gelatin at 9:39 AM on January 26, 2016 [32 favorites]
Oh, goody, another chance to cite Orwell's Down and Out in Paris and London! As the title implies, Orwell spent some time living rough in both France and England; his book is in part a study in the contrasts of being poor in the two nations. Due to the laws at the time, England's homeless were forced to tramp from one shelter to another, and Orwell has a few things to say about the Salvation Army mission where he and some companions rented beds for the night.
I have slept in a number of Salvation Army shelters, and found that, though the different houses vary a little, this semi-military discipline is the same in all of them. They are certainly cheap, but they are too like workhouses for my taste. In some of them there is even a compulsory religious service once or twice a week, which the lodgers must attend or leave the house. The fact is that the Salvation Army are so in the habit of thinking themselves a charitable body that they cannot even run a lodging-house without making it stink of charity.
He also provides a contrasting example:
At half past eight Paddy took me to the Embankment, where a clergyman was known to distribute meal tickets once a week. ... Presently the clergyman appeared and the men ranged themselves in a queue in the order in which they had arrived. The clergyman was a nice, chubby, youngish man, and, curiously enough, very like Charlie, my friend in Paris. He was shy and embarrassed, and did not speak except for a brief good evening; he simply hurried down the line of men, thrusting a ticket upon each, and not waiting to be thanked. The consequence was that, for once, there was genuine gratitude, and everyone said that the clergyman was a--good feller. Someone (in his hearing, I believe) called out: 'Well, _he'll_ never be a--bishop!'--this, of course, intended as a warm compliment.
It never ceases to astonish me that Down and Out in Paris and London is close to a century old, and yet the problems of poverty and homelessness continue to defy solution.
posted by Gelatin at 9:39 AM on January 26, 2016 [32 favorites]
How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
I know we all know this but it's worth repeating:
Homelessness is a weapon of fear, keeping the lower classes and middle classes from pushing for better employment, wage, benefits, treatment.
posted by Cosine at 9:49 AM on January 26, 2016 [70 favorites]
I know we all know this but it's worth repeating:
Homelessness is a weapon of fear, keeping the lower classes and middle classes from pushing for better employment, wage, benefits, treatment.
posted by Cosine at 9:49 AM on January 26, 2016 [70 favorites]
Portland, Oregon's public toilet solution: The Portland Loo
Not that it's a bad idea, but really, installing a large trio of restrooms in a vacant storefront, with a small parlor with a desk and a phone, and paying someone to alternate between sitting at that desk and going in to tidy up, even at $15 an hour, is probably cheaper.
posted by ocschwar at 9:53 AM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Not that it's a bad idea, but really, installing a large trio of restrooms in a vacant storefront, with a small parlor with a desk and a phone, and paying someone to alternate between sitting at that desk and going in to tidy up, even at $15 an hour, is probably cheaper.
posted by ocschwar at 9:53 AM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Homelessness is a weapon of fear, keeping the lower classes and middle classes from pushing for better employment, wage, benefits, treatment.
Yep. I think the main fear is that, if homelessness and/or joblessness isn't so bad, all of the people who have truly shitty jobs will bail on them. So they're deliberately constructed to be as scary as possible.
posted by Mitrovarr at 10:04 AM on January 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
Yep. I think the main fear is that, if homelessness and/or joblessness isn't so bad, all of the people who have truly shitty jobs will bail on them. So they're deliberately constructed to be as scary as possible.
posted by Mitrovarr at 10:04 AM on January 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
When I was in Mexico City J̶a̶p̶a̶n̶ a little while back, I was completely shocked by the municipal public restrooms..
posted by Captain Chesapeake at 10:10 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Captain Chesapeake at 10:10 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Captain: yes, I was there last week and thought the exact same thing, "WC" everywhere, how civilized.
posted by Cosine at 10:12 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Cosine at 10:12 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Why do they do this? Because the fear is that people won't work they'll just become bums and live off the fat of someone else.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 10:13 AM on January 26, 2016
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 10:13 AM on January 26, 2016
> Why do they do this? Because the fear is that people won't work they'll just become bums and live off the fat of someone else.
People hate most in others the characteristics of which they are themselves ashamed.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 10:15 AM on January 26, 2016 [14 favorites]
People hate most in others the characteristics of which they are themselves ashamed.
posted by I-Write-Essays at 10:15 AM on January 26, 2016 [14 favorites]
these should be basic fucking things.
sometimes I just don't understand and I'm very tired.
posted by suddenly, and without warning, at 10:19 AM on January 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
sometimes I just don't understand and I'm very tired.
posted by suddenly, and without warning, at 10:19 AM on January 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
where a clergyman was known to distribute meal tickets once a week...
-Whuffie
-Miracle poverty solution. Just give people money.
-How To Fight Poverty? It's Simple: Give Cash To Poor People
it's also worth noting that if it's 'cheaper' to give homeless people houses and poor people money (or legalize drugs) and you dismantle the whole system of control -- that's more 'expensive' to maintain -- then you're also putting a lot of people out ofbullshit jobs 'work': "They don't want this to stop. It employs too many people. Cops, lawyers, judges, probation officers, prison guards... The day dope stops coming into this country, a hundred thousand people lose their jobs."
posted by kliuless at 10:40 AM on January 26, 2016 [14 favorites]
-Whuffie
-Miracle poverty solution. Just give people money.
-How To Fight Poverty? It's Simple: Give Cash To Poor People
it's also worth noting that if it's 'cheaper' to give homeless people houses and poor people money (or legalize drugs) and you dismantle the whole system of control -- that's more 'expensive' to maintain -- then you're also putting a lot of people out of
posted by kliuless at 10:40 AM on January 26, 2016 [14 favorites]
> Why we target the people who have the least to take away their most basic dignity, I have no effing clue.
For all the reasons outlined by others above, plus it's easier to demonize people who smell (Orwell talks about this in The Road To Wigan Pier IIRC), go to the washroom in public, etc.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:50 AM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
For all the reasons outlined by others above, plus it's easier to demonize people who smell (Orwell talks about this in The Road To Wigan Pier IIRC), go to the washroom in public, etc.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:50 AM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Urban rest stops are a really, really great idea. I think that they should be built in every city, and include laundry facilities and showers. I promise, if a lot of homeless people are going in and out, nobody is going to use it if they don't absolutely need it.
At the same time, the presence of homeless is going to make public facilities unpleasant for non-homeless civilians to use. And that is going to erode public support for public facilities - because people will think, "Well, those park bathrooms are always overflowing with trash and filthy and full of sketchy people who don't follow social norms, I don't want to use them, and I don't want my kid to use them. So what's the point?" And that's not a moral judgment on anyone - homeless people, by virtue of being homeless, cannot maintain personal hygiene in the same ways someone who has a house and various places they can go to can. And, understandably, having lived on the streets on the outskirts of society, many homeless people don't really give that much of a fuck about social norms. And non-homeless civilians can't be blamed for wanting to use clean bathrooms, or for not wanting to expose their kids to people who don't care much about social norms or the consequences of the law.
So what do you do? What is the solution?
posted by corb at 10:55 AM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
At the same time, the presence of homeless is going to make public facilities unpleasant for non-homeless civilians to use. And that is going to erode public support for public facilities - because people will think, "Well, those park bathrooms are always overflowing with trash and filthy and full of sketchy people who don't follow social norms, I don't want to use them, and I don't want my kid to use them. So what's the point?" And that's not a moral judgment on anyone - homeless people, by virtue of being homeless, cannot maintain personal hygiene in the same ways someone who has a house and various places they can go to can. And, understandably, having lived on the streets on the outskirts of society, many homeless people don't really give that much of a fuck about social norms. And non-homeless civilians can't be blamed for wanting to use clean bathrooms, or for not wanting to expose their kids to people who don't care much about social norms or the consequences of the law.
So what do you do? What is the solution?
posted by corb at 10:55 AM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
So what do you do? What is the solution?
I'd start by looking at them as individual people rather than getting the world's biggest paint roller and proceeding to write all of them off simultaneously. Maybe Michele in California would be a good person to set you straight.
It's always so damn easy to write the homeless off but it's difficult to actually help. So we just write them off. Which is what I assume the answer to your leading, rhetorical question is.
posted by Talez at 11:08 AM on January 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
I'd start by looking at them as individual people rather than getting the world's biggest paint roller and proceeding to write all of them off simultaneously. Maybe Michele in California would be a good person to set you straight.
