Apple's homeless relocation project still hasn't found homes for everyone

Posted:
in General Discussion
Apple has spent millions supporting people moved from a homeless encampment on its property, but with nine months of support drying up, many haven't yet found permanent housing.




Following months of discussions in 2021, Apple evicted 56 people from a homeless encampment on 55 acres of Apple's land in September. Dozens of the displaced people were given lodgings in a motel for nine months, as well as assistance to find new homes.

Almost nine months later and with a deadline looming for the people, many are still unable to find a permanent home. Of the group housed in the San Jose motel, only eight were successfully moved on into a permanent home, FLTimes reports that more than three times as many people have yet to be rehomed.

"We know (the motel) worked quite efficiently for some program participants, and more time is needed for others," said Lori Smith, CMO of nonprofit HomeFirst, which runs the program funded by Apple. "Each person has their journey into homelessness, and each will have their path out - and rarely will they look the same."

Apple said it had "been working with partners across the state to support at-risk communities and provide new affordable units."

However, the project had obstacles in the form of a lack of appropriate affordable housing, managing the histories and medical needs of the participants, and other restrictions.

HomeFirst intended to find placements before the end of the motel program, but as of 16 May, 25 people were still at the motel. Those who were still there at the time of the deadline would be offered emergency shelter beds instead.

Those who did leave moved into a mix of permanent or transitional housing, including tiny homes and apartments, as well as with family members. More than a quarter of participants were connected to healthcare, or had Social Security or other benefits, with nearly all added to housing waitlists.

Ten were made to leave the program, due to either breaking the rules or after being arrested.

Though the program has cost Apple millions to operate so far, and helped a group of homeless people for nine months, it is still facing criticism for ending the program.

Activist Shaunn Cartwright complained that Apple had offered stability with a motel room, but then took that stability away. Pointing out how the residents benefited in terms of their physical and mental health, Cartwright insisted Apple should extend the program.

"If they end up on the streets, that is entirely Apple's fault. That is Apple's shame," Cartwright declared.

The plight of two unplaced participants are highlighted in the report. In the case of 65-year-old Bertha Iglesias, her plans are to move back into a trailer, and park on a street near her mother's house.

Richard Bebee was told by the program that he could get into permanent housing through the program, leading him to sell his truck and try and get a commercial driver's license. However, he was unable to raise the money to get the training and to take the test.

The 50-year-old Bebee was offered a place in a tiny home, but he decided not to take the opportunity.

HomeFirst CEO Andrea Urton underlined the critical role of Apple in funding the project, but there's only so far the program can go. Citing a shortage of permanent housing in the area, as well as how participants don't necessarily meet the criteria to be placed in housing, Urton admits "that is all we can do: provide service, support, encouragement, and allow them to make their own decisions."

Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    mobirdmobird Posts: 695member
    Why isn't the motel purchased outright and then used as a permanent housing facility? This arrangement seems to have worked for the majority of the participants.
    Doesn't appear that Cartwright appreciates Apple's efforts, his comments certainly would not motivate very many benefactors.
    iOS_Guy80lordjohnwhorfinWeetu
  • Reply 2 of 19
    This is not Apple’s fault they are going above and beyond when it comes to helping them. Finding them jobs and building cheep housing like potentially three printed homes may be an option. 
    iOS_Guy80lolliverMplsPWeetu
  • Reply 3 of 19
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,051member
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    DAalsethWeetujcs2305
  • Reply 4 of 19
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,037member
    jdw said:
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    Well said. A place to live is a human right, but it’s not Apple’s job to provide it. That’s the job of society writ large, one that it is failing at miserably. 

    Every one of us is a few missed paycheques or a bit of bad luck away from being homeless. Any one of us could be sleeping rough. Any one of us could have to consider turning to drugs to try to stay awake so we don’t get robbed, raped, or set on fire. Any one of us could have to consider which was riskier, a shelter full of desperate people or freezing to death outside. 

    Yet as a culture we tend to blame the homeless for being homeless. I know people who look down on them, call them street rats, and worse.  I know it’s almost impossible to get a job without a permanent address. It’s a trap that society has made and reinforces every day. 

