
The Affluent Homeless: A Sleeping Pod, a Hired Desk and a Handful of Clothes - jameslk
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/23/715107132/the-affluent-homeless-a-sleeping-pod-a-hired-desk-and-a-handful-of-clothes
======
kristianc
> He's part of a new-ish group of young people. He's educated and owns his own
> business. He could be considered well off, but he's also, in a way,
> homeless. By choice.

> There are two big reasons for this shift: the price of housing and student
> loan debt. A little more than a third of millennials currently own homes, a
> rate lower than Generation X and baby boomers when they were the same age.

That's the very definition of not by choice. This current effort to rebrand
millennials not owning anything as a positive lifestyle choice based on happy
clappy sharing economy "choosing experiences" BS is really nefarious.

Given the choice, Millennials would own. They "choose experiences" because
they can't afford to own stuff.

~~~
DennisP
The article does say that some do it by choice, but a lot "rent and share
because they're broke and they need to save money."

~~~
logfromblammo
It reeks of rationalization. They don't want to admit to themselves that they
got dealt a bad hand, so pretend that they own nothing and rent their entire
life by choice.

It's like breaking someone's kneecaps, and they say they're in the wheelchair
by choice, because walking is dangerous and inefficient, and knees are a
horrible leg-joint design anyway.

They never had a choice, so they invent the illusion of choice by
retroactively justifying that they would have chosen what they have now if
they actually did have a different option that some might have considered to
be objectively better.

I am well familiar with this. I consciously unwant the things that I want, but
cannot afford, all the time. No, I don't need a car manufactured after 2010.
No, I prefer to stay at home for my vacation. Eating out is for people who
can't shop and cook. The current crop of movies in theaters seems pretty lame.
I can wait another season for new tires. We can have strips of skirt steak
instead of top sirloin. In fact, how about roaster chicken instead of beef?

It's bullshit that I shovel over myself, and I know it. If I had more money, I
would definitely buy more and better stuff with it--to own and not rent.

------
choeger
It always baffles me how the proponents of the share economy do not see its
downside: If you do not own what you use, you don't control it. Individual,
motorized, traffic has a huge negative impact, that's clear. But how about it
enables you to travel whereever you want whenever you want? Owning a house or
an apartment might seem unnecessary in our modern society, until the next rent
increase or some disturbance in your financial situation (assuming you're not
sitting on a huge mortgage).

And why does nobody talk about how we have to pay every fucking minute,
regardless what we do, in the share economy? Maybe you spend less money for
each activity, compared to owning, but maybe you are just paying more often?

And finally, what about responsibility? If I own nothing, do I ever care about
something? Who cares about the gearbox of a rented car? Just have a look at
the interior of your average subway train. When the street I live in gets to
dirty, why not simply move away?

While I love to be able to rent things that I cannot or don't want to own, I
have the impression that this "share everything" paradigm is actually just a
toxic mixture of permanent monetarization and centralised control.

~~~
will_brown
>It always baffles me how the proponents of the share economy do not see its
downside:

They do, that’s why they are behind all these PR/fluff pieces like this one
that promotes the “affluent homeless” life style.

You to can live the homeless dream and own two pairs of clothes...working when
you want and where you want. Best part is you won’t get any benefits, like
health insurance.

It used to be any riff-raff could achieve the homeless lifestyle without even
a job, but big tech is classing up the streets. Now everyone thank big tech
making homelessness great again...just don’t shit on the sidewalks.

~~~
ForHackernews
You thought this article was _promoting_ this sad life living in a flophouse?

~~~
will_brown
Yes, after all the article is promoting rental services WeWork (you to can
pretend to be an employed tech worker while homeless) and REI rentals (for the
millennial homeless who no longer own their own tents but rent them)...both of
which are financial sponsors of the publisher.

And just in case you weren’t convinced how great the life is, they throw in a
PhD quote promoting these “choices”, odds are the PhD will be homeless soon
too and hoping their qoute will get them a job.

Curious how you read anything but promotion into this article?

~~~
ForHackernews
> Curious how you read anything but promotion into this article?

So for starters, it's clearly a "straight news" piece, so the overall tone is
neutral (not promotional), but the subtext is pretty obviously negative:

1) The tragic photo at the top of the piece.

2) Highlights the role of adverse circumstances: "There are two big reasons
for this shift: the price of housing and student loan debt." / "But a lot rent
and share because they're broke and they need to save money."

