West Coast baby

  • Pipoca@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s multiple groups of homeless people.

    There’s the long term homeless, who often suffer from issues like mental illness, and short term homeless, who usually don’t.

    High housing prices absolutely causes people to become homeless when they lose their job, become addicted to drugs, etc.

    Being homeless is itself traumatic, and exacerbates most issues homeless people have. Affordable housing and giving homeless people an apartment aren’t a panacea, but it does prevent a ton of issues for newly homeless people.

    • Chr0nos1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know if they’re included in the groups you mentioned, but there is also a vehicle dwelling homeless as well. Last I checked, there are over 3 million Americans living full time in a vehicle, whether it be a car, a bus, a van, an RV, or another type of vehicle. Some of them, it’s by choice, but for some of them, that’s all they can afford because housing prices have skyrocketed in so many places.

      • funkless_eck
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        when you said…

        The only thing I don’t see is how it would fix people being homeless.

        Many homeless are unable to be properly housed because they have mental illnesses, trauma, etc.

        If you put them in an apartment without extensive further help, many will get back on the street and/or destroy the apartment.

        You can’t solve their problems with just providing housing.

        That says to me, four times, that you are against giving people homes. Could you clarify how each of those points is a positive?

        • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Literally none of this says: don’t give people a home. My point is giving them a home is not enough, it won’t solve the problem.

          Is this a weird English language thing? Is this a Lemmy or an internet thing? People seem to deliberately put stuff into posts that aren’t said.

          It’s even in the text you quoted from me that my opinion is just giving them housing won’t solve the problem.

          How the fuck does that say “don’t give them a home”???

          • funkless_eck
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the missing context is that when you write with majority negative phrasing, people assume your argument is against it.

            Consider: “You have to cover apples in sugar and put them in pastry, and then add custard to make me want to consider eating them!”

            This sounds like you hate apples, not that you like apple pie.

            • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I thought the situation was more like: “If you got apples you can make an apple pie”. And I was: “No, just apples make a bad pie, you also need the other ingredients”. And then people wrote: “How dare you hating apple pie!”