No.1846205[Last 50 Posts]
Arrived today in downtown Denver. First thing I noticed was the smell—the faint smell of feces. Second thing I noticed were clearly drugged-out homeless people on every block nodding off on fentanyl. Third thing I noticed was that downtown was almost completely dead despite it being a Sunday and an unofficial holiday (Cinco de Mayo). And take a look at pic related: Denverites carry narcan on them just in case they come across someone OD'ing—THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENS IN A FUNCTIONAL SOCIETY.
This phenomenon is obviously not limited to Denver. Ground Zero is San Francisco, where people have to volunteer so that kids don't get accosted by hordes of homeless in the Tenderloin neighborhood (See
https://apnews.com/article/san-francisco-tenderloin-drugs-children-7ae668d1050363170514ca057589ec1e). And go to any liberal "hip" city like Seattle, Portland, California, Austin, etc. and you'll see the same epidemic of homeless drug addicts spilling out into the streets.
What the fuck is causing this problem? You don't see this humanitarian catastrophe to this degree in non-progressive cities like Houston, Dallas, Phoenix, Miami, etc. (though they still have it bad.) I mean for fuck's sake, I'm from Chicago and even here it's not as bad as Denver (our homeless are more of the shit/piss on the L kind, not the nodding off on fentanyl downtown kind. Per capita, homelessness is less pervasive here, but we are a failed city by many other measures).
What the fuck are these "progressive" cities doing that are completely ruining their cities? What is the humane solution? Is it just as simple as build more housing? Or doing what Houston is doing and getting these people into apartments? (see
https://www.governing.com/housing/how-houston-cut-its-homeless-population-by-nearly-two-thirds) You would think "leftist" cities would be on the ball here, but clearly they are fumbling hard.
Something has got to be done, or this country is quickly going to become uninhabitable.
No.1846206
>>1846205Red cities put their homeless on busses to progressive cities for laughs, also the climate is better in blue cities. Also it's obvious why homeless people would congregate in places where being homeless isn't treated as illegal
No.1846207
>>1846205>What is the humane solution?Free housing and more drug health clinics instead of punishing homeless people for existing and substance abuse.
No.1846208
>>1846205>Houston’s emphasis is on getting people into their own individual apartments. On average, a year later, 90 percent of them are still in those homes. That costs roughly $18,000 a year, per person. The city has concluded it’s a good investment. Letting people stay on the streets costs three or four times as much, between jail time, emergency room visits and the rest. But the money sent to landlords has to come out of its own accounts, not from projected savings from other departments.This would cost like 3x more in San Francisco
No.1846210
the solution is to house them but that will never happen under porky, so your choices are either feces in the street or displacing massive populations and killing thousands
No.1846215
postmodernism was invented as a theoretical background for justifying immiseration and degradation. its not strange that the bourgeois allow things like this to happen, they just mask it with condescending attitude and appeals to self perceptions instead of actually solving problems. and no, their governing authorities are neither progressive nor leftist, no matter how they pose as such
>What is the humane solution?
what is an "humane solution" in the first place? you have a critical, complex social problem that needs solving, and you have to take practical actions, even if they seem distasteful
developing means of production seems like a logical start to establish social discipline and materialbabundance, but you also need to guarantee housing, schooling, clinical checkups and treatment for the afflicted (even if its against their will) and take no half measures to erradicate drug trafficking. heavy handedness towards dealers nonwithstanding, thers bound to be rotten apples within the police, government insitutions and local corporations
as you can see, there is no easy nor pretty way out of these problems
No.1846217
>>1846210Sadly I think a sizeable number of Americans would choose the latter.
No.1846221
>>1846205The “red cities” ship them on busses and send them out to “blue cities”.
No.1846245
>>1846208>paying 18k per person to landlordsthis is literally what eminent domain is for
No.1846367
>>1846205I was going to write but you phrased this in retarded burger blue MAGA vs red MAGA terminology instead of any sane analysis of homelessness.
No.1846379
>>1846205The "humane" solution is institutionalization, i.e. "put them into camps." That's what all the old social democracies did, and what all the "AES" countries did with all the warlords and vagrants left over from their civil wars.
Mind you, re-institutionalization will never be reestablished, mostly because it's too expensive but also because there was a real reaction against the abuses and repressiveness of the old asylum system that led to them being shuttered. You can't "just house" people, you need to force them to give up drugs and obey social norms and many homeless will not or can not do this willingly.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) No.1846380
>>1846205Living in a country that has basically no homelessness you understand that its a choice by society to let their citizens suffer like homeless americans.
No.1846384
>>1846379Retarded or completely ignorant of homelessness.
Homelessness is largely caused by lack of affordable housing, social institutions like healthcare, and access to well paid jobs.
For fucks sake, a huge number of homeless people are gainfully employed, pay taxes, etc but can't partake in a basic need like housing. In what world is institutionalizing ostensibly normal people who have no choice but to accept a job that can't afford them a place to live. Be real.
No.1846389
>>1846380I lived in the US, in Seattle for a bit. The homelessness there is absolutely fucking disgusting. Nobody gives a shit about it either, and at best looks away, if not they demonize the homeless in a variety of ways.
I now live in a place with less, but a growing homeless population. I don't understand how people can see this and not see it as an absolutely disgusting, completely unacceptable state of affairs. It is such a huge cruelty and such an enormous social ill.
I can't help but feel my stomach churn with resentment and hate when I see homeless people which is part of the reason I had to leave Seattle. Abhorrent, deplorable, disgusting.
Homeless people truly are an underclass. It's like they're not full citizens. It's understandable when they die, when they overdose, when they're removed by police, when their only semblance of a shelter is removed by the police and burned, when they have open wounds in their bodies, when they have to sleep in freezing temperatures.
So many of the things homeless people face every day would be the matter of public outcry if it happened to a housed person, a "full" citizen. I try to temper myself around liberals, but there's simply no justification for liberalism anymore. It is a disgusting colonial racist antihuman ideology, a death cult idolizing a profit machine that churns human lives with cruelty to keep itself going.