It's always so damn easy to write the homeless off but it's difficult to actually help. So we just write them off. Which is what I assume the answer to your leading, rhetorical question is.
posted by Talez at 11:08 AM on January 26, 2016 [11 favorites]
I worked for homeless services for three years, working for individual people to get them housed. It was very emotionally rewarding, if often very, very challenging. But at the end of the day, the structural problems that made homelessness so shitty in those cities were still there. Working with people as individuals is great to say, but it doesn't do much to address the constant forces making people's lives shittier.
posted by corb at 11:11 AM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by corb at 11:11 AM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
But to write off entire ideas because they may not be perfect? That's a nirvana fallacy if I ever heard one. Just because the overarching situation is still shit and may not even be getting better is no reason to stop doing small things that try to make things better.
posted by Talez at 11:13 AM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Talez at 11:13 AM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Oh, I see - you misread me. I wasn't shrugging my hands and saying "c'est la vie". I was saying: "I can see the problem, but not the solutions. Urban rest stops are good and can secure funding, but they're not enough. Anyone else got any ideas?"
posted by corb at 11:19 AM on January 26, 2016 [8 favorites]
posted by corb at 11:19 AM on January 26, 2016 [8 favorites]
In SF: Lava Mae.
You guys on your toilet vacations. I went to a place much less toilet-festive. When I got back I looked upon a homeless gentleman with two gallons of clean water and thought how rich even the barely surviving were.
posted by Ogre Lawless at 11:24 AM on January 26, 2016
You guys on your toilet vacations. I went to a place much less toilet-festive. When I got back I looked upon a homeless gentleman with two gallons of clean water and thought how rich even the barely surviving were.
posted by Ogre Lawless at 11:24 AM on January 26, 2016
Urban rest stops are good and can secure funding, but they're not enough. Anyone else got any ideas?
I think the idea is urban rest stops, let's move onto the next this when we complete the first.
posted by Cosine at 11:24 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I think the idea is urban rest stops, let's move onto the next this when we complete the first.
posted by Cosine at 11:24 AM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
The problem of lack of public bathrooms for the homeless is a self reinforcing problem: we cannot have public bathrooms because the homeless (and prostitutes) might use them. At the same time, we would be able to have these things if we did not have homelessness.
Too often we view the homeless as a "force of nature" about which nothing can be done. But we should remember that the more homelessness makes everyone's life worse. A city with a homeless problem is a city in which the quality of life for those with homes plummets as well. Can't we pose this as, "yes, putting the homeless in homes is expensive, but it's a cost we are willing to pay to increase our own quality of life" ?
posted by deanc at 11:34 AM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
Too often we view the homeless as a "force of nature" about which nothing can be done. But we should remember that the more homelessness makes everyone's life worse. A city with a homeless problem is a city in which the quality of life for those with homes plummets as well. Can't we pose this as, "yes, putting the homeless in homes is expensive, but it's a cost we are willing to pay to increase our own quality of life" ?
posted by deanc at 11:34 AM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
What about the homeless that don't want to be put in homes? What about urban nomadic lifestyles not framed in terms of deviance? What about technologies that enable better homeless living, for those who wish to be homeless and to live scavenging lives on the truly abundant waste that those living "homeful" lives generate? I'm thinking well-insulated little tents, electricity-generating hand-carts, water filter, etc. I'm thinking Beyond Civilization.
posted by holist at 12:01 PM on January 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by holist at 12:01 PM on January 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
Well, it's more complicated than that, but that doesn't mean it should be impossible.
You'd have to build the building, and then put systems in place to support the people who would keep this a safe space; protect it from being taken over by bored/desperate/angry people who would prey on the otherwise innocent folks who would take refuge there, and maintain it in a safe and clean condition, or make it possible for residents to maintain it in a safe and clean condition.
We have housing projects, shelters, etc. (not enough), but they aren't usually very nice places; they need a little more attention than just "build it and forget about it".
We need to figure out how to both build these places -- even park benches -- and make sure we don't let them deteriorate to the point of awfulness; but just because that's difficult doesn't mean we shouldn't do it anyway.
Research on human motivation is probably key to making this kind of thing work; some of it is happening, and I hope people realize the incredibly broad-based implications of research, thinking, and attention to these kinds of things.
posted by amtho at 12:05 PM on January 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
Well, it's more complicated than that, but that doesn't mean it should be impossible.
You'd have to build the building, and then put systems in place to support the people who would keep this a safe space; protect it from being taken over by bored/desperate/angry people who would prey on the otherwise innocent folks who would take refuge there, and maintain it in a safe and clean condition, or make it possible for residents to maintain it in a safe and clean condition.
We have housing projects, shelters, etc. (not enough), but they aren't usually very nice places; they need a little more attention than just "build it and forget about it".
We need to figure out how to both build these places -- even park benches -- and make sure we don't let them deteriorate to the point of awfulness; but just because that's difficult doesn't mean we shouldn't do it anyway.
Research on human motivation is probably key to making this kind of thing work; some of it is happening, and I hope people realize the incredibly broad-based implications of research, thinking, and attention to these kinds of things.
posted by amtho at 12:05 PM on January 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
And yet many, perhaps many of these same people, proclaim that the USA is a "Christian nation."
I refer you all to Max Weber. Hoarding money and shunning the needy has been the hot new thing in Christianity since the 16th century.
posted by phunniemee at 12:23 PM on January 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
I refer you all to Max Weber. Hoarding money and shunning the needy has been the hot new thing in Christianity since the 16th century.
posted by phunniemee at 12:23 PM on January 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
Utah is figuring it out probably as well as anywhere in the US at this point.
posted by Lyn Never at 12:24 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Lyn Never at 12:24 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
What about the homeless that don't want to be put in homes? What about urban nomadic lifestyles not framed in terms of deviance?
This is the sort of thing that isn't a problem on a small scale, but once it reaches a critical mass, causes public trust in common facilities to break down.
When you see "Bob the eccentric dude who lives in a tent" in the library every now and again, no big deal. When the park bathrooms are gathering places for all sorts of homeless and mentally ill, support for public shared facilities of any kind will collapse. If, in our move to rebuild trust in shared spaces by housing and treating the homeless, a few people who want to be urban scavengers can't squat on public land, then that's a worthwhile sacrifice.
posted by deanc at 12:37 PM on January 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
This is the sort of thing that isn't a problem on a small scale, but once it reaches a critical mass, causes public trust in common facilities to break down.
When you see "Bob the eccentric dude who lives in a tent" in the library every now and again, no big deal. When the park bathrooms are gathering places for all sorts of homeless and mentally ill, support for public shared facilities of any kind will collapse. If, in our move to rebuild trust in shared spaces by housing and treating the homeless, a few people who want to be urban scavengers can't squat on public land, then that's a worthwhile sacrifice.
posted by deanc at 12:37 PM on January 26, 2016 [5 favorites]
We also need to find ways to accomodate homeless people with dogs, which is the #1 reason I see for people who refuse shelter - they won't go without their dog.
posted by corb at 12:37 PM on January 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
posted by corb at 12:37 PM on January 26, 2016 [10 favorites]
What about the homeless that don't want to be put in homes? What about urban nomadic lifestyles not framed in terms of deviance?
I guess I would still rather start with homes, while also decriminalizing a lot of stuff that prevents living in a tent, having some plans for people living in tents, etc. My reasoning is two-fold:
1. IME, a lot of people find it fun to live Beyond Civilization when they know they have Civilization to come back to. The people I knew who were really, unavoidably street-homeless (even my one friend, now housed, who hated shelters and loves the outdoors) were really, really stressed out by the fact that it was basically a permanent condition. And that had all kinds of effects on physical and mental health.
2. I think that getting houses for people is politically more radical than getting tents. We're already in a society where there's all this sort of tech-disruption "you too can live in the back of a panel truck and spend more time coding" culture, and I feel like there's a certain risk that the powers that be would be only too happy to equip our various more marginal citizens with a tent and a water filter and then gently boot them off into the good social night.
posted by Frowner at 12:45 PM on January 26, 2016 [18 favorites]
Anyone else got any ideas?
More investment in: early years education; proper non-patronising social support for families in chaotic situations; mental health care; support for looked-after children (including when they age out of education) and for people with addiction problems. Then, joining up all of the above so that vulnerable people get consistent care when they need it.
