I wasn't trying to imply homeless == stupid, I apologize if it came off that way.
I understand homelessness is multifaceted and for some, even though intelligent, classic employment opportunities are not available/desirable for a whole host of reasons.
That's a pretty condescending reply. Homeless in no way implies stupid or ignorant. To state that a homeless person wouldn't know how to turn on a computer is insulting.
Also keep in mind that employment doesn't guarantee a home, either. And that not having a home (namely, not having an address) can be a barrier to gainful employment. There are a lot of unfortunate Catch-22s sprinkled around our bureaucracies.
The impression I got from your question wasn't that homeless people were incapable of intelligence, but rather that you thought intelligence was the exception, rather than the rule. This becomes a problem when, say, a rags-to-riches story comes around and people conclude not that this one person got a lucky break, but that this one person decided to stop being as stupid as the others. This in turn suggests that nothing is actually broken and homelessness is less an indicator of societal malfunction and more a casual nuisance.
Yes, if you're homeless because you want to be that's your choice, I'm not going to try to convince you otherwise. What I'm saying is that it's dumb to assume most people are homeless because they made bad decisions. Rarely are people homeless by choice. Hence the whole "Fear of new and unknown scenarios should not be keeping people homeless." bit.
Edit: I admit, it is a bit unclear. I can see why you thought what you did.
I think the author's definition of homeless is a little bit facetious and it sounds like a humble brag. It's very different to be homeless because you ran your technology startup into the ground and another to be seriously challenged by your socioeconomic standing leading you from affordable housing, to a shelter, to the street, ad infinitum.
I've edited my post to include the context-- but my point stands. I just don't believe that most homeless are incapable of finding shelter, let alone choosing to be on the streets.
Not at all, why would you think that? I'm arguing that learning how to code while living on the street is going to require a spectacular amount of motivation, and only a certain percent of people will be able to pull it off (not sure I could).
Since $100 has a higher marginal utility for a desperately poor homeless person than most people with adequate shelter, the fact that someone turns it down shows an uncommon amount of motivation.
But really, if you're going from what I said to "root causes of homelessness", I can't help but feel you're just looking to pick an argument.
someone who has the intelligence and work ethic to do this probably wasn't going to be homeless for long.
And capacity. Many people on the street have serious health problems or other obstacles to productivity. I lack neither intelligence nor a work ethic, but I do have health problems. I have been homeless 5.5 years, though I blog, do freelance work, etc.
Edit: You also need opportunity. Being homeless can be a huge barrier to opportunity, both in practical terms and due to stigma. People don't want to hire homeless people.
> Being "out on the streets" because you don't have a job is hardly a "remote possibility". It's a virtual certainly unless you have a massive cash hoard built up.
Few people have a "massive cash hoard" built up, yet lots of people lose their jobs. And if you're willing to work "BS jobs for random spending money", as the OP said, then you probably won't remain unemployed for long.
To be honest I think there is a bit of semantic trickery here by homeless advocates. In colloquial parlance, “homeless” means “unsheltered” rather than “lacking a long term living arrangement”.
Agreed, but you seemed to be suggesting that the current homeless or very poor are something different than that, and different from you and I. I think this is an inconsiderate and inaccurate suggestion, by and large.
You make homelessness like a super awesome thing, do you think people will be tempted to quit their jobs and give up their homes for a taste of this?
But wait, since being homeless is one the worst experiences a human being can have this can only be the flippant perspective of someone who has no clue about homelessness and no interest to learn.
Not a stupid question to think on. You should consider offering a burger or a coffee to a homeless and ask them this question - you'll hear a more realistic answer.
Aren't you hijacking the topic of homelessness here then? When people say homeless they don't mean someone who is homeless out of choice and can get out of it whenever they want to?
I wasn't trying to imply homeless == stupid, I apologize if it came off that way.
I understand homelessness is multifaceted and for some, even though intelligent, classic employment opportunities are not available/desirable for a whole host of reasons.
reply