
A third of the homeless people in America are over 50 and I’m one of them - dwaxe
http://www.vox.com/first-person/2016/9/29/12941348/homeless-over-50-statistic
======
makomk
Also, when you see the US press - including Vox - talk about how low
unemployment is, bear in mind that she doesn't count as unemployed. When the
fact checkers point at Trump's claims about unemployment and say they're lies,
they're treating people like her who're forced into early retirement they
can't afford because the jobs have gone away as success stories in the fight
for full employment and insisting it's stupid to think otherwise. Even before
she officially retired, she probably didn't count because she was still
freelancing.

~~~
vtlynch
Which is how they have always measured it, as far as I am unaware. While you
may not like the measurement, this allows you to make actual comparisons to
past years data, instead of comparing two different metrics.

~~~
dexterdog
They measure it many ways. They just report it with the lower statistical
number so that it doesn't seem that bad. I would prefer all numbers to be
given out. If I am the only person working in my family supporting 9 other
people so that they can do other things we are not exhibiting 100% employment.
10% of the people are working to support the whole. If that works, great, but
on the level of society as a whole you want to know all of the numbers.

~~~
mikeyouse
All numbers _are_ given out.. In fact they're in the exact same report from
the BLS every month. This is the most nonsensical conspiracy theory. We report
U3 most widely because it matches the historical rate and the rate used by
other countries in their reporting. If you prefer U4/5/6 just read one
sentence further, is not like Trump's team found some deep government
secret...

Here's the table from the monthly report;

[http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm](http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm)

Or you could look at any of the data viz sources that are more user-friendly
than the BLS to see trends;

[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=7tTt](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=7tTt)

~~~
makomk
I've no doubt it matches how other countries report unemployment; the UK's
about as bad. Also, one of the things that annoys me is exactly that this
isn't something that Trump pulled out of his hat - the existence of
unemployment that's hidden by the statistics has been a topic of discussion
for a long time, especially on the left. Then Trump comes along and the fact
checkers declare that U3 is the one true definition of unemployment and
anything above that is an unpatriotic lie designed to undermine America. It's
all been a bit much really. (Though even U6 isn't broad enough to help much
here.)

~~~
mikeyouse
Of course it's been discussed, it's a serious problem. Nobody has ever claimed
that U3 is _the_ measure of unemployment, it's just one in a series but
happens to be the one with the most history.

If you want to look at the impacts of long-term unemployed or the falling mix,
check out the prime-age labor force participation rate.. another metric that
is _also_ in the same report:

[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=7ujb](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=7ujb)

There's no conspiracy to hide these numbers, they're reported dutifully every
month. It's been discussed by politicians, economists, journalists..

~~~
makomk
The definition of "prime-age labour force" is under 55, which also excludes
the author of this piece (and is about a decade under the age at which most
people can claim retirement benefits). It also excludes under-25s who have a
much lower labour force participation and higher unemployment rate.

~~~
mikeyouse
Great, so use the full labor participation number, then spend some time
disentangling the impacts of rising college attendance and the waves of
retirements of Baby Boomers. I don't care which metric is your preferred one,
the point is, they are all in the very same report. Nobody's hiding anything.

------
jernfrost
A sad read. It is provocative that one of the richest countries in the world
can treat its unfortunate citizens in such a manner. But I guess that is what
happens when you build a whole country on the myth that the life you get is
completely your own choice. It is very odd how many American you read who
state I don't need health insurance because I make sure I live healthy.

That is about as intelligent as saying I don't need a seatbelt in my car
because I drive safely. Many people utter words like that too.

Perhaps it is simply something people want to believe in. They don't want to
believe they can be the next victim. They want to believe everything is under
control and they are master of their own faith. If you realize how much is out
of your control it would be all too depressing to know how screwed you are
going to be if you developed serious health problems, getting into serious
accidents etc in the US. There is little safety-net to fall back on.

I have a good job today, but I have period mental problems. I do worry about
what would happen if I suddenly couldn't hack it anymore. What do you do when
you got small children to provide for and you get screwed up in the head?
Fortunately I know that because I live in Norway and not the US, there are
limits to how far I can fall. I will never end up on the streets with my kids.
They will still be able to go to good schools, and university whatever happens
to me. That takes some stress away.

I can not begin to imagine what it is like struggling in America and knowing
that if you can't work, your whole life is over and the future of your
children.

It is surprising why American's don't want a proper welfare system. People buy
insurance for their car and house. They buy health insurance. I pay higher
taxes than Americans but I view that as the cost of having airtight insurance
against the mishaps of life.