Oh and working on accessibility issues with government programs and benefits. If I leave a series of foster placements at 16 or 18 with mild learning difficulties and PTSD, can I still successfully navigate the system to get me and my future kids the help we need?
posted by emilyw at 12:55 PM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
More investment in: early years education; proper non-patronising social support for families in chaotic situations; mental health care; support for looked-after children (including when they age out of education) and for people with addiction problems. Then, joining up all of the above so that vulnerable people get consistent care when they need it.
Oh and working on accessibility issues with government programs and benefits. If I leave a series of foster placements at 16 or 18 with mild learning difficulties and PTSD, can I still successfully navigate the system to get me and my future kids the help we need?
posted by emilyw at 12:55 PM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
What about the homeless that don't want to be put in homes? What about urban nomadic lifestyles not framed in terms of deviance?
I guess I would still rather start with homes, while also decriminalizing a lot of stuff that prevents living in a tent, having some plans for people living in tents, etc.
If we solve the problem of the homeless who don't want to be homeless, the urban nomads are just campers, and the laws keeping them from stinking up the streets will vanish.
posted by Etrigan at 12:57 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
I guess I would still rather start with homes, while also decriminalizing a lot of stuff that prevents living in a tent, having some plans for people living in tents, etc.
If we solve the problem of the homeless who don't want to be homeless, the urban nomads are just campers, and the laws keeping them from stinking up the streets will vanish.
posted by Etrigan at 12:57 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
corb: Urban rest stops...should be built in every city, and include laundry facilities and showers.
Twenty-odd years ago I was traveling in Europe for several weeks, and at one point had half a day to kill in London. I went to a laundromat, purchased some detergent, and put everything I was carrying except my duffel bag, book, and papers into the washing machine to get cleaned. I read my book and ate some cookies while I waited for the machines to finish.
I had showered at a hostel two days before and then spent about 36 hours straight on trains & ferries, so I was kind of scruffy. I felt very obvious and out of place, and I wished I could have, I don't know, done my laundry out of view of a big plate-glass window, you know?
It's not a huge thing to ask, and I would have felt a lot less "on display"; it gave me a lot of sympathy the for people who live out of a bag 24/7 and never even get to do their washing.
posted by wenestvedt at 1:34 PM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Twenty-odd years ago I was traveling in Europe for several weeks, and at one point had half a day to kill in London. I went to a laundromat, purchased some detergent, and put everything I was carrying except my duffel bag, book, and papers into the washing machine to get cleaned. I read my book and ate some cookies while I waited for the machines to finish.
I had showered at a hostel two days before and then spent about 36 hours straight on trains & ferries, so I was kind of scruffy. I felt very obvious and out of place, and I wished I could have, I don't know, done my laundry out of view of a big plate-glass window, you know?
It's not a huge thing to ask, and I would have felt a lot less "on display"; it gave me a lot of sympathy the for people who live out of a bag 24/7 and never even get to do their washing.
posted by wenestvedt at 1:34 PM on January 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
(Yes, I know: scales from my eyes, etc. My point is that even small private tasks that are perforce done in public view are emotionally draining, and over time that is just an enormous burden on homeless folks. So if someone is going to offer services to the homeless, please do so in a way that provides them dignity & privacy.)
posted by wenestvedt at 1:38 PM on January 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by wenestvedt at 1:38 PM on January 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
I think the statement 'what about the homeless who want to stay homeless'is equivalent to 'what about the people who commit welfare fraud.' It exists but not in numbers that are substantial.
The number of homeless who won't/don't pay rent is higher usually due to some substance use issues or mental illness.
And those problems decrease with stable housing.
posted by AlexiaSky at 1:40 PM on January 26, 2016 [8 favorites]
The number of homeless who won't/don't pay rent is higher usually due to some substance use issues or mental illness.
And those problems decrease with stable housing.
posted by AlexiaSky at 1:40 PM on January 26, 2016 [8 favorites]
I also think that if services were widely avaliable then homeless will use what is convenient to them and not the one homeless spot. Travel when homeless takes alot of time, money and effort. Disbursed services give people the chance to blend back in with society.
One program here gives out laundry cards for an entire chain of laundry mats. The laundry mat hasn't complained and the people I know who have used it have been really greatful.
posted by AlexiaSky at 1:48 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
One program here gives out laundry cards for an entire chain of laundry mats. The laundry mat hasn't complained and the people I know who have used it have been really greatful.
posted by AlexiaSky at 1:48 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
So part of the class I offer,* Homeless 101, is the toilet problem. Here's the first thing you do, everywhere you go you look for a place to use the bathroom. If you don't have a good memory then write it all down. Places you can pee during the day and those you can only use at night. And of course finding places to poop (day and night) is a huge priority as it generally requires some kind of indoor facility which can be very difficult to find (as the article covers).
Living in downtown areas especially in big cities makes all this very hard. As a homeless person you live in these places because there are more resources available (whatever the nature of those resources). But if you can get to smaller towns with smaller downtown areas then it's easier to get to the woods and/or non-downtown establishments that aren't quite so tight-assed about public bathrooms.
But the thing is, it's a very weird habit to develop. You're always scouting out places to use the bathroom (similarly for places to sleep). It's not a good feeling. And just like the first lesson in my Homeless 101 class (never ever ever tell anyone where you're sleeping) when you find a good spot to relieve yourself there's a very good chance you shouldn't tell anyone as they might blow it for you.
Where I live there are several good spots outside the downtown area. Some of them are well-known to other homeless people but the others not so much. I don't talk about the latter with any but close friends.
It really sucks that anyone ever has to think about bathrooms in this kind of survivalist dog-eat-dog kind of way. I mean there's absolutely no way in hell that anyone should ever have to go through that.
But I also get the problems. Some of my homeless colleagues do do things to bathrooms that should remain unmentioned and definitely unseen. This is not to blame them but in recognition of the fact that there are people who have problems and that need help and how they end up homeless and in shelters or on benches is a crime against humanity. They shouldn't have to only use public restrooms.
In the end I know of no other solution than getting housing for everyone. That will take a tremendous effort of will from the people and the government but there it is.
As for the folk who want to live off the grid (I call them survivalists). They do exist. I tend to befriend more of them than I do the hardcore downtown folk as they often don't have the substance and mental difficulties that the latter do (not that survivalists don't have those same problems but that they are "higher functioning"). There's also a fairly large group of homeless people reside somewhere between the survivalist and the downtown crowd. These folk often come from middle-class backgrounds. They learn to survive but not necessarily deep in the woods but also not in the downtown areas. They often look just like regular middle-class folk (though there's almost always a marker that you can see if you know what to look for). Librarians and coffee-shop workers can often identify them. Anyway, there are a lot more of us than folk realize.
Yes, the dowtown folk with their addictions and/or mental/physical disabilities do make up the large majority but the rest do exist and the solutions for these three different groups are different. Which I guess is another issue, there is not one solution for all homeless folk. There are many. So many that it makes the problem even more difficult to solve.
But having a decent place to poop shouldn't be that hard to work out.
* I don't really, of course, but while putting together dos and don'ts I think of them as Homeless 101, Homeless 201, etc. It amuses me.
posted by bfootdav at 2:18 PM on January 26, 2016 [25 favorites]
Living in downtown areas especially in big cities makes all this very hard. As a homeless person you live in these places because there are more resources available (whatever the nature of those resources). But if you can get to smaller towns with smaller downtown areas then it's easier to get to the woods and/or non-downtown establishments that aren't quite so tight-assed about public bathrooms.
But the thing is, it's a very weird habit to develop. You're always scouting out places to use the bathroom (similarly for places to sleep). It's not a good feeling. And just like the first lesson in my Homeless 101 class (never ever ever tell anyone where you're sleeping) when you find a good spot to relieve yourself there's a very good chance you shouldn't tell anyone as they might blow it for you.
Where I live there are several good spots outside the downtown area. Some of them are well-known to other homeless people but the others not so much. I don't talk about the latter with any but close friends.
It really sucks that anyone ever has to think about bathrooms in this kind of survivalist dog-eat-dog kind of way. I mean there's absolutely no way in hell that anyone should ever have to go through that.
But I also get the problems. Some of my homeless colleagues do do things to bathrooms that should remain unmentioned and definitely unseen. This is not to blame them but in recognition of the fact that there are people who have problems and that need help and how they end up homeless and in shelters or on benches is a crime against humanity. They shouldn't have to only use public restrooms.
In the end I know of no other solution than getting housing for everyone. That will take a tremendous effort of will from the people and the government but there it is.