No.1846390
>>1846384>Homelessness is largely caused by lack of affordable housing, social institutions like healthcare, and access to well paid jobs. >For fucks sake, a huge number of homeless people are gainfully employed, pay taxes, etc but can't partake in a basic need like housing. In what world is institutionalizing ostensibly normal people who have no choice but to accept a job that can't afford them a place to live. Be real.when most people think about homeslessness they think about visible homeslessness i.e. public camping not the minimum wage janitor who sleeps in their car
No.1846391
>>1846384And for every 'down on their luck' working poor who just needs a home, there's someone strung out on hard drugs who will tell you to fuck off if you request that they sleep in one place from now on and hold down a 9-to-5 job.
Thinking you can just end America's homelessness problem by walking through the Tenderloin and handing every tent-dweller a set of housekeys and an office job offer is the kind of painfully stupid naivete that is only possible on a fake-communist imageboard.
(USER WAS WARNED FOR THIS POST) No.1846392
>>1846391I never said you can solve it by "handing out keys and jobs" you fucking moron.
No.1846394
>>1846391>>1846392well you cant do that now since youd need to readjust those people to normal life by getting them sober and theyd probably have to start on the lowest rung of the job ladder since theyd have no skills after not working for so long
No.1846395
>>1846394shut your fucking liberal whore mouth, will you?
No.1846397
Trump and Mao were right: KILL DRUG DEALERS.(b&)
No.1846409
A "progressive" city I had the displeasure of visiting, was a price-fixed shithole where the landlords scratched the back of city officials and in return were never investigated for any kind of abuse unless it was impossible to ignore. My guess it is identical everywhere. So, start by breaking up that political power block.
But for drug use, and the homeless themselves, the solution is to help them get clean while restoring their desire to work . Only way to do that is to move them out of the city, away from where they are a known quantity, to a facility or preferably a farm. They should be provided equal pay for their productive labor, and trained in skills. Both of which will be rehabilitative.
No.1846416
Lol at all the people here thinking you can force sobriety on addicts. You literally cannot cease opiate or benzodiazepene use once your body is dependent on them. The only way for these people to live and be productive is if you keep tricking their body into thinking they are on their favorite drug using Suboxone or methadone. Most will have to be on Subs or Methadone for the rest of the life lives. There is no hope for sobriety once you've damaged your brain and living outside long term will do that even worse than the actual drugs, the only thing to do is to make their use accessible, legal, and clean so they avoid antisocial behavior for the acquisition of drugs.
No.1846430
>>184639140% of homeless still work jobs.
Do you think the other 60% just decided one day to fuck off to the streets and nod off to fentanyl until they OD?
No.1846439
>>1846430>Do you think the other 60% just decided one day to fuck off to the streets and nod off to fentanyl until they OD?yes
No.1846440
>>1846430>40% of homeless still work jobs.retards
No.1846441
>>1846439You're missing the breakdown of family structures and relationships, addiction is a disease of the family and most of these people are at stage 4 and beyond where their behavior and mental health issues have alienated what family they had. Governments, no matter how progressive, cannot give you a family.
No.1846443
>>1846429>>Denverites carry narcan on them just in case they come across someone OD'ingNot American but I carry Naloxone (come on anons no need to call it specifically by brand..) with me.
Everyone who lives in a poor area should tbqh.
No.1846444
>>1846443>>1846205And have personally saved lives.
No.1846445
>>1846416>Lol at all the people here thinking you can force sobriety on addicts. You literally cannot cease opiate or benzodiazepene use once your body is dependent on them.There was a comrade on this site who had (actual) alcoholism. Three different idiots, one a therapist and two medical professionals, told them to just 'quit drinking', even during delirium tremens caused by
alcohol withdrawal. I hope this isn't news to anyone, but yes, acute alcohol withdrawal kills people, much more likely without medical intervention. Some drugs like alcohol and opiates create a chemical dependency (your body compensating for its consistent presence by changing chemical production) and suddenly removing your dependency (withdrawal) can be catastrophic enough to cause death.
No.1846454
>>1846416>Lol at all the people here thinking you can force sobriety on addictsLol at exactly 0 people then. Are you the same drooling fucking retard as this poster
>>1846394 ?
I want to believe we don't have two morons of this caliber here.
No.1846456
Becoming a drug addict is actually the ultimate lifehack: You need only one thing, to be happy in your life. I don't even mean hard drugs, let's take cigarettes. Your life revolves around nicotine, it is the substance which gives your life meaning. Addiction is such a easy solution to existence. You can solve a technical problem through very complex actions. But you can also just power off the device and turn it on again. It just werks.
No.1846472
>>1846416>You literally cannot cease opiate or benzodiazepene use once your body is dependent on them. The only way for these people to live and be productive is if you keep tricking their body into thinking they are on their favorite drug using Suboxone or methadone. Most will have to be on Subs or Methadone for the rest of the life lives.That's just not true though.
You can taper off relatively quickly from bupenorphene and within months on methadone for example. Actual physical addiction is relatively easy and simple to fix.
The hard part - and the stuff thst costs money - is the mental, social and emotional stuff; therapy, group activities and socialisation, meeting material needs, and so on and so on.
<t. I worked in the sector. No.1846504
>>1846215>postmodernism was invented as a theoretical background for justifying immiseration and degradationKys reactionary
No.1846506
>>1846379Can we just take all the tankies and lock them up in rape camps so that they can have their dreams and the rest of us can have peace and orgasms
No.1846507
>>1846441>addiction is a disease of the familyYes, the bourgeois family is a disease. Engels wrote all about it.
No.1846508
>>1846506Tbh it’s only tankie countries that solved homelessness.
No.1846509
>>1846508They solved nothing; they merely changed the names of things. Also kys for ancestor worship mystification shit
No.1846510
>>1846507Having no family is the only thing worse than the nuclear family
No.1846512
>>1846472There's no government program that's going to give you a loving family and relationships in your life, and that's the problem
No.1846513
>>1846509>Also kys for ancestor worship mystification shituygha are you high?
