
Tent Cities Sprouting in Sacramento and Seattle - rms
http://www.fundmymutualfund.com/2009/03/tent-cities-sprouting-in-sacramento-and.html
======
Brushfire
I'm struck by two things while watching this video:

1 - Those tents seem pretty nice.

2 - This is pretty shameful for a society that is right now bailing out
executives.

I'm generally very libertarian in my beliefs, but tent cities are where I draw
the line and agree with social assistance / intervention. They seem to be
relatively small right now, but if they grow to large hundreds, or thousands
of people, this will become a critical issue.

~~~
patio11
The lack of a roof over your head isn't the cause of homelessness, it is the
symptom. Addressing it in a more permanent manner would probably require you
to compromise on a lot more of your libertarianism than just offering more
social assistance.

For example, a huge percentage of the homeless are mentally ill. If we
institutionalized them, which is a nice euphemism for "confined them against
their will", they would no longer be homeless. Are you willing to do that?

Another major portion prefer camps to shelters or traditional housing
arrangements because they just fundamentally do not want to accede to societal
norms like "You should work for a living and pay rent", and necessary
prerequisites like "In order to maintain that job, you will probably find it
necessary to come in to work almost every day, and be sober for the duration".

Empirically, a significant portion of the homeless population will trade
comfort for autonomy. Living in a shelter means a loss of autonomy, and some
people prefer a largely-unsupervised tent or, in a pinch, the streets. NYC
used to have significant excess shelter space and tried to force it on a
homeless encampment by Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church. The church and
homeless advocates sued to protect the homeless' right to live outside of
shelters.

So, again -- are you OK with agents of the state having to physically restrain
people to get them into shelters? Because that is what will be required to
alleviate this symptom.

~~~
davo11
Some homeless people are mentally ill but this isn't a reason to not have a
social safety net. There used to be a term 'noblesse oblige' where the more
fortunate are duty bound to look after those less fortunate, to my mind this
is where a social security net is required.

Some people will for one reason or another, whether by bad luck or plain old
stupidity will end up at some point in there life out on the streets. If these
people have kids then the kids end up on the streets and no longer receive an
education, so they'll end up as criminals or on drugs or something like that.
If this cycle is allowed to continue you end up with large areas of slums in
cities. If instead when bad things happen there is a security net that allows
you to wipe yourself down, get up and move on then the cycle is avoided, or at
least it's depth is less. It can become a social welfare problem, but at least
you don't have children dying in tents from exposure, and there's always the
chance that when things pick up, they'll be able to get a job or at least the
children do.

~~~
patio11
_Some homeless people are mentally ill but this isn't a reason to not have a
social safety net._

To be effective, it would have to be a social safety cage. Reasonable people
can differ on whether that is a good idea.

~~~
davo11
Why would it be a cage? Isn't the idea of a free society is that it is a
society? A group of responsible adults could agree that events could occur
which result in people having to live on the streets for no reason of their
own. I agree with some forethought these events could be planned for, but this
is the sense of noblesse oblige. It recognises that not all people in the
community are able to plan with the same level of forethought, and that the
resources they have to work with will forbid this level of planning. And so a
wealthy society can afford to look after all people if they so desire. If they
wish to opt of the safety net then that is fine, I don't see how it's a cage.

~~~
davidw
> I agree with some forethought these events could be planned for

Really? One of the things that Hayek is well known for, the 'socialist
calculation problem', states that too much central control is bad because it's
simply impossible to 'calculate' an economy - it's best left as a dynamic
system with millions of independent actors. However, doesn't that also apply
to individuals? You can do your best to make plans, only to run into things
beyond your knowledge or control.

