Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Or..."hurting people's feelings". Could just mean holding recipients and leaders responsible for living within the constraints of rules, such as contribution of labor, finances, cleanliness, community service... Or living within the social constraints of treating others with respect and safety.
Having lived and worked in countries with Housing First.... There are expected minimum requirements of behavior and contributions (financial and service). And quite serious repercussions of not complying. Which would be deemed abusive in the eyes of USA coddled / spoiled / entitled behaviors.
Beyond hurt feelings, there can be physical punishment. That's not gonna fly in Oregon.
I would hope not. What good would such cruelty do?
Being homeless sucks pretty bad. From my limited experience of volunteering for some homeless resource centers, my sense was that it only takes about 3-4 months on the street before your mental hold on normality slips away. And that's for the ones were the most lucid, did not have prior addictions or mental health issues, and can still be rehabbed. From what they told me, things like no one willing to look them in the eye is mentally, very difficult to endure.
After years on the street, based on my experience, it's difficult to bring these people back. There is a very vulnerable period in the first 6 months of homelessness where I think they can be brought back. But beyond that? The street breaks them. It would break me... if I were to become homeless I'm quite sure I would die quickly.
Then there are the ones who don't want to come back. A non-negligible number. Just straight-up irascible people who cannot and will not conform to society.
In between, the plurality or majority of them are some kind of sick, addicted, or both. My sense is that for most of them, around 70%, they could not hold a job if you gave them one. For most of us, a roof over our heads is not THAT hard to maintain. You can work at McDonalds and share a bedroom. When I worked fast food, there were guys I worked with that would have rented out their couch to me for $150 a month and sharing the groceries, which I easily made from that job. But we take for granted that even that requires some level of mental acuity and toughness. Having dealt with depression myself, I can imagine a scenario where, if I were to lose all support, the depression might overwhelm me and I'd become so self-destructive as to lose everything and just waste away. More accurately - throw away everything. We take for granted how important mental health is.
So I find it highly unethical to suggest that we should sanction incarceration or harm against people who are already the most crapped on people in the world. That's just cruelty for the sake of... what exactly? What would we gain by engaging in such activity?
Last edited by redguard57; 03-22-2021 at 01:03 AM..
A lot of this thread is discussing what to do with "down-on-your-luck" homeless and homeless families. Those people likely want to get off the streets and become more successful. Even the majority of the influx of new immigrants will likely look for work and take jobs many American's don't do anymore (dairy, ranch ranch and other ag work, for example). Having government housing, and job training programs, may work for this group of homeless people. Drug addict and other mentally challenged individuals probably won't successfully work through programs like that.
So, for the homeless in Portland, what is the mix of down-on-their-luck, new immigrants, and drug/mental homeless people? I don't think a one-size fits all approach will work to fix the problem. There need to be several approaches from government paid for apartments (as discussed SLC is doing), jobs training, setting up an area for tent cities, incarceration, etc. Some social/government/NPO would need to screen people, and move them to the most likely solution... which may "hurt peoples' feelings." Throwing temporary money at ever shifting programs likely will just let the problem continue to simmer/boil over and grow. Until it is in everyone's backyard the "homeless" problem likely won't get fixed... just shifted around.
Well Finland is not getting that and they have a housing-first policy.
I doubt very much that whatever the results are from a homogeneous country of 5 million souls would be repeated in a diverse, large country with almost 350 million people.
For some reason, folks like to trot out small Scandinavian countries as examples of "goodness" that are easily repeatable in other places.
I traveled to China A LOT (before COVID). In all my travels, I did not see many homeless people there either. Maybe we can follow their lead?
I doubt very much that whatever the results are from a homogeneous country of 5 million souls would be repeated in a diverse, large country with almost 350 million people.
For some reason, folks like to trot out small Scandinavian countries as examples of "goodness" that are easily repeatable in other places.
I traveled to China A LOT (before COVID). In all my travels, I did not see many homeless people there either. Maybe we can follow their lead?
The size of country should not matter re: whether a policy works or not. You just scale the policy up or down. I find that to be a weak excuse, and makes the U.S. look even more pathetic.
Finland was an agricultural province of the Swedish Empire and then Tsarist Russia until the 20th century, enduring numerous devastating wars on its territory. In 1917 it had a civil war that was part of the Russian Revolution. Then during WWII Finland was invaded by Russia, then Germany, and after WWII was quite destitute, with a significant portion of its population uneducated.
