

Homeless Lose a Longtime Last Resort: Living in a Car - coltr
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303847804579479930243974564?mg=reno64-wsj

======
malanj
_Officials say these bans aim to prevent nuisances that can be created by
those living in cars, and most are enforced only on a complaint basis._

Nothing scares me more than comments like that from government officials. A
law that is selectively enforced is effectively an invitation for police
harrasment. Either the law makes sense, or it doesn't. If individual civil
servants get to decide when to apply a law, you've got a big problem.

~~~
jdmichal
It's only an invitation for police harassment if you're breaking the law. And
in your version, you would instead have been arrested / fined immediately
regardless of anyone reporting you.

The bottom line for selective enforcement is that the police recognize that
there is a priority structure in laws. They have limited resources and cannot
enforce every law, everywhere, every time. While I would rather see this law
unmade, the second best thing that can happen is exactly what is, which is the
police only getting involved if an actual legitimate issue is raised.

EDIT: A second pertinent example is noise ordinance, which this is similar to
as a "public nuisance" law. The law is not worded that it's OK as long as all
your neighbors are OK with it. In your world, police would be walking around
neighborhoods with a decibel meter and fining every non-compliant house,
regardless of whether you cleared everything with your neighbors, or even if
your neighbors are the ones making all the noise at your party!

~~~
malanj
I see this a closer to something like prostitution laws that are selectively
enforced in many countries and lead to large scale police
corruption/harassment.

Random rant: my limited experience of police treatment of homeless people in
San Francisco leaves quite a lot to be desired. I've spent about one month in
total there and I saw police hassling homeless people quite frequently.
Anything that makes that easier is bad in my mind. Sure - poor people are an
"irritation" by some definitions but they remain _people_ even if their
existence is inconvenient to some.

~~~
jdmichal
I agree with your principle whole-heartedly; I was just pointing out that I
feel that police harassment is an orthogonal concern, and that selective
enforcement is a Good Thing in the vast majority of cases -- ie, all the ones
you never hear nor think about.

------
clarky07
I hate to be that guy, and I'm going to sound like an ass, but this is 100%
his doing. Software worker in Palo Alto for 30 years making as much as 150k
has no excuse. Save some money stupid. Also, when you get fired and can't find
another job, perhaps you should move out of your $2150 a month rental. That's
enough for 4-5 months or more in other places. $1700 a month SS isn't much,
but it's enough to not be homeless in other places in America. It's not enough
to live in Palo Alto. MOVE.

All that being said, I'm not sure what the point of making criminals out of
homeless people is. No reason to kick people when they are down.

~~~
mcknz
Perhaps you're right in his particular instance.

But the issue is the same even for those who end up homeless through no fault
of their own.

Moving for the homeless has many hidden costs, including the time and effort
required to rebuild the local network of support one has built over many
years.

~~~
sentenza
Also, in my experience, moving is expensive. At least if you want to take more
stuff than fits into a suitcase.

Another thing that bugs me about the moving advice is this: It is good advice
for an individual or a family, but it becomes extremely problematic if too
many people do it. Many of the places where living expenses are low are also
places were the public finances at the local level are in a catastrophic
state. "Unemployment tourism" can be the deathblow for the municipal level if,
as is the case in many places here in Europe, the municipal level has to
finance much of the social infrastructure.

------
sologoub
It's very unfortunate, but the main character also an interesting study in
skill set relevance and retirement planning (or lack thereof).

He's a software engineer in SV... By all the common stereotypes, he should be
in the winner circle and living the life. Agism is definitely an issue in
tech, but it's likely that he is not up to date with some of the more modern
languages or techniques, resulting in lack of employment.

If he lived there since the 70's, he could have had a paid off place. (Typical
mortgage is 30 years term.) If not save by paying off the mortgage, he could
have also saved via 401k or something similar. It probably never really
occurred to him that employment might be so hard to come by or that things
would get so pricey. Coming from an eastern european background, I was
conditioned that if you have a paid off place, you can withstand a lot of up
and down swings in the economy and the world.

As a society, we should really be focusing on helping people properly market
themselves and acquire/update skills needed AND re-enforcing the need to plan
for the future. Not really sure how we'd go about implementing the latter
without annoying people though...

