But there are also homeless Germans, despite of safety nets existing in theory. I think it is often associated with mental illness and addiction, making it difficult for people to master the bureaucracy to get access to social services.
But there are also homeless Germans, despite of safety nets existing in theory. I think it is often associated with mental illness and addiction, making it difficult for people to master the bureaucracy to get access to social services.
In Germany, I've only seen homelessness due to mental illness, because the bureaucracy in the social programs causes too much friction for them to use it with decent success. There are organizations that help people navigate the mazes and paperwork, but it's still too much friction.
In America, it's both, but primarily economic. The levels of economic inequality in America is something I'd only seen in third world countries before. TBH I'm surprised at how low the corruption level in government jobs is given how dire peoples circumstances have become. It is much worse than in other first world countries, but not as bad as in places like Mexico or India. The higher the inequality, the more the proportion pushed towards mental illness in the homeless people living there. San Francisco was particularly bleak...
In Japan, it's also primarily economic, but I suspect that's mainly due to their tendency to hide mental illness away since it's a source of shame. The "tent cities" in the parks were a sight to behold...
this myth gets repeated and has no basis in reality. people in every city that offer any kind of service for the poor think that this attracts poor people. i guess it’s easier to believe that people are choosing to cheat society than society failed to provide for them
From the charts in your article it still doesn't seem unlikely that many homeless people migrated there for the jobs, a ka money - 30% in the "1 to 4 years" bracket, 48% if you go to "up to 9 years".
In my city (Berlin) it certainly seems to be the case that it is often immigrants who end up homeless, presumably because the social net for citizens doesn't fully apply to them.
That's a poor choice of words that betrays your lack of knowledge on the subject. Instead of guesses about what is happening backed up with with "why else" reasoning, why not just do a little research on your own first? Or at least start with a question instead of a claim?
If you would apply the principle of charity, you would have been able to read my comment correctly.
> homeless people flock to places with spare money and mild climate.
Here is what it would look like as a question:
Do homeless people move to places with spare money and mild climate?
The "why else" construction is not a literal question. It's rhetoric device used to make a claim about reasoning. It implies that you've thought through all the possible reasons and you've come up with the obvious answer.
But if you were really making a sincere question, the answer to "why else" is: that is where they lived when they became homeless.
"It implies that you've thought through all the possible reasons and you've come up with the obvious answer."
No, me writing "MIGHT" literally implies the opposite of that.
It is also an aspect to consider, in any case - it is a valid question of why there are many homeless in a rich place. Merely claiming "inequality" is not actually an answer. In theory, the rich place should offer more job opportunities than poor places elsewhere.
Which theory? Because trickle down doesn't have much support in terms of evidence. Often it's actually the wealth that causes the homelessness. As wealthy people move into an area and rents skyrocket, people who once could afford to live there end up on the street.
And where are homeless people getting all this money to relocate a thousand miles away based on the hopes that they might get a job in a city with a much higher cost of living? None of this even passes a quick common sense test.
Are there no renter protections in the USA, anyway?
The theory is simple that where the area is rich, there are more jobs - catering to the rich people, but also the jobs that make the rich people rich.
As for relocating, in the old days, you could hitchhike or jump on trains.
Plenty of it, it is one of the primary causes. But just to put it in concrete terms that should scare anyone, the average rent in San Francisco in 1994 was about $1000. By 2001 the average rent was $2300. [1]
Consider that other living costs go up along with rent.
> Are there no renter protections in the USA, anyway?
Sometimes. But what happens when you lose your job, and then lose your apartment as a result? How are you going to afford the much higher rents now at a new apartment even if you can find a new job? At minimum wage?
If you ever decide to work with homeless people (you should) you'll hear two types of stories over and over: 1. Diseases such as mental illness and addiction. 2. People who are pretty much just like you and me. And then something unexpected happened. These stories are humbling, because after hearing enough of them you realize that a lot of what's keeping a roof over your own head is luck. Add medical bankruptcy to the mix and you've got the USA.
> The theory is simple that where the area is rich, there are more jobs - catering to the rich people.
So your theory is that rich people hire homeless people off the street to cater to them? NYC has loads of rich people - the most in the world [2]. NYC also has a huge homelessness problem. Maybe that will get solved when and if NYC gets just a few more billionaires?
NY state itself has the highest per capita homelessness rate in the USA [3]. Trickle down doesn't work.
> but also the jobs that make the rich people rich.
This is along the lines of saying "stop being poor, just get one of those jobs that the rich people have".
I would encourage you just read up on the subject instead of inventing theories that sound good to you. Homelessness is a well researched topic, and there is no lack of studies and data around it.
