I used to work in a country club while I was homeless and living out of my beat-up car. It was pretty difficult to go to work and see all these other young people my age living the good life, pulling up in brand new Corvettes and BMWs that their parents gave them, spending as much money as I made for an entire two weeks on breakfast, and then heading out to play golf all day, while I was working harder than any of them to have none of the luxuries. The only thing they did better than me was be born to rich parents, yet they were set for life, and I was homeless while serving them gourmet food. Thankfully I managed to eventually fight my way up the ladder, but motherfucker is it hard!
I grew up not seeing my mom or dad at 8pm. We were never hungry, but food wasnt always available and they’d open up a can of spaghetti or make soy sauce/rice and we’d share that as a family meal of 4. I was the first one to go to college, and mostly lived in the college library and slept in a closet or friend’s couch. I busted my ass to become a software engineer and happy that I made it.
But honestly, my life wasn’t so bad, compared to the many other immigrants, broken homes, and other struggles people have.
What about the shareholders? … if we deal with homelessness, it will affect the shareholders!
Won’t someone think of the shareholders?!?
Boatless please help
I get your joke, really and truly, but you might be surprised to know a lot of poor people live on boats. I did it. Down at the marina was the shadiest place I’ve ever been.
Now be honest, your pee and poop went into the water, didn’t it?
It’s technically illegal, but we all know everybody out there does it.
We were illegal poopers. However! When you are living so close to nature, you are aware of your “footprint”. And it’s just poop. Chemical cleaners were minimal, which is not something “landlubbers” think about.
You just assume it goes down the drain and the problem is solved. But we knew how often the sanitation plants for civic sewage had “incidents” when they couldn’t operate properly and just dumped it all into the river.
So my poop; just a drop in the bucket; picture it. It isn’t all those chemicals; it’s just poo. Picture my poo, picture my poo, picture my poo.
Anyway, if your local news says something about boaters polluting your water, that is a red flag about civic sanitation because a little bit of poop is a small concern when stacked up to everyone’s poop and chemicals. And don’t even get me started on those macerator things some people have in their sinks; those are the worst.
How often did you have to go back to land to get clean drinking/showering water supply?
I’m fascinated by the boat lifestyle because I live in a van. I think living in a boat would be charming but a little more complicated than van life.
I just want to point out that the other commenter’s experience isn’t universal. My mom lived on a boat for years and loved it. I couldn’t do it long term as there’s very little space available, but it doesn’t have to be a negative experience.
This particular marina had bathrooms with showers up on land which the majority of, if not all, residents used. There was also a restaurant on the water with bathrooms. Electricity and tap water were available at each slip. Heat wasn’t necessary, because it was Southern California.
I never knew how much it cost, but I know for a while she lived there while working as a waitress at that same restaurant, so it couldn’t have been too expensive.
Funny that you mentioned the public washroom. I avoided bringing it up because we were told (under no uncertain terms) we weren’t allowed to use it. Back in the day, an openly gay couple was not common, I guess. So, apparently, straight people peeing and pooping and showering nakedly was fine; but me doing it was “pornographic”. I apologize to everyone I accidentally introduced to hot gay porn. Sorry; my bad.
Now hold on. You say “shadiest” but isn’t that a slur on the fact that a lot of those folks are permanently there instead of swanning in on a sunny day to mess around at leisure?
I mean, I was living there. I am not putting myself above the shady. That was just life at the time, and still is for people still living there.
I know why people resort to it. I get why desperate people steal. It was where I had to be at the time and I’m not going back.
Okay, this bullshit. It’s not shareholders who would be negatively affected by this, and it’s not shareholders who are actively working against doing something about the problem. Shareholders are just an easy acceptable target to point your fingers at, whether it makes sense or not.
What needs to be done to tackle the homelessness problem (not the only thing, but probably the most important one) is to zone much, much more land inside or directly next to cities for affordable mid-rise multi-family homes. Guess who is opposed to that and has the power to do something about it? Existing property owners. Specifically owners of detached single family homes. Because doing that would negatively affect their property values. Personally, I think that shouldn’t matter, because what good is living in home that is worth absurd amounts of money on paper going to do you if society is falling apart because of it? But home owners are always massively concerned about their property values and will torpedo anything that might threaten it. Of course, pointing your fingers at home owners is much dicier than pointing them at shareholders, because even in a bubble like this one, you are bound to point at some people here who will feel personally attacked by that…
“Shareholders”, on the other hand, aside from those that are also home owners at the same time, don’t really have much reason to care one way or another about effective projects to reduce homelessness.
Have you heard of REITs? Rent-seeking capitalists have been working together for decades to speculate on housing. Wealthy people have billions and billions of dollars invested in the status quo, and they are quite interested in maintaining their position of power.
Do people hold shares in the private equity firms buying up all the homes and driving up the housing costs? No no it’s all the NIMBYs fault.
Corporations holding residential real estate are a growing part of the problem, but still a small one. The vast majority of single famliy homes are still owned by either their residents or small time, non-incorporated landlords.