    That’s the reality of homelessness. 
    edited May 24 lolliverfred1MplsPjdw
  • Reply 5 of 19
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,646member
    Completely agree with the above comments. Apple was under no obligation but went above and beyond to help these people. What they couldn’t do was change the reasons for their homelessness. Apple can’t magically make housing more readily available or affordable. Nor can they cure mental illness or drug addiction. I don’t get why some people blame them for not letting people squat on their property. 
    jdwmuthuk_vanalingamWeetu
  • Reply 6 of 19
    riverkoriverko Posts: 148member
    Anyone blaming Apple for not doing enough is more than welcome to provide their house, their jobs to these homeless people…
    Weetu
  • Reply 7 of 19
    How is any of it Apple’s responsibility and why are this specific 56 homeless people suddenly entitled to preferential treatment just because of where they chose to set up camp? It’s absolutely ridiculous.
    The homeless problem is the government’s to deal with. Apple’s responsibility is to chip in by paying taxes.
    firelockWeetu
  • Reply 8 of 19
    Paul_BPaul_B Posts: 37member
    Apple has spent millions supporting people moved from a homeless encampment on its property, but with nine months of support drying up, many haven't yet found permanent housing.




    Following months of discussions in 2021, Apple evicted 56 people from a homeless encampment on 55 acres of Apple's land in September. Dozens of the displaced people were given lodgings in a motel for nine months, as well as assistance to find new homes.

    Almost nine months later and with a deadline looming for the people, many are still unable to find a permanent home. Of the group housed in the San Jose motel, only eight were successfully moved on into a permanent home, FLTimes reports that more than three times as many people have yet to be rehomed.

    "We know (the motel) worked quite efficiently for some program participants, and more time is needed for others," said Lori Smith, CMO of nonprofit HomeFirst, which runs the program funded by Apple. "Each person has their journey into homelessness, and each will have their path out - and rarely will they look the same."

    Apple said it had "been working with partners across the state to support at-risk communities and provide new affordable units."

    However, the project had obstacles in the form of a lack of appropriate affordable housing, managing the histories and medical needs of the participants, and other restrictions.

    HomeFirst intended to find placements before the end of the motel program, but as of 16 May, 25 people were still at the motel. Those who were still there at the time of the deadline would be offered emergency shelter beds instead.

    Those who did leave moved into a mix of permanent or transitional housing, including tiny homes and apartments, as well as with family members. More than a quarter of participants were connected to healthcare, or had Social Security or other benefits, with nearly all added to housing waitlists.

    Ten were made to leave the program, due to either breaking the rules or after being arrested.

    Though the program has cost Apple millions to operate so far, and helped a group of homeless people for nine months, it is still facing criticism for ending the program.

    Activist Shaunn Cartwright complained that Apple had offered stability with a motel room, but then took that stability away. Pointing out how the residents benefited in terms of their physical and mental health, Cartwright insisted Apple should extend the program.

    "If they end up on the streets, that is entirely Apple's fault. That is Apple's shame," Cartwright declared.

    The plight of two unplaced participants are highlighted in the report. In the case of 65-year-old Bertha Iglesias, her plans are to move back into a trailer, and park on a street near her mother's house.

    Richard Bebee was told by the program that he could get into permanent housing through the program, leading him to sell his truck and try and get a commercial driver's license. However, he was unable to raise the money to get the training and to take the test.

    The 50-year-old Bebee was offered a place in a tiny home, but he decided not to take the opportunity.

    HomeFirst CEO Andrea Urton underlined the critical role of Apple in funding the project, but there's only so far the program can go. Citing a shortage of permanent housing in the area, as well as how participants don't necessarily meet the criteria to be placed in housing, Urton admits "that is all we can do: provide service, support, encouragement, and allow them to make their own decisions."

    Read on AppleInsider

    Apple is in the business of Electronics and Software.  They are NOT Realtors or in the Business of Real Property or in the Business of Starvation.  The question you should be asking is This - Why should a company that has nothing to do with welfare, be in welfare? 
    docno42
  • Reply 9 of 19
    hammeroftruthhammeroftruth Posts: 1,181member
    I think this is why more corporations are less likely to help. Instead of criticizing Apple, the activists should have been touting how Apple
    has tried to find the evicted homeless permanent homes. It’s a tough job since nobody wants homeless living next to them, even if there is a place to house them. It’s a complex problem that involves mental health treatment and drug abuse treatment in order to be an actual cure for homelessness. 

