Find me an example of any city in the USA aside from NYC where the homeless population outranks the vacant home rate
I did not include this but when looking at those numbers this was the same for Seattle, for San Francisco, for Michigan, etc.
I’m not surprised if it exists but given LA and NYC have some of the highest rates of homelessness in the country I doubt there are many examples
The idea presented was never “ship homeless people all over to displace them and also put them in camps” but notice how it immediately gets twisted to the worst interpretation to defend commodity landownership
I’m not defending commodity landownership. Rent seeking behavior shouldn’t be rewarded, and I think housing people by transferring ownership of vacant units to them without remuneration to prior landlords would promote the public good.
My point was that as you change the perspective by which you look at a problem like homelessness, the casual factors change, as do the sorts of solutions that people consider. Yes, some of them are really bad at large scales, and I’d rather focus on smaller scales for that reason. At city/metro scales, it’s a lot easier to make meaningful change, and there’s something special about helping your neighbors like that. You’ve kind of made my point for me, there.
Find me an example of any city in the USA aside from NYC where the homeless population outranks the vacant home rate
I did not include this but when looking at those numbers this was the same for Seattle, for San Francisco, for Michigan, etc.
I’m not surprised if it exists but given LA and NYC have some of the highest rates of homelessness in the country I doubt there are many examples
The idea presented was never “ship homeless people all over to displace them and also put them in camps” but notice how it immediately gets twisted to the worst interpretation to defend commodity landownership
I’m not defending commodity landownership. Rent seeking behavior shouldn’t be rewarded, and I think housing people by transferring ownership of vacant units to them without remuneration to prior landlords would promote the public good.
My point was that as you change the perspective by which you look at a problem like homelessness, the casual factors change, as do the sorts of solutions that people consider. Yes, some of them are really bad at large scales, and I’d rather focus on smaller scales for that reason. At city/metro scales, it’s a lot easier to make meaningful change, and there’s something special about helping your neighbors like that. You’ve kind of made my point for me, there.
Me neither but u/ragebutt also twisted my words in this way. I suggest disengaging they are so mean lol.