Never mind increasing the supply of housing would drive down prices and remove pressure regardless of who owns the existing stock.
Do private homeowners and small-time landlords generally leave their homes vacant?
The good news is, homelessness is illegal in many places now which solves the “unhoused” part of being homeless.
We plan to cut all homeless people in half by 2025!
Carl, that’s killing people!
Caaaaaaarl
Caaaaaaarl what have you done?
“You’re not allowed to not have a home!”
“Oh so you’re gonna give me a home?”
“No!”
“I’m not being broke to fuck with you. My life is just shitty…”
-Louis CK
Kentucky wants it to be legal to just fucking shoot them.
Marvellous. What a Christian solution.
What?
yup it just makes you unemployable with a felony YAAAYY!!!
Well, look at it from the bright side: the person in this picture does have a roof over their head.
Do I need to slap an /s on it?
Somebody somewhere will eventually downvote it either way:-P.
Although there’s also some truth to it, in being one of the reasons that people end up behind bars.
Land of the fee, home of the slave
Fwiw, it wasn’t always - the government used to have a top marginal tax rate of 90 fucking percent, and money was just handed out by outright socialist policies. Maybe that wasn’t good either, especially when distributed
primarilyexclusively to white families, but dayum the pendulum sure has swung the other direction now that people learned that minorities might get some ever so small slice of that pie. Yeah, surely better to turn us all into slaves than for that to happen. (To be clear, I am joking, and actually unfortunately so bc with globalization and automation, the ultra wealthy don’t really even need slaves at all, so better for the population to just fall to levels that they can more easily control.)
you just have to put a house around that and you’ll be accurate.
Too late - large corporations bought them all up and now there are none left:-(.
To represent a rental property.
I’m too European to get it. What is the message?
Edit: I do get it now. I was lost in translation.
In Germany, we got two terms that translate to homelessness in English: Obdachlosigkeit (literally “shelterlessness”), defined as living on the street, and Wohnungslosigkeit (literally “appartmentlessness”), defined as lacking a living space rented or owned. “Wohnungslose” people live mostly in communal owned homes or with friends/acquaintances.
So, for me, understanding “homelessness” as “Obdachlosigkeit”, this cartoon was hard to grasp.
Homelessness doesn’t just mean looking like a bum on the streets. Shocked a European wouldn’t be aware that all homelessness is not having a steady place to live, that includes people in hostels that are addicts or victims of various abuse. That includes 18 year olds told to leave the nest and stand on their own two feet when they’ve nothing actually lined up. That includes people who are couch surfing because they have an unsafe family home.
Homelessness is incredibly easy to fall into when situations spiral out of control. I’m long term unemployed (looking for employment though) with no savings but I live with my dad and if my dad kicked the bucket today then I would lose the home I grew up in and would have to get in touch with relevant authorities to be put on a waiting list that lasts years for somewhere to live.
Thank you for your explanation. It is legal to tell 18 year olds to leave home without providing for them? Wow. We have to provide for our relatives for life (parents for kids, but kids for parents as well. Well, at least legally – does not work in all cases.)
I’m aware that homelessness is not restricted to people like the man in the first panel. I’m working in a psychiatric hospital, and finding a place to live for our patients who are no longer capable of looking after themselves is not easy, but usually possible. I wasn’t aware people are forced to live in hostels.
I wish you good luck finding a job, long lasting health for your father and a way to keep your home on your own.
This is my current situation. He passed a month ago and I am scrambling.
People think of the top left as homeless, and ignore the other three. Homeless people can have jobs and go to school, but can’t afford a home or might be homeless due to other circumstances like being kicked out of their home.
But people only think of the top left when someone says homeless.
To be clear, it’s the landlord’s that are kicking the most people out in 2024. Fuck all landlords.
I didn’t understand it either.
Seems like the message is just anyone can be homeless, which is pretty obvious. I guess if people’s awareness is that low then it’s good for these sorts of messages to get out but also suggests that many people are just morons.
What is the message?
That you should get out more (or stop ignoring homeless people when you are out). The idea that homelessness isn’t a problem in Europe is absurd.
I never said homelessness is not a problem in Europe. On the contrary – working in a psychiatric hospital I am pretty aware of homelessness in our area. I just didn’t get the message of this cartoon, and I am shocked about what I learned today.
Wish I was able to get out more, though, your analysis is spot on.
This is also a problem in the EU. Maybe not as big.
You don’t have homeless people in Europe? The message is that not all homeless look like the guy in the first panel. There are all of these “invisible” homeless that go unseen because they don’t fit the stereotype.
We do have homeless people in Europe/Germany.
Thank you for your explanation. My problems understanding these panels were
- The kids in the panels. TIL, it is possible for kids to be homeless in the US. It’s hard for me to imagine that a society would let there kids be homeless. We got kids who fled from home and do not accept any help, thus being homeless in Germany as well, but these kids are on the run, not in schools or in cars with their mother.