No.1846516
>>1846509What?
Post proof of your claims, please. This is new information I've never heard before.
No.1846519
>>1846510The feelings of the middle class aren't arguments.
No.1846520
>>1846516It's all very easy to pretend that the perfection of professional policing actually "solves" problems when you get your ideology from a church school retard
No.1846523
>>1846520Could you write normal? I don't want to solve riddles and would rather get straightforward answers as I'm trying to learn something. Clarity is key.
Could you explain your claim as to how the Soviet Union did not solve homelessness and instead just changed the name of such?
No.1846525
>>1846519See how long it takes for you to break down when you have no support network and tell me it isn't a material condition, ill wait
No.1846527
>>1846525>family is actually a support networkMiddle class brain. My relations don't have shit for me.
>long it takes you to break downTell me you've never left your basement to interview for a job without telling me
No.1846530
>>1846476I sell you drugs, so you can have your dopamine kick.
You make me richer, so I can have my dopamine kick.
We are both the same.
No.1846533
>>1846530No, we are not. You need command of other people in order to get dopamine kicks, which makes you a biological defect to be eliminated.
No.1846538
They’re by and large people with severe mental illnesses like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Many wouldn’t be able to hold down an apartment if you handed one to them on a silver platter. The solution is either to bring back the old mental hospital system where they lived under constant supervision or to euthanize them.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
No.1846542
>>1846538>euthanizecalm down justin trudeau the mentally ill don't deserve to be liquidated just because you refused to nationalize the pharma industry and allowed the CIA to push drugs in low income neighborhoods
No.1846547
It's a combination of homelessness caused by skyrocketing property prices combined with the apocalyptic surfeit of hard drugs that literally rot these people's brain. You look at all these cases of homeless people randomly attacking people on subways and shit and 99% of them don't ever remember what they did because fent already fried their brains. To tackle this problem the US needs to invest a crap ton of money on health, housing and robust, accountable police force that won't turn into a de facto gang, and most cities would rather herd all the homeless people away into what is virtually a containment zone than do all that. As long as the hobos are kept away from the high value properties owned by speculants and tech porkies everyone is happy
No.1846548
>>1846512Addicts loose their families to addiction all the time.
It takes more than a family to fix this.
Thry need a coherent and strong social network. A community.
As well as all the other stuff I mentioned, a home, a job, stability etc.
No.1846550
>>1846548They need medical intervention. All the things you mentioned are useful to prevent people falling into fatal addictions, not necessarily curing them.
No.1846553
>>1846538Is not this a prejudice?
google:
>People living with schizophrenia can work. With proper treatment and support, people living with the condition may be able to manage their symptoms and perform meaningful work. Stigma, discrimination, and lack of support are real barriers to employment for people with schizophrenia. No.1846555
ITT: eugenics enthusiasts pretending to be communists
No.1846558
>>1846555It would be interesting to consider a Marxist analysis of the imageboard format and the reasons for its apparent selectivity in reproducing reactionary ideologies. Has anyone written anything on this yet?
No.1846559
>>1846553Overwhelming majority of people with schizophrenia can’t and do not work, barring some exceptions.
No.1846560
>>1846555another day on leftypol
No.1846561
>>1846553Even the nature of that work is arbitrary and conditional on a host of factors.
The primary goal should be to remove the nature of wage exploitation i.e. wage slavery. It is the hard, single and uniting thread that stitches together the current form of capitalist society. When one talks of wage slavery it is implicitly acknowledged the prevailing conditions of injustice that take form in the present world, because it is the fulcrum upon which the world is held. No matter the place no matter the person.
So long as the social organisation of labour is shackled to wage exploitation there will not be an equitable distribution of resources that can be built to accommodate the mentally ill, the homeless, etc.
No.1846570
>>1846559Then obviously your institutions have failed to capture what they have to offer, and therefore you should be disappeared for advocating for them.
>>1846565>mystical will shit>degradedKys for reifying your feelings
No.1846574
>>1846550>They need medical intervention. All the things you mentioned are useful to prevent people falling into fatal addictions, not necessarily curing them.Read again:
>>1846472<You can taper off relatively quickly from bupenorphene and within months on methadone for example. Actual physical addiction is relatively easy and simple to fix. No.1846587
>>1846570>Kys for reifying your feelingst. Somebody who has never experienced this.
No.1846614
>>1846555>communism is when you provide critical support for junkies and schizophrenicsNobody here is arguing that there should be less social support you stupid lib. There is a significant and visible subset of the homeless that are a serious public safety issue, and they are what most people talk about regarding homelessness in America to downplay discussion about the material factors pushing regular people into poverty. It would be more honest if you came out and said that you enjoy watching lumpen terrorize petit-bourgeoisie and labor aristocrats in coastal cities.
No.1846630
>>1846439t.sheltered
>>1846538kys
>>1846555>>1846560literally just LARPers who make a personality out of misunderstanding ML thought online like this
>>1846391 dumbass
No.1846714
>>1846205My parents wouldn't help me go back to school for nursing or engineering after MAGAboomers tricked me into going into a field known for getting automated. I needed a minor student pause to help me and even that wasn't enough.
Biden >>>>>>>>> Trump
No.1847004
>>1846570>>mystical will shit>reifying your feelingsabsolute brainrot
keep sponsoring drug addictions you pomo succdem fuck, but dont expect sympathy from actual socialists if you do
No.1847057
>>1846558If we assume the premise to be true (a silly thing to do, in my opinion) then one materialist theory is that there isn't an effective social pressure to repress unpopular ideas. In fact, the 'bump' style format of forums like chan imageboards (unlike many other sites and societies with voting systems or stronger social punishment) rewards controversy and attention over conformity. Reactionary messages get more exposure, unless you're on a reactionary place where progressive messages are more controversial.