[1] https://johnmacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Rents_Avg-S...
[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotognini/2020/04/07/world...
[3] https://psydprograms.org/the-places-with-the-most-and-least-...
"what happens when you lose your job, and then lose your apartment as a result?"
Then losing your job is the cause, not the rising rents.
"So your theory is that rich people hire homeless people off the street to cater to them?"
I could imagine many people migrate to those places to try to make their luck, because there are many opportunities. Many people trying their luck means also many people failing.
Pretty sure that a couple of dozen Billionaires do NOT cause homelessness.
"Trickle down doesn't work."
People living in New York are probably quite well off in general. A bunch of homeless people don't contradict the trickle down effect. You yourself mentioned mental illness, addiction, and unforeseen events as major causes of homelessness. Notice how rising rents and high paying jobs are not on the list.
"> but also the jobs that make the rich people rich.
This is along the lines of saying "stop being poor, just get one of those jobs that the rich people have"."
Not at all, and this is becoming silly. All I said is that there are presumably the jobs that made the rich people rich, which will usually be a lot of jobs, because rich people will usually have sold a lot of things. Building lots of things requires many workers.
"I would encourage you just read up on the subject instead of inventing theories that sound good to you."
If you are so well read, then provide some convincing evidence for your claims. None of the three links you provided tell us anything about the cause of homelessness. I noticed in the last one that California has very low youth homelessness, though.
Frankly, your "well researched" theories about homeless sound mostly like leftist anti capitalist propaganda to me.
Yes, that's the entire problem I've been encouraging you to stop doing. You don't need to imagine. It's an extremely well researched subject.
I was sincerely hoping you'd put a little work into the research yourself (like I asked you to) instead of continuing to create mental fantasies about why homelessness might happen. We already know why it happens. Without any cherry picking on my part, here are the top five search results from "causes of homelessness". Is it really going to surprise you that "lack of affordable housing" shows up over and over? When average rents goes from $1000 to $2300 in a few years, that's a specific example of "lack of affordable housing" isn't it? It's plain common sense that skyrocketing rents are going to put some people on the street. If you don't believe the articles, talk to some real homeless people, like I have during my volunteer work to help them.
https://atlantamission.org/7-major-causes-homelessness/
https://www.homelesshub.ca/about-homelessness/homelessness-1...
https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/what-cau...
https://www.solutionsfdl.com/resources/what-causes-homelessn...
https://www.humanrightscareers.com/issues/root-causes-of-hom...
I've concluded that the best way to understand America is as the top first world country and a Latin American third world country still struggling with the effects of colonization - in the same physical location. You can see bits of both next to each other, and the ugly coexistence of pretending not to see the problems.
Trump surprised a lot of people by suddenly manifesting the politics of the Latin American country - he's a lot more like Peron than GWB. He's a sort of "business generalissimo": rather than going around in a uniform with a bunch of unearned medals, he talks about his business "successes" (inherited or bankrupt) endlessly.
But there was also a man who was bullied out of the company where he had worked for 21 years. I guess he didn't see homelessness coming for him. Also there was an older woman who lived in her car because she was forced out of the apartment where she lived for her whole life and she refused to accept moving to a different apartment. She had a reputable job, it was after she retired that all these issues came up. So I guess that even here there is no absolute guarantee that one wouldn't end up homeless.
Most homeless in western european countries come either from losing their job and having drug problems, or losing their wifes and thereby homes. The many eastern homeless cross the borders because they can live much better by begging on the streets here than in the east. But there are plenty of homeless, squatters there also. Eg nost of the abandoned village houses in the east were subsequently squatted by gypsies. The city center in Bucuresti is also full of homeless. When writing a book about homeless over the world in the US and Russia, the problems were the same, just that in the USA there's a homeless shipping industry to get them out of the city, but they still prefer the warm south where it's easy to survive. Who wouldn't. Even the rich old folks prefer Florida over NY. Just politicians and police are more inhuman there.
To me it’s always seemed like mostly a way to regulate begging, and also to let both parties pretend it isn’t begging. And in the best case maybe it’s therapeutic for people to write for them.
But it doesn’t seem like anyone reads these, and I wonder, are the other effects worth the cost / effort?
They have to buy all the papers they are distributing in advance. It's a financial risk. But a good income, if you've got a good location.
I vividly remember that just across the Romanian border, there are numerous Roma villages that look quite like Skid Row.
I can't compare European homelessness to its American variant, but I can say it certainly exists. Safety nets have holes in them, particularly for those who aren't in the system. Freelancers are not that well-protected either.