Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dgrin91 1401 days ago
You "system-level approach" is still missing OP's main point. If the system did not allow/encourage OP to buy his Vermont home, but instead 'successfully' managed to allocate it to a needing & worthy homeless person.... then what? As the old adage goes, it takes a village. This person still requires infrastructure to escape poverty/homelessness. You wont find that in a skitown in Vermont.

Where will this person find a job? Where will this person get help organizing their lives? How will this person transport themselves? Where will this person get help for any significant issues in their lives (e.g. substance abuse, mental disorder, etc)?

This is where your "system-level approach" breaks down - you can't bring the support infrastructure for this to a small Vermony ski town and also to all the other small towns in America. This is, as your first post says, poor resource allocation.

1 comments

I'm not sure why respondents are focusing on a specific home after it has been materialized in Vermont other than it serves as a specific example that any solution must address.

Zoom out a bit and observe the broader systems which conspired to guide the invisible hand to allocate a largely unproductive property in Vermont to exist in the first place. I'll be very clear - I'm not advocating for unhoused people from New York to inhabit this property. If that's how you've decided to read it I implore you to go back and begin steel-manning instead.