~~~
zajd
You'd be absolutely shocked at how little a vast majority of Americans are in
interested in paying taxes to improve their communities from the smallest to
the largest. I don't really get it because I've lived here my whole life and
you can pretty much 100% guarantee the more a locality taxes their populace
the better the quality of life is, at least in the states. I live in a town
(Boulder, CO) where this isn't the case and it's such a breath of fresh air.

There's such a prevalent "the federal government is less efficient than
private business" attitude it's mind blowing. This despite the fact that in
any area where public competes with private public wins here every single time
(ISPs, Infrastructure, Criminal Justice, etc)

edit. oh yeah and the army of "well at least the poor here aren't literally
dying of starvation en masse"

~~~
ves
>I don't really get it because I've lived here my whole life and you can
pretty much 100% guarantee the more a locality taxes their populace the better
the quality of life is, at least in the states.

..what? This makes no sense. My quality of life was significantly better when
I lived in TX than when I lived in SF, and you already know which one taxed me
more. Even a lot of public infrastructure, like roads and highways especially,
was just so much better. Plus, even though TX doesn't do much to help the
homeless, the likelihood that the author would have ended up homeless in the
first place is lower because home ownership is feasible. And the programs the
OP is referring to, social safety net type things, aren't local but national
in scale.

That said, I do like the idea but the quoted statement just makes no sense to
me.

~~~
zajd
Yeah I mean if you think the quality of life is higher anywhere in Texas than
San Francisco obviously I'm not going to convince you of much.

edit. yeehaw, downvotes

~~~
beachstartup
the quality of life in san francisco is absolutely abysmal unless you are the
top 10% in either wealth or income.

being able to spend $300 on a multi-course crudo and wine prix fixe dinner for
2 is not 'quality of life', that just means you're rich and you like nice
shit. you can do that anywhere there are other rich people, texas included.

most people consider quality of life to be cleanliness, low crime, affordable
property, personal freedoms, etc., all of which are in dramatic short supply
in san francisco.

~~~
zajd
San Fransisco does have a great deal of personal freedoms, has low crime and
is clean compared to tons of cities across the states. Beyond that, I don't
know that San Fransisco would be the ideal model because they aren't really
what I'm talking about, cities that collectively pitch in to use taxes to
provide more services. In many cases, SF isn't doing that.

All of that being said, Texas, by any measure, is a way worse place to live in
the US than SF if you actually do value things like a criminal justice system
that doesn't make a point of murdering the mentally disabled.

------
throwaway1098
I live in a Van. Mid 30s junior software developer who's kinda regretting
taking the CS path at this late age.

However, that as it may be, it's really not that bad. I shower at a gym at I'm
rarely home anyways, usually doing things so I really just need a place to
sleep which I don't feel paying 800 a month is worth.

The only issue is authorized places to park. There's a lot of us vehicle
dwellers there's a whole sub-reddit /r/vandwellers devoted to it.

I think it's an growing problem and solution to massive housing shortages that
are just going to get worse.

How big of a deal is it to have parking lots for 'liveaboards'?

You can obviously have applications to weed out troublemakers like any other
apartment complex.

This might be a very interesting sort of start up.

~~~
usr
Your idea about a parking lot for "liveaboards" sounds kind of cool. Or how
about an airbnb-like service where people offer up part of their yard for
people to park their van or pitch a tent. Especially in more rural areas where
people have a lot of land that is just sitting there and other people could
take advantage of it.

And I'm also curious, in what ways do you regret taking the CS path at your
age? Did you just get your CS degree? Are you experiencing a lot of ageism?

------
TeMPOraL
I know it's nitpicking, but eyeballing the chart at
[http://www.census.gov/popclock/](http://www.census.gov/popclock/).

> _A third of the homeless people in America are over 50_

So is the case for the _entire_ population of America, it would seem.