As for the folk who want to live off the grid (I call them survivalists). They do exist. I tend to befriend more of them than I do the hardcore downtown folk as they often don't have the substance and mental difficulties that the latter do (not that survivalists don't have those same problems but that they are "higher functioning"). There's also a fairly large group of homeless people reside somewhere between the survivalist and the downtown crowd. These folk often come from middle-class backgrounds. They learn to survive but not necessarily deep in the woods but also not in the downtown areas. They often look just like regular middle-class folk (though there's almost always a marker that you can see if you know what to look for). Librarians and coffee-shop workers can often identify them. Anyway, there are a lot more of us than folk realize.
Yes, the dowtown folk with their addictions and/or mental/physical disabilities do make up the large majority but the rest do exist and the solutions for these three different groups are different. Which I guess is another issue, there is not one solution for all homeless folk. There are many. So many that it makes the problem even more difficult to solve.
But having a decent place to poop shouldn't be that hard to work out.
* I don't really, of course, but while putting together dos and don'ts I think of them as Homeless 101, Homeless 201, etc. It amuses me.
posted by bfootdav at 2:18 PM on January 26, 2016 [25 favorites]
The Pioneer Square district of Seattle is located at the physical Venn intersection of places where tourists visit, places near sports stadiums, places near bars and clubs, and places where people without homes assemble.
I traveled around a bit this past summer and fall, and i just have to say what the fucking fuck are we doing in this city that it's gotten as bad as it has down there. Seriously, people who haven't been to that part of seattle, or parts of vancouver, or a couple different spots in oregon really don't know how bad it is.
I've been talking to a couple friends about it recently, especially as someone who was homeless for over a year a few years back... but what the hell are we doing in these cities where there's such opulent ridiculous wealth on display 24/7 and there's this many people just out on the street?
Part of it is that the cops literally move people on and tell them to go down there/that way, but it's also where a lot of the shelters and services are... but even still, it's a lot of people.
If you're down there during a sports game, you can sometimes literally watch neon pink bentleys and sparkly gold-wrapped BMWs drive right by the huge number of people just meandering around. Obviously not having a good time.
And then i read threads on like, /r/seattle or listen to bullshit libertarian tech bros talk about it and fucking weep. Their solutions range from "¯\_(ツ)_/¯ but we shouldn't like give them free stuff because then people will WANT to be homeless! perverse incentives!" to "turn them into soylent green idk". And i'm completely fucking serious. Recently i've repeatedly heard "we can't be responsible for solving this on our own, it has to be a nationwide thing, otherwise people will just intentionally come here! other cities will give hobos one way tickets here!" and everyone nods along and jerks eachother off.
How about.... that's fine? How about there's untold billions of fucking dollars flying around up here, a turgid overclass of people making six figures and up, and we should be doing everything we can? This is literally a problem you can just throw money at! This isn't a toughie! You just give people housing and money and stop wringing your damn hands over the fact that hey, maybe they'll drink and do drugs or do stuff you don't like. Maybe they wont want to leave/stop using the services. How about, who cares? This goddamn money geyser isn't going to run out.
Like toilets and stuff are cool but there's enough cash here to tax everyone with good amounts of it and build another fucking city. Like, lets lower the sales tax and other regressive flat taxes, implement a progressive income tax, and build some shit? How about fuck the tax breaks to boeing and the look-the-other-way loopholes some other companies are exploiting? They can leave if they want, but they wont, and everyone knows it.
They could literally just charge a car tab like fee monthly on every apartment X amount above the mean, adjust property taxes again, and build housing. There's plenty of solutions like that if people could just get over the idea of "but i PAY for my apartment, why shouldn't they have to?". Especially when the people i hear squawking that the loudest drive $80,000 cars and live in places that cost 3x or more what mine does.
It's really, really hard to not just say "go fuck yourself" to the people who are loudly oppositional to any real solution in this city. And they're always the most grossed out by "a handout". They WANT strings, and they WANT it to kind of suck and be awkward/hard/shameful. I've posted about it before, but when i was helping my mom work at a county services place the lady processing donations was doing stuff like cutting buttons off of the expensive brand jackets. I asked her why, and she went "they can't be TOO comfortable".
I think of her every time someone is being an asshole about this stuff. That's exactly what they're thinking. I can see it in their fucking eyes, or their words.
We also need to find ways to accomodate homeless people with dogs, which is the #1 reason I see for people who refuse shelter - they won't go without their dog.
We also need a robust solution for feeding, and providing medical care to homeless peoples pets. And something like a boarding facility where they can check in their pets during medical appointments/court/really anywhere they can't or don't want to bring their dog/pet.
posted by emptythought at 2:21 PM on January 26, 2016 [20 favorites]
I traveled around a bit this past summer and fall, and i just have to say what the fucking fuck are we doing in this city that it's gotten as bad as it has down there. Seriously, people who haven't been to that part of seattle, or parts of vancouver, or a couple different spots in oregon really don't know how bad it is.
I've been talking to a couple friends about it recently, especially as someone who was homeless for over a year a few years back... but what the hell are we doing in these cities where there's such opulent ridiculous wealth on display 24/7 and there's this many people just out on the street?
Part of it is that the cops literally move people on and tell them to go down there/that way, but it's also where a lot of the shelters and services are... but even still, it's a lot of people.
If you're down there during a sports game, you can sometimes literally watch neon pink bentleys and sparkly gold-wrapped BMWs drive right by the huge number of people just meandering around. Obviously not having a good time.
And then i read threads on like, /r/seattle or listen to bullshit libertarian tech bros talk about it and fucking weep. Their solutions range from "¯\_(ツ)_/¯ but we shouldn't like give them free stuff because then people will WANT to be homeless! perverse incentives!" to "turn them into soylent green idk". And i'm completely fucking serious. Recently i've repeatedly heard "we can't be responsible for solving this on our own, it has to be a nationwide thing, otherwise people will just intentionally come here! other cities will give hobos one way tickets here!" and everyone nods along and jerks eachother off.
How about.... that's fine? How about there's untold billions of fucking dollars flying around up here, a turgid overclass of people making six figures and up, and we should be doing everything we can? This is literally a problem you can just throw money at! This isn't a toughie! You just give people housing and money and stop wringing your damn hands over the fact that hey, maybe they'll drink and do drugs or do stuff you don't like. Maybe they wont want to leave/stop using the services. How about, who cares? This goddamn money geyser isn't going to run out.
Like toilets and stuff are cool but there's enough cash here to tax everyone with good amounts of it and build another fucking city. Like, lets lower the sales tax and other regressive flat taxes, implement a progressive income tax, and build some shit? How about fuck the tax breaks to boeing and the look-the-other-way loopholes some other companies are exploiting? They can leave if they want, but they wont, and everyone knows it.
They could literally just charge a car tab like fee monthly on every apartment X amount above the mean, adjust property taxes again, and build housing. There's plenty of solutions like that if people could just get over the idea of "but i PAY for my apartment, why shouldn't they have to?". Especially when the people i hear squawking that the loudest drive $80,000 cars and live in places that cost 3x or more what mine does.
It's really, really hard to not just say "go fuck yourself" to the people who are loudly oppositional to any real solution in this city. And they're always the most grossed out by "a handout". They WANT strings, and they WANT it to kind of suck and be awkward/hard/shameful. I've posted about it before, but when i was helping my mom work at a county services place the lady processing donations was doing stuff like cutting buttons off of the expensive brand jackets. I asked her why, and she went "they can't be TOO comfortable".
I think of her every time someone is being an asshole about this stuff. That's exactly what they're thinking. I can see it in their fucking eyes, or their words.
We also need to find ways to accomodate homeless people with dogs, which is the #1 reason I see for people who refuse shelter - they won't go without their dog.
We also need a robust solution for feeding, and providing medical care to homeless peoples pets. And something like a boarding facility where they can check in their pets during medical appointments/court/really anywhere they can't or don't want to bring their dog/pet.
posted by emptythought at 2:21 PM on January 26, 2016 [20 favorites]
And honestly, there have been nights when I lie awake worrying about ending up like them, because in general what happened to them was nothing that couldn't happen to me, and it sure does make me a more assiduous worker.
Homelessness is a weapon of fear, keeping the lower classes and middle classes from pushing for better employment, wage, benefits, treatment.
Repeating this until the end of days. Homelessness being shitty is a feature, not a bug. The struggles of homelessness and the demonized welfare queen are some of the boogeymen by which the oligarchy maintains their disposable labor pool, regardless of how mistreated they are. This includes things like OSHA violations, sexual harassment, wage violations, and lack of basic human respect.
