Homeless Millennials Are Transforming Hobo Culture

To some, the value of doing what you want is greater than the value of the physical structure. That could be because they consider time extremely valuable, they don't value a home as highly, or because they hate the work. It's usually some combination of the three.

A lot of voluntarily homeless just see "society" as the entire list of rules of what you're supposed to do (go to college, get a job, buy a house, settle down, have kids) and reject the whole of it. It could be that you've seen enough to think that the entire system is flawed, so you just bail on all of it. It could be that those ideals just don't jive with you personally and are completely unappealing. That's how I felt when I dropped out of college and moved to China for no good reason. (Homelessness came after that). I was on track to be an investment banker or something, but hated the idea a little more each day until I finally said, "f this, I'm out" and started vagabonding around Asia.

Maybe there is an element of mental illness, I don't know. I had lunch with a psychologist once and he tried saying, "Seriously, listen to me, you are mentally ill." I guess he thought I was crazy - maybe I am - but I never went in to see him. I had no interest in altering my mind with drugs. I like who I am, even when it is difficult to interoperate with the rest of society.

When I was homeless, security was worthless. I still think it's largely an illusion, but that's a different topic. Freedom to do what I loved was well worth not having a home for. Working happened to be the thing that I loved, and I especially loved tech. I worked 16 hour days - I just wanted to work on my thing not someone else's thing. If I had enough runway to afford a House I would have done that, but I didn't. So living in a Honda civic it was. It didn't really bother me, to be honest. A bed is a bed.

Now I am married and have a baby on the way. I still don't care about security, but they need it, so ok I'm kind of reformed in that way. Luckily we're now funded so i still do exactly what I want all day. I don't know what would happen if the company failed. It's just not an option.

There are also those that can't/won't accept responsibilities like maintaining a house, paying bills, etc. Our society caters poorly to these people because we are not full-on socialist; adults must accept responsibilities to function in our world.

Those are two rough groups that come to mind.

Of course, there is the shitty thing where people are so disconnected that they attempt to talk 'to' someone but end up talking 'at' them instead... but at least then there is the chance for communication and understanding.

And I've seen it. I lived in eastern Ukraine (Gorlovka, Kharkov, Donetsk, Makyevka) from 2008 to 2010. I was a Mormon missionary, meaning I literally walked around all day talking with anyone who would talk with me. And yes, you're absolutely right, there are an absurd amount of people who live only to drink, especially in eastern Ukrainian mining towns after the economic collapse when all of the mines are closed. They would follow us around and harass us, try to pick a fight (didn't work too well when they were drunk) beat up the other bums (бомж), steal their money, and drink. Mostly just drink until they pass out in the park. I gave a couple grievni to a homeless man once who was asking for bread, and watched him literally take my money, walk to the nearest store and buy a bottle of vodka. He didn't even care that I watched him do it. It was my last time giving money to beggars. When we'd serve the homeless food from the church it was pretty much гречка (buckwheat) loaded up with salt, because we knew they were all either drunk or on a hangover.

But I also met Pyotr, a man who was seemed to be in his fifties. He was obviously incredibly intelligent, and had times when he seemed perfectly normal, and he despised alcohol (for ruining his family, he said). If he were diagnosed he probably would have been diagnosed with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder; I'm no psychiatrist, but he would take bundles of sticks and obsessively clean out the walkways and stairways until they were spotless. If he saw somebody drop a bottle in the park he would literally sprint to pick it up and throw it away. He dressed in rubber boots usually worn by older women, and just went around cleaning stuff all day muttering to himself. All day, every day. I liked talking to Pyotr. He even recognized that he had gone a little bit crazy, and said he did so when he was studying higher math at a local university. He was working at a level of math that was very theoretical, and he just snapped, I guess.

When I first met him, I thought he was drunk or high or something. He had a little bit of a twitch and talked so quickly that his sentences slurred together (not like a drunk slur, just a way that was very difficult to understand as someone who had learned Russian as a second language). But as I talked with him, it became clear that there was just something mentally off.

So by and large, I'd say you're correct; it's pretty hard to be truly homeless in eastern Europe. Most are intolerable drunks. But some aren't.

The point I was trying to make is that there are many, many types of homeless people. Of course, the vast majority of homeless aren't like the voluntarily homeless in Palo Alto who could easily get a job if they cared to. Being homeless in a country that provides a pension and housing for all is especially interesting, but not all of them are drunk assholes either.

Across the UK an iPhone is a trivially* cheap item.

1 months' rent in London would buy you a decent spec MacBook. 3-4 months' rent in a cheaper city would do the same.

Many people seem to have the viewpoint that it's some sort of irrational decision to not prioritise housing above everything else.

40 hour weeks making others obese so that I can barely make the rent whilst my boss buys his next car?

Trivial choice from where I'm standing. I do feel for those who have dependents, though.

* It is fairly common here for people to 'call out' welfare recipients as owning big TV's, iPhones, etcetera; as evidence as profligate spending. From my point of view, luxury electronics are for the poor and rich, and excluded from the middle classes. Why? Because the poor can never expect to build capital regardless, and the rich have capital already. Only the middle classes actually need to think about expenditure, because they may eventually be able to own property.

Some, but only a minority, really had not much of a choice. Either their family was very fucked-up and had botched their upbringing pretty bad, or they had gone down too low on drugs/alcohol.

And I'm not condemning them for choosing this lifestyle. Like I said, it does have its pros. It can be a good, exciting life, especially since you're in the US, where you can get a lot of society's excesses for free, when they are discarded.