~~~
zajd
So?

~~~
kbart
So it implies that age is not a factor?

~~~
zajd
And? How does that dispute what's put forth in the article?

"The percentage has spiked by almost 10 points since 2007 — in 2014"

~~~
kbart
If 1/3 of population is >50 years old, a random subset of this population is
expected to have 1/3 of >50 years old as well. After reading this title, one
could get an impression that this part is un-proportionally big, which is not.

~~~
zajd
It wasn't as big 7 years ago. I don't get what's so hard about this to
understand? The statistic grew from ~25% to 33%. This is noteworthy.

~~~
kbart
_" The statistic grew from ~25% to 33%. This is noteworthy."_

That's the whole point! Compare to, for example: "Homeless people in America
that are over 50 increased by 30%". See the difference? "A third" is just what
one would expect from pure statistics.

~~~
peeters
I'm really confused as to what your point is. Just because over-51s now
represent their demographic in homeless population as well, doesn't negate the
fact that there was a MASSIVE upward trend in over-51s in the homeless
population. If the trend continues, wait a few years and they'll be severely
over-represented.

Imagine people 50 and under all of a sudden accounted for 70% of Alzheimers
diagnoses. Would you say that's not notable, because 70% of the population is
50 or under?

------
peter303
She needs to talk to a social worker because she is not claiming all her
senior benefits. First the minimal SSI is 733, a bit above her regular SS
check. Second, she automatically qualifies for almost free medicaid.

Plus when you qualify for either of these its easier to get other poverty
benefits like food stamps, housing assistance and a free cell phone.

Sometimes people go into victim-pity mode and dont claim everything available.

~~~
rkangel
She says she's had to go to a hospital a lot, so she's probably on cheap/free
healthcare (or she wouldn't be able to have it).

She says she gets foodstamps. She may well have a free cellphone.

By the sounds of the article she isn't passive and actively looks for ways to
improve her situation.

~~~
agumonkey
Also in the storm it's easy to forget to ask for every possible aid. And
probably avoid asking for more if you're already given some, to actually avoid
being seen as more of a leech that you feel being.

------
benbenolson
Yes, this is a horrible situation that she is in, and it's extremely sad.
However, Social Security is not meant to be lived on; it's meant to simply be
a supplement to a retirement that the individual was saving up for their
entire working life. Let this simply be a lesson to put money away for
retirement, as people have successfully done for centuries.

~~~
jernfrost
You can't save up for mishaps of life. Chronic disease, cancer can cost a lot
more money than people can save up. That is why you buy insurance in case your
house burns down. Catastrophic events are not things you can save up for in
advance. Do you suppose that people should save up for in case their car
crashes or their house burns down?

Of course not. The whole point of insurance is that most people pay in more
than they get back. A few take out way more money than they put in. That is
acceptable because those who pay more, get safety in return. That is the whole
point of a welfare system. Most pay more in than they get back, but they get
safety back. They get the certainty that if their life should get screwed up
by chronic disease, accidents etc, then there is something to fall back on.

------
losteverything
< I divorced my husband,

In my county, the number one (by far) reason people are homeless is because of
divorce.

Marriage is a commitment and the second biggest choice one (usually) has to
make.

~~~
haneefmubarak
What's the first biggest one?

~~~
masterponomo
Team vi or Team Emacs.

~~~
throwaway1098
PC or Console

------
bko
> CeliaSue Hecht’s writing work has been featured in more than 40 local and
> national newspapers and magazines, on her dog travel blog, in newsletters,
> and in five romantic travel guides. She has traveled around the world and
> has written and led seminars and workshops in the US and Europe. Her travels
> have included about 245 cities. She can be contacted by email at
> prmatchmaker@yahoo.com or on her website celiasue.com.