On the other hand, you could draw a line from 4chan's edginess and later its public fame for misogyny and racism towards the rise of /pol/ and the reputation of imageboards as a refugee space for reactionary ideologies. PDFrel (2013). This isn't inherent to the imageboard format, less well-known and less popular imageboards are evidence of this, but the reputation is associated with imageboard.
But, while you didn't state this, I assume you're talking about /leftypol/ in particular. /leftypol/ is a place with a history, a post-8chan board with /pol/ in its name. It can't be treated as a normal imageboard which
just happens to attract reactionaries, oh no, how could that have happened?
THIS POST BROUGHT 2U BY NAZBOL GONG hooman rights are a spook boil a romanov in a pot of water kill everyone with glasses.
No.1847059
>>1846533>taking a joke this seriouslygo away, nerd.
No.1847099
>>1847057That's not actually a materialist analysis.
You would begin with the premise that these forums are concrete forms of capital.
The code base is a software which is produced and is the result of labour. The code base runs on servers, which are essentially capital to which businesses pay rent (a hosting fee) for their use. The structure of the software realizes in whatever form a type of access which can be defined as consumption for the generic user.
Bandwidth is incredibly interesting, because it is both a fictional and a real limitation for which a business is charged. Theoretically server farms can provide infinite bandwidth, but allocate a price point to derive a profit from its use.
Eventually, what would be seen is that the content derrived from these sites is axiomatic to the form the content provision takes; media groups that retain advertising rights use this to drive consumer growth by competing to be the most popular service, balancing it in turn with the content that is accessible through it.
You can take this to its logical conclusion with Netflix. Netflix is a media entertainment platform that started out simply buying the rights to stream shows. Its success with its wider adoption has led to its own standard of production in the content it produces; blithely, this can be seen in the Right's exageration of its DEI standards. But its cinematic techniques, the types of shots, even the list of cameras that producers of its shows are allowed to use are strictly regulated.
In the end, the form of the content produced is as much a product of its initial growth that the content begins to merge in its similarity. Every element, including the script writing, becomes indestinguishable.
It is the same with Instagram influencers. They occupy the apex of an audience niche through interaction by effectively producing and 'selling' content that Facebook owns as a sort of patronage. Despite the differences in the nature of the audiences, the content that one sells is effectively identical across the platform. This has reached its peak in what the term 'influencer' signifies: the commodification of the imaginary value of a lifestyle of consumption. Taste itself is sold back to the audience which they consume by adopting, to the point that meaning itself is a commodity.
But at the heart of it, nothing has changed: simply the structure of the code base, and what the service profers to provide to its users. Whatever the forum, they are still simply circuits in the operation of this megalith. The only thing to be remembered is that they are fantasmagoric: they are nothing more than reflections of the current state of the division of resources in society. Down to the very language that is used.
No.1847131
>>1847099>That's not actually a materialist analysis. Poor choice of words on my part, was really more just pointing out how the base (software) influences the superstructure (culture) above it in a mechanical sense.
I find it interesting that you've ignored the typical non-profit nature of most imageboards and many forums. This is essential if you're making a capital-centric material analysis of forums. Overall, monetization attempts of the owner (rather than 3rd party shills) beyond banner ads are rare and ineffective. Web3 (cryptocurrency) integration with imageboards is a joke. Lots of imageboards don't even have ads or donation instructions, being truly non-profit entities.
No.1847299
How are homeless not the lumpenproletariat?
No.1847808
>>1847131>I find it interesting that you've ignored the typical non-profit nature of most imageboards and many forumsI haven't ignored them. As I state at the end, they're part of the same circuit of internet traffic. The content that appears on them is as much inflected by that of the profit-driven media groups as they are the independence of their ownership. And again, these are phantom relationships; it is the individuals, who are a product of a material social reality, that interact as consumers of this content, not the other way around.
No.1847828
>>1847299Because sometimes they're the proletariat.
It's not rocket science.
No.1847913
>>1846205>What the fuck is causing this problem? >What the fuck are these "progressive" cities doing that are completely ruining their cities?They're blocking the construction of new housing. These cities, especially San Francisco, have tons of restrictions on what kind of housing can be built. Developers are only allowed to build single-family homes, and aren't allowed to build dense, multi-story affordable apartment complexes. Every time a developer tries to build new housing, a bunch of liberals crying about gentrification come crying to city hall telling them not to build these new buildings because it will ruin their view of the bay, or will ruin the neighborhood character or some shit. This all creates a restriction on supply, meaning that landlords can charge exorbitant rents because demand for housing is inelastic. If the price of pizza goes up, people will buy less pizza, but if rents go up, people have no choice to either pay them or go homeless. Most people pay them, making huge profits for the unproductive rentier class. Some people can't afford it and go homeless, which is no problem for the landlords. That's externalities.
>Is it just as simple as build more housing?Yeah, pretty much.
>Or doing what Houston is doing and getting these people into apartments?Yes.
Step 1: build housing
Step 2: put people in that housing
Step 1 is illegal in blue states. Step 2 is unprofitable for the old wealthy property owners with the free time to show up to city hall. The solution is to abolish zoning restrictions, levy a land-value tax, and have the government fund cheap, high-density public housing provided at cost, and establish a positive legal right to shelter.
No.1847918
>>1847299This might come as a shock to you but depending on the city roughly the majority of homeleys people do actually have a fulltime job
No.1847925
>>1847299>How are homeless not the lumpenproletariat?Some of them can be, but being homeless is not the same thing. You could have homeless workers. You could have lumpens who have homes. I tend to think of the lumpen as "grifters" and scam artists basically. Or contract killers and organized criminals.
Marx for example listed "organ grinders" as a lumpen profession, who were these guys who'd play annoying wind-up music boxes for coins. "Squeegee men." Or the guys who wear Elmo costumes around tourist attractions.
No.1847976
>>1847952>Zoning laws are neoliberal mythology and cope.I disagree. Cities with much laxer zoning laws, like Austin, have much higher rates of construction, and much lower rents. Cities with much more restrictive zoning laws, like San Francisco, have much lower rates of construction, and much higher rents. It makes sense that this would happen in theory, and it also visibly happens in practice.