3) Ends with this quote focusing on how unsustainable it is: "It's not
something that you can do forever, because you do need to have a place that
you can genuinely point to and say, this is my home," he says.

~~~
will_brown
1) tragic photo? It’s a promotional photo complete with positive quote from
the person how great the life style is.

2) the entire article highlights how this is a lifestyle choice...and you
cherry-picked the sole comparative quote acknowledging not all homeless are
affluent and homeless by choice.

From the NPR financial sponsors:

>"We're selling joy," he says. "We're selling inspiration when you get out on
a trail or go for a bike ride. We're selling the adrenaline buzz at the end of
a run, and we're just trying to enable that in any way we possibly can."

3). Right...”you can’t do it forever” we shouldn’t be speaking about
homelessness in these terms. Nothing is going to change to make these homeless
people not broke and magically be able to go out and buy a home.

~~~
ForHackernews
Re: #2 -- read more carefully -- I highlighted two separate quotes from
different paragraphs in the piece.

And I'll wager the journalist chose that quote about "selling joy" to
emphasize how ridiculous it sounds. There's a degree of dramatic irony at work
here; you have to understand how to read between the lines.

e.g. here's one of the author's colleagues at NPR retweeting the "Hilarious
story from @samsanders"
[https://twitter.com/pgogoi/status/1120711647323197440](https://twitter.com/pgogoi/status/1120711647323197440)

I guarantee you NPR journos do not think everyone should live in "PodShares"

~~~
will_brown
>And I'll wager the journalist chose that quote about "selling joy" to
emphasize how ridiculous it sounds... you have to understand how to read
between the lines.

The qoute is from their financial sponsor...the “journalist” is not picking
quotes, and they are not mocking their sponsors “ridiculous” quotes, they are
being paid ...and they are pushing their sponsors brand new rental business.

~~~
ForHackernews
Sorry, why are you putting the word "journalist" in scare quotes? Is your
assertion that Sam Sanders is not a journalist?

I think your interpretation badly misunderstands the relationship between
journalists and sources quoted. Every reputable publisher has a strict
separation between the advertising/business side of the organization and the
editorial side.[0]

[0] [https://ethics.journalism.wisc.edu/2012/12/19/breaking-
down-...](https://ethics.journalism.wisc.edu/2012/12/19/breaking-down-the-
wall/)

------
helen___keller
> He rents a bed in a large room with other people who rent beds, for nights,
> weeks or months at a time, through a service called PodShare

Cynically, this sounds like we've found a way to reinvent the packed tenements
of the industrial revolution

~~~
0xB31B1B
Why is that cynical/implying this is bad? IMO We need more tenements. Someone
making 50k/year working in a central city should be able to chose if they want
a bigger unit and a commute, or a bed to crash in and a walk to work. There is
a huge and underserved demand for these by for example grad students, recent
college graduates, consultants/long distance commuters (ex, live in Oregon fri
- Sunday, fly to SF and work mon - thurs)

~~~
Balgair
Aside: I wonder if the rise of the so-called 'incels' sub-culture is more
tightly linked to income or to housing. It may be worth while to investigate
the self-professed 'incels' and their housing habits. If you are in one of
these tenement style group bunks, I imagine that you'd have a much harder time
meeting and 'interacting' with your preferred partners-to-be.

~~~
P_I_Staker
I think it's more people on the frindges, finally able to share ideas. I know
plenty of people that live with parents or in squalid conditions and have no
problems. Lots of these incels are socially challenged and / or on spectrum

------
mauvehaus
I think a more accurate term for people who have a living arrangement that
isn't within the confines of most people's idea of "home", but is a stable
home to them nonetheless is "houseless".

Full-time RV'ers, for instance, would be houseless. A person who has given up
their house or lease, and disposed of or stored their possessions to take a
long-term trip (gap year, thru-hike, etc) would be houseless. Hashtag
vanlifers? Houseless.

Similarly, I'd call somebody living the lifestyle presented in the article
houseless, not homeless.

~~~
Balgair
Jessica Bruder's _Nomadland: Surviving America In The Twenty-First Century_ is
a very good look into the RV'ers and their lives[0, 1]. Though at first, many
people profess to love the freedom of the RV life, upon further inspection,
most are very unhappy with it. Financial crises typically nucleate the move
into the RV and that lifestyle. Per a recent NPR interview:

"And then maybe four days later, a week later, if I'm still hanging around as
a reporter, that's when I hear about the foreclosure or the 401(k) that got
wiped out, those other details. So people are eager to tell you that they
chose this, but their options have narrowed quite a bit in recent years. So,
you know, on the one hand, there is the I'm out there and I'm having an
adventure. And on the other hand, this is sometimes the result of few
options."

