I feel very strongly about this.
The only way to make significant reductions in the homeless population is by accurately defining homelessness. And accurate definitions of the causes of homelessness are rare. I believe this happens mostly because people in the homeless industry come to it with preconceived ideas, either on political, or religious, or other cultural demagoguery. Not only are these people working on homelessness unable to end it, they have the ability to cause a great deal of money and resources to be wasted chasing after shadows.
Although a person can live in poverty his/her entire life, and yet never become homeless, part of being homeless means doing without and living in poverty. And once a person leaves homelessness most likely he/she will still be in a state of poverty. But, poverty itself does not cause homelessness. Poverty is only the environment in which homelessness exists.
Any person who loses a job can get another one. A person who misses a rent payment can implore upon the graces of his landlord for leniency. A person without any money can borrow from family or friends or government or lending institutions, or can begin selling off personal property. Eviction from one's residence requires a court order, which takes 3 months or more to process. For other personal items, like food and toiletries and laundry, there are many organizations that supply these items to those in need. And one does not have to wait until they are homeless before receiving such charity. If the issue is solely an economic one, a person can stave off becoming homeless long enough to reestablish themselves financially, and thus avoid homelessness.
When it does appear that financial ruin caused a person to become homeless, a closer look will reveal that money issues were only a symptom of other problems. The person might have anti-social tendencies that prevent them from keeping a good paying job, or from making adequate bonds with people, people would normally bail out a friend during difficult times. Or they may have addiction issues that actually cause the person's financial downfall. These are the things that can, and do, lead a person to homelessness.
When a person cannot get himself rehired after losing a job, it's not because of the economy, it's because he's fallen into depression over having lost his job - and thus has developed a mental health issue. Homeless addicts and alcoholics have reached the point in their illness that they spend all the money they make on their addictions. So, it would not matter if the addict had a job making 10, 20, or 50 bucks an hour, and free rent - all their money would go towards drugs and alcohol and they would have nothing left for a place to live. And a mentally ill person is just not going to have the personal, or job skills to call on, so to get, or maintain a job.
So, yes, if you haven't already guessed, the idea that people are a paycheck or two away from homelessness is a myth.
Yes, homeless people do deserve sympathy and help overcoming their homelessness. But misleading people about the nature of homelessness is not going help anyone in the long run - regardless of how much sympathy or funding it generates.
Of course, once a person becomes homeless, the state of the economy will effect how quickly and efficiently a person will returned to a housed situation. But that is an entirely different matter.
Don't get me wrong, poverty is a terrible thing, and should be eradicated as much as possible. But even if there were no poverty, there would still be homelessness.
The reason so many people are drawn to the idea of homelessness being an issue of poverty is that the solution becomes both simple and impersonal. In other words, it's easy. How efficient, and sterile, would be the process, if all we had to do to end homelessness was to create a more equal and balanced economy. Pay people more for their labor, and not charge them as much for rent, utilities, and food. Best of all, this approach would allow us to keep our distance from actual homeless people. We would not be required to be their teachers, or mentors, or friends, or anything else to the homeless.
to be concluded...
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Poverty Does Not Cause Homelessness
Labels: economy, homeless, mental health, money, poverty
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)









8 comments:
Very well said. I agree wholeheartedly.
Spot on, Kevin.
I've really enjoyed your blog. Thank you. Happy Easter.
Good stuff always Kevin. I just noticed you linked to my blog...thanks for that! It's an honor my friend.
Wow, I just found this blog. Really interesting I will keep reading.
http://www.exitrealtyvernal.com
"Any person who loses a job can get another one"
So how many hours of $7 per hour labor does it take to remain in, (or regain), a home? Around here, $7 per hour is about what you'd get working fast food or in those "jobs any person can get". As far as I can tell, none of them are actually hiring at the moment, nor are most of the ads in the paper and on Craigslist legitimate jobs instead of scams, (with the exception of those requiring CDLs). However, pretending that they are, how many years of working at that wage do you think it would take to get into a house?
Say "any person" got 40 hours a week, (2080 hours a year), that gives them about $14,000 net, or about $10,000 after taxes. Keeping extremely frugal, they could limit themselves to spending only $250 a month on food every single month, $60 a month on a health club membership, (that would be a very cheap membership here, the cheapest I'm aware of is $90), clothes and laundry machine usage as necessary, and maybe a storage locker and a small amount of other expenses. If they don't deviate at all from extreme frugality they might be able to get by on $4000 a year, leaving them another $6000.
Now, does this "any person" have any debt? Credit cards? Anything left on a mortgage that remains unpaid after foreclosure? If they have an interest rate of 7%, (usually by the time foreclosure occurs they've been talked into an "emergency refinance" situation which got them up to around 10% prior to them losing their house a year or so later), and an $80,000 balance left on the mortgage after the sale, guess what. $5600 of that $6000 they worked so hard to save goes to pay JUST THE INTEREST on that mortgage for the year. So, if they don't have any credit card debt or anything, that leaves them a whopping $400 closer to buying a new home. How many years will it take?
I appreciate your desire to get to the real root of the problem, but I think when you promote the idea that economics has nothing to do with it and that anyone can get a job and thereby get into a home or apartment you are perpetuating a very harmful falsehood and missing the real root of the problem. As this has gotten long, I'll come back with my opinion on that later. However for now I'll just ask you to consider the following question, which I believe leads directly to the real root of this problem. Why did they kill all the buffalo?
Dear Hagbard,
Thanks for commenting. I do think that you missed part of my post - there is a part where I wrote that even if a homeless person could get himself homed, he would most likely still live in poverty, which is what I think you are expressing above. So, I'm thinking we are mostly in agreement here.
But as I tried to stress in the post, homelessness and poverty are two different things. They have things in common. But, solving homelessness is different than solving poverty - they have different causes.
I do think that poverty is very much an issue of economics. On that I think we also agree.
Post a Comment