>social housing stock was mass privatized and the government retreated from its function of building affordable housing stockI agree, hence why I advocated for universal public housing.
>Add that to new laws allowing for unproductive capital inflows by allowing foreigners to buy homes and properties that they don't even use just to sit on it as an "investment"I agree. Hence why I said a land-value tax should be levied so that land speculation is no longer profitable.
Banning the construction of new housing does in fact worsen the housing crisis. It is not the sole thing holding back the free market (pbuh) from instantly solving all our problems, but it is not mythology that if you forbid people from building apartments, apartments will not get built.
No.1848009
>>1847976The problem is that you are operating under the assumption that the local government, in, say, San Francisco,
desires that there be additional housing stock, and then running with that assumption to your conclusion of blaming the zoning laws as a result.
Let us say for the sake of argument that all developers regardless of public or private are hereby restricted to building single family homes. In California alone there's currently (according to Google) around 300,000 acres of undeveloped land being put up for sale. Let's say each acre has enough space to build 8 single family dwellings.
That's 2,400,000 homes that can be built on that land.
Is that enough to solve California's housing woes? According to the Public Policy Institute of California, California needs 3.5 million units of housing by 2025 to meet demand.
3.5 million - 2.4 million = a 1,100,000 units of housing deficit.
Now let's apply the anti-foreign investment restriction.
According to CalMatters,
https://calmatters.org/housing/2018/03/data-dig-are-foreign-investors-driving-up-real-estate-in-your-california-neighborhood/Nearly one in four California single-family homes and condominiums are purchased in all-cash transactions. Since there is no real statistical data on the matter, all-cash transactions are treated as a proxy for foreign investors as realtors have noted that it's almost twice as common for foreign investors to pay solely in cash. But let's cut that 25% down to 10% just for the sake of argument and say that only 10% of Californian homes are being held by foreign investors.
10% of 14,824,827 total housing units (latest annual estimate by the California Department of Finance) = 1,482,482 units.
1,482,482-1,100,00 = 382,482 surplus units of housing after existing demand has been met.
CONCLUSIONEVEN IF ALL DEVELOPERS WERE RESTRICTED TO BUILDING ONLY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, A MASS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM COUPLED WITH A BAN ON FOREIGN INVESTMENT INTO THE HOUSING MARKET WOULD IMMEDIATELY ALLEVIATE ANY AND ALL SHORTAGESNEOLIBERALS ARE FUCKING LIARS AND RETARDS No.1848021
>>1848009>In California alone there's currently (according to Google) around 300,000 acres of undeveloped land being put up for sale. Let's say each acre has enough space to build 8 single family dwellings. >That's 2,400,000 homes that can be built on that land. This is kind of a completely absurd assumption. Developers can't (and shouldn't!) cover all of the undeveloped land in the state. Most of that land is nowhere near where people actually work. Building a suburban house in the middle of the desert will not bring any benefit to someone who works a minimum wage job in downtown San Francisco. In order to provide affordable housing, you have to build upwards, not outwards.
>A MASS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM COUPLED WITH A BAN ON FOREIGN INVESTMENT INTO THE HOUSING MARKET WOULD IMMEDIATELY ALLEVIATE ANY AND ALL SHORTAGESI hope your proposed affordable housing program does not involve tiling Death Valley in McMansions. It would be prohibitively expensive, environmentally catastrophic, and also all 2.4 million of those cookie-cutter houses would be nowhere near any schools, stores, or any other non-housing buildings! And it still wouldn't address the housing shortage unless you kick out all the people who live in foreign-owned housing and deport them to Mexico or whatever! And even then you would have literally filled up all available land in the whole state so you're fucked after the population grows. It would be so much smarter to spend that affordable housing government budget on cheap, high-density apartment complexes in mixed-use residential areas where people have access to public transportation and walkable infrastructure. But that's currently illegal in cities like SF.
No.1848026
>>1848009>The problem is that you are operating under the assumption that the local government, in, say, San Francisco, desires that there be additional housing stockForgot to respond to this. I'm actually operating under the opposite assumption. The local government is in fact an impediment to additional housing stock, because property owners and landlords are lobbying them to pass policies that artificially increase property values and rents by putting restrictions on high-density development.
No.1848032
>>1848021The only thing I set out to prove was that the housing shortage could be completely alleviated even if only through the construction of single family homes, when backed with a foreign investment ban. You have not been able to counter this idea so I will take that as a conclusive win.
I never said it was a good idea.
I didn't claim the idea was totally environmentally friendly.
All I did was run with your assumption that it was impossible to solve the housing shortage simply through construction of single family homes, and decisively proved that it was indeed possible with basic sums.
By the way, those 300,000 acres of land being up for sale doesn't mean that's the total amount of undeveloped land that exists in the entire state. Even when I was building my example to extremes I left tons of leeway for myself.
>>1848026>The local government is in fact an impediment to additional housing stock, because property owners and landlords are lobbying them to pass policies that artificially increase property values and rents by putting restrictions on high-density development.CORRECTNow ask yourself why that would automatically void the idea that there can't be enough single family homes built for everyone in the state. You made an assumption that one claim automatically linked to the next when there is no linkage. Both these things:
1. Single families are lobbying to keep restrictive zoning laws
2. The government and state have the capacity to build enough single family housing to solve the shortage
can both be true at the same time. The neoliberals fooled you into thinking they couldn't.
No.1848038
>>1848009>Nearly one in four California single-family homes and condominiums are purchased in all-cash transactions. Since there is no real statistical data on the matter, all-cash transactions are treated as a proxy for foreign investors as realtors have noted that it's almost twice as common for foreign investors to pay solely in cash. But let's cut that 25% down to 10% just for the sake of argument and say that only 10% of Californian homes are being held by foreign investors.
>10% of 14,824,827 total housing units (latest annual estimate by the California Department of Finance) = 1,482,482 units.
