Mm I don’t think this is the solution to homelessness. It’s not that we don’t have enough housing it’s that the working class gets pushed down so much and can’t work despite wanting to. But I’m not qualified to solve homelessness so who am I to tell them how to spend their money.
I like this because it is both a good story about an individual helping their community and it is proof individual action alone is not enough to rely on to solve social problems.
There’s a lot of negativity from armchair experts in this thread but this seems like a genuine case of somebody putting a lot of thought and a lot of effort into actually helping the homeless. It’s not just dropping a bunch of tiny houses and saying “job done”.
Incredible read, thank you for sharing this
I think most likley that is actually the case. Y’all are masters at the sophist uno card. Cha cha real smooth…how low can you go…Charity is a band aid of tyranny and all those in the hierarchy play their part. Some towns out west that have a bunch of rich people don’t have any infrastructure for the poor so the peasants can serve them their cheeseburgers at their local McDonald’s. This means the rich need us. It is not altruism but out of necessity, but you can spin anything the way you would like, especially when it’s hard to tell rich people what to do.
Yes this… “What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.” Butttttttt… “But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you” (Matthew 6:6, ESV)
Rich people love peacocking managing perception and you will lap it up like a loyal dog unaware of your position in the hierarchy. I am not even Christian but raised Christian I suppose.
Are you high? It’s incredibly difficult to follow your wondering logic.
Are you high? It’s incredibly difficult to follow your wondering logic.
This is a terrible idea. We are not helpless children, it’s our society, we have the right to provide the necessities of life: food, health care, a place to live and a decent job. Capitalism is the sickness: get healthy, go woke.
I think it’s easier to make a million dollars and help a fair number of people out than it would be to over throw capitalism.
While helping people out with your millions of dollars you could also advocate for reform. Work with the systems available to make change. Screaming at the walls of Troy won’t get you inside.
Now imagine if billionaires did it with their infinite wealth…sad. humanity and capitalism is just cancer.
If we can convince them their dick size is measured by how much charity / benefit they do with their wealth we will solve many of the world’s problems overnight
Nooo!!! Anyone with money is inherently evil! The only way to help the world is to ensure that none of us ever rise above the level of a wage-slave drone! Anyone who even approaches a position where they might be able to make an actual difference must be attacked mercilessly!
This is a showy display promoted to soften negitive opinion of capitalism. We would need “nice rich people” if we made a ethical wage
Show me a single leftist calling to remove the middle class.
I know of a guy who wanted to remove the middle class, but he also wanted to remove the upper and lower class as well so as to create a classless stateless society.
There is no such thing as evil … But their is antisocial and managing perception
There’s a story about how Bill Gates plans to give away 99% of his wealth in the next 20 years (on causes like eradicating polio, decreasing child mortality, etc) and all the Lemmy comments are “he’ll still have a billion dollars” or “he shouldn’t have that money to begin with”. Can’t we appreciate some good in the world?
Not everyone agrees with this thought but I’m also for allowing unused city parcels to be used for homeless tents and such. My city does everything it can to hide homelessness without addressing any of the underlying issues
deleted by creator
And why were they homeless?
Why were they homeless???
I’m of two minds.
-
shitty bungalows are what is killing infrastructure costs and perpetuating urban sprawl. We have a generous home in a hyper-dense housing area and - thanks to triple paned windows and concrete - no claustrophobia.
-
tiny homes for people returning from homelessness may be a good idea. The unfair concerns are mitigated by very repairable units separated from neighbours.
We need to keep these as transitional housing, though, and a feeder into a “starter” unit in proper dense mixed-use: every block (hectare) taken for tiny homes is 3 million cubic meters of space taken from a land budget we’re already overdrawn on.
I think thats always the hope that they are first steps of stability to move up. None of the projects like this I’ve seen have been intended to be life time residence.
There are tiny-home dwellers but they’re often highly educated professionals who decide to live Buddhist for a while. Some of them wind up enjoying it.
The better analogy for homeless folks would be living in cars, aka the invisible homeless - is this better than that? Fuck yes. Even if it WAS permanent it’s better than that.
-
Good for him, but this is pretty much an Orphan-Crushing Machine moment.
Haha uhhh gawd.
I see no reason to believe that letting this guy make unilateral decisions is somehow better than taxing him appropriately and using the revenue to build public housing.
