
Homeless turn overnight bus route into Hotel 22 - BIackSwan
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_24429126/homeless-turn-overnight-bus-route-into-hotel-22
======
skwirl
A 10 year old child has spent 5 months sleeping on the bus at night with her
father. She's getting off the public bus and onto a school bus each morning.

I'm not saying that the adults deserve to be homeless, but can't _everyone_
agree that no child should be in this situation? I can't even imagine how 10
year old me would have done in such a situation. I know kids are resilient,
but it sounds absolutely terrifying.

According to a quick search, it is claimed that there are 1.6 million homeless
children in America, with 1.1 million enrolled in public schools. That is
insane. I can only hope that this number counts mostly children who were
homeless for very short stints, and that most of them aren't doing anything
like sleeping on a bus for 5 weeks straight.

~~~
yummyfajitas
I was under the impression that every state provides a foster home or group
home for children in need. Is that incorrect?

(Granted, I'm under the impression that these systems suck. But it's not as if
there is no effort to care for the children.)

~~~
20131102
Why do you think they suck? Not "why is that your impression", but granted
they suck, why?

~~~
NovemberWest
It would be better to provide support that makes the family successful rather
than tearing it apart as our default approach.

------
Sanddancer
I used to work swing shift, and would take the late night busses in Orange
County home. I'd get on Line 60 in downtown Long Beach, taking it to the 57
line in Orange, then the 2 or so miles to home. The drivers of those late
night busses usually having the interior lights off. They knew what their
passenger load's like -- regular working people just wanting to nap before
they got home, the homeless people who would sleep as the motors wound up,
brakes hissed, and stops were announced -- so tiny bits of peace and quiet
were appreciated.

I'd see the same faces night after night. Some were grumpy, years of living on
the streets having turned their faces and attitudes to weathered stone. Some
were friendly; willing to chatter, unbowed by what the fates had given them.
I'd say hi, but not much else; we didn't have much in common -- my ipod and
sidekick were very out of place for them.

There were routines, ways to keep their semi-warm, if bumpy, beds. People
getting off at Harbor to transfer to the 43 bus. Long bus line there, could
get lots of uninterrupted sleep. People getting on at Harbor; they'd done a
round trip, needed to change to the 60 so they could get to the 57 for another
good trip, another few hours of sleep.

It saddened me. Couldn't do much about it. I donated when I could to shelters,
even when people in my social circle would question my sanity for it. "Fuck
you, got mine" being the mantra of entirely too many. After all, this was a
county where a light rail system was vetoed because of fears that "those"
people would have too much mobility and become visible in areas where they
obviously didn't belong.

Unfortunately, a few years back, the Powers that Be decided to cut even that
most slim of safety nets. Budget cutbacks, no need for busses in those wee,
cold hours. Regardless of the passengers inconvenienced, regardless of the
people thrown even deeper into misery. Regardless of people working those late
nights. Having a soul is too expensive in times of austerity.

~~~
NovemberWest
Well, we need to stop trying to solve homelessness per se. We need to work on
taking better care of people generally. That will shrink the numbers of
homeless.

~~~
GhotiFish
...

explain.

No one's willing to gives these guys work.

~~~
NovemberWest
Yeah, I know that. I am homeless and people have told me I should not admit
that online, they would not hire me..blah blah. But most homeless were not
born that way. It isn't a trait like skin color. "The homeless" come from the
rest of of the population. They aren't some distinct separate population that
interbreed or something, geez. So you get homeless by failing all of your
citizens in some important way.

Welfare in America was designed to "help poor single moms" at a time when most
poor single moms were widows and intentionally having a baby out of wedlock
was a huge taboo. The very framing of it changed the social contract and
actively undermines the social fabric. It has helped foster an atmosphere
actively hostile to fathers and has single handedly all but put an end to the
practice of "shotgun weddings." In Europe, programs are more generally
designed to help women (like maternity leave), help children, help families --
not POOR women, not POOR children, not POOR families.

America requires you to be a failure before you qualify for assistance.
Therein lies the problem. It actively creates a culture of failure and too
many broken, shamed people.

It's a terrible system. Just terrible.

But I don't really want to discuss this at length tonight.

Later.

------
ck2
No one should be homeless and freezing in this country.

I am really disgusted how we let people fall this far.

We should all be ashamed.

The comments on that article are even more disturbing but I am going to assume
it is people trolling because they are in warm homes with computers so they
feel comfortable being asses.

