The goal is suffering
-
I'm sure plenty of homeless people will get to stay there
God is Jesus all the time. Braise the Lord. Amen in the chat if you Jesus every day in the shower.
-
I don't disagree with you, but I feel a communal housing with lots of homeless people in close proximity would be deleterious to homeless rehabilitation as the worst examples would negatively effect the best examples in the same way that prison turns a normal person into a broken person that can manage existing outside of that system.
You couldn't even separate the degrees of maladaptions and have productive rehabilitation because there would a point at which you create a oroboros class that would never be capable of rehabilitation in proximity to similar cases that would fester and grow until you need a larger capacity that never really makes progress.
The same sort of thing happens on the streets now. The influence of the worse cases drag down others until you have a common population of bad cases that are decivilized until rehabilitation is almost impossible.
A more separate and isolated rehabilitation program would allow for a greater ability for improvement in a vacuum devoid from the detrimental influence of worse or more of the same influence. Obviously that would be more costly and have greater logistical needs, but that is the cost of meaningful homeless rehabilitation.
Yeah, that's to an extent what happened with Soviet microdistricts (so many examples from Soviet practice, guess it was some good after all). Except in a bit different way, but I'll get to the part about creating a district populated with just homeless people not being a good idea.
There was a bright idea of, for some degree of coziness and comfort, building serial housing organized into similar (they all look like one more or less) sections, having same spaces with grocery stores, laundries, same green places with trees, same everything, and on a bit larger scale even schools in the same locations.
So - being a teenager or a young man in USSR you'd do well not to wander into your neighboring microdistrict after dark or even at day alone. Local hooligans would treat that as trespassing, rob you and possibly beat you up. That wouldn't be even considered something wrong, your own mistake.
They did achieve the set goal - in terms of green spaces and proximity of everything and nice feel those districts are fine, - but for the same reason of isolation and silence all areas developed this way had (and still have) problems with street crime.
As to your specific concern - I think that if we want to do serial state-provided housing, then it shouldn't be limited to homeless people.
Probably some kind of categorization of applicants should be done, a few apartments in each building should be allocated to homeless (not in the same section of it, but equally spread), a few for veterans, a few to be sold to redeem some of the cost, a few for students, and so on. The proportions can be decided upon. So that the general composition of each house's inhabitants were kinda average.
This would naturally be contrary to the interest of realtors and developers and landlords, so I'd expect such a program to require overcoming a lot.
-
And what's with the borders?
Makes easier to understand it's two different posts from two different people. Easily confused otherwise
-
This post did not contain any content.
Yes, the cruelty is the point.
-
I'm so glad the yellow underline exists in this 60-word screenshot to tell me where I should pay attention. I don't think my poor, dystrophied zoomer brain could sit down for the average 15 seconds it would take otherwise.
thanks me later
-
Yeah, that's to an extent what happened with Soviet microdistricts (so many examples from Soviet practice, guess it was some good after all). Except in a bit different way, but I'll get to the part about creating a district populated with just homeless people not being a good idea.
There was a bright idea of, for some degree of coziness and comfort, building serial housing organized into similar (they all look like one more or less) sections, having same spaces with grocery stores, laundries, same green places with trees, same everything, and on a bit larger scale even schools in the same locations.
So - being a teenager or a young man in USSR you'd do well not to wander into your neighboring microdistrict after dark or even at day alone. Local hooligans would treat that as trespassing, rob you and possibly beat you up. That wouldn't be even considered something wrong, your own mistake.
They did achieve the set goal - in terms of green spaces and proximity of everything and nice feel those districts are fine, - but for the same reason of isolation and silence all areas developed this way had (and still have) problems with street crime.
As to your specific concern - I think that if we want to do serial state-provided housing, then it shouldn't be limited to homeless people.
Probably some kind of categorization of applicants should be done, a few apartments in each building should be allocated to homeless (not in the same section of it, but equally spread), a few for veterans, a few to be sold to redeem some of the cost, a few for students, and so on. The proportions can be decided upon. So that the general composition of each house's inhabitants were kinda average.