Employees faced with these adverse conditions evaluate their situation and see that they might be worse off, or they consider their families which might be worse off, and so they put their nose back to the grindstone again. Coupled with affordable healthcare being largely tied to employment, these structures paralyze us with fear and make it difficult to seek a better path. After some time trapped in this hostile environment with few alternatives, hope for anything better is slowly eroded away in many people, and the stress from this can lead to both physical and psychological problems, including violence and substance abuse. In many industries there simply isn't a "better" corporation to go work for and you can expect the same treatment across the board.
None of this matters to the corporations, which only seek to extract wealth in whichever way they can, including from the blood and tears of the poor. Ending homelessness would negatively effect their bottom line.
Urban rest stops are good and can secure funding, but they're not enough. Anyone else got any ideas?
Hire somebody to clean the toilets so little Timmy isn't so afraid to use them? If we can send robots to Mars, I am pretty sure we can figure out an alternative to homeless people having to shit in a gutter. The problem is there isn't a profit motive so those with the resources don't care enough to fix the problem, and those of us who do care don't have the resources to fix a lack of basic infrastructure. This is literally the job of governments, to provide basic services for their citizenry regardless of economic means. It doesn't get much more basic than shitting.
I don't really, of course, but while putting together dos and don'ts I think of them as Homeless 101, Homeless 201, etc. It amuses me.
I wonder though, if there were basic urban survival skills classes, including how to dumpster dive and make nutritious meals with what you find, if homelessness wouldn't get a bit less terrible for everyone! Many people are afraid of homelessness simply because it is alien to them.
I've posted about it before, but when i was helping my mom work at a county services place the lady processing donations was doing stuff like cutting buttons off of the expensive brand jackets. I asked her why, and she went "they can't be TOO comfortable".
IMO a lot of this malice stems from people who are stuck at the grindstone, frustrated at their own shitty situations, punching down because there is no effective way for them to punch up. There is no real shared social identity for the working class, and with the unions dead, we have resorted to fighting amongst ourselves instead of questioning why everything sucks for 90% of us and banding together. We have been taught for years that poverty is a personal failing, we live under the long shadow of Calvinism. These myths are reinforced and exploited by corporate messaging, directly or via their political mouthpieces, including much of the mainstream media.
Homeless people are a socially acceptible target for anger and frustration, because they represent a failure to conform to the social norms of capitalism. I have seen this spark a bizzare form of jealous-loathing: jealousy because the person with the shit job wishes they could just give it up, but can't. People who have not directly experienced homelessness often have naively idealistic ideas of what that daily life entails.
We also need a robust solution for feeding, and providing medical care to homeless peoples pets. And something like a boarding facility where they can check in their pets during medical appointments/court/really anywhere they can't or don't want to bring their dog/pet.
Homeless people's dogs are absolutely service animals and I agree that the lack of access to basic vet care adds another layer of stress to an already-stressful lifestyle.
posted by Feyala at 2:56 PM on January 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
Homelessness is a weapon of fear, keeping the lower classes and middle classes from pushing for better employment, wage, benefits, treatment.
Repeating this until the end of days. Homelessness being shitty is a feature, not a bug. The struggles of homelessness and the demonized welfare queen are some of the boogeymen by which the oligarchy maintains their disposable labor pool, regardless of how mistreated they are. This includes things like OSHA violations, sexual harassment, wage violations, and lack of basic human respect.
Employees faced with these adverse conditions evaluate their situation and see that they might be worse off, or they consider their families which might be worse off, and so they put their nose back to the grindstone again. Coupled with affordable healthcare being largely tied to employment, these structures paralyze us with fear and make it difficult to seek a better path. After some time trapped in this hostile environment with few alternatives, hope for anything better is slowly eroded away in many people, and the stress from this can lead to both physical and psychological problems, including violence and substance abuse. In many industries there simply isn't a "better" corporation to go work for and you can expect the same treatment across the board.
None of this matters to the corporations, which only seek to extract wealth in whichever way they can, including from the blood and tears of the poor. Ending homelessness would negatively effect their bottom line.
Urban rest stops are good and can secure funding, but they're not enough. Anyone else got any ideas?
Hire somebody to clean the toilets so little Timmy isn't so afraid to use them? If we can send robots to Mars, I am pretty sure we can figure out an alternative to homeless people having to shit in a gutter. The problem is there isn't a profit motive so those with the resources don't care enough to fix the problem, and those of us who do care don't have the resources to fix a lack of basic infrastructure. This is literally the job of governments, to provide basic services for their citizenry regardless of economic means. It doesn't get much more basic than shitting.
I don't really, of course, but while putting together dos and don'ts I think of them as Homeless 101, Homeless 201, etc. It amuses me.
I wonder though, if there were basic urban survival skills classes, including how to dumpster dive and make nutritious meals with what you find, if homelessness wouldn't get a bit less terrible for everyone! Many people are afraid of homelessness simply because it is alien to them.
I've posted about it before, but when i was helping my mom work at a county services place the lady processing donations was doing stuff like cutting buttons off of the expensive brand jackets. I asked her why, and she went "they can't be TOO comfortable".
IMO a lot of this malice stems from people who are stuck at the grindstone, frustrated at their own shitty situations, punching down because there is no effective way for them to punch up. There is no real shared social identity for the working class, and with the unions dead, we have resorted to fighting amongst ourselves instead of questioning why everything sucks for 90% of us and banding together. We have been taught for years that poverty is a personal failing, we live under the long shadow of Calvinism. These myths are reinforced and exploited by corporate messaging, directly or via their political mouthpieces, including much of the mainstream media.
Homeless people are a socially acceptible target for anger and frustration, because they represent a failure to conform to the social norms of capitalism. I have seen this spark a bizzare form of jealous-loathing: jealousy because the person with the shit job wishes they could just give it up, but can't. People who have not directly experienced homelessness often have naively idealistic ideas of what that daily life entails.
We also need a robust solution for feeding, and providing medical care to homeless peoples pets. And something like a boarding facility where they can check in their pets during medical appointments/court/really anywhere they can't or don't want to bring their dog/pet.
Homeless people's dogs are absolutely service animals and I agree that the lack of access to basic vet care adds another layer of stress to an already-stressful lifestyle.
posted by Feyala at 2:56 PM on January 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
Emptythought, the worst bit? King County is already the "gold standard." Social service programs in Portland send their people there for just that reason!
posted by corb at 5:00 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by corb at 5:00 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I think that getting houses for people is politically more radical than getting tents. We're already in a society where there's all this sort of tech-disruption "you too can live in the back of a panel truck and spend more time coding" culture, and I feel like there's a certain risk that the powers that be would be only too happy to equip our various more marginal citizens with a tent and a water filter and then gently boot them off into the good social night.
And yet, funnily enough, it's not happening. Anywhere that I've heard of. Some NGOs collect disposable tents at festivals to pass on, but governments: nope.
posted by holist at 6:04 PM on January 26, 2016
And yet, funnily enough, it's not happening. Anywhere that I've heard of. Some NGOs collect disposable tents at festivals to pass on, but governments: nope.
posted by holist at 6:04 PM on January 26, 2016
Anyone else got any ideas?
Design things in a pedestrian friendly manner and provide public bathrooms as part of the park system.
Participate in city planning stuff and try to encourage the development of smaller houses that are more affordable. Do not use the phrase "affordable housing." It sounds like you are asking for charity for poor people. Come up with some other angle to sell the idea. Demographics have changed since the post WW2 housing boom. Argue it from the angle of demographics. I.e. "We need more housing for single people and childless couples. We have an excess of family housing and not enough housing for single people and childless couples."
I left San Diego County last May. I am currently someplace where housing prices are generally more affordable. Based on stats I read in some article, I have done some calculations and I believe the incidence of homelessness is about half of what it is on downtown San Diego (on a per capita basis). Additionally, most homeless people here do not look nearly as rough as homeless individuals in downtown San Diego. In part because of the excellent park system, I have no problem accessing bathrooms. Although I rarely shower, I have less difficulty here getting cleaned up in bathroom sinks than I did there. Plus, things are generally more affordable, so my money goes farther.
I had a class on homelessness. Most folks on the street have intractable problems for which there are no easy answers, no matter how many resources you throw at it. However, in very expensive places, people get pushed out of housing due to the high cost of housing. If you can improve that situation, retirees and others with a limited income are less at risk of ending up homeless. After you are on the street, there are substantial barriers to getting back off (including prejudice). "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure", unfortunately people are often looking to play hero and that advice isn't as emotionally gratifying as getting someone off the street after things fall apart. So it is hard to get support for such programs.