------
elag
Hack this; disrupt that; look down at your smartphone when the 22 rolls by.

~~~
Aloha
This to me points at the flaw of the startup model. Most of the problems
startups are solving are not real problems, they don't need solving - but
there is money to be made in solving them, so they get solved. This is a
problem (lack of jobs/affordable housing) that does need solving, but there
isn't much money to be made in it.

~~~
iron_ball
Edit: replaced snarky response with this.

It's not just startups -- businesses tend to focus on earning money. I don't
know if we can realistically expect private industry to take an interest in
social or economic problems. At the lowest level, there are founders trying to
choose a niche that gets them from debt to break-even as quickly as possible;
at the highest level, you get into transnational corporations which act only
in their own interest.

I would be happy if Apple or Google were to dump their excess billions into
social welfare or government reform, but it is vanishingly unlikely.

~~~
Aloha
Jobs are something we can focus on.

Many companies choose to make marginally more profit by moving production to
'low cost markets' rather than manufacture here. I believe firmly if you make
your product overseas it should cost some amount of money in duty to bring
your product back to the United States, ideally about (or maybe more than) the
difference in cost between what it would cost to make your product here and
what it costs to make it there - is it an easy to implement solution? no. But
its the right thing to do.

That said, I believe that rising transport costs will eventually solve this
problem for many types of goods, probably within the next 10-15 years or so.

~~~
knoepfle
Why do you prioritize giving work to Americans over those in developing
nations?

~~~
Aloha
Because I'm selfish. I'm an American, my countrymen are hungry, homeless, and
cant find jobs, in a country that is not well accommodating for the poor. I
hardly think I can be blamed for wanted to help my countrymen first.

~~~
philwelch
Selfishness is caring about yourself. Caring about people who share your
nationality at the expense of others is nationalism, in much the same way that
caring about people who share your race at the expense of others is racism.

~~~
Spooky23
So it's selfish to help my neighbor?

Give me a break -- that's some nonsense PC excuse to mask a decision purely
driven by profit.

If choice of production locations is driven by concern for our brothers and
sisters in the developing world, why aren't we making stuff in India? Or
Liberia? Or Bolivia? And why are we generally operating in a model that shifts
liability for things like pollution and labor problems to local partners?

~~~
philwelch
Choice of production locations is generally driven by actual selfishness
rather than nationalism or racism. But actual selfishness can produce good
results if things are set up properly. Not so for nationalism or racism.

~~~
Aloha
In short, I believe I need to solve problems near to home before I worry about
the rest of the world. There are hundreds of NGO's who worry about Africa and
development in the developing world, there isn't really anyone working on
poverty here, at home, not with any resources. So I want to work on creating
jobs here, here where there are real environmental rules, protections for
workers, occupational health and safety rules.

~~~
philwelch
I think it's natural to care about people who are closer to you or more
similar to you. But that doesn't make it right, because that exact same
tendency is what drives racism. And it's hard to say the moral effects are any
different when you compare what poverty looks like in China or Bangladesh to
what poverty looks like in America. If you start with the premise that all
human life has the same value, then the difference between subsistence farming
and a sweatshop job in East Asia is a much bigger improvement than you could
ever create in the United States.

This kind of selective altruism, where you care about other Americans so much
that you'd make comparatively _marginal_ improvements to their lives instead
of making _drastic_ improvements to the life of a foreigner, is the moral
equivalent of racism.

------
paddy_m
This points to the need for less restrictive zoning. There are cheaper ways to
house people than in a moving bus. They are willing to pay, maybe not the full
rate, but they are paying something. Build army barracks style residences
(which I guess is what homeless shelters are).

~~~
jisaacstone
There is this:

[http://www.weirdasianews.com/2009/11/21/hong-kong-
citizens-l...](http://www.weirdasianews.com/2009/11/21/hong-kong-citizens-
living-cages-literally/)

Which is not a good way to live, but much much better than riding a bus.

Zoning and fire codes and whatnot means this may be illegal here. But really I
think people here are more comfortable with homelessness than allowing
uncomfortably affordable housing to be built.

~~~
VladRussian2
>Zoning

it is what "we the people" through our elected representatives use to keep
unwanted (i.e. weak/ill/less fortunate ones) out. Shame.

>fire codes

this obviously a necessary and what is most important - pure technically
solvable thing for minimum amount of money.