- The idea that a woman having a car and a kid might be homeless is totally alien to me, as well. The only possibility I can think of how this could happen is if she just ran away spontaneously neglecting all help she could get – that does happen, of course, and probably I’m just too naive.
It’s hard for me to imagine that a society would let there kids be homeless.
The kids are homeless because their parent is homeless. In Europe, are you guaranteed a home as long as you have children?
The idea that a woman having a car and a kid might be homeless is totally alien to me, as well.
It’s actually more likely if you have a car. Cars are a money sink.
The only possibility I can think of how this could happen is if she just ran away spontaneously neglecting all help she could get
The US does not guarantee you a home if you have a child. If countries in Europe do that, that’s awesome, but the US definitely does not.
Sure, there are charities, but there aren’t enough resources to help everybody.
Technically there are plenty enough resources to help, we just don’t adequately distribute them. Jeff bezos has like 4 condos in NYC alone iirc, (or maybe that’s musk) but he definitely also has a mansion with 24 fucking bathrooms.
My guess is that your society has the same problem to a much smaller degree and you just don’t know about it.
I can’t imagine seeing this and immediately turning it into a international dick measuring contest. Maybe have some compassion instead of just making a “Sucks to be you” comment.
I think this reply makes clear it was an honest question.
Being “too European” is clearly meant to be a slight (ie “My life is too good to understand this”), and honestly a naive one since it’s not like European countries have no homeless people.
Or maybe they thought it was referring to something more specific in American politics that they weren’t knowledgeable about and didn’t realize it was a more general message?
The message is that it’s not only the unwashed pan handlers that are homeless. There are a lot of people that are or have been productive members of society that still become homeless. In the US a lot of the obvious homeless have major mental health conditions so many just assume that’s the main issue behind the majority of homless. When in reality it’s low wages that don’t keep up with inflation let alone inceases in cost of living
If you think the solution to the homeless is the government, then let me point to the government letting in millions of people (in america), and almost none of them dont have homes. The government doesnt give a shit about you, they are not the solution.
Viewing things as zero-sum is convenient. Simple, understandable, it makes us feel smart. Aware. So it makes sense why you would think in this manner.
But anyone who is a fan of freakanomics or other academic economics focused podcasts, the types of podcasts that find where the science meets the real world would know that viewing the world this way leads to much more wrong answers than right answers. Economics is a machine of indirect consequences.
There are not X number of limited housing slots. Houses can be built.
Or can they? Is someone stopping the building of homes? Or are there any events that reduce the supply of homes? Is anyone purchasing a large supply of them?
Immigrants are always used as a racist dog whistle to avoid having people ask such questions as I mention. And it worked well, on you.
But not me. I’m not so simple.
Let me end by congratulating you, you have found your simple answer. And I suspect you don’t focus too hard on scrutinizing your own ideas. Do you? You can feel they are true, you don’t need to examine them.
My only critique, you seem angry, perhaps you should modify your world view and give yourself a better life. The only person stopping you from seeing things differently is yourself. Good luck.
I dont claim its a zero sum game, that is obviously not true. And sure you can build houses, but you can only build houses so fast, and the government makes it harder to build houses. I dont kow the number, but if we are able to build 1.5 million units per year, and we have more people coming in legally and illegally and are being born, then that will obviously have a pressure on housing availability. The issue is that people like you dont understand what goes into building housing, and jsut think “Houses can be built”. Tell that to anyone in housing and they will laugh at you.
Immigrants are always used as a racist dog whistle to avoid having people ask such questions as I mention. And it worked well, on you.
Oh gotcha, you are one of those NPCs that calls everyone racist.
And you call people NPCs.
I do, see above!
Sealioning again.
If you meet one asshole.
You met an asshole.
If everyone you meet is an asshole.
Who is the common denominator?Same idea for racism.
If you get called a racist once.
Maybe you met an unhinged person.
If you are constantly called a racist.
Well…?I don’t live in a world where myself or anyone around me gets called racist, ever.
Do you?
There’s more vacant homes than homeless people.
Homelessness is a policy issue and is a symptom of how we treat homes as a commodity, for the generation of infinite profit, rather than as a human necessity.
That is not how housing or homeless work. You cant just put homeless people in houses and expect that to do anything.
Why do people like you see immigration as bad? Taking in immigrants is exactly how this country became great in the first place. It’s emphatically un-American, and unethical to blame our problems on immigrants.
I can only imagine you’re brainwashed by the GOP. Take it from someone who lives on the border, these people aren’t a problem. You’re being lied to.
You can take examples of any group and easily villify the whole. For example, 82% of all serial killers are white. “Are white people RUINING our country? More at 11!”
I have not made a comment on immigration, that is a separate question. I will directly comment on illegal immigration, its really bad and should not be done.
And then you repeat bullshit left side talking points about how if people possible disagree with you its because they are a republican, I am not, and everyone (including democrats from 10 years ago) agree that illegal immigration is bad, you should to if you were being honest.
The point of my comment was that its bullshit to claim the left side care about peoples housing sitiation when they are greatly increases pressure on housing by letting millions more people into the US.