This would naturally be contrary to the interest of realtors and developers and landlords, so I'd expect such a program to require overcoming a lot.
Yeah, having a distribution of "classes" within a communal housing makes the most sense.
The issue of having a maladapted homeless person within proximity of "normal" people is that they may negatively affect others in meaningful ways. So an intermediary step from the streets to communal housing is necessary to act as a rehabilitation point to filter out the homeless that would actively harm the peace, safety, and security of everyone else. Without that intermediary step, the community will step up and "handle" the situation in a less than desirable manner. "So you are saying the guy that we have had various complaints about multiple times a month just decided to jump off the roof and nobody saw anything?" That sort of dynamic has played out throughout human history.
So a degree of isolation and counseling is necessary and the duration would be highly dependent on the individual's needs.
-
"The director tells me it could have been done in 72 hours if we were allowed to make it even more inhumane / unsafe"
Fixed that for you.
Don't forget to make the working conditions inhumane and unsafe for the workers building the place! That could probably shave off a few hours, too!
-
This post did not contain any content.
Why would literally anyone want to live in a concentration camp for any reason. The streets seem way better than this.
-
This post did not contain any content.
This is the first Lemmy meme I've seen that's been deep fried compared to how I saw it on Reddit.
There's no brainrot underline on the other version.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
Don't forget to make the working conditions inhumane and unsafe for the workers building the place! That could probably shave off a few hours, too!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Built by and built for it's occupants planned occupants I bet
Edit: Its not it's (and autocorrect tried to correct me again)
-
Yeah, having a distribution of "classes" within a communal housing makes the most sense.
The issue of having a maladapted homeless person within proximity of "normal" people is that they may negatively affect others in meaningful ways. So an intermediary step from the streets to communal housing is necessary to act as a rehabilitation point to filter out the homeless that would actively harm the peace, safety, and security of everyone else. Without that intermediary step, the community will step up and "handle" the situation in a less than desirable manner. "So you are saying the guy that we have had various complaints about multiple times a month just decided to jump off the roof and nobody saw anything?" That sort of dynamic has played out throughout human history.
So a degree of isolation and counseling is necessary and the duration would be highly dependent on the individual's needs.
So a degree of isolation and counseling is necessary and the duration would be highly dependent on the individual’s needs.
I agree. In between and also for some time after being given that social housing.
-
So a degree of isolation and counseling is necessary and the duration would be highly dependent on the individual’s needs.
I agree. In between and also for some time after being given that social housing.
Absolutely, you can't just call them good and send them off into the population. A degree of continued support would be advisable even if they have transitioned into a "normal" state equal to the average person because homelessness has long-term psychological effects that can't be allowed to smoulder.
-
thanks me later
Wait I need my subway surfer footage
-
Wait I need my subway surfer footage
And a ton of auto-bad-generated subtitles bumping in the screen
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
It's not that difficult to build a concentration camp with shitty cots, inadequate facilities, and hazardousness as a feature built in on nearly unlivable land in the Everglades.
It likely is slightly more difficult to build housing for homeless people unless you're trying to build death trap, concentration camp housing for them as well.
-
thanks me later
thanks, you later
-
I'm so glad the yellow underline exists in this 60-word screenshot to tell me where I should pay attention. I don't think my poor, dystrophied zoomer brain could sit down for the average 15 seconds it would take otherwise.
Oooh, a wild "dystrophied" appeared!
So rare, so shiny! -
And what's with the borders?
The border issues are just theater to distract us all from the real machinations of our universal puppeteers...
️🫣 -
It's not that difficult to build a concentration camp with shitty cots, inadequate facilities, and hazardousness as a feature built in on nearly unlivable land in the Everglades.
It likely is slightly more difficult to build housing for homeless people unless you're trying to build death trap, concentration camp housing for them as well.
Yeah, I get the point they're trying to make, but this is a pretty silly comparison. It's like "oh, so you can eat a 6" sub but not an 18" pizza? Pff, fake hunger".