We don't have to go for extreme HK approach. A city like PA, MV, Sunnyvale
could easy build on a single-family size lot a shelter that would take a
busload of homeless. Considering that MV (San Antonio/El Camino) and Sunnyvale
(near downtown) have just had huge redevelopment projects going so fitting a
couple of 10-20 bdrm appartments somewhere on the back alley (so it wouldn't
offend eyes and noses of our sensitive citizens) would be noise for the
projects' cost.

~~~
meepmorp
>Zoning it is what "we the people" through our elected representatives use to
keep unwanted (i.e. weak/ill/less fortunate ones) out. Shame.

Or it's what we the people, through our elected representatives, use to keep
the strip club and petroleum refinery from opening across the street from the
elementary school.

It's not black and white. Zoning laws are a way for the people in an area to
have a say about how their community is developed. That's both good and bad.

------
johnrob
The influx of money into silicon valley has many side effects; not all of them
are good. People outside the tech industry are becoming relatively poorer
across the board, including those at the bottom in this article. What bothers
me the most is that none of this is planned. It's just happening and everyone
is observing. I would be more comfortable if this 'relatively poorer' effect
was part of a plan since it would imply that someone had considered the
consequences.

------
jisaacstone
Curious if there are any examples of major metros that have successfully
tackled homelessness without simply forcing them to go somewhere else.

Anyone know of any examples?

People paying to sleep on a bus clearly shows the problem here is ridiculously
bad.

~~~
discardorama
There are 2 problems that I can see here that need to be tackled: shelter, and
safety. It is _relatively_ easier to provide shelter: just 4 walls and a roof,
basically. The more difficult part is the safety. City-run shelters are a
haven for criminals, who are much better than the homeless in working 'the
system'. And then there's the problem of amenities: showers, toilets, etc. Who
will build them? Who will maintain them? And finally: homeless come with
assorted mental/physical/drug issues. It's very rare to find a homeless person
who does not have serious issues.

SF is doing a massive underground dig for a subway line. I often wonder: how
difficult would it be to create some more room down there, and let the
homeless just pitch a tent or crash for the night? But that would solve the
shelter problem, which isn't that hard. It's the other facilities that are
needed, which make the problem intractable.

~~~
grey-area
Safety really isn't an intractable problem. There is absolutely no reason,
apart from lack of money and will, that the city run homeless shelters have to
be oversubscribed and unsafe. A few security guards keeping an eye out and
throwing out anyone unruly, and better facilities with lockable single/family
rooms would make them a far safer and a reliable option.

With a little bit of money, this problem of secure _safe_ sheltered housing
could be solved, even if all the other problems leading to homelessness could
not. As you say there are often other issues leading to the lack of a stable
life which cannot be easily solved.

Just as an example, we have sheltered housing round the corner from me in
London for the homeless in a normal house - people have their own rooms, and
it works, even if it doesn't solve their other issues. People seem to stay a
few years then hopefully move on to a more stable life, I think that's the
idea anyway. The provision here is inadequate as in the states, but it can be
done with more money.

~~~
discardorama
> A few security guards keeping an eye out and throwing out anyone unruly, ...

... and therein lies the problem. I know my evidence is anecdotal, but: there
have been many cases here (in SF) of such security guards actually running
protection rackets for drug dealers and participating in associated criminal
activities.

Look: I know that if you throw _enough_ money on a problem, you can mostly
solve it (or mitigate it). If we had $1MM to spend per homeless person, I'm
sure we could put them up in top-notch places with full care. But then the
~7000 homeless people in SF would eat up the entire budget, leaving $0 for the
rest of the city.

------
landongn
The mental picture of these people, huddled on a bumpy bus, in the middle of
the night, being the only regular thing they can look forward to is incredibly
saddening.

I wish there was something I could personally do.

~~~
DamnYuppie
Volunteer your time, give of your resources, open your home up to a family in
need. This list of things we could do to make a difference in someones life is
bounded only by our own selfishness.

~~~
chris_mahan
Find a church, shelter, or other organization, and send them a check each
month for $100. (that's $3.30/per day). Try it for a year.

------
wehadfun
Just to build homes for the homeless. Provide food, water, soap, security. It
can't be much more expensive then the millions the government wastes on other
things.

~~~
potatolicious
Not quite that simple. Homeless shelters, per resident-wise, are much more
expensive to run than an equivalent place housing, well, people like us.

Some homeless people avoid shelters even if there are space because they are
frequently giant nests of disease and violence. Besides catching some rather
unpleasant diseases and pests, your odds of getting stabbed increase
dramatically.

So you'd have to pay for hygiene, health, and security expenses well above and
beyond the norm. And that's just if you want to pursue the "containment" side
of housing the chronically homeless.

If you want to pursue the "rehabilitation" side it gets even crazier. A large
portion of the population suffer from severe mental health problems that
prevent them from any meaningful integration into mainstream society, and
mental health care ain't cheap.

That said I do believe it should be done, but it isn't "oh yeah just levy a
tiny tax" territory.