I'm a little confused. Her blog and personal site make it seem like it's more
of a lifestyle choice than a victim of circumstance. Perhaps both?

Anyway, I don't think social security was designed to be a complete retirement
plan. I agree with the author about some laws discriminating those without
permanent lodging (e.g. many places it's illegal to sleep in your car), but I
hope that able and intelligent people take responsibility for their own
retirement.

~~~
anexprogrammer
Well it doesn't sound like a choice. What makes you think so? The about text
from a site that preceded the homelessness by some years?

I don't know where cheap rentals are in the US (Detroit?), but presumably $600
a month isn't going to get there, pay rent, deposit and keep her alive.

~~~
Retric
People do live off of ~600$/month in the south west. No need for heating and
you can get away without cooling. An acre of land is as low as ~1,000$ or so
to buy. Add some minimal shelter, water, and minimal electricity plus some
very minimal taxes..

It's not what I would call pleasant, their are few jobs, and transportation is
an issue. However, basic food and shelter can be really cheap.

~~~
TheCoelacanth
Young healthy people can get away without cooling in the southwest, but can an
elderly person who has been hospitalized thirteen times in the past year?

~~~
fizgig
Not having active cooling in the arid southwest US does not necessarily mean
dangerously hot during the day. When night-time temps can hit the 50s and 40s
in higher elevations, a house with decent mass can remain comfortably cool
throughout the day if you ventilate properly at night.

~~~
AstralStorm
A shack she could afford would not have decent mass or decent walls.

------
ErikAugust
I'm working on a piece about living in my truck. I live in a major metro area
(not a top five most expensive however), as a software developer making over
six figures.

It's impossible to find rent for under $900/month. My anger boiled over when
someone wanted $975/month for a 6 month lease for a 350 square foot "studio"
that has no kitchen.

Yet, supposedly there are 18 million vacant homes in the United States [1].

It's time to put together an Airbnb for these vacant units that provide the
new transients of America with affordable and safe places to stay. Interested
in helping, or just want to have a conversation about this topic, check out my
profile.

[1]
[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/EVACANTUSQ176N](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/EVACANTUSQ176N)

Additional info from the Census:
[http://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/index.html](http://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/index.html)

~~~
Mc_Big_G
Honest question. You make over $100k and can't afford > $1k/month for rent.
Why? Because you morally object to the cost or because you can't afford it?

~~~
ErikAugust
I can easily afford it. I object.

------
avyfain
According to Wikipedia[0], a third (~32%) of the people in the US are over 50,
so without reading the article this is roughly what you should expect.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_State...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States)

------
forgetsusername
Alright, these situations are sad, and sometimes unavoidable due to what is
essentially "bad luck". I can't imagine being caught in the vicious cycle.

But I do take issue with:

> _The housing crash and its chilling effect on mortgage lending have hit the
> poor the hardest...Homeowners are being replacing by renters, as the
> American dream of owning your own property is becoming increasingly a luxury
> for the rich and upper middle class._

Why should "the poor" have access to mortgages? Lending to poor people (NINJA
loans, predatory loans) was a root cause of the housing collapse. Do people
really think giving the poor mortgages is any kind of solution?

It's a pretty common refrain on HackerNews that the "banksters" and (mostly,
in reality) shady mortgage brokers took advantage of people by providing them
with loans they couldn't afford. But, other times, this is seen as a good
idea?

~~~
jernfrost
They mention upper middle class. Should not the middle class have access to
home ownership. Other than that I agree that across the western world there is
an unhealthy obsession with homeownership.

I live in Norway and I am just waiting for housing market to come crashing
down. I am a homeowner but I really don't want to be one. It is just that the
economic incentives created by the tax system makes it stupid to rent. It
shouldn't be like that because it causes an over-investment in property and
runaway prices. Countries like Germany which has not been so overly focused on
home ownership has much healthier housing prices.

If feel like Russian roulette. You got to figure out that right time to pull
out and go renting before everything comes crashing down. But if you pull out
too early you pay a heavy premium and getting into the housing market will be
so much more difficult in the future with even higher prices.