In the end, people are involved in complicated choices in their complicated
lives. Still, it seems that most people would rather not be RV-ing their way
through life, but make the best of it and put on a smile despite their
situations.

A similar effect may be occurring with the OP.

[0] [https://www.npr.org/2017/09/25/553532591/nomadland-tracks-
ri...](https://www.npr.org/2017/09/25/553532591/nomadland-tracks-rising-
number-of-americans-living-on-the-road)

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/Nomadland-Surviving-America-Twenty-
Fi...](https://www.amazon.com/Nomadland-Surviving-America-Twenty-First-
Century/dp/039324931X)

~~~
driverdan
Full timers range from being forced to live in a broken down car to having a
successful exit and buying a million dollar class A. It depends on who you
talk to. Some people choose it, some don't. Many who don't are making the best
of their situation so they're trying to be positive about it.

I live in a bus. I choose this life. I know many others who also made this
choice. I could afford a decent mortgage if I wanted to. Instead I'm exploring
the country while I put that money towards paying off other debt and into
savings. At some point I'll buy real estate but not today.

~~~
Balgair
Thank you very much for the additional viewpoint! Is there a good resource
available for others to see this flip-side better? Do you have a blog or other
book that you could recommend? Again, thanks!

~~~
driverdan
There are many depending on which segment you want to look at. Most RV clubs
(eg Escapees[1]) cater to retired people who have sold their houses to travel
in RVs. Vanlife / vandweller[2] type sites mostly cater to 20-40 somethings
choosing the lifestyle. Some, like Cheap RV Living[3], cater to a wide range
including those forced into it.

There are also forums dedicated to people building their own vehicles. Cheap
RV Living has one. Skoolie.net[4] focuses on buses. Then there's a whole
segment of adventure / overlanding vehicles such as Expedition Portal[5].

1: [https://www.escapees.com/](https://www.escapees.com/)

2: [http://reddit.com/r/vandwellers/](http://reddit.com/r/vandwellers/)

3: [https://www.cheaprvliving.com/](https://www.cheaprvliving.com/)

4: [http://www.skoolie.net/forums/](http://www.skoolie.net/forums/)

5: [https://www.expeditionportal.com/](https://www.expeditionportal.com/)

------
40acres
It's surprising to me that we aren't heavily subsidizing the development of
high density apartments. Developers are building luxury housing because low
and middle income is not economically viable -- the cost of building materials
and labor is rising, so why not use tax breaks and permit deregulation to spur
more growth?

I was surprised that the 2017 tax cut didn't seem to have any mechanisms to
address the lack of middle class housing. I'm not sure if "opportunity zones"
is sufficient.

~~~
Teckla
_high density apartments_

Light sleeper here.

Apartments are a nonstarter for a lot of people, due to poor soundproofing.

Unless and until soundproofing gets better -- and I mean a _LOT_ better --
apartments will never be practical for a nontrivial percentage of the
population, as much as we might otherwise prefer them.

~~~
imtringued
I don't get it. If my neighbours didn't renovate their apartments by drilling
holes or hammering on the walls I wouldn't even know that other people besides
me live in the same building. Sound proofing isn't going to stop walls from
vibrating. Just suck it up. 2 days of noise a year isn't a nonstarter.

------
sevensor
Private quarters with shared kitchen and bathroom? We used to call these
"rooming houses." They've been around since the industrial revolution if not
longer. Every time I see an article about the strange new living circumstances
being chosen by Millenials, it ends up being an article that's actually about
the 40-year aberration that was America between 1960 and 2000.

Edit: speling

------
rootedbox
My nephew is 22 lives in his van in SF. He makes plenty each month from his GI
bill, and it's a really nice van. I would never call him homeless living in a
van.. at this point he's made a lifestyle choice for a guy who prefers to be
at the beach on the weekends.

I would say the same for the guy in this article. He's made a lifestyle
choice.

True homelessness is not a lifestyle choice.

~~~
wvenable
The question is, what is his alternatives? Living in SF making plenty each
month doesn't mean he can afford to own something reasonable. Perhaps he would
make a different choice if he had more opportunities.

------
grecy
It's amazing there is still such a stigma around people that choose an
alternate lifestyle, or simply choose not to own a 4,000 sq. ft. McMansion
that we stoop so low as to call them _Homeless_. The word has such dirty
connotations.