~~~
davo11
I agree that it's not possible to calculate an economy. I was talking on a
personal level, a rational person in a situation where at any time they may
lose their job and be thrown on the streets will save and put aside enough
money to survive for a reasonable amount of time. However if you're already
living hand to mouth, you lose your job, the bank forecloses on your house and
you're out on the street, well it seems in the US it's tent city here I come.
Many of the people are victims of an economic event out of everyones control.
A social security safety net would prevent tent cities from happening. Which
is the greatest cost to a society - having citizens living in tents without
any sanitation or health care, which will increase crime and health care needs
- or provide all citizens with a safety net of a subsistence wage?

~~~
davidw
I agree - which is my point, that it's more or less correct to point out that
a government, with everything available to it, is unable to 'calculate' an
economy, but by the same token, individuals can try their best and miss the
mark too. There ought to be something there for them to help pull them up and
get them going again.

------
mikeytown2
Currently living in Seattle, and our tent city has been apart of the area for
many years now (nothing new).
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tent_city#Seattle.2C_Washington...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tent_city#Seattle.2C_Washington.2C_USA)

~~~
gregwebs
yeah, I have been biking past the "tent city" of Sacramento for a year now.
This isn't something new, although it may be bigger now.

~~~
softbuilder
I agree and I'll add that Sacramento's homelessness has a seasonal cycle to
it. The homeless population increases every spring as the weather warms.
There's a lot of migration involved with homelessness, apparently. I don't
pretend to know the mechanics of it exactly, but that's what I've seen.

------
davo11
Isn't there any sort of social welfare if you're unemployed in the US? I'm in
Australia, and if you're unemployed here you get an allowance from the
government, it's not much but enough to keep you able to share the rent with a
couple of people and so on, so no one has to live in tents or die from
exposure in the year 2009.

There are a small percentage that abuse the system, but not many and most view
it as an acceptable price to pay for a social security net. To receive it you
have to do so many hours of community service after a number of weeks, which
minimises abuse of the system. But then we also have free medical if you need
it to. If you're really on the skids the government will provide housing even.
I believe this is the same in the UK and some other european countries, the UK
is where we got it from.

The total laissez-faire system has it's up and down sides, which really aren't
necessary in the 21st Century imho.

~~~
rms
Unemployment in the US can be tricky to get. You need to be laid off in the
proper manner and then you can only collect for 9 months on average. It would
definitely be enough that you don't need to live on tents. It's different in
every US state.

Here is one program in social welfare program in PA: a lot of college kids
working 20 hours a week in minimum wage jobs qualify even if they're aware. I
know someone who did it, apparently there are multiple interviews that are
annoying. <http://www.dpw.state.pa.us/ServicesPrograms/FoodStamps/> I can't
find the specific figures right now but regular old welfare is now called
TANF. I remember seeing the numbers paid and they were laughable, not enough
to pay rent.

------
rms
I see this as an unexpected exception to the guidelines.

>If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

This post is aggregated TV news but it interesting because it is new
information precisely because none of us actually watch the TV news.

~~~
Brushfire
Agreed. +1

------
paul7986
This either blown out of proportion by the media or a scary reality!

What has led us to this path, if it is indeed reality?

Over the last few months our govt has taken the stance of spreading the
wealth, but that has not helped Wall St. nor confidence in investors (banks)
to start loaning money and or investing! It's seems like a democratic mindset
against a republican one, with the latter holding onto the money, not helping
the country as a whole.

But, why invest or loan money when you may lose it all, ending up like these
people in these tent cities. Capitalism at its worst!

------
quellhorst
We have hacker houses. Why not hacker tents? Give me power and WIFI and I can
build it :)

~~~
helveticaman
I thought of this as a solution to the interminable curveballs life has been
throwing me of late. Interesting.

~~~
noonespecial
"A van down by the river" sprung to mind. I could have a pretty nice van for
1/4 the rent I'm paying now. A few solar "battery boosters" from the rv place,
an EeePC and a tether-able smartphone and I'm set.

Forget google's "container datacenters", prepare yourself for container
startups. Simply place your container of geeks in the sunlight within range of
a cell tower, insert ramen and Mountain Dew and interesting web apps should
begin to sprout within a week or two. I'm calling it the "Y-Container". :)

~~~
nazgulnarsil
I know this is supposed to be a joke, but I think that in places like china
and india this could be explosive.

you know how there's that company converting shipping containers into living
accommodations? How about ad hoc office space?

go anywhere: drop off an office capable of being wired up and worked out of.

~~~
menloparkbum
It's more likely in places like Africa. China and India are very physically
crowded. I've actually seen a number of shipping container houses in Kenya,
years ago.

Also, being a giant communist country, one thing China does do is provide some
sort of housing for most everyone.