I do what I can by blogging as a means to put out information. My writing does not get much attention and possibly never will. My point of view is frequently pretty unwelcome, no matter where I share it or how hard I try to say it in some kind of socially acceptable fashion. For example, I am not really for developing more shelters. It is a concentration of poverty and breeds problems. I have never stayed in a shelter. I would much rather see programs to put homelesspeople in hotels during inclement weather.
I have read too many articles about homeless people who have other viable options and simply do not want to take them. I recall one article about a retiree in an RV bitching about not having a place to park it and not wanting to move elsewhere and not able to afford housing at the local high prices. I am not very sympathetic. Either get a job or move someplace cheaper. If you are homeless because you simply do not wish to move and would rather sleep in your car and complain about injustice, there is no system than can fix your problems.
I realize that it genuinely makes problems worse for cities to criminal homeless specific behaviors. I think that fundamentally does not work. But I also understand why you cannot just let homeless people do whatever the fuck they feel like doing. Catering to the lowest common denominator like that does not fix the problem. It just helps entrench it and multiply problems.
I have a long history of hiking out to greenery in the evening and camping in as rural a spot as possible. I carry trash out every morning. You would be unlikely to realize that my campsites are occupied every night if you saw them during the day when we are gone. I have mostly not been hassled by police and I have gotten a lot of sympathetic support. That doesn't mean I never get my life made unnecessarily hard by housed people, but I am finding a path forward for resolving my problems and the more my personal problems get resolved, the more I am able to fit into "normal" society, even while still "perma camping" for health reasons. But most people throw their hands up and feel that chronic health problems, mental health problems, etc are simply unresolvable. So no one really wants to hear my take that helping people get their act together is, ultimately, the only real solution. That just sounds like crazy talk to folks. So, I mostly spend my time getting my shit together and not trying too hard to tell people that, because it is usually a waste of my time and energy and not anything constructive in their eyes.
posted by Michele in California at 6:09 PM on January 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
Design things in a pedestrian friendly manner and provide public bathrooms as part of the park system.
Participate in city planning stuff and try to encourage the development of smaller houses that are more affordable. Do not use the phrase "affordable housing." It sounds like you are asking for charity for poor people. Come up with some other angle to sell the idea. Demographics have changed since the post WW2 housing boom. Argue it from the angle of demographics. I.e. "We need more housing for single people and childless couples. We have an excess of family housing and not enough housing for single people and childless couples."
I left San Diego County last May. I am currently someplace where housing prices are generally more affordable. Based on stats I read in some article, I have done some calculations and I believe the incidence of homelessness is about half of what it is on downtown San Diego (on a per capita basis). Additionally, most homeless people here do not look nearly as rough as homeless individuals in downtown San Diego. In part because of the excellent park system, I have no problem accessing bathrooms. Although I rarely shower, I have less difficulty here getting cleaned up in bathroom sinks than I did there. Plus, things are generally more affordable, so my money goes farther.
I had a class on homelessness. Most folks on the street have intractable problems for which there are no easy answers, no matter how many resources you throw at it. However, in very expensive places, people get pushed out of housing due to the high cost of housing. If you can improve that situation, retirees and others with a limited income are less at risk of ending up homeless. After you are on the street, there are substantial barriers to getting back off (including prejudice). "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure", unfortunately people are often looking to play hero and that advice isn't as emotionally gratifying as getting someone off the street after things fall apart. So it is hard to get support for such programs.
I do what I can by blogging as a means to put out information. My writing does not get much attention and possibly never will. My point of view is frequently pretty unwelcome, no matter where I share it or how hard I try to say it in some kind of socially acceptable fashion. For example, I am not really for developing more shelters. It is a concentration of poverty and breeds problems. I have never stayed in a shelter. I would much rather see programs to put homelesspeople in hotels during inclement weather.
I have read too many articles about homeless people who have other viable options and simply do not want to take them. I recall one article about a retiree in an RV bitching about not having a place to park it and not wanting to move elsewhere and not able to afford housing at the local high prices. I am not very sympathetic. Either get a job or move someplace cheaper. If you are homeless because you simply do not wish to move and would rather sleep in your car and complain about injustice, there is no system than can fix your problems.
I realize that it genuinely makes problems worse for cities to criminal homeless specific behaviors. I think that fundamentally does not work. But I also understand why you cannot just let homeless people do whatever the fuck they feel like doing. Catering to the lowest common denominator like that does not fix the problem. It just helps entrench it and multiply problems.
I have a long history of hiking out to greenery in the evening and camping in as rural a spot as possible. I carry trash out every morning. You would be unlikely to realize that my campsites are occupied every night if you saw them during the day when we are gone. I have mostly not been hassled by police and I have gotten a lot of sympathetic support. That doesn't mean I never get my life made unnecessarily hard by housed people, but I am finding a path forward for resolving my problems and the more my personal problems get resolved, the more I am able to fit into "normal" society, even while still "perma camping" for health reasons. But most people throw their hands up and feel that chronic health problems, mental health problems, etc are simply unresolvable. So no one really wants to hear my take that helping people get their act together is, ultimately, the only real solution. That just sounds like crazy talk to folks. So, I mostly spend my time getting my shit together and not trying too hard to tell people that, because it is usually a waste of my time and energy and not anything constructive in their eyes.
posted by Michele in California at 6:09 PM on January 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
organized public shit-ins in the middle of prominent intersections. take the street, then shit in the street, as a mass, in the most highly visible way possible. Denial of places to shit is an act of violence committed against the homeless. Organized shit-ins are an act of self determination and self defense
that makes that violence impossible to ignore.
or something. basically I just got to thinking about Alinsky's use of a shit-in against O'Hare in order to extract concessions from Daley — Daley was dragging his feet on some damn thing, and Alinsky hurried him up by making a plausible threat to have protestors stationed in every bathroom stall in the airport and in front of every urinal, occupying the bathrooms and refusing to leave until Daley agreed to concessions. Apparently the mere threat of a shit-in was enough to get Daley to give in.
Since denial of a place to shit and pee is such an effective means of humiliating people, it may become necessary in cities that systematically deny their unhoused citizens and residents for those citizens and residents, assisted by housed allies, to themselves claim public space for pissing and shitting.
Should Murray fail to come through on the provision of facilities, may I suggest the intersection of Ballard and Market as Seattle's first People's Public Toilet? Market and 15th might also work, in order to mess up traffic coming off the bridge.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:29 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
that makes that violence impossible to ignore.
or something. basically I just got to thinking about Alinsky's use of a shit-in against O'Hare in order to extract concessions from Daley — Daley was dragging his feet on some damn thing, and Alinsky hurried him up by making a plausible threat to have protestors stationed in every bathroom stall in the airport and in front of every urinal, occupying the bathrooms and refusing to leave until Daley agreed to concessions. Apparently the mere threat of a shit-in was enough to get Daley to give in.
Since denial of a place to shit and pee is such an effective means of humiliating people, it may become necessary in cities that systematically deny their unhoused citizens and residents for those citizens and residents, assisted by housed allies, to themselves claim public space for pissing and shitting.
Should Murray fail to come through on the provision of facilities, may I suggest the intersection of Ballard and Market as Seattle's first People's Public Toilet? Market and 15th might also work, in order to mess up traffic coming off the bridge.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:29 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Downtown shit-ins should, of course, be held on the street directly in front of city hall. once that People's Public Toilet has been established we could branch out and hold satellite shit-ins on the onramps and offramps for I-5.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:34 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:34 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
On dogs and other pets:
One of the things that made me want to start donating to San Francisco's Larkin Street Youth Services was learning that they have some accommodation for pets. It can be done. It is being done.
posted by kristi at 6:53 PM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
One of the things that made me want to start donating to San Francisco's Larkin Street Youth Services was learning that they have some accommodation for pets. It can be done. It is being done.
posted by kristi at 6:53 PM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
PSA: The annual homeless count is starting, if you want to volunteer some time to a homeless census. This is the site for L.A. but search for the homeless count in your city. Smaller cities only take a few hours, some take all weekend.
posted by Room 641-A at 7:21 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Room 641-A at 7:21 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
You Can't Tip A Buick - bad plan. Remember a few years ago when some people from an anarchist squat were rolled up, and piss bottles became "biological terrorism"?
posted by corb at 7:26 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by corb at 7:26 PM on January 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
San Francisco's BART system took advantage of post-9/11 terrorism security theater to close most of the public bathrooms in BART stations in neighborhoods with a homeless population in the early 2000's. The result is an insane level of permanent piss stench in every vaguely unattended corner of some stations, many of the elevators, etc (not to mention inconvenience to everyone, not just the homeless- commuters, shoppers, people with a bladder).