Makes you wonder about the whole free market pricing. Back in my parents day
the whole housing market was socialist. Government set the prices. As any
socialist system, it caused a lot of waiting lines to get housing, but man it
was so much cheaper. Despite making way more money than my parents did, they
could afford a much bigger house than I can today.

The free market seems very poor at stopping asset bubbles. I think we need a
new way of handling assets in the market.

~~~
cloudjacker
Without over leveraging Norways housing market can continue its appreciation
for decades more.

------
nojvek
I've been personally thinking what I would do if I were in such a situation.
If I had to purely rely on govt funds and found it very hard to get by. I
can't imagine.

I can see why so many people want trump. He feeds on the anger at how broken
this country is.

~~~
innertracks
From experience in the Seattle area, if you are in the USA you can get
yourself passes for state and/or federal parks. In Washington state for
example with a Discover Pass ($30 annual fee) you can park overnight for I
believe up to two weeks. Not sure about the federal parks. Much cheaper than
motels and no harassment from law enforcement. You're just camping! Move
around as needed.

Edit: pass fee.

------
throw2016
Most of these threads end up with dry platitudes about living carefully or
demonizing homeless people as mentally imbalanced or irresponsible.

There is no concept of victim or adverse circumstances and zero sense of the
collective. It is denial. For other countries poverty is a problem to be
solved, for the US it's identity, something everyone wants to wish away.

The first modern dystopia will be here, the idealogy of selfishness, greed,
wealth and narcissism may benefit some individuals but leaves no space for a
community to form and a culture that is not only bereft of empathy but
positively despises it.

------
joshuaheard
A quick search on Apartment Finder for a random city like Albuquerque, NM
shows apartments for under $300 per month. She is receiving $672 per month in
Social Security. It seems to me she can afford housing.

[http://www.apartmentfinder.com/New-Mexico/Albuquerque-
Apartm...](http://www.apartmentfinder.com/New-Mexico/Albuquerque-
Apartments/q/?xr=600&sr=2)

~~~
dexterdog
She would probably have to get rid of her dog.

~~~
csomar
> She would probably have to get rid of her dog.

> Dexterdog

Is this a coincidence?

------
tluyben2
Sad read and hope to never see anyone close to me have to go through this,
but; why stay in a city? It must be cheaper to live in some town far from
cities? At least here you would not only be able to live of your the money she
has in a village and no one would bother you if you sleep in your car outside
a village. Not sure how that is in the US but i would imagine it makes a
difference outside cities.

And then ofcourse; how many close friends do you have; i have many friends and
family who would all just rent a house for me. Or let me stay at theirs. Not
one but well i could think of at least 20 people who would not hesitate; am i
lucky or did she just connect with very few people?

~~~
nojvek
Wow I guess you are lucky. If I died today, there's probably less than 10
people who would come to my cremation. Sad I know but I'm okay with that.

I do relate to the dog though, they are amazing companions. I would really
worry about depression if he passes away.

~~~
dexterdog
Do people go to a cremation?

~~~
GreatPowers
Maybe people who hate you? "Burn you piece of shit!"

------
phodo
This was very sad to read. I was wondering why - given the fact that she has a
car - she doesn't drive for Lyft or Uber. Maybe it is because her car is
filled with her living stuff, or hygiene reasons. These are assumptions that
might not be true. Let's assume that she is able to meet the qualifications of
a driver. Would Uber and Lyft block her application because she doesn't have a
home? I wonder if this is something the Ubers / Lyfts can do - employing
homeless drivers - to help people get back on their feet.

~~~
AstralStorm
This, even if possible, would quickly kill her car and make her additionally
homeless.

Uber and Lyft drivers not in premium service are not paid enough to get
maintenance.

Also, an older person requires often psychological and technical checks to see
if they still can drive at all. In EU those are mandatory after 60 years to
keep your licence at all, earlier in pro drivers.