I'm quite certain the author of this article would call me homeless. In fact
I've been living in my vehicle for 3 years while driving around Africa, and
I've never been happier in my life. Certainly night and day compared to when I
was working a Desk as a Software Engineer, renting a nice place.

I have no interest in ever owning a home, and I'm sure I'll move between
renting and living on the road as I see fit. That I should be labeled
_homeless_ for this is partially laughable, but also really disgusting. The
drive to force people to consume is intense in the West.

~~~
kristianc
> I'm quite certain the author of this article would call me homeless. In fact
> I've been living in my vehicle for 3 years while driving around Africa, and
> I've never been happier in my life. Certainly night and day compared to when
> I was working a Desk as a Software Engineer, renting a nice place.

There is a difference between you, who has taken a conscious decision _not to
own_, and has the means to drive around Africa, and someone who has no choice
but to do that in order to support a precarious existence as a social media
content producer in Hollywood.

~~~
bluGill
That social media producer in Hollywood chose that as well. He could move to a
number of cities where the cost of living is lower. He could have gone to
school and become a brain surgeon which would pay for a nice house even in
Hollywood.

~~~
kristianc
Different people are endowed with different natural abilities. It's not just a
good school that stands between someone becoming a brain surgeon or not.

Likewise, the cost of living in Scranton, PA is proportionate to the
opportunity for gainful employment there.

------
mschuster91
Funny enough: (mostly conservative-leaning, old) people complain that the
young generation has less kids, has girst time sex much later in life etc.,
but they seem to ignore the cause: stuff like this. How can one have a
relationship without having a space to live said relationship in?

Call me a pessimist but this is going to hit societies hard in the next
decades. When there are not enough young people to sustain pension systems,
and the people in their 30s or 40s don't have a house, savings or any other
asset to make up for not having a decent pension system...

------
sna1l
Really playing fast and loose with the word "homeless" here...

------
christkv
Is this just the modern version of a flop house ?

~~~
everyone
Of course not! Its a 'Pod' .. Thats why its much more expensive than a
flophouse.

------
CharlesColeman
> Steven T. Johnson, 27, works in social media advertising

What does that mean exactly, in his case? Is he an "influencer" like
TheYachtGuy ([https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/the-lonely-life-of-a-
yac...](https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/the-lonely-life-of-a-yacht-
influencer))?

~~~
povertyworld
I wonder if Podshare is one of his clients.

------
paulpauper
The short-term inconvenience pays off in terms of saving money to buy a home
and invest rather than pissing away the money on rent and other recurring
expenses. Rent is a major rain on savings, especially in high cost of living
areas.

~~~
aetherson
Is this guy living inexpensively? He takes ride-share, which is much more
expensive than owning a cheap car. Owning two pairs of clothes doesn't really
lower your clothing costs, and my guess is that he doesn't cook much for
himself, which is another good way to drive up your cost of living.

Podshare lists rates of $1,000/month in LA ( _not_ SF). I don't know what
local rents are there, but my guess is that Podshare is below the rates of
studio apartments, but at or around the rates of renting one bedroom in a
house.

~~~
paulpauper
hmm..but The cost off the car does not include insurance, gas, insurance. A
cheap old car will probably need a lot of repairs.

~~~
aetherson
You pay for insurance and gas (and repairs) on an Uber, too. If your
utilization of the car is low, you can get per-mile car insurance and pay a
low cost for it.

You can get a cheap new car for a lot lower TCO than traveling an equivalent
number of miles with Uber. Like, a _lot_ lower, unless your utilization is
crazy low. If you travel under 2,000 miles per year or so, Uber might be the
best option for you.

------
bena
That's great if you don't have any responsibility but yourself.

For some people, being homeless isn't a real option.

~~~
josefresco
I had the same reaction, that this lifestyle is pretty common for young,
single professionals living in the city. 25+ years ago my sister lived in the
city and also didn't own a car, washing machine, house or... because of her
tiny apt lots of "things". This is another trash (IMHO) article, seeking to
depict "millennials" as some sort of new breed of human more willing to share
when in act their just young and unattached.

------
mdupin
If you can't afford to buy a house, then by definition you're not "affluent."
Many of the type of people profiled in this article can't afford to buy a
house in their locales, and thus should not be labelled "affluent."

The article should be called something like, "The Non-Indigent Homeless."

Words matter.