There is nothing, absolutely nothing that junkies, mentally ill people, or other undesirables might occasionally do in a public bathroom that could possibly be worse than the cost to society of closing bathrooms to "them" (and to "everyone else" for that matter). Of course BART bathrooms are open in suburban stations where one presumes the 'security threats' would also be an issue, but...
We also have a couple of tiny programs like the Pit Stop (http://sfdpw.org/pit-stop) and the showers program in the Tenderloin (run by a nonprofit, I think)- toilet stalls on a trailer with an attendant and showers on a bus which are designed to provide services to a small population of homeless people outside of certain stations or congregation points- but they currently have super limited hours.
The Pit Stop trailer toilets stop running at 8 or 9 PM, right before the serious street drinking action heats up in some neighborhoods, and BART's convenient elevators/dark corners/corridors are open til midnight, with predictable results by the time people (homeless and otherwise) are inebriated at night. It would be interesting to see what the argument for these limited hours was when they implemented this program.
Argh, this society.
posted by girl Mark at 7:56 PM on January 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
There is nothing, absolutely nothing that junkies, mentally ill people, or other undesirables might occasionally do in a public bathroom that could possibly be worse than the cost to society of closing bathrooms to "them" (and to "everyone else" for that matter). Of course BART bathrooms are open in suburban stations where one presumes the 'security threats' would also be an issue, but...
We also have a couple of tiny programs like the Pit Stop (http://sfdpw.org/pit-stop) and the showers program in the Tenderloin (run by a nonprofit, I think)- toilet stalls on a trailer with an attendant and showers on a bus which are designed to provide services to a small population of homeless people outside of certain stations or congregation points- but they currently have super limited hours.
The Pit Stop trailer toilets stop running at 8 or 9 PM, right before the serious street drinking action heats up in some neighborhoods, and BART's convenient elevators/dark corners/corridors are open til midnight, with predictable results by the time people (homeless and otherwise) are inebriated at night. It would be interesting to see what the argument for these limited hours was when they implemented this program.
Argh, this society.
posted by girl Mark at 7:56 PM on January 26, 2016 [7 favorites]
When I visited NZ 16 years ago I used an aitomated public toilet in a park which had buttons to open, close and lock.It was late in the afternoon, so I was checking a guidebook to pick a place for dinner. The door opened and I shut it. Then I noticed the sign which told me that an alarm would sound if I was there too long. I did not stay for the grand finale.
10 years ago metro Dublin put blue lights in their public toilets to discourage addicts who injected drugs.
posted by brujita at 8:11 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
10 years ago metro Dublin put blue lights in their public toilets to discourage addicts who injected drugs.
posted by brujita at 8:11 PM on January 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Several people have pointed out that America has this mean streak about blaming the unfortunate for their own misfortune.
It's called our Calvinist heritage. Lots of academics have written about this when it comes to attitudes about healthcare, and it's also true of our attitudes about poverty in general.
That story about someone cutting off the buttons off of expensive jackets at a donation center is horrifying. I'm sure the excuse was probably something more like 'somebody will take it and resell it' or something, but still... horrifying.
posted by girl Mark at 8:13 PM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
It's called our Calvinist heritage. Lots of academics have written about this when it comes to attitudes about healthcare, and it's also true of our attitudes about poverty in general.
That story about someone cutting off the buttons off of expensive jackets at a donation center is horrifying. I'm sure the excuse was probably something more like 'somebody will take it and resell it' or something, but still... horrifying.
posted by girl Mark at 8:13 PM on January 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
Downtown shit-ins should, of course, be held on the street directly in front of city hall. once that People's Public Toilet has been established we could branch out and hold satellite shit-ins on the onramps and offramps for I-5.
As much as i like this idea conceptually, you should have seen the public backlash when someone from the occupy camp shit on the sidewalk for similar reasons.(and then several someones relatively near the same time, but that's another story).
The aforementioned got-mine-fuck-yours no handouts educated tech worker crowd could possibly be brought in to the "tentatively for" camp with Logic and good marketing. But the cries of Fuck These People would be loud, and the spin/framing awful if people started shitting in intersections.
I'm not vehemently against it, but i see more ways it could go wrong than right. And it's entirely in optics. It would do way more damage in the form of making the average everyday person go "fuck those people" than it would do in forcing the cities hand to end it.
San Francisco's BART system took advantage of post-9/11 terrorism security theater to close most of the public bathrooms in BART stations in neighborhoods with a homeless population in the early 2000's. The result is an insane level of permanent piss stench in every vaguely unattended corner of some stations, many of the elevators, etc (not to mention inconvenience to everyone, not just the homeless- commuters, shoppers, people with a bladder).
The exact same thing happened in seattle. All the transit stations used to have bathrooms, then they ~mysteriously~ closed due to "safety" or "issues".
It was right around that time too. The last one probably closed around... 05? 06? maybe even earlier. Some of them had feeble bullshit signs about "plumbing issues"*, the rest just closed.
As it is, the only capitol-p Public toilets i can think of are in libraries, which close relatively early, and public parks... which lock the bathrooms relatively early. Everything else that was just a public toilet is gone.
And there's a lot of whiny assholes in seattle who haven't forgotten this bullshit boondoggle and would loudly throw a tantrum up to the level of whiny news stories or newspaper editorials. Busting through that is going to be... annoying.
*I know this is the highest grade of bovine manure, from the kings own cows, because the ones that saw that right on the door are still regularly used by bus drivers and metro employees who have keys.
posted by emptythought at 10:54 PM on January 26, 2016
As much as i like this idea conceptually, you should have seen the public backlash when someone from the occupy camp shit on the sidewalk for similar reasons.(and then several someones relatively near the same time, but that's another story).
The aforementioned got-mine-fuck-yours no handouts educated tech worker crowd could possibly be brought in to the "tentatively for" camp with Logic and good marketing. But the cries of Fuck These People would be loud, and the spin/framing awful if people started shitting in intersections.
I'm not vehemently against it, but i see more ways it could go wrong than right. And it's entirely in optics. It would do way more damage in the form of making the average everyday person go "fuck those people" than it would do in forcing the cities hand to end it.
San Francisco's BART system took advantage of post-9/11 terrorism security theater to close most of the public bathrooms in BART stations in neighborhoods with a homeless population in the early 2000's. The result is an insane level of permanent piss stench in every vaguely unattended corner of some stations, many of the elevators, etc (not to mention inconvenience to everyone, not just the homeless- commuters, shoppers, people with a bladder).
The exact same thing happened in seattle. All the transit stations used to have bathrooms, then they ~mysteriously~ closed due to "safety" or "issues".
It was right around that time too. The last one probably closed around... 05? 06? maybe even earlier. Some of them had feeble bullshit signs about "plumbing issues"*, the rest just closed.
As it is, the only capitol-p Public toilets i can think of are in libraries, which close relatively early, and public parks... which lock the bathrooms relatively early. Everything else that was just a public toilet is gone.
And there's a lot of whiny assholes in seattle who haven't forgotten this bullshit boondoggle and would loudly throw a tantrum up to the level of whiny news stories or newspaper editorials. Busting through that is going to be... annoying.
*I know this is the highest grade of bovine manure, from the kings own cows, because the ones that saw that right on the door are still regularly used by bus drivers and metro employees who have keys.
posted by emptythought at 10:54 PM on January 26, 2016
Neighborhood NIMBY groups do put up a lot of roadblocks to public facilities that are used by the homeless, but the single biggest obstacle to getting more & better public facilities (toilets, showers, urban rest stops) is always, always, always the city's chamber of commerce or business association. Downtown Seattle's business association spent years fighting the Urban Rest Stop's every permit renewal and request for city funds.
posted by duffell at 6:38 AM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by duffell at 6:38 AM on January 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
I get annoyed as a non homeless because I've spent a good portion of money buying a soda or French fries to use a toliet.
posted by AlexiaSky at 6:40 AM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by AlexiaSky at 6:40 AM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
Overnight, it occurred to me that we already have a couple of standard terms for demographic based housing that is affordable: student housing and senior housing.