------
agumonkey
Quick question, is the illegal car sleep law universal or are there subtleties
? I can understand cities wanting to have quiet streets at night and avoid
people ending up in cars after parties etc, but for a homeless person there
should be a special case.

~~~
AstralStorm
The law is probably meant to keep parking space from being permanently
occupied. I bet it's legal to sleep in a car parked outside the road and not
in a generally public space such as a park. (that's loitering)

~~~
agumonkey
Aight but preventing "forever parked" spots isn't the same as forbidding
sleeping in a car for a homeless person. If a police officer realizes that
person has no home, will they direct them toward another spot or give them a
fine, or take them into a precinct ?

------
Cozumel
A situation like that is almost unimaginable. Sounds like a potential idea for
a startup/app though. If the author got together with another homeless person
they could probably get an apartment between them.

~~~
fencepost
Odds are good that she'll end up with a shared apartment, but she's already
done that once (though not starting out with someone else homeless) and it
didn't work out well.

I suspect the biggest problem with finding another homeless person or two to
share an apartment with is what she already ran into - for a lot of homeless
there are mental health issues that may have led to them being homeless in the
first place. Many who are homeless also are going to have a hard time covering
even part of the cost of an apartment, particularly since it's going to be
harder to find and keep a job without having a permanent place to stay in the
first place. Finally, I suspect that many cities have limitations on how many
unrelated adults can live in a single residential unit - something that for
many it'd be easy to ignore, but for a small group of people it could make it
very difficult to secure an initial lease unless one of the group members was
able to demonstrate the resources to get the lease on their own anyway.

------
adrianlmm
That is why my priority is to have a home of my own, so at the end it won't
matter if I'm broke, I'll still have a roof over my head.

------
Fej
We will have our safety net eventually. The pendulum of hopefully slowly
swinging to the left. Until then, folks like her are fucked.

------
jedmeyers
Ah, another resident of a homogeneous country with 13% of the population of
California with vast amounts of oil is telling everyone else how their country
should be organized. It's like the only son of a rich lawyer telling his
college buddy, from the worker's family of seven: "why do you still drive that
2002 Accord, clearly my brand new BMW M5 is much better! It's surprising you
poor people don't want a proper car"

~~~
enraged_camel
What does cultural homogeneity have anything to do with the way a country
treats its homeless?

Also, while Norway may be rich in natural resources, so is the USA. So I'm not
entirely certain how _that_ matters either.

~~~
ef4
> What does cultural homogeneity have anything to do with the way a country
> treats its homeless?

It's easier to be generous to people who are more like oneself, and who are
physically closer to oneself.

Consider all the people in Europe right now who may be perfectly happy to
support generous welfare for homeless people who happen to have been born on
the same side of their borders, but who are hostile to homeless people who
just fled Syria.

Or consider the difficulty of scrapping every national welfare system in
Europe and uniting them under a single EU government. I contend that would be
very difficult. America is more like the EU than it is like Norway. Norway is
much more like Massachusetts, which has very Norway-like quality-of-life
metrics.

~~~
AstralStorm
So why not solve the problem in each state separately? Add long as the problem
is solved, nobody would care why. Federal government can provide the right
incentives and resources.

------
known
45% of USA is uninhabited :)

~~~
pavlov
Is your solution for a 66-year-old homeless woman with multiple illnesses and
who had cancer last year that she should move to the wilderness?

------
bko
> CeliaSue Hecht’s writing work has been featured in more than 40 local and
> national newspapers and magazines, on her dog travel blog, in newsletters,
> and in five romantic travel guides. She has traveled around the world and
> has written and led seminars and workshops in the US and Europe. Her travels
> have included about 245 cities. She can be contacted by email at
> prmatchmaker@yahoo.com or on her website celiasue.com.

I'm a little confused. Her blog and personal site make it seem like it's more
of a lifestyle choice than a victim of circumstance. Perhaps both?

Anyway, I don't think social security was designed to be a complete retirement
plan. I agree with the author about some laws discriminating those without
permanent lodging (e.g. many places it's illegal to sleep in your car), but I
hope that able and intelligent people take responsibility for their own
retirement.