Oh, I'll condemn the ones that choose it. If you're homeless because you have mental or physical problems that's one thing, but people who choose to be homeless because they're too lazy to work are parasites.

Automation doesn't mean people have to live by it, on the contrary, we could still try to live away from large cities, and thrive by improving life standards. There is so much more thing to do in more rural, less populated areas now that technology is there.

The current problem is the anti competitiveness, that's what ruining young people: most of them just stick to the cities, where it's easier to be poor.

If people will abuse that system, they'll abuse them all, and I think the cost of preventing welfare abuse is worth it.

In welfare-state Britain of the 70's, they had multiple generations on public assistance and in public housing who were proud, as a culture, of their unproductivity, which led to the backlash that brought Margaret Thatcher and the Conservatives into power.

Bottomline: if you want to ensure the deserving get your tax dollars consistently over time, you must guard against fraud, abuse, and overindulgence, or the public backlash may deprive even the deserving.

All it was calling for is a distinction between people living on the streets because it's fun versus people living on the streets because they must. It muddies the mind to lump them all together in one group called "the homeless".

You'll find that most difficult experiences people endure in life don't make sense on a logical level. You'll also probably find it hard to empathize with. If you've heard of love hate relationships, it's sort of like that.

I wasn't homeless, but my father was as a child under 5-10 for some time (I am not exactly sure how long).

All I can really say is sometimes it feels like you've been born into a path that is predetermined by fate, you've tried as hard as you can to jump over that wall to get out of that path, and every time you try, someone kicks you out. So you wind up rationalizing your current circumstances, finding value where you can while you have to live it, and generally developing intolerance for people who do not tolerate you.

But most of the time, quick snaps of the tongue like this are exactly that. They are a flit of emotion, over a thing that is a tangled web of emotion.

These are complicated things. It is sad to me, but most of the time, instead of helping, all I can do is continue trying to survive, so I don't have to live the life my parents did.

In that case, if someone asks, best politely say no, direct them to places where they can get help (most advanced economies have some capacity in every city), and take the money and donate it to said places or another cause when you get home, pool it in a jar for a once a month or whatever donation if you want.

On the other hand, someone close to me in my own family was homeless for quite some time after a wrongful prison conviction. Despite him having enjoyed a great life, big social circle, never addicted, enjoyed higher education and a nice career etc, typical upper-middle class stuff, he struggled on the streets. His prison time carried stigma that he didn't deserve, but couldn't be proven innocent. He stayed on the streets partly because he was afraid to ask for help, to be seen. And partly because he was convicted on a holiday, outside of the country he knew well with a limited network.

Someone else in my family took him in, from the streets, gave him some money, a roof to stay under etc. And that's why this person is part of my family now. And I've spoken to numerous ex-homeless who had no addiction, and just didn't have any food or a roof to stay under. Or recently when we partially funded the first month rent for an illegal immigrant. He now has a painting job etc. It's an uncertain existence for him, but he's got an alright life and contributes his share to society and is financially independent. The issue is that cases like this require time to evaluate that you tend not to have passing someone by.

In short, I'm similarly conflicted and usually do give. When I have time I tend to have a chat and ask what they need. They'll say 'some change' or whatever and I'll just cheerfully say huh, why? And they'll say for some food or w/e, and I'll just hang out with them for 20min and buy them some food and eat with them. Best case he actually wanted money for food and had some social contact, worst case I fed someone who didn't starve and had a nice chat.

If they need liquor to stop withdrawals, the money is well spent as far as I'm concerned. Not everyone is in the position to get treatment.

They are an addict, and somehow, each day, they are going to get whatever it is. And they are going to do it, because they have to do it.

And for some of these people who are homeless, they are going to do what they do, because they feel they have to do it...

In any case, getting that thing, whatever it is, can go the easy way, or the hard way. They could be giving blows in an alley, or pay with some money they got on the streets from kind people, or due to the property crime.

We can't make people do anything. Not really. They, themselves have got to resolve to improve, or do things differently, or they simply won't. We can put incentives out there, punishments, and all sorts of things, but in the end, they really do have to resolve to do things differently, or it really won't happen.

Every year, a few of these people get there. One day, they see something, experience something that brings that resolution about! And with that comes motivation, and with that motivation comes the doing of things differently.

Nobody but them knows when this is, and often they don't even know when this is.

And until they get there, it's the easy way, or the hard way.

If we look at the cost of this, those costs can be low, average, or high, depending on how often it's the easy way or the hard way.

And when they get there, how much potential remains? That too is determined by the easy way and the hard way.

So when we give, we are helping to pay down those costs. It's up to them to get there, and when they do, they will appreciate all of us who helped get them there at a much lower cost and risk to themselves as beings, and they will be capable of that much more too.

One of us, who gives that dollar, thinking they will just go buy another beer, will be that person who gave the dollar that got them there. They don't buy a beer, instead a razor, clean up and improve from there.

We can't make their choices for them, but we can continue to present the option of doing things differently, and that happens one gift, one less hard way at a time.

In general, we are helping out. And the help is in the form of harm reduction to preserve their options, health, and buy them time during their struggle.

If you think about it, real help, selfless type help, not controlling help that comes with strings and such, is a gift. It's a gift with the best of intent, and in this world intent is what matters.

When your intent is to help, you are doing the right thing --and it's the right thing even when it doesn't appear to have done much, or the bad outcome seems your doing.

It's not, and it can't be, because we can't make their choices. Only they can.

And if we don't give that help, so many more of them won't ever get there at all.

It's nothing to most of us. Every so often, it's all that ever did matter to them.