Everyone understands that to mean that it needs to not be crazy expensive as these people have budgetary constraints, but it is viewed completely differently from anything that sounds remotely like "poverty relief." There may be other phrases, but those two came to mind. I know for a fact some homeless people are seniors and have some kind of retirement check, it just does not go far enough. Housing for seniors can help keep people off the street and it is generally handled better and viewed completely differently from programs to help the homeless or programs to house the homeless.
posted by Michele in California at 11:28 AM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
Everyone understands that to mean that it needs to not be crazy expensive as these people have budgetary constraints, but it is viewed completely differently from anything that sounds remotely like "poverty relief." There may be other phrases, but those two came to mind. I know for a fact some homeless people are seniors and have some kind of retirement check, it just does not go far enough. Housing for seniors can help keep people off the street and it is generally handled better and viewed completely differently from programs to help the homeless or programs to house the homeless.
posted by Michele in California at 11:28 AM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
I will note that this works best if the framing is "we need more housing that works for seniors and students" without it being "you actually have to be in school" or "you need to be x age". Just use that framing to argue for development of housing that would appeal to these demographics.
Every single constraint you put on it makes it less inclusive, cuts someone out, adds friction to the process. I am thinking more like "This city really needs an apartment complex that would appeal to seniors and students" which has additional implications beyond "affordable", including: near the college, in walking distance to shopping, easy access to public transit, etc.
All of these things enhance the lives of poor people, but are frequently not part of the thought process when we design poverty housing. "The Projects" tend to have pretty bad reputations, and with good reason: they tend to be sucky quality, create a concentration of poverty and help keep people trapped in poverty. Seniors and students are not trapped in poverty. They have full lives, they just have full lives on a budget.
posted by Michele in California at 12:36 PM on January 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
Every single constraint you put on it makes it less inclusive, cuts someone out, adds friction to the process. I am thinking more like "This city really needs an apartment complex that would appeal to seniors and students" which has additional implications beyond "affordable", including: near the college, in walking distance to shopping, easy access to public transit, etc.
All of these things enhance the lives of poor people, but are frequently not part of the thought process when we design poverty housing. "The Projects" tend to have pretty bad reputations, and with good reason: they tend to be sucky quality, create a concentration of poverty and help keep people trapped in poverty. Seniors and students are not trapped in poverty. They have full lives, they just have full lives on a budget.
posted by Michele in California at 12:36 PM on January 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
How hard is it to just build a big building with three wings; male, female, and families and just give everyone who wants it a hot shower and a warm place to sleep?
This is pretty much what existing emergency shelters are, and while there are lots of barriers that might prevent any individual from accessing shelter, in a numerical sense most regions in the US are not lacking in sheer shelter bed capacity. However, shelters are rarely pleasant or comfortable, and often unsafe.
posted by threeants at 5:56 PM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
This is pretty much what existing emergency shelters are, and while there are lots of barriers that might prevent any individual from accessing shelter, in a numerical sense most regions in the US are not lacking in sheer shelter bed capacity. However, shelters are rarely pleasant or comfortable, and often unsafe.
posted by threeants at 5:56 PM on January 27, 2016 [2 favorites]
re: demographic based housing, maybe combine elderly care with child care services?* i also think it's a good idea to pay people to go to school and fund them -- the teachers to do so -- more, along with student housing; that is, with students going to school longer and more people going back to school for retraining to stay in the labor force, opening up campuses and academic institutions to a broader demographic, rather than just catering to a narrow 18-22 year old age group.
also btw...
-A Long Game
-Where Sprawl Makes It Tougher to Rise Up the Social Ranks
---
*like i was reading about the french crèche movement (pdf), search 'firmin marbeau', who had the great idea of asking women what they did with their kids when they went to work and wondered what he could do to help:village gov't to collectively subsidize what we'd want more of and to tax what we'd want less of... that can be agreed on :P
posted by kliuless at 11:56 AM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
also btw...
-A Long Game
-Where Sprawl Makes It Tougher to Rise Up the Social Ranks
---
*like i was reading about the french crèche movement (pdf), search 'firmin marbeau', who had the great idea of asking women what they did with their kids when they went to work and wondered what he could do to help:
Marbeau discovered that when Madame Gérard went off to wash laundry, she left her children with a babysitter. This cost her seventy centimes a day, about a third of her daily wages. And the babysitter was an equally poor woman who, when Marbeau visited, was “at her post, watching over three young children on the floor in a shabby room.”now consider a modern incarnation of this appeal from the 'pay people' link above: A smarter way of subsidizing parenthood
That wasn’t bad child care by the day’s standards for the poor. Some mothers locked kids alone in apartments or tied them to bedposts for the day. Slightly older kids were often left to watch their siblings while their mothers worked. Many very young babies still lived at the homes of wet nurses, where conditions could be life-threatening.
Marbeau was seized with an idea: the crèche! (The name was meant to invoke the cozy manger in the Christmas story.) It would be all-day care for poor children from birth to age two. Funding would come from donations by wealthy patrons, some of whom would also help oversee crèches. Marbeau envisioned a spartan but spotless building, where women called nurses looked after babies and counseled mothers on hygiene and morals. Mothers would pay just fifty cents a day. Those with unweaned infants would return twice a day to breast-feed.
Marbeau’s idea struck a chord. There was soon a crèche commission to study the matter, and he set off to woo potential donors. Like any good fund-raiser, he appealed to both their sense of charity and to their economic self-interest.
“These children are your fellow citizens, your brothers. They are poor, unhappy and weak: you should rescue them,” he wrote in a crèche manual published in 1845. Then he added, “If you can save the lives of 10,000 children, make haste: 20,000 extra arms a year are not to be disdained. Arms are work and work creates wealth.” The crèche was also supposed to give a mother peace of mind, so she could “devote herself to her work with an easy conscience.”
A country can only thrive if it has the human capital to do so, and it’s one of the most important roles of any government to maximize the value of its country’s aggregate human capital. One way it does that is by encouraging population growth; but the main way it does that is by providing universal education. After all, as technology advances, the skills that a country’s workers boast are ever more important than the simple number of warm bodies in the labor force. If your country falls far behind on education (think Portugal, or even Puerto Rico), then it will surely fall behind economically as well...so as with subsidized housing (red vienna?) and education, the same with childcare, elderly care, disability care, health care, transportation/communication systems, financial systems, national parks, &c. which are all public goods -- exhibiting positive externalities -- that benefit everyone beyond anyone's narrow self interest or direct advantage, but it takes a
Right now, most education funding happens locally... On top of that, the student-loan crisis is essentially an artifact of the way in which US society forces individuals to pay for their own education, even though that education will ultimately benefit society as a whole.
The result is a country where the childless are prone to consider themselves to be subsidizing other people’s children: we (the childless) are paying taxes so your kids can get a good education. This is narrowly true, but it misses the bigger picture — that we (the childless) should want kids, in general, to be well educated, for any number of reasons, most of which boil down to the fact that it makes us better off in both the short term and, especially, the long term.
posted by kliuless at 11:56 AM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
more re: framing beyond 'affordable' and 'poverty relief'
Are Programs for the Poor Actually Poor Programs?
Are Programs for the Poor Actually Poor Programs?
Drum's second point is that universal programs in the US are only well-liked because they are old-age programs and are perceived as benefits that retired people have paid for during their working lives. To the extent that we haven't tried many other universal programs, this point is hard to prove one way or another. My intuition is the opposite of Drum's however. It's hard for me to see how universal paid leave would be anything but adored once it was put in place. The same goes for child care and the other programs the US currently lacks.posted by kliuless at 12:21 PM on January 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
We do actually have a big universal welfare program that doesn't involve elderly people: public K-12 education. While some people complain about education particulars, one of the most striking things about educational debates is that basically no one wants to simply get rid of it. Even voucher people still endorse the basic idea that the government should massively redistribute income to pay for the universal education of children.
Finally, Drum seems to miss one of the main parts of the "poor programs" point. It's not just that programs for poor people are vulnerable (which I think AFDC/TANF shows they are). It's also that they are often immiserating in other ways.
States try to drug test SNAP recipients and limit their food options. States try to limit TANF withdrawals to $25 per day. Asset tests on means-tested programs require people spend themselves down into complete asset destitution, which paradoxically makes it even harder for them to get reattached to the labor force. Although Medicaid has grown (both through unit costs and more recently through expansions in participants), 19 states still refuse to implement the Obamacare expansion. Something tells me this would not have happened if Medicaid was the name of our new universal health insurance system, and not simply a program for the poor.
« Older Dekoven Presents: Super OTW! | Earned Media Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:44 AM on January 26, 2016 [20 favorites]