Homelessness was on the rise even before the pandemic

Patent nonsense in the GD (unemployment >20%); see the above photo.

So what about today? Still patent nonsense, in a NAIRU neoliberal economy which MANDATES a level of unemployment/low wage-employment, by definition, to control inflation.

You aren't sure about the meaning of "choice"?

 

Irrelevant. Whether tents or little shacks, the fact was the inhabitants were clean living, ordinary, decent people. If you're going to pretend they're the same as the modern homeless addict living in squalor, we're not going to have much to discuss.

As for how they adapted back in the day ... they lived within their straightened means for the duration necessary, and then returned to conventional living. They were not dissolute addicts, shunning responsibility and answerability, you see.

 

You are failing to address the CAUSES of addiction/low self-esteem. Generational poverty and unemployment itself, a consequence of a dysfunctional economic system, may be a cause of addiction. ie, the experience for a child of growing up in a home without a working parent (aka "generational unemployment") is a breeding ground for addiction....not to mention poor parenting models.

Speaking of dysfunctional economic systems, we also have a dysfunctional social system:

eg, Britney - a smart lass - was dead drunk, so much so she didn't even know what was happening to her.....all courtesy of the mainstream alcohol culture that thinks drinking to excess is "normal", and so removes personal responsibility.

 

Okay, I think blaming addiction on poverty may be taking it a little too far.
Yes, poverty may be a big factor leading to addiction, but it seems like an absurd stretch to put most of the blame for addiction onto poverty.

Anyway, I think the main point was not blaming addiction on poverty, but rather pointing out that addiction is not the only factor causing the individual to be homeless, in many cases. Economic factors can combine with addiction to make them become homeless.

And it is not true that most of the homeless have addiction problems. (It is a little more complicated than that)

 

I wrote "A" cause, not THE cause of addiction, along with low self-esteem, and homelessness, is poverty... which suggests poverty begets poverty, which is true in the inter-generational sense.

Agreed.

Agreed.

So...do we agree that provision of public housing is a desirable policy?

 

I see I didn't reply to your question in the MMT thread, namely:

The correct description would be a combination of free market and command economy.

Interestingly, commentators have suggested this as a reason for the success of the Chinese economy, after Deng's 'opening up'.

In any case, relevant to the OP, public housing is obviously outside the free market, because public housing must be funded in the public sector. (Likewise for your question in the MMT thead re the JG: a JG job is "valued" and funded in the public sector.

So....half a "command" economy....

 

demonstrable fact of reality. Sorry. Nobody is prevented from bettering themselves, learning new skills in order to obtain a higher salary.

I'm quite sure about the meaning of choice. Nothing prevents you from learning a skill to increase your worth. Remaining in a low paying minimum wage job is 100% choice, and not my responsibility because you choose to stay in a job that pays you less that you think you deserve.

 

It's not just people; it's businesses, and governments at all levels running deficits, and the federal government creating debt on steroids! How would many of our private companies perform if they were not getting big cash from the stock market? How many people, businesses and governments use debt as SOP? How healthy would our economy be if government was not spending trillion$? IMO our economy is always teetering on the brink...

 

The best economies have a hybrid of supply and demand economics.

Debt is fine as long as the debt service can be managed. Can the US afford to pay $1 trillion per year in debt service?

We can't have demand versus supply or Reps versus Dems or debt versus no debt...we must look at each situation and take more precise actions to mitigate root issues...

 

Hating homeless victims won't solve anything...

 

Well, that very much depends. Is there a way to make that public housing affordable housing? (And I mean affordable for the government, not the people living there)

If the underlying problem in the first place is just that housing in that area is unaffordable, then public-funded housing is not really going to solve the main problem and could even be a little counterproductive.
(Are you going to tax the other people with housing to pay for this? That would make housing even more difficult to afford for most other people)

 

I think one of the first things that needs to be addressed up front if you are really going to solve the homeless crisis is to let go if this idea of the homeless being entitled to "equal" housing just like everybody else.
What I mean is it's probably not going to actually be pragmatic to house them the same way that other people are housed.
Something like 9 foot by 11 foot bare concrete cell blocks might be what is called for, with prison-style toilets.

Additional details:
Run it like a dormitory. Segregate the homeless living there into different groups away from each other. For example, the ones who are not willing to keep a quiet noise level, or the smoking ones.
Have cafeteria provided meals.

Maybe even an electronic system to limit how many times the toilet can be flushed. Like only an automatic three flushes a day, and after that a special ID card has to be used, with a limit of 20 flushes in the span of a week, and 70 flushes in the span of a month.

 

1) the cause of low self esteem etc is family dysfunction in childhood. that's psych 101. don't want to see more of it? then be the best and most responsible role model and parent you can be. don't add to the tax payers burden by producing more liabilities. that's 'addressing the cause'.

2) that might YOUR culture, but it sure isn't mine, and it sure isn't mainstream outside of a fairly narrow sector of white Western First Worlders.

 

Seriously, that's your response? Wow, my post must have hit home

 

In the case where rents are too high for otherwise responsible low-paid workers, then rental accommodation can be subsidized by government in ANY area; and in the case of ("irresponsible") people with drug/alcohol addiction and mental health problems, government should accommodate these people in special supported-living units, to avoid negative social impacts on the local community.

How to fund either case? You already know my solution....since all the resources required for the government to implement the above policies are available for purchase by the sovereign currency issuing government.