~~~
muzz
> Agism is definitely an issue in tech, but it's likely that he is not up to
> date with some of the more modern languages or techniques

Why do you suspect that he is likely not up date? The first part of your
sentence mentions ageism, although the second part sounds a lot like it.

------
ChuckMcM
Well if Palo Alto is willing to spend $250,000 they could pave a bit of
parking lot and put in a bathroom/shower unit like exists in campgrounds. But
that seems a bit extreme.

The guy profiled was tech worker for 30 years, but allegedly "not good with
money." If you're in your 20's don't be that guy. Live within your means, save
for those future days.

~~~
fvrghl
As a 20-something, does anyone have any advice me for or know of resources
where I can learn about financial management?

~~~
Natsu
I don't know about links, but the basics are simple enough: track what you
spend and save some % of what you make. Avoid debt for things that lose value
(e.g. cars). Debt for things like houses that retain value can make sense,
though. Always keep money in reserve. Pay off the high-interest debt (e.g. 30%
APR credit cards) first. If you do buy any complex investments, keep in mind
what conditions cause gain or loss. For example, I recently saw an annuity/ETF
product where they let you invest in indexes and cover the first 10% of any
losses, but you gain at most 10% annually (they get the rest). It took me a
while to realize that this means you get a 10% upside and 90% downside.

I'm sure others can give you more common sense advice.

~~~
jamesaguilar
> Avoid debt for things that lose value (e.g. cars).

This is actually not terribly good advice. Debt does not become especially bad
depending on whether what you used it for is gaining or losing value.

This rule is really a proxy for, "Don't buy an expensive car, boat, or plane,
relative to what you are making." Now that is a good rule. There's no reason
to hide it behind a false rule. Financing a purchase that you could pay cash
for can sometimes be wise, even if the purchased item is losing value.

~~~
Natsu
If you fall on hard times, you can sell things. If you have to sell something
like a car that lost value, it won't be as good as being able to sell
something like a house that holds value.

------
theorique
Seems to be largely a means of pushing the problem elsewhere.

"Um, could you please be poor some place else? This is Palo Alto - we have a
prosperous reputation to uphold."

~~~
mbillie1
It is, but that's nothing new. The cops in NYC have been known to give the
homeless a McDonalds meal and a bus ticket up the coast.

I'm curious what the prevalence of work-from-home software jobs will do, over
time, to the ridiculous swell in cost-of-everything in the bay area though. I
realize that, like Manhattan for finance, there's some status associated with
being in tech in the bay area, as well as legitimate opportunities. But there
are high-paying tech jobs in places where you can live much more comfortably.

~~~
theorique
Many people want to be where other people are - the center of the action for
their particular universe. They vote with their money.

You're right that status is a big part of it. Manhattanites look down on the
"bridge and tunnel" crowd.

------
pharaohgeek
At the risk of sounding (or even outright being) cruel, Mr. Smith's real
problem is that of terrible financial management skills. Keep in mind that
when he moved out there in the 70's, the Valley was not nearly as expensive as
it is today. And, with a software engineer's salary during its heyday, he
could have very easily purchased -- and paid off -- a place for him to live.
As he, himself, said, he made a choice to stay in the area even after he lost
his job. He could have made a choice to move somewhere cheaper.

At the age of 70, after a long -- and I'm assuming successful, based on his
highest salary -- career, having only a "meager" savings is no one's fault but
his own.

~~~
Xdes
>At the age of 70, after a long -- and I'm assuming successful, based on his
highest salary -- career, having only a "meager" savings is no one's fault but
his own.

I sympathize with him. I do not intend to save since there is no point when
the future of the country is so uncertain.

