miraculous free market: 5x more vacant homes than homeless people
- Thread starter rickyb
- Start date
rod
Retired 23 years
How would you propose they get them together with out placing a bigger tax burden on the working man? Someone has to be paid for the house.
when drug dealers commit a crime, their property gets repossessed...
oldngray
nowhere special
Drug dealers don't own the crack houses they squat in. They just use someone else's vacant house and constantly repeat by moving to other vacant houses.
rod
Retired 23 years
Planning what? Giving some ones property to someone who didn't earn it? I'm having a hard time trying to figure out how you are going to give houses away.
haha im not talking about just their homes
im saying the government could plan it if the free market isnt working efficiently or in most people's interests. how it would do that i dont know go look up richard wolff, or ralph nader or paul krugman see what they have to say. try robert reich. that wasnt the point of this article: the point was free markets are not as efficient as teh propaganda tells us.
another example of free markets not working in most people's interests would be the paid vacation time in america. most americans take 2 weeks vacation, and it is left to the market. in europe it is planned and they have laws saying workers have a right to 4 5 6 weeks vacation. who do you think is more happy?
rod
Retired 23 years
I would say the 25 year full time UPS employee with 7 weeks paid vacation would be the happiest of them all----I wouldn't blame him a bit if he didn't want to give his extra home to a bum.
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
What the heck. Seize all the vacant homes. Give them to the homeless. Watch them destroy what's left of the home until it gets condemned.
Great idea.
Great idea.
Why do I care about what most Americans have/do? That doesn't affect me any
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
They're owned by the banks, under false pretenses (most especially in low-rent districts, so to speak).
One of the LARGEST BAILOUTS in history went to the housing side of the banking industry, who PURPOSEFULLY LIED, AGAIN AND AGAIN, AND BASICALLY WALKED OFF SCOT-FREE.
I don't feel like I need to tell you this, but here goes:
Those homes shouldn't have been seized from the people in the first place, or to put it more clearly, those people shouldn't have had those homes in the first place, because they didn't qualify...
But, but, if they didn't qualify, how did they get those homes, you might ask.
BECAUSE THE SYSTEM WAS RIGGED.
Bankers made millions, the economy collapsed, people who shouldn't have been in homes lost their homes (clearly), but a lot of other 'innocent' consumers also ended up losing their homes in the fallout of what was basically the government giving the bankers a hand-job.
So, yes, these homes are owned by SOMEONE...most likely a bank, and in terms of no buyers, sometimes it makes 'economic' sense to populate said homes with people who will then go forth and propagate and spend money and pay taxes...etc.
--------
If you do some research, it actually makes economic sense to repopulate homeless people in vacant buildings.
You will call this 'SOCIALISM'.
A lot of the things you talk about I could easily describe as 'FASCISM'.
(Such a fine line...)
Offer is still open, if you want to get that beer...
realbrown1
Annoy a liberal today. Hit them with facts.
When you move a homeless person into a vacant home, who pays for the home's maintainence and utilities like heat for winter?
This is the stupidist liberal idea yet. And look at the TROLLS who like it.
wkmac
Well-Known Member
It is true that not all homeless are equal and thus not all homeless want a home in the first place. At least not the kind of home we typically think of.
Homeless by Choice
Homeless by Choice
this is not hte point of my article which was about the inefficiencies of free markets, but its related to a debate guys were having here:
http://www.nationofchange.org/2015/...-the-street-heres-proof/#.VQNR7KSFT4g.twitter
the repeated emergency room visits and nights in jail that the chronically homeless endure costs around $30,000 to $50,000 per person, per year – approximately $3 billion annually. At the same time, there are approximately 18 million vacant homes all over the U.S., many of which were made vacant after Wall Street built and burst the subprime mortgage bubble. After doing the math, there are between 20 and 24 vacant homes for every homeless person. What’s wrong with this picture?
One study cited by Mother Jones tracked 4,679 chronically homeless people in New York City and found that their emergency room visits, jail costs, shelter stays, and other uses of public welfare programs cost, on average, $40,449 per person, per year. When they were put in supportive housing, the state saved $16,282 per person. Denver conducted a similar study and found that for each homeless person given supportive housing, taxpayers saved $17,858 per person each year over a two-year period. And according to a Mother Jones infographic, support housing for a homeless person in Los Angeles’ Skid Row cost taxpayers just $605 per person, per month, as opposed to $2,897 per person per month if they remained on the street.
alt Lake City’s program to end chronic homelessness has had enormous success, housing almost 2,000 chronically homeless people in a new apartment complex. The city learned that while it cost $20,000 per person, per year to leave them on the streets, taxpayers saved $8,000 per person when they were moved into the new apartments. Added benefits of homeless people getting a home accumulating over the long term also mean that taxpayers save more money on fewer emergency room visits (as well as time saved while waiting for treatment at the ER), and that police are able to respond faster without having to enforce anti-homelessness laws
http://www.nationofchange.org/2015/...-the-street-heres-proof/#.VQNR7KSFT4g.twitter
the repeated emergency room visits and nights in jail that the chronically homeless endure costs around $30,000 to $50,000 per person, per year – approximately $3 billion annually. At the same time, there are approximately 18 million vacant homes all over the U.S., many of which were made vacant after Wall Street built and burst the subprime mortgage bubble. After doing the math, there are between 20 and 24 vacant homes for every homeless person. What’s wrong with this picture?
One study cited by Mother Jones tracked 4,679 chronically homeless people in New York City and found that their emergency room visits, jail costs, shelter stays, and other uses of public welfare programs cost, on average, $40,449 per person, per year. When they were put in supportive housing, the state saved $16,282 per person. Denver conducted a similar study and found that for each homeless person given supportive housing, taxpayers saved $17,858 per person each year over a two-year period. And according to a Mother Jones infographic, support housing for a homeless person in Los Angeles’ Skid Row cost taxpayers just $605 per person, per month, as opposed to $2,897 per person per month if they remained on the street.
alt Lake City’s program to end chronic homelessness has had enormous success, housing almost 2,000 chronically homeless people in a new apartment complex. The city learned that while it cost $20,000 per person, per year to leave them on the streets, taxpayers saved $8,000 per person when they were moved into the new apartments. Added benefits of homeless people getting a home accumulating over the long term also mean that taxpayers save more money on fewer emergency room visits (as well as time saved while waiting for treatment at the ER), and that police are able to respond faster without having to enforce anti-homelessness laws
god hard life being unemployed...shoulda stayed with ups worked 12 hour days rest of my life and get my wages stolen.
can you read? it said it was cheaper for the government to build houses for the homeless than it was to just leave them in the streets. and considering housing dropped 40% in value, and theres more homeless now that people were unemployed or have low paying jobs, its a good time for government to tax the rich and corporations and do it.
moreluck
golden ticket member
I don't read Canadian.
u dont read period
oldngray
nowhere special
You still can't understand the government has no money. All it can do is spend other people's money. If you are so interested in helping the homeless start by donating some of your own money.
Similar threads