>1,482,482-1,100,00 = 382,482 surplus units of housing after existing demand has been met.Wouldn't some of the investment-held housing already be rented out? It would be better to use data for vacant housing and go from there.
No.1848046
>>1848038According to Fox 11 LA, California has an average 8.5% annual vacant housing rate.
1.5% isn't going to make a real difference from my deliberately conservative estimate of 10% housing units owned by foreign investors.
1,260,110 - 1,100,000 = still leaves us with a surplus of 160,110 homes using the revised 8.5% estimate.
No.1848050
>>1848046Also no, vacant housing is not a good indicator. Companies like AirBNB also play their role in driving up housing prices. An investor sitting on 10 homes renting them all out through AirBNB is still contributing to the housing shortage.
Ideally there should be a third rule put in place to block individuals (both foreign and domestic) from buying and claiming more than one property at a time for proper de-commodification of housing.
But this is getting way off topic and my intent was just to prove that yes, indeed, you can solve the housing shortage of basically any US state even just through mass construction of single family homes, and neoliberals are fucking liars for trying to state otherwise.
No.1848051
>Third thing I noticed was that downtown was almost completely dead despite it being a Sunday and an unofficial holiday (Cinco de Mayo)
mid and lower tier cities in north america are just like that
too much suburban sprawl and lack of a public culture
>And take a look at pic related: Denverites carry narcan on them just in case they come across someone OD'ing—THIS IS NOT WHAT HAPPENS IN A FUNCTIONAL SOCIETY.
do you want them to not carry narcan?
whats a "functional society"?
No.1848055
>>1848050And who is going to pay for this mass home-building scheme?
And what about people who already own their own homes in the area? I expect you're just going to tell them to suck it up? That their hard work and saving doesn't matter, because we're giving everybody with a pulse a free home?
What next, a scheme to build swimming pools in every one of these homes?
And what of those whose job it is to finance, maintain, and sell these houses? What of the loyal American tax-paying businesses and corporations who will be cheated out of their hard earned incomes?
No.1848057
>>1848055fuck homeowners and fuck loyal american tax paying business
No.1848059
>>1848009>single-family housing zones aren't the problem. >It's neoliberal copeExactly. Changing zoning laws will not solve the housing crisis, no matter what democrats do or say. That narrative is just a pretext for the next phase of Bidenomics: Today, in America, the democrats fight to end reasonable living-standard zoning to put us into minimum cost, state-subsidized, privately-owned pod-ghettos.
Communist China has no ghettos. Communist China has the most amazing and massive single-family villa zones. Rational and proportional socialist development means constructing ALL necessary housing types, and single-family villas give workers something to strive for. Westernerners, like monkeys, seek only to meet their basic needs; hence, they ally with capitalists' efforts degrade themselves further, to expand the ghetto zones.
No.1848060
>>1848057Watch it, I'm a fed and you're on thin ice pal.
No.1848061
>>1848055you sound like a boomer who has zero idea what the fuck is going on
No.1848064
>>1848061These are actually genuine questions though. A solved housing crisis means that all home owners basically lose their entire life savings, generations of wealth
No.1848066
>>1848055>And who is going to pay for this mass home-building scheme? The same groups as in any large scale government public infrastructure project. The government will sell bonds and raise debt, people in the local area will chip in through taxes, perhaps local legislators can even throw a solidarity tax on high income earners or capital gains, and the future generations will also pay property tax and business taxes and what not on the newly developed areas.
>And what about people who already own their own homes in the area?They can keep them? In my example I deliberately chose undeveloped land plots. As for foreign investors who aren't even citizens of the country, lmfao if you think anyone will feel pity over an oil baron from Saudi Arabia losing his house or Chinese financier fleeing the communist anti corruption police.
>That their hard work and saving doesn't matter, because we're giving everybody with a pulse a free home? What about the hard work of everyone who has a job but can't afford a house due to all the distortions in the market? Are you telling them to suck it up and stay homeless? Because that's what your retarded country has been doing for decades and all it's done is increase crime and poverty and reduced economic efficiency.
>What next, a scheme to build swimming pools in every one of these homes? No? Why are you strawmanning so hard? Did I come into this thread saying such a thing? Then why are you accusing me of saying it?
>And what of those whose job it is to finance, maintain, and sell these houses? What of the loyal American tax-paying businesses and corporations who will be cheated out of their hard earned incomes?If you've seen how China develops you would not be saying such a stupid thing. China builds subway stations, apartments, and business complexes years before they're needed in anticipation of population growth. The population grows and starts moving into those areas >>> congratz now you have a region pulling ahead and business confidence increases.
What is the alternative you suggest? Allowing for a minority to monopolize all housing and then expecting massive economic growth as everyone flees the area because it's too expensive? Are you genuinely retarded?
Tbh I'm glad the Americans turned their back on Keynes. The more they go into the laissez-faire bullshit the faster they will destroy themselves. They have completely forgotten the long term to favor the short. Keynes said build housing and the economy will improve. Friedman said sell off all the housing and stop the government from building more (lol) and allow the invisible hand to work and things will improve. Decades later who was right? If you say Friedman, enjoy your decline.
No.1848069
>>1848066This guy clearly ain't thinkin' about the shareholders.
No.1848071
>>1848055>we're giving everybody with a pulse a free home? More proof that Western Civilization has been Satanic from the start.
Even in Ancient Israel every breathing Israelite had his ancestral home that could not be taken from him, that was even initially divided by lottery so as to guarantee equality so n one would complain about someone having a better view than them or whatever nonsense.
Centuries later and we have mouth breathing Anglo scum questioning the very right to a home. You're all destined for Hell.
No.1848072
>>1848059>Westernerners, like monkeys,Monkeys can at least feed themselves. Gardeners are more like tapeworms, they can't survive without a host. Same color too.
No.1848075
>>1848071>You're all destined for Hell.Yeah, well I hope Satan charges me rent.
I want to earn my way in the world unlike you dole scroungers, in this life or the next.
