this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2024
259 points (98.1% liked)

World News

32304 readers
433 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Quebec City Mayor Bruno Marchand has suggested that the solution to the crisis may be a Finnish model, which is a 'housing first' approach that aims to give everyone a home.

all 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 94 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Never have I seen so many people with so many unworkable solutions to a problem take so long to come to the most obvious solution. Just give people homes. Don’t let people die on the street, it’s inhumane.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 49 points 9 months ago

Yeah but... capitalism?

[–] crackajack@reddthat.com 78 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I am reading a book on supporting universal basic income, and it provided all examples of the times when the homeless were provided unconditional income and a home. Every cities in the world that did this have been successful in eliminating homelessness.

This is not a Finnish model, it's common sense.

[–] WTFdetroithouse@lemmings.world 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

What's the name of the book?

[–] crackajack@reddthat.com 31 points 9 months ago

"Utopia for Realists"

[–] BlackPit@feddit.ch 47 points 9 months ago (2 children)

has suggested that the solution to the crisis may be a Finnish model, which is a 'housing first' approach that aims to give everyone a home.

Fixing homelessness by giving people a home! I'm not sure that's going to work.....facepalm

[–] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

If you go on reddit threads for topics like this you will always see some people echoing conservative think tank talking points like how homeless people are homeless because of their own not only shortcomings but also volition. They will say that homeless people being put into homes will trash the place and leave for the streets despite every housing first experiment showing a very good sticking rate. In fact one dude is doing this in this very thread.

Almost every developed country has the resources to solve the homelessness "problem" for good. The problem is the lack of political will. The property owning parasite class are scared of what easily available homes will do to property prices. The employers are scared labour not being docile without the threat of homelessness. It's just vampires all the way down profiting from keeping people destitute and on the streets.

[–] InputZero@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago

You're absolutely right, to add a bit more depth to the conversation, providing a home is the first step. Those homes need to be dispersed throughout a whole community so no single neighborhood has to handle the influx. As opposed to project housing. They need to be near services like welfare, public transportation, food banks, etc, and occupational opportunities to break the cycle of poverty. In many places that means a job but it doesn't necessarily have to be.

I think the cause of all this is simple, a system where ultimately your only value is the wealth you generate instead of valuing the person we all are. I also think that the solution will be complicated. I've been fooled too many times by the simple solution to fall for it here.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

If you go on reddit

You just need to go 5 posts from yours in this very thread to find one saying "homeless people didn't agreed to the rules". And one post beside yours "homeless will flock from all over the world".

[–] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 9 months ago

Yeah I saw that. Unsurprisingly it's someone from a nordic "socialist" country.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 24 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But this is just common sense?

[–] toastus@feddit.de 9 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I don't necessarily disagree, but why isn't it widely adopted then?

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If we guarantee enough housing for everyone, it stops being as valuable as a speculative asset. Which is bad for landlords (including the ones that work in legislation)

[–] honey_im_meat_grinding@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Also economists (who are usually wealthy enough to be able to landlord if they want to do so)... which means they're financially incentivised to hold right wing economic views like "rent control doesn't work, 9/10 economists recommend against it!" like it's a toothpaste advert and economists who challenge that don't get much spotlight in the mainstream.

[–] crackajack@reddthat.com 16 points 9 months ago

Greed. And people just unwilling to change from what they have been grown accustomed to.

[–] Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works 12 points 9 months ago

It really should be catching the eye of all cities / countries with large homeless issues.

[–] Netrunner@programming.dev 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The same people who say give them homes don't want to pay for it

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The program has actually SAVED money, so this should be enough incentive for taxpayers to want to support it.