[BobbyJo]

Are you saying things are fine the way they are and their isn't a problem? Are you saying that there is a problem and it's easy to solve? Are you saying there is a problem and it's hard to solve?

I'll be honest, it seems like english is your second language and you're struggling to connect a few different ideas, but I'm just not getting where you're going.

[romanoderoma]

Thanks for the question.

I'm saying it should be easy to solve for the richest country in the World given the sheer amount of resources it possess.

It looks impossible for the same exact country, because the society there doesn't like the solution.

Or to be more precise, they don't like being told that if other have solved it, they should just copy what the others have done.

Looks like that if you try to teach America something, the knee jerk reaction is always "X is of course underestimating something, the problem is hard, the solution can't be that easy and if X is proposing it is obviously wrong, or X would be richer then us"

Other countries have solved it, so it is solvable.

Solvable doesn't even mean it will disappear in this case, it means the situation can drammatically improve just by tuning a few knobs.

Like wearing and not wearing a mask, keeping or not keeping social distance, etc. you put all of these precautions together and you magically have much better chances of avoiding the contagion.

It is that simple.

Why it isn't in the US?

Because they don't want to solve it.

It would be as easy as reading the Wikipedia page on homelessness in Japan, for example

I'm taking Japan as an example because it was struggling with the problem, then they changed approach to it and have radically improved the condition of homeless people and reduce their number.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Japan

> At the beginning of the 1990s, the homeless in Japan were viewed as a nuisance. The government tried to get rid of the people on streets because of "beautification programmes". Only in 1997 did Tokyo at last acknowledge the existence of homeless group representatives and start listening to their issues.

> I'll be honest, it seems like english is your second language and you're struggling to connect a few different ideas

I could write it in Italian, French, Spanish and even in bad German, but that would make it harder for people to follow.

The best I can do is my confusing English, sorry.

[BobbyJo]

First, Japan's lower incidence of homeless is an anomaly mostly owing to the countries culture of extreme personal responsibility. If you've ever been to Japan you'd notice that extends to basically everything they do in public. Changing the culture of a melting pot of 300 million people is significantly harder than reading a wikipedia page. Side note (as someone whose been to Japan several times, and has several close friends who are Japanese citizens) Japan's homelessness problem is much more extreme in severity than raw number would lead you to believe. They have a smaller incidence, and the homeless themselves tend to try very hard to stay out of the way, but in the words of a Japanese friend "Japanese homeless are very very homeless". They aren't just people down on their luck, they are people with extreme mental and developmental impairments. Japan has an altogether different problem when it comes to homeless than other nations, not to mention many non-profits think the government's official numbers underreport the population of homeless by 2-3x.(TL;DR: Japan is a really awful model for any other country to follow.)

Second, the US has a lower incidence of homeless people than many countries with much more generous social programs (Canada, France, UK, New Zealand). Saying we just aren't throwing enough of our wealth at the problem is also evidently wrong. (You can look that up on Wikipedia)

Third, the homeless rate in the US has been on the decline for decades. So blowing San Francisco's problems up into some larger conversation that the US as a whole is failing is just inaccurate.

[pompeirules]

> Second, the US has a lower incidence of homeless people than many countries with much more generous social programs

US have 17/100k of population, Italy has 8.

We are not famous for being big on personal responsibility.

> Japanese homeless are very very homeless

They are 0.3/100k of population though or roughly 56 times less than US.

At that level the problem is solved, not completely, but at least the number the country has to deal with is manageable.

If US had the same share of homeless people of Italy (and they could do muuuuuuch better than us) they would have half of the homeless population.

Which is a radical improvement if you ask me.

> Third, the homeless rate in the US has been on the decline for decades.

Is it?

According to the stats it increased from 2018 onwards from previous years

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/09/18/surprisin...

[BobbyJo]

>US have 17/100k of population, Italy has 8. We are not famous for being big on personal responsibility.

I didn't say we were the best, just that we are doing better than some who are throwing much more money at the problem. So money obviously isn't the issue.

>They are 0.3/100k of population though or roughly 56 times less than US. >At that level the problem is solved, not completely, but at least the number the country has to deal with is manageable. >If US had the same share of homeless people of Italy (and they could do muuuuuuch better than us) they would have half of the homeless population. >Which is a radical improvement if you ask me.

Yeah, again, the US isn't the best. You can find many countries with lower homeless rates. We can do better. The countries with the best rates can do better. So what? Japan has one of the highest suicide rates in the world. Italy has double the unemployment of the rest of the EU average. "Do what they do" is obviously not good advice in a general sense. Homelessness is a hard problem, but San Francisco specifically is doing an awful job, even relative to the US as a whole, managing it because of local politics.

>According to the stats it increased from 2018 onwards from previous years

And I'm sure COVID-19 made things worse as well, but I said decades, not years. Years are lumpy, but the trend line at least since 2007 is very much downward.

[pompeirules]

> I didn't say we were the best, just that we are doing better than some who are throwing much more money at the problem.

US spend 3 billions, France only 800 millions but was spending much less

> As the news of homelessness steadily increased in the country, the French government increased the budget from 305 million euros to 820 million euros between 2012 and 2017

While the US

> First, HUD's Homeless Assistance Grants received an additional $130 million compared with FY 2017, bringing total funding to $2.513 billion.

> Congress should invest in proven solutions to homelessness by providing at least $3.1 billion for Homeless Assistance in FY 2021. This represents a $323 million increase over the FY 20 level

If we compare the population they are spending the same amount, but France is facing (as most of the Mediterranean EU countries) a huge migration from Africa, that brought millions of people in just 10 years.

> the trend line at least since 2007 is very much downward.

It's only 13% better 647,000 in 2007 Vs 567,000 in 2019

Also, COVID hit in 2020, not in 2018.

It's never been about budget alone, but what each country does with that budget.

Most of the US spending is not helping the homeless situation, it's simply trying to hide it without much success.

The original point is that given how much money US has to spend and how much money they are throwing at the "problem" the results are underwhelming at best.

Maybe trying something different could change things.

[BobbyJo]

1) I know COVID hit in 2020. I'm alive. I am living in it. I was pointing out that if you're looking at year over year rates, this year will be particularly bad, but that doesn't tell you anything about long term trends. You should presume someone you're engaging with is at least as smart as you if you hope to have a fruitful conversation.

2) France has a higher homeless rate than the US, as does much of Europe. As does much of the world. Much of the world also has a lower rate. Again, so what? If the US were on the bad end of the spectrum, this whole line of conversation might make sense in context, but we aren't, so it doesn't. As far as the migration issue: Every country has special circumstances, that's my point. Saying "do what they do" is obviously a bad faith view because of that.

3) I'm not saying the US can't improve. Even if the homeless rate were 1/10th what it is now we could still do better. I'm just saying the problem in San Francisco (look at the post you're in) isn't because the US is doing a particularly poor job, it's because San Francisco is doing a particularly poor job.

Look up, my original comment above was essentially: San Francisco is doing a bad job with the homeless issue.