No.1848077
>>1848055>And who is going to pay for this mass home-building scheme? I don't know. Maybe the same way the F-35, mass incarceration and the forever wars are paid for? Oh, that's right. We can't have
that because social spending causes super-duper megahyperinflation, unlike bank bailouts and free fighter jets and nuclear submarines for Israel.
No.1848081
>>1848055You. They'll tax the shit out of you specifically.
No.1848082
>>1848075Charging rent? I thought hell was supposed to be socialist. Have the ancaps taken it over after they all died and went there?
No.1848083
>>1848082Friedman died and found someone dumber than Reagan.
No.1848088
>>1848082Hell has no Means of Production and thus cannot be categorized. It's just God putting you in time-out forever with a side of torture (opinions vary on whether said torture will be extremely painful or just like being locked into a dark closet and crying forever).
No.1848089
>I love paying useless landlords as long they're white
Rightoids are literally bugman
No.1848095
>>1848075I don't give a rats ass about your "earn your right to breath" bootstraps nonsense. At the end of the day, a society that's able to meet its citizens basic needs is going to be more productive than one where half of them are starving to death.
No.1848100
>>1848095No bro you don't get it! The only real housing is over priced bullshit no one can afford!
No.1848130
>>1848075>I want to earn my way in the world unlike you dole scroungers, in this life or the next.Yeah landlords do so much hard work right.
No.1848132
>>1846565rehab is okay, but euthanasia should be prohibited .
No.1848143
>>1848130Earth is just a practice run for the rich for the management positions they'll be undertaking in the afterlife.
No.1848210
It really amazes me how the psychs have rehabilitated and whitewashed the reputation of asylums over the past years and are manufacturing consent for what will be the next form of mass incarceration. And I've seen literally nobody talking about it.
>>1846384>Homelessness is largely caused by lack of affordable housing, social institutions like healthcare, and access to well paid jobs. This, but affordable housing would mean the housing prices might down and less money for interventionism and we can't have
that, now can we?
No.1848550
>>1848210A comprehensive long-term rehabilitation program for homeless populations would necessarily involve depriving people of their individual liberties if they were unable to function on their own. Lib-left unwillingness to accept this is why the prevailing 'solution' to homelessness in blue-voting cities is to let them roam freely around public spaces, which leads to an anti-homeless backlash and the empowerment of 'law and order' politics.
No.1848557
>>1848210People who can't function in normal society need to be in institutions, there's no way around it. Hopefully many can get better, some can't.
No.1848604
>>1848210Always has been a form of mass incarceration. One function of prisons is to lock up the crazies there now, to give the prisoners people to torture and mock.
What they want isn't mass incarceration, but outright extermination in the open. If you have a psych record, society has already agreed to a compact that you are a prisoner in the community, and you are treated as if you are a fugitive slave. Free men are not treated that way for a moment and if that ever begins, there is holy hell brought upon the transgressor. It has gone on for this long, so why do you act like there is a struggle you can win? Even if redemption were possible, the condemned want nothing to do with human society. The condemned - myself included - want you to leave us alone forever and never speak of us sharing anything. You'd give us our land back so we can find whatever meager living we would have on this world, and there would be nothing more to say on the matter. You wanted this, you got it, and I highly doubt anyone in authority cares. We are under no obligation to a society that does this to its own subjects.
No.1848607
The best you could possibly do is to simply not do what you're going to do, abandon the project to "perfect society" since you clearly aren't going to accomplish that, and ask yourselves for the first time if you are the assholes who kept pushing this. Whatever happens, humanity is already split in two, forever apart and irreconcilable. The idea that we would want to join your society after this is only abided because you choked the life out of this world and made sure to hoard anything that would allow us to continue existing, and when that isn't enough, you actively invade our homes, torture and humiliate us for sport. You can't not. Yet, we are the insane ones for having the temerity to continue living and expecting anything else in the world.
If we didn't live in this dark age, our lives wouldn't have to be this. We've always been willing to hand over our bodies and tell you about our lives to prevent this fate in the future, but it's pretty hard when you went out of your way to make society like this, to make sure we were targets of humiliation. There is no negotiating with people who glorify ritual sacrifice this much. So, humanity is failed. I just try to make what I can of this world in spite of those who wanted to make it more like this.
No.1848611
Oh, and every time we attempt to repair our own lives, because we would have to, you people come in to disrupt that, because "only Christ can redeem you", or something like that. It's a very disgusting religion that rules us.
Anyway if you want to do something about homelessness, it is very obvious - the rent is outrageous. This is intended. They do not want anyone to afford housing, so the run-down can be accelerated. People who were once members of society will be sacrificed on the altar of a failed system.
Ultimately the only thing you would do is not attack people for being downtrodden, and stop facilitating drugs as if they were a natural phenomenon. But, you won't do that or suggest that such a thing is possible. The theory can never be wrong, after all. Besides, the condemned know this is never going to change. Their lives are never going to be anything, and they've lived like this for so long. Even if the world did change without them, there would be nothing for them in the next world either. Those who believe redemption is possible learn the hard way that there is no such thing. Ever.
No.1848612
But, this has gone on for 100 years, all of it intended and foreseen. There are a lot of people who are highly invested in continuing this ritual sacrifice, and to even name the enemy has become illegal. Humans were never going to be any different. If they were, history would look very different, even if there were a faint sign of it. There is not one sign in human history of any drive to do what would have been necessary to avert this. Anyone who tried was snuffed out before they got any ideas.
There is one possibility - that there will be a break from history at some point in the future, from the parts available to us now. This will not happen, and if it did, it would have to occult itself for a long time and operate in ways that cannot be interdicted by present social control mechanisms.
No.1848615
Is this the eugenics guy?