~~~
wehadfun
Give the homeless homes.

Homes with lock, bathroom, AC/Heat, kitchen, bedroom, living/dining area, and
food.

I predict 50-70% of the issues disease and violence would go away if they had
homes and not shelters.

A security,sanitation crew could probably bring this disease and violence down
even further.

~~~
wehadfun
I fail to understand why providing someone a comfortable, safe home to live
does NOT fix the problem of people using hotel 22

~~~
Sanddancer
It solves the immediate problem, but doesn't come anywhere near actually
solving the reason why people end up using hotel 22. To do so means doing
things like destigmatizing mental health issues so that people are willing to
get help before the problems spiral out of control.

You also need to work on outreach -- letting people on the streets know that
there is a place they can go to get help. Social services departments tend to
not be nearly explicit enough in helping get people to the right sorts of help
they need; additionally, a lot of social workers are overworked and underpaid,
which leads to a good amount of burnout which further exacerbates the problem.

Saying we need more housing shows a misunderstanding as to why this problem
exists. There are a lot of things that need to be done before, and concurrent
with, housing in order to fix this problem. Otherwise, you'll end up just
whitewashing the situation.

~~~
VladRussian2
>Otherwise, you'll end up just whitewashing the situation.

no, what you end up with is homeless people having a chance to sleep under the
roof whenever they want and for whatever long they want (why shelters kick
people out on the street every morning? At least why not provide the homeless
with a fixed guaranteed bed every night and a locker to keep her/his stuff?)

------
biot
I hope my YC application gets approved for BusBNB: disrupting traditional
fixed shelter in favor of housing that is simultaneously mobile, social, AND
local. Extensions to the bus add food truck capability, washroom/shower
facilities, dedicated hacker spaces, and more.

------
tptacek
This happens in Chicago too, on the blue line.

~~~
officemonkey
This happens on the Red Line as well. 1:20 each way.

The nice thing about the Blue Line is they generally don't make you get off at
O'Hare. You can doze until the train goes back downtown. That means you can
get a 2+ hour sleep in a round-trip between Forest Park and O'Hare.

~~~
tptacek
I just remember picking up the Blue Line in Forest Park, the southern terminus
of the line, at 8:30AM, and the train always having several sleeping homeless
people on it.

~~~
Locke1689
One thing that may be different is I'm not sure how many people use this bus,
while I regularly took the blue line when I had a red-eye into O'Hare.

------
andrewhillman
This guy
[https://twitter.com/LiCharles1985/status/396322399198539776](https://twitter.com/LiCharles1985/status/396322399198539776)
reached out to the reporter, he wants to help the man and his daughter.

------
schenecstasy
Can't these people learn to code?

~~~
Raphmedia
Sure, go ahead and teach them.

Remember you will need to start from the ground up. "To start the computer --
that machine in front of you -- press the button that is right there"... then,
in about a year, perhaps you could teach them to code.

~~~
CanSpice
That's a pretty condescending reply. Homeless in no way implies stupid or
ignorant. To state that a homeless person wouldn't know how to turn on a
computer is insulting.

~~~
invalidOrTaken
Is it? I managed convicts on work-release recently. Some of them had quite a
bit of trouble clocking in and out. I'm talking basic "fill out this form"
stuff.

~~~
chris_mahan
Also, many employers will balk at employing people with criminal records. Many
are legally prohibited from hiring them too (banks, etc).

Want to help? Make a company, hire people at the bottom who need help getting
their sons and daughters out of shelters and to school on time at 7:48 am with
a full breakfast in them after a good night's sleep. Keep your company going
by providing excellent and valuable service to your customers. And when your
janitor invites you to his daughter's middle school graduation, put on your
best suit and go. Just because a man has darker skin, tattoos, a shaved head,
doesn't want to talk about his past, and clams up with a frown and a thousand-
yard stare when discussions get heated at the office, doesn't mean he's
spending his pay on drugs and hookers. He's probably thinking that his
girlfriend needs him to keep his job so he can make the car payment and the
rent and buy groceries so he can feed the three year old at home that's
watching Curious George right now.

