Homelessness has been increasing nationwide for about 3 decades or so:
http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/why.html
This is because the supply of affordable housing has been dwindling while demand grows:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1292331.... It's true that homelessness is on the rise. But in New York, half of our rental housing is rent regulated, that's 1M apartments. Even if 100% of them were rent regulated, there likely would be homeless people, since lower rent does not mean cheap rent (an $800 studio will still be out of reach to someone from the street). Then we have projects, but those have severe funding problems and a long line to get in.
Many homeless people you see have mental health and addiction issues. The bigger issue is funding clinics and mental facilities so their only occasional beds aren't public hospitals and jails.
This is not specific to New York per se. I guess you have every right to argue that this is just a New York issue because this this a New York law under discussion, but lack of affordable housing is hardly specific to New York and AirBnB is also hardly specific to New York.
I have every right to be New York specific? That's an interesting way to put it, to say the least. Listen, and I'm assuming you're in the U.S.: we live in a big country, one that's run as a Federation. State laws and city laws differ enormously. It's hard to talk about housing policy in the abstract without reference to specific cities and states. Where we can talk more generally are trends, like the growth of cities.
So, do you have any pointers as to how and when it would be okay to make any points about it without them being dismissed out of hand as irrelevant, not on topic and so on?
Thanks
My sarcasm detection seems unable to parse this sentence, but I'll be naive and assume you're asking a serious question. How do we avoid making points dismissed out of hand as irrelevant? Well, when we have political entities make doublespeak or insincere commentary to bolster something different entirely in their own interest, I say it's fair to dismiss as insincere. In this case the hotel lobby of NYC came out making commentary about communities and affordable housing, when in fact the law was for the most part protecting the hotel lobby. That's insincere. I feel that as a nation we're so accustomed to our political figures and advertising entities make insincere comments that it barely registers morally.