Failing this, then the funds will need to come from taxes and/or borrowing from the private sector, ie, you and me (or anyone who is subject to paying tax).

 

Dude, there is no compassion in simply throwing money at the symptoms - and homelessness is a symptom. That does nothing but perpetuate the problem. Since no sane adult thinks giving drunks a drink helps the drunk, it has to be assumed that this is deliberate perpetuation. Only you know why you support that.

Compassion lies in addressing the CAUSE, not throwing money at the symptoms. Since you describe the solution (raise your kids to be self-respecting and responsible, and dismantle the indiscriminate welfare state) as beyond reality, you've made it clear that you find the solution onerous and objectionable. To which I say .. 'and there's your true contempt and disregard'. You want the solution to be as easy as throwing money at the symptoms. Anything requiring effort or compromise is beyond the pale, apparently. Your interest is apparently limited to the instant gratification that goes with making exhortations for 'someone to do something'.

If you truly cared about homelessness, you would have a very different perspective. You would know that genuine love is tough as nails. It does NOT seek to enable (and thus destroy), it seeks to teach and empower.

 

Problem is you can't simply say to an adult (who has been damaged by generational poverty in their childhood) "now be the best role model you can be ". Such people will need supported living in special housing units. I'm surprised you can't see this (after all, you did mention psych.101). Both OMOF and Kazenatsu have tried to point it out to you.

??? You don't know that excessive drinking is a benchmark - even a right of passage - of Aussie culture? Not to mention many other nations....even Britney was caught up in it, FGS...

 

1) In which case be the best relative or friend you can be and provide that assistance and housing, so generational bad habits can be broken. Provide save harbour for as long as the person needs it, and so long as they're helping themselves (staying clean, pulling their weight, etc). That's your 'assisted housing'. That's what's lacking in modern First World society.

2) You know a different Australia, sorry. That's not the demographic I mix with, at all.

 

Note my underlined.

Correct, and in fact, taking the concept somewhat further ie, beyond the free market alone:

China Economic Growth: Cause, Pros, Cons, Future (thebalance.com)

"China's economy has enjoyed 30 years of explosive growth, making it the world's 2nd largest and growing.

Its success was based on a mixed economy that incorporated limited capitalism within a command economy. The Chinese government's spending has been a significant driver of its growth".

Note the bolded: now THAT'S what you call a REAL "hybrid of supply and demand economics".

Yes it can, provided it has access to the necessary resources and can maintain/improve its productivity.

Unfortunately, economics professors are divided on how much debt or borrowing governments can sustain:

The return of the Macro Wars - Noahpinion (substack.com)

"In fact, it’s worth asking whether this represents a paradigm shift in macroeconomic theory — not theory as academics do it, but theory as employed by central bankers, legislators, and public intellectuals. J.W. Mason says yes — according to him, the Biden bill is a recognition that fiscal stimulus is really, really important, that aggregate demand and employment matter a lot, and that public debt “doesn’t matter.” John Cochrane fires back, saying Mason’s theory is wrong, and that if we try to live by that theory, inflation will result.

I think Mason isn’t quite right, first of all because the Biden bill mostly isn’t fiscal stimulus, but more importantly because actions don’t constitute theory. Biden’s relief bill — and the even bigger infrastructure bill, if it passes — is actually an experiment. Like a minimum wage hike or a more permissive immigration policy, Biden’s massive spending is a bet that something economists traditionally thought would cause substantial negative consequences actually won’t be that bad.

If Biden’s bet fails, we’re in trouble. But if it succeeds, we’ll learn something valuable about the way the economy works."

In my view, any "trouble" can be quickly dealt with, provided the economy has access to the necessary resources and can maintain/improve its productivity. Central governments can always cancel public debt, though they don't want the general public to know it.

Tuesday, March 23, 2021 – Bill Mitchell – Modern Monetary Theory (economicoutlook.net)

RBA (reserve bank of Australia) shows who is in charge as the speculators are outwitted.

 

People damaged by generation poverty in childhood, or suffering mental illness, don't want - in fact often refuse - help from family or relatives.

Ist result from quick google search:

"Based on self-reported data from the AIHW** 2016 NDSHS, a similar proportion, almost 1 in 5 (18%) people aged 18 or older, consumed more than 2 standard drinks per day on average, exceeding the lifetime risk guidelines" [4].7 Aug 2017

** Australian institute of health and welfare.

It's a significant problem in Australia as in many other countries.

 

So if they don't WANT help, why in heck are you trying to help them? You're making no sense at all, here. What a total waste of time and precious resources, focusing on people who don't want it. Unbelievable, when there are so many people who DO want it, and will use it for its intended purpose.

Dude, Australia is a LOT bigger and more diverse than white alcoholics.

 

You realize that is just going to lead to shortages?

Basic economics.

In a normal free market, goods are allocated by price. Remove that rationing mechanism and you would have to allocate scarce goods through some other mechanism, which can get very problematic and messy. Generally not economically efficient.

 

Hating the homeless, judging the homeless, won't solve anything...

 

Biden is dealing with economics and reality and business and people in trouble. Since immediate action is necessary, there are basically only two choices; do something or do nothing. And the obvious something is force more money into society. When this is considered an emergency scenario more debt is a moot point. Taking the option of doing nothing is economic and political failure.

Government debt cannot be cancelled without defaulting world nations and US citizens and even the USPS who all hold the bonds...