Comment by zdragnar | Hacker News Reader

Comment by zdragnar | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

You are trying to use a universal solution to a specific problem. Furthermore, visible homelessness is often a presenting symptom of other, non-homelessness problems. Look no further than San Fransisco or Seattle for how little throwing money at something will change the outcome.

Or, look at the education system in Washington DC- highest expenditure per pupil, with sub-par results.

Giving everyone for an undefined, but definitely finte, period a lump sum of cash will certainly help a small number of people. Others will not leverage the windfall and will once again be destitute when the charity ends.

What do we do then? I would rather have a more systematic solution [edit: set of solutions] to help people whenever they are in need, rather than a blanket solution.

Some arguments I've seen boil down to "well, let's do both!" at which point all they are arguing for is sticking with the same broken system, but throwing more money on top of it. It doesn't change the fact that what we have isn't working, and isn't going to be solved by further crippling the middle class (since "the rich" typically adjust income strategies whenever taxes change, they're not going to be affected in the way "tax the rich" folk expect).

> You are trying to use a universal solution to a specific problem

Wat? It (UBI) is a self described universal solution. Inability to avoid becoming degenerate (where your daily situation will gradually worsen) in the western world is not a specific problem. The idea that leveraging UBI for 2 years (which is oddly specific) is beneficial, is laughable. Almost every degenerate (not a pejorative usage here) started from a stable lifestyle, belies the problem with that approach. You've staved off a few years, but not addressed the underlying issue. If you aren't adapted (intelligent, able bodied, whatever) to survive in modern western society, is sterilization (or lawful restriction on childbirths) for permanent UBI moral? This avoids the octomom welfare queen issues. It's worth thinking about, I believe.

Based on my association with welfare workers (and one in particular that specifically works with the homeless) "visible" homelessness is most frequently a result of mental illness and / or drug abuse (which renders a person roughly at the same capability level as if they had mental illness).

Throwing money at them won't change their condition so much as providing treatment for the underlying cause that allowed them to become "degenerate" as you say.

Unfortunately, many have no desire to accept treatment- either they feel they don[t need it, don't want it (hard to give up drugs) or fear repercussions of accepting treatment (i.e. come under close scrutiny, lose freedom, get locked away, etc).

The sort of homelessness that is harder to "see", so to speak- and that's the sort of people who are temporarily out of a job and lost their home, or suffered a medical setback, or what have you. Sometimes, money is enough for them to get back on their feet. Other times, they simply lack the financial skills necessary to make wise money decisions (aka have a savings account built up for emergencies) and could also benefit from financial training to avoid landing right back in the same situation again.

No matter how you look at it, a tailored solution is more effective than throwing money at people, because the problem you see isn't necessarily the root problem that needs to be addressed.

> (aka have a savings account built up for emergencies)

As far as I can see it, "not having a savings account" is primarily a function of money.

Intelligent people have low savings because rent is higher than their take-home pay. Remember that the average American family lives under $50,000 / year wages. That's a family, which typically includes TWO wage-earners.

Average wages is below $35k / year. Drop out a bunch for taxes and it becomes difficult to build up savings.

Go to "below average" jobs and you straight up are unable to afford rent, unless you band people together somehow.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com