80 years ago Finland was 2/3rds uneducated agricultural peasants and a pawn of Russia and/or Nazi Germany. Yet somehow in 75 years they are now a 1st-world country with one of the best growth rates and per-capita income in the OECD? Perhaps they have done something right and the U.S. something wrong.
The U.S. did not have those disadvantages, and is MUCH MUCH RICHER than Finland has ever DREAMED of being. So how can it not solve a little problem like 600k homeless? If a pissant nothing country like Finland can figure it out, you'd think the mighty United States, richest country in the world, could do it.
Finland is also nearly one homogenous culture, as are most of the Scandinavian countries. Yes, there has been some immigration from Africa and the Middle East, but not on the scale of what has hit the U.S. or southern Europe. Also, the majority of immigrants are not looking to live on the street forever, but are using government programs to better themselves so they can integrate into the local society.
There are more subsets of homeless in Portland, and across the U.S. Those that are "down on their luck" and ended up on the streets do have some incentive to get off the streets and back into society. There are programs for these people.
Many new immigrants are also looking for ways to get work and support family members back home. They often live in multi-family, or multi-adult male homes/apartments so they likely are not on the streets long. Many would also be receptive to government and NGO programs that will help them improve their job skills and opportunities.
Then there are people that don't fit those categories, and are not going to be receptive to government/NGO programs, and so are chronically living on the streets due to circumstances they no longer can control. What does society do with these people? Does society force them to live in a segregated area of cities? Do they force them to move from city to city, or neighborhood to neighborhood? Do we ignore them and let them squat where they want and the rest of us ignore and move around them? The federal government needs to lead the way with policies to address these chronically homeless people, otherwise we will be stuck with shuffling their camps from place to place and most people will ignore them.
I assume Finland's government came up with a nation-wide policy, unlike the U.S. Then again, if there are only 5.5 Million people in Finland (2020), using RedGuard57's numbers, that means there were only 5.5Mx0.2%=11,000 homeless to take care of.
So, if homelessness is a priority problem for Portlanders (and the whole U.S.) to fix, what have we done about it? Likely continue to vote for the political incumbents that have done nothing for years.
Finland is also nearly one homogenous culture, as are most of the Scandinavian countries. Yes, there has been some immigration from Africa and the Middle East, but not on the scale of what has hit the U.S. or southern Europe. Also, the majority of immigrants are not looking to live on the street forever, but are using government programs to better themselves so they can integrate into the local society.
There are more subsets of homeless in Portland, and across the U.S. Those that are "down on their luck" and ended up on the streets do have some incentive to get off the streets and back into society. There are programs for these people.
Many new immigrants are also looking for ways to get work and support family members back home. They often live in multi-family, or multi-adult male homes/apartments so they likely are not on the streets long. Many would also be receptive to government and NGO programs that will help them improve their job skills and opportunities.
Then there are people that don't fit those categories, and are not going to be receptive to government/NGO programs, and so are chronically living on the streets due to circumstances they no longer can control. What does society do with these people? Does society force them to live in a segregated area of cities? Do they force them to move from city to city, or neighborhood to neighborhood? Do we ignore them and let them squat where they want and the rest of us ignore and move around them? The federal government needs to lead the way with policies to address these chronically homeless people, otherwise we will be stuck with shuffling their camps from place to place and most people will ignore them.
I assume Finland's government came up with a nation-wide policy, unlike the U.S. Then again, if there are only 5.5 Million people in Finland (2020), using RedGuard57's numbers, that means there were only 5.5Mx0.2%=11,000 homeless to take care of.
So, if homelessness is a priority problem for Portlanders (and the whole U.S.) to fix, what have we done about it? Likely continue to vote for the political incumbents that have done nothing for years.
Our homeless are largely not foriegn born refugees. The homogenous culture should not be relevant. Our homeless tend to be white and black, not that culturally different than the rest of us and people that have been in this country as long as anybody.