No.1848616
>>1848612I can say with reasonable confidence that no such "hidden movement" exists today. The people who would be interested in such a thing are scattered, often unable to even think of a different world let alone act towards any goal. Many who would be the victims of this are also the most fervent facilitators of the present project, and that is a great tragedy of humanity - one of many. The occult forces that exist are largely disinterested in changing the world for that purpose, and really have less control over the world than they are believed to hold. Most of the condemned, if they do anything at all, gave up on the world a long time ago, and this was always their inclination. We have no reason to believe that such a thing as "human society" could be repaired, especially with how much humans want to make other humans suffer and seem to love that more than any other purpose.
No.1848620
>>1848615Maybe? Sounds more wizard-y than anything.
No.1848644
>>1848612>>1848612>But, this has gone on for 100 years, all of it intended and foreseen. There are a lot of people who are highly invested in continuing this ritual sacrifice, and to even name the enemy has become illegal.You what? What's this about?
No.1848678
>>1848644Basically telling you that this won't be "solved" and it always is tinged with this crusader ethos that wants to make the unsightly disappear. You can ask the people who are cursed to live in this life why it turned out this way, and they'll tell you the society is designed to grind down anyone who doesn't fit in the "perfect world". The world that would allow them - us - to live, was specifically rejected because it contradicted the inclinations of those who captured the world and wanted it for their interests. No one in charge wants a productive society, let alone for that product to go to workers. If that happened, most people would see the ruling apparatus as entirely ruinous, dismantle all of it worldwide, and all nations would out of necessity agree to a universal peace premised on the general fear of those who would restore the old order. The purge mechanism would be reversed against those who initiated this war.
No.1848681
In other words - we hate you and want you gone. We do not want to coexist with you - why on Earth would we coexist with people who stubbornly refused to allow basic things when it would have been relevant? Who stubbornly refuse to even acknowledge what they did to "win" the world, who only "won" the right to be obsequious to a few oligarchs and called it freedom? We are robbed of even a language to adequately describe what was done to us. Anyone who even starts is attacked on sight for "negative thinking", while the same Nazis continue stealing everything in sight. The intellectuals openly disdained even the mildest expectation we had, when we were fool enough to believe coexistence was even possible. They would go out of their way to hurt us, but it was too much to even suggest that life could be easier - that we didn't have to struggle for this shit, to exhaust us and drive up the death rate. You did that, and keep doing that even after the illness has been diagnosed. You don't want to hear about that. That's "negative thinking", or "against historical progress", or some other excuse that graspers always use to justify their venal behavior.
You could "treat the symptoms" largely by removing all of the pressures designed to drive people to homelessness. But, at this point, the condemned will never believe any promises. They'd take their free shit and piss off, and it would be on you to suggest there is anything at all for us in "society". We would be perfectly happy if you let us have some small world for ourselves and allowed us to even say to each other what you did to us - that would be better than any advice you have for us. But, we'd always come to the conclusion that reconciliation is impossible. That is locked in now.
No.1848683
The society where it can be different would be very different from this one, and for it to be the predominant condition would require things that are not presently conceivable. We can only see vague portents of a different world, only to see them snuffed out for more "historical progress". You will see more desperate acts of those who are trying to find a way out, but you will not see a vision of the world where there is reconciliation between the factions of the past, nor will it end with struggle with one part victorious. If we are all exterminated, more of us will be created by the very society you championed, because it creates its wretches of its own accord. That is how the "contradiction" is resolved - we all are ruined and purged, leaving behind a few vampires who rule over a dumpster fire.
It is not worthwhile to speak of any work towards making society as a whole different, unless we are speaking of something very different from any political goal. To even begin with that, "politics" will first have to be understood properly, and then has to no longer be a mitigating factor. The simplest way to accomplish that would be democratization in the genuine sense. The people would get outright their land and security without onerous threats, and there wouldn't be a despised class treated this poorly. The downtrodden would be told the truth, offered relatively decent lives in exchange for submission since we've clearly lost, and we would not pretend humanity had anything different in them. Ultimately the only class that really wanted it to change was the lowest class - the very class that was to be disposed on sight. Everyone else would always choose kicking down and purging the weak, because to do otherwise would violate humanity's historical tendencies. This was particular to human history, rather than a rule of nature or life itself, but to even acknowledge that is forbidden in this society.
No.1848686
At least, forbidden if you want to keep your job. I can say it because my life is forfeit - but by merely being what I am, anything I do is "retarded" and therefore ignored. I'll always be right, but that doesn't count for anything - just like anyone who hoped their labors would lead to anything but more of the same.
All of this says that the only way it really changes is if the "ruling power" becomes something very different, inhuman and disinterested in the conceits that have governed human politics and human society. At that point, the "ruler" would be something very different, probably not recognizable as living, but something that would be attuned to what humans really are, and that would want existence to not entail this level of misery. What we have now is the exact opposite - a parodic version of that presented as "the end of history" which just presses the nerve of power to crush all life and make the world into the preferred image of some perverted aristos. None who tell us they were rule the world are worth following, and should not be allowed to rule over a goldfish tank.
No.1848687
>>1848678>>1848683>non specific eloquent doomingThe short answer to this that the solution is Communism. It's the way to prevail over what you call "humanity's historical tendencies"
No.1848692
>>1848687A communist has to answer the same question as any other government does. They had their turn and decided in the end that communism didn't work.
No.1848702
>>1848687Also, communists today have advanced solutions or what they think are solutions to the homeless problem. Usually the solution is to get rid of them, and they resolved to do that a long time ago. If you didn't fit in, they did not want you in their society. It has always been like that.
If you wanted to not make people worse, then you're asking a question that no political system will solve by imposing it on the world. The politician can facilitate us living, if they so choose. That is what communists usually did - tell people the wars to kill them off were bullshit, gave people the land and bread they already held simply by saying they weren't going to confiscate more, and attempted rebuilding and development. But, it turned out, the political minds didn't want that, because the people didn't love them automatically or something. People are not naturally inclined to be political minds nor jazzed that they were put through civil wars and now had party officials barking contradictory orders at them, apparently because it was amusing to some cadre boss to mock them.
No.1849992
>>1848692Ok doomer glowie
Unique IPs: 51