I see one: he actually did something instead of a council that blows all of the money on meetings
This is obviously way better, come on. Why involve middle men in something like this? Add more layers and it becomes less efficient. Less of the money goes to helping people and it gets spread around to different agencies, or even worse goes to government contractors who can charge ridiculous rates because they know someone and didn’t have to compete for the contract. I worked at a place once where we got a couple hundred thousand dollars for a useless study because if the money didn’t get used it would make their budget smaller for next year. That kind of thing happens all the time.
Did anyone say that it was better this way? He could just go buy another yatch instead.
Dont let perfection be the enemy of better
millionares($) wouldn’t be able to afford multiple yachts, or even so large of a yacht. billionares, those who offshoring wealth makes sense for, are the problem.
not the docter nor lawyer, but the whale.
millionares pay about 48%-49%, at least where im from.
Man, Im starting to think I’m tarded. Something about this isn’t letting my brain work, please do more sentences
This statement might be true, but we’re not taxing him. Should he just donate his money to the government?
I don’t even think you can do that.
Sure there are lots of failures to the way we govern ourselves. This shouldn’t be a need. The reality is that it is a need and that person did what he could. Have you?
If every billionaire did this and ended homelessness perhaps they would have a point about their wealth hoarding. I won’t be holding my breath for this to happen though. Tax the rich!
Absolutely. We don’t need kings making decisions like this. The downside is the difficulty in forcing government and the anti-help-anyone segment of our society to spend such taxation correctly to actually help people.
I’m also angry he did a good thing despite the government’s abject failure to tax the rich.
Especially because his unilateral decision is optional. Someone got lucky with his choice vs someone was guaranteed an outcome.
What makes you think Trump’s administration will make better use of that money?
Corruption could make that money go to some people’s 3rd, 4rd or their relatives houses UNFORTUNATELY . The question here is: what about those who pay a rent???
Corruption already makes most millionaires’ and billionaires’ money go to that anyway. At least if it’s taxed some of it will actually go to toward necessary housing, maybe even frequently enough that it’s not newsworthy when it does, the way it is now.
I did not understand what you said, sorry
You’re worried that if we collect money from the wealthy through taxation, it might not be used to reduce homelessness. However, if we don’t tax the wealthy, they’ll spend the money on their own goals, which definitely won’t be to reduce homelessness. While you’re right that taxes are largely wasted, they do still fund important things such as fire departments, medical research, and yes, government housing. It’s true that we need to implement better tax management systems, but we also need a wealth tax.
I never said we don’t need a taxation system, I’m just reporting what’s happening almost everywhere.
Alternatively a possibility is to give the public sector to woman, they should be a little bit more immune to corruption (I might be wrong though).
So we’re so scared of corruption that (checks notes) we stop even trying for fairness and instead just let rich fucks make all the decisions and hope for the best?
It’s clear that a lot of people switched to that way of thinking, thanks to those corrupted people.
That’s what current voting results say all around
Has he tried paying his employees a good wage and benefits?
He sold his company for eight figures and used that wealth to build these communities for the people most in need, not (just) his (now former) employees.
But even if he was still CEO, the fact remains that it’s not just for his employees and pay is still just half the equation: he doesn’t control the price of rent, and the real solution is rent control. Otherwise nothing stops landlords from just raising rent higher ans higher once they figure out that employers will just pay their tenants more.
So yes, good pay matters, and we need comprehensive minimum wage laws and worker protection, but we also need rent control. And preferably to banish all landlords to the shadow realm.
Rent control is a stopgap measure. Without enough supply, it doesn’t matter how controlled the rent is if your odds of obtaining a unit are miniscule. Adding to the supply as a response to rising rental rates and property prices is the correct way to keep things stable. Which should be the govt’s job, but…
Rent control is a good first step. Building more is second.
Cooperations crying that controlled rent is bad bc it doesn’t let them build more… have they tried reducing the CEOs’ pay? And asking for government intervention in building houses?
Hell yeah we’re bringing back shanty towns
Spacing looks a bit odd. Would a communal park and then less space between each be better? Not really enough space around each one to be much use beyond a few plant pots anyway.
They’re probably parking spaces. It doesn’t look like a bad set up. Parking is behind your little studio apartment style trailer.
So cars are given more space to live than humans?
deleted by creator
Lemmy sad sacks, man…
