Fact Check

Based on currently available numbers, there are about 31 vacant housing units for every homeless person in the U.S.

  • jorp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    6 months ago

    That’s another condemnation of allowing only the market to decide where we build housing. A socialist government would build houses where people need houses.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      In my experience, the vacant housing is not built without demand, it’s that the demand vanishes.

      There were two trailers where they would have been scrapped, but some relatives took then over and kind of refurbished them, and one of those is now home to another relative that would have been homeless otherwise, and the other is a “hobby” trailer until someone else needs it.

      Another is a house where the man died and the wife moved to a small apartment because she felt like she needed to be in the city near a hospital, but no one wants the house because the area is the middle of nowhere.

      Rural areas tend to have a fair amount of “nobody wants them anymore” housing laying vacant, but they all, at one point, were being used as housing.

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      And… Float them in the air? Homeless in metro areas may not have started there, but that’s where a sizeable portion are now and it’s not like there’s abundant space for housing.

      People need houses but we need stores and office buildings and other things too.

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        There’s plenty of room; we just build nothing but luxury housing. And there’s an over-abundance of parking lots because of land speculation. Our land is not being used efficiently at all.

        • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Are you finding homeless people somewhere I’m not? The downtown metro areas are where there is a) not other housing by and large, and b) not space for anything else anyway. Maybe we are talking past each other.

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            I’m in downtown Los Angeles. We have lots of homeless people, vacant housing, and wasted space like paved parking lots. Where are you?

            • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Midwest, below Chicago burbs. We have in my area way way way more housing demand than supply and houses sell before market or within hours. We have some here and there homelessness but it’s never as bad as streets of downtown Chicago, where parking spaces cost as much as houses.

      • Glytch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        Most office jobs are done as or more efficiently by workers at home so we should downsize office real estate. This frees up a lot of space for affordable housing and encourages office workers to stay in their suburban communities, thus reducing congestion.

      • Crikeste@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Have you ever thought that the houses don’t need to be in big cities? Why is that not an option in your mind? Other states bussed them out, they can pay to bus them back in and give them homes.

        Why would you advocate for keeping displaced people displaced?

        • jorp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          it’s insane how people cannot imagine a way to make decisions that’s not profit driven. people’s minds are so poisoned by capitalism. If we’re around in 100 years, people will judge us like they judge any superstitious culture from the past. We sacrifice our own to the “profit motive” to appease “the market”

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Oh don’t worry, the end of the world’s probably coming around 2045 with the start of the post-oil dark ages

        • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Did you read the person I replied to? You can’t house then where they are with socialism or marxism or Harry potter magic. Sure, yes, move them, that’s sane. But no you can’t just snap your fingers to generate housing in places with no footprint to build in.

          • jorp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Why are you hung up on the literal square footage of where these people currently sleep on the streets?

            People commute with public transit across great distances.

            But yes, downtown areas can be densified. Did we hit the limits of engineering? As far as I can tell we can still build tall buildings.

            Holy shit bro, just think.

            • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              There’s no reason to reply to you at all if you can’t read dude. This starts with “we can’t house then where they are because capitalism” but this is the fucking point. You can’t house then where they are no matter, literally because of square footage. Public transit and house. Calm your tits and learn to read.

                • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  Well that’s not what you said. It’s not unreasonable except for the fact that you just eliminated all the green spaces from an otherwise concrete jungle. I could be persuaded anyway, but it’s a not insignificant downside.

                  • jorp@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    Ok I actually feel bad now. I’m being sarcastic. Build more houses in cities, and people can live in those houses, just like the people in those cities that already have houses. People use transportation to move around inside of cities.

      • jorp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is your sincere and well thought out position? You think the homeless population in each downtown area is so large that there’s not enough real estate to house them?

        You can just say you don’t care about housing them, this is a safe space

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          And you can just say that you are not listening because you believe your position is the most moral one.

          This guy’s point is that it doesn’t matter what government is running things. There will always be some desirable areas where demand is larger than supply. You haven’t proposed any details besides “a socialist government would solve it”.

          Post your specific proposals or stop posturing.

          • jorp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            You might want to sit down, it’s complicated.

            500 people need houses in an area. Ignore what the market thinks should be done. Build houses or densify housing in that area.

            Do you think there are any real world examples where you would need to “float them in the air?”

            It’s a stupid argument that’s not on good faith and completely lacks any imagination…

            How are houses built now? People speculatively buy land and build on them. Instead of market speculation telling people where to build, people tell people where to build.

            Planned economies aren’t a novel or theoretical concept.

            TL;DR use your brain

            • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Do you think there are any real world examples where you would need to “float them in the air?”

              Yes, in cities. We were talking about downtown areas. Not anywhere that has land available. So any housing project will be more complicated than “build houses”.

              You obviously think you are more moral than everyone else, but you’ve provided no interesting solutions. so there’s no use talking to you.

              • jorp@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                On a more serious note i wonder why you think people that are currently unhoused couldn’t take public transit?

                Do you ever have any ideas? What’s it like not being able to reason?

                • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Watch out! Goal posts are moving boys!

                  This is not “house then where they are”. This is the sane argument of put housing and move the people, not “There’s no housing so I cast SOciALisM!” And poof it’s solved.

                  • jorp@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    6 months ago

                    local man disproves leftist theory on technicality by taking online argument extremely literally!

            • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              “planned economies”

              My dude you can just say you have no idea about economics and leave it at that

              • jorp@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                ah yes true capitalism is equivalent to economics I’ve forgotten