~~~
smm2000
If you have high salary now and do not save for retirement, I really hope you
won't burden society when you are out of job at 65 by either dying young or
living exclusively on social security. Spending all income is as selfish as it
gets.

~~~
Xdes
We live in what is called a free country.

------
jisaacstone
"The neighbors in the community, I think, wanted to be reasonable, but they
didn't feel safe having their kids go to the center"

Making laws to make the neighbors feel safer! Fantastic! "Don't be poor around
me, I don't feel safe."

This is one of the worst forms of NIMBYism. And treating the disadvantaged as
dangerous is a form of prejudice. How unfortunate that people only seem to
care about racial prejudice.

------
ghalusa
Hard to fathom that a 30-year seasoned veteran of software engineering can't
find a shred of work in the heart of Silicon Valley. According to the article,
Mr. Smith hasn't worked since 2006? Something is terribly amiss here.

------
bowlich
I find the overwhelming perspective of comments approaching this article to
be, fascinating. I also think that Diogenes of Sinope would have a great deal
to say concerning the matter.

I would say that it's a fallacy to dwell on why Mr. Smith is living in an RV
or what he could have done to prevent himself from landing there. After all,
it doesn't answer the question of why the state thinks it ought to so finely
dictate the comings and goes of a person or where it is that one should choose
to sleep. To seek shelter is as much a natural right as any of the others and
to deny someone easy access to readily available public shelter should come
with the same level of concern as restricting speech.

I think it's more interesting that we choose to allow those who do own or can
afford to rent property to dictate and bully others for the convenience of
their avoiding a "nuisance." Since apparently choosing to reside in a house
grants you greater worth than choosing to reside in a car.

------
melvinmt
"An ordinance passed by Palo Alto last year would punish people cited for
living in a vehicle with as much as a $1,000 fine or six months in jail."

Yep, that's exactly the incentive they need to not be homeless. /s

------
Asparagirl
Only 15 emergency shelter beds in all of Palo Alto?! And an estimated 150 men,
women, and children competing for those spots every night? That's disgusting.

Companies who have HQ's in Palo Alto:
[http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Companies_based_in_P...](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Companies_based_in_Palo_Alto,_California)

Not one of those companies, some of which are valued in the billions, could
pick up the cost of sponsoring another ten emergency beds? Another five, even?

~~~
a3n
Possibly, but they'd have to bring in their profits from offshore, and that
would be taxed.

~~~
chris_mahan
Ahhh, but you see, if they were taxed, then Palo Alto would have the money to
build more shelters.

~~~
toast0
Palo Alto doesn't have an income tax. Maybe California or the federal
government would have the money though.

------
jack-r-abbit
I don't see why they needed to make this law specifically against living in a
vehicle. Most places already have some sort of limit on how long a vehicle can
be parked on the street. Usually around 72 hours and you have to relocate to
another street (it doesn't count to just move it a few feet). Let them sleep
in their car... as long as they move it to another street every few days.

------
sharemywin
Let's assume started in 1978 with 30k. Pay increases of 5.75%/yr which gets
him to 151K in 2007. assuming saving 10% and a 8% return per yr that's 628k in
401k. Let's assume market takes 40% and losses job with 2-3 years before SSN.
Out there you could easily blow through any kind of retirement savings pretty
quickly.

~~~
smm2000
4% of 628k (safe withdrawal limit) is 25k - this is amount you can withdraw in
pretty much perpetuity (for 62 year old). 25k combined with SSN (20k/year) is
very close to average family income in US and guarantee good living in most
cities in US (outside of Bay Area/NY and a few other zip codes).

Saving 10% is borderline enough to retire on if you do not make stupid
financial moves (like moving out of market in 2007 or living in most expensive
area in US). It's not enough to be financially secure - you need to save
20-25% for that (totally doable on software engineer salary).

------
ssharp
Serious question: Are there trailer parks in the area? A place where you can
rent land for parking a mobile-home long term?

I am not at all familiar with the SF/Valley rental market, other than hearing
how it's exorbitantly expensive and rents keep growing. I'd have to think
there would be somewhere where rents are not so expensive. I have a hard time
believing a standard suburban studio or one-bedroom apartment would cost
$2800.

As for the article, it sounds like the man profiled here isn't really making
rationale decisions, so it's difficult to tell how bad the situation, outside
of this anecdote, actually is.

~~~
chiph
There are a couple of RV parks in the area. I want to say they're $700 a month
plus electricity. Not sure if any of them would be up for multi-year
residents, that's more of a mobile-home (trailer) park thing. Of which, there
are several in the area and from what I can tell from Google maps, they're all
full.

------
m_d
Does Palo Alto have regulations regarding minimum apartment size? If not,
lower-cost microapartment complexes might make a good long-term investment.

~~~
ilyanep
Good luck building anything in Palo Alto.

~~~
m_d
I'm not familiar with the real estate situation there beyond "people are being
priced out of Palo Alto". Is the city averse to all new construction or just
lower-cost housing?

~~~
praptak
Google "Palo Alto NIMBY".

~~~
rosser
AIUI, the NIMBY-ism in Palo Alto is second only to that in San Francisco.