Although Blacks and Native Americans have more likelihood of being homeless, which indicates the problem is inequality and lack of services, not cultural friction
It takes government involvement to foster a long-term solution. Our current governmental representatives, leaders and agency employees apparently don't have the political reason, so political desire, to make fixing the homeless problem in Portland/Oregon/USA a priority. If fixing the homeless problem in Portland and Oregon is a priority to you (general you), then support political candidates that state they will make solving the homeless problem a priority and state they have a plan. If enough of these new city/state/national leaders make it into office then we might see some lasting action. It may not be the action everyone likes, but if it solves the problem, so be it. Nothing much will change, unless we change the political leadership via the ballot box. Voting for the same incumbents that show no desire to tackle the problem isn't likely to lead to a good solution.
The size of country should not matter re: whether a policy works or not. You just scale the policy up or down. I find that to be a weak excuse, and makes the U.S. look even more pathetic.
Finland was an agricultural province of the Swedish Empire and then Tsarist Russia until the 20th century, enduring numerous devastating wars on its territory. In 1917 it had a civil war that was part of the Russian Revolution. Then during WWII Finland was invaded by Russia, then Germany, and after WWII was quite destitute, with a significant portion of its population uneducated.
80 years ago Finland was 2/3rds uneducated agricultural peasants and a pawn of Russia and/or Nazi Germany. Yet somehow in 75 years they are now a 1st-world country with one of the best growth rates and per-capita income in the OECD? Perhaps they have done something right and the U.S. something wrong.
The U.S. did not have those disadvantages, and is MUCH MUCH RICHER than Finland has ever DREAMED of being. So how can it not solve a little problem like 600k homeless? If a pissant nothing country like Finland can figure it out, you'd think the mighty United States, richest country in the world, could do it.
In both cases they started from a similar base - between about 0.1 and 0.2% of the population homeless as of the early 1990s.
Now Finland's rate is much lower, while the U.S. is getting worse and more visible. All the comparison does is make the U.S. look incompetent.
A naïve, populist reply remote of any logic. Finland's 4000 homeless can be handled via a multi-year hotel voucher. Apples/oranges comparison. You claim homogeneous culture is not a reason for success in this endeavor. To that I say poppycock. Similar values and thought process make alignment of goals easier especially with complex topics.
Same analogy works in the business climate. A viable solution that may work in a 30 person family owned company; may not work in a GE, Microsoft or Volkswagen.
A naïve, populist reply remote of any logic. Finland's 4000 homeless can be handled via a multi-year hotel voucher. Apples/oranges comparison. You claim homogeneous culture is not a reason for success in this endeavor. To that I say poppycock. Similar values and thought process make alignment of goals easier especially with complex topics.
Same analogy works in the business climate. A viable solution that may work in a 30 person family owned company; may not work in a GE, Microsoft or Volkswagen.
It's because of America's diversity, eh? We can't fix homelessness because unlike Finland we are not 95%+ caucasian like they are?
So you admit that there are systemic inequalities in the U.S. and they are based on race and ethnicity. Thanks for proving liberal critiques of the U.S. valid.
We'll just ignore that 55-60% of the homeless are white Christian, and speak English. Most of the rest are black, Christian and speak English. In Europe their homeless migrants are refugees. They are not only from different ethnicities, they hace different religions and speak different languages. That is not our problem: the homeless are neither foreign-born migrants nor refugees. They are American born, became homeless as adults not born into it, and from our dominant culture.
[If anything our undocumented migrants seem to find places to live somehow. Recent migrants are very few of the homeless population]
So what precisely ARE the cultural problems you refer to, that prevent the U.S. from implementing homeless solutions?
You certainly have a lot of excuses for why the U.S can't fix this, but few ideas for solutions. What other countries have done seems impossible to you and beyond the U.S.'s capabilities, so what would you do?
Last edited by redguard57; 03-25-2021 at 02:46 PM..
We moved to Hillsboro last year, but starting coming to Portland 5 years ago when our son moved here. We would see a few homeless camps along side the freeway back then. But now, it’s horrible and no businesses are going to want to come here. A friend visited recently for the first time. I kept bragging about how beautiful Portland was and it was an embarrassment. Abandoned homeless camps, couches, overturned cars. I’m baffled.....what do the mayor and city officials have planned? They have to live among all this too. I always thought Portland was known to be such a beautiful city......SIGH I don’t expect perfection or homeless to leave, but this has gone way beyond that. Anyone know if the city has plans for a major clean up? I’d be the first to volunteer!!!
Hopefully one day this problem will be reckoned with.
Compassion is the key.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