    I would have put pressure on all of the big tech companies in the Bay Area and Silicon Valley to create a consortium that works with non profits to create an agenda to find housing that has good doctors on site to treat these people to find out why they are homeless and if they can be rehabilitated. If they can’t, there needs to be a place where they can go like a group facility  to either try to get better, or live out the rest of their lives without being homeless. 

    It’s not a money thing, it’s a difficult problem not enough people want to try to tackle. 
    MplsP
  • Reply 10 of 19
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,864member
    DAalseth said:
    jdw said:
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    Well said. A place to live is a human right, but it’s not Apple’s job to provide it. That’s the job of society writ large, one that it is failing at miserably. 

    Every one of us is a few missed paycheques or a bit of bad luck away from being homeless. Any one of us could be sleeping rough. Any one of us could have to consider turning to drugs to try to stay awake so we don’t get robbed, raped, or set on fire. Any one of us could have to consider which was riskier, a shelter full of desperate people or freezing to death outside. 

    Yet as a culture we tend to blame the homeless for being homeless. I know people who look down on them, call them street rats, and worse.  I know it’s almost impossible to get a job without a permanent address. It’s a trap that society has made and reinforces every day. 

    That’s the reality of homelessness. 

    No.  A place to live is not a human right.  A place to live is a commodity that someone else has to provide.  Once you start proclaiming things "rights," you inherently argue to take those things from the people who produce them.  

    Secondly, no.  Not "every one of us" is a few missed paychecks away from being homeless.  That's absurd.  It's not "blaming the homeless" to state that I, by God's grace, would figure out a way to have a place to live if I lost my job.  I'd work two jobs.  Or three.  I'd do whatever I had to do.  

    As a culture we don't blame the homeless for anything.  We excuse it. We ignore it.  We allow it.  We are letting people due in the streets from drugs, alcohol, mental illness and disease.  We allow homeless encampments to take over portions of cities.  What we should be doing is getting people treatment.  We shouldn't allow homeless camps (e.g. tent cities) because they are bad for everyone, including the people who live there.  We need massively expanded drug, alcohol and mental illness inpatient centers.  Thousands and thousands more beds in short-term shelters.  And yes, we should care for those who cannot care for themselves.  

    The reality of homelessness is that our policies encourage it.  And while Apple may be well-meaning, finding them hotel rooms ins't a long-term solution.  Nor is simply building "affordable" housing.  
    docno42JWSC
  • Reply 11 of 19
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,709member
    "If they end up on the streets, that is entirely Apple's fault. That is Apple's shame," Cartwright declared.

    I sincerely hope there is some missing context to this quote; otherwise it seems incredibly ungrateful.  Is Apple supposed to be these people's perpetual guardians simply because they once squatted on Apple's land?

    Good god!
  • Reply 12 of 19
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,709member

    or live out the rest of their lives without being homeless. 

    There are quite a few homeless people who will never go into a shelter or group facility - for them it's a matter of principle.  They would also bristle at your assertion that they are "homeless"; for them being outdoors and independent is a plus, not a minus.  

    I'm not saying that all or heck, even the majority of the homeless have that mindset - there is no one size fits all solution for "homeless".  I'm more interested in cautioning you that framing everything through the lens of what looks like "normal" to you is a bit short sighted.  Be very careful when making blanket assumptions or assuming you know what's best for everyone in every situation  :)
  • Reply 13 of 19
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,709member
    Paul_B said:
     The question you should be asking is This - Why should a company that has nothing to do with welfare, be in welfare?  

    Indeed.  The obvious answer is their original effort allowed them to also signal virtue.  The danger is they also stepped out of their core swim lane, and now own more of a situation than they should.  I think they could have been far more effective at partnering with non-profits that specialize in helping the homeless (and hopefully smarter non-profits than the one that has that Cartwright dude as a spokesperson); letting them help the people displaced with Apple providing extra financial backing. 

    The ultimate "you break it, you bought it".  
    edited May 25
  • Reply 14 of 19
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 6,102member
    sdw2001 said:
    DAalseth said:
    jdw said:
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    Well said. A place to live is a human right, but it’s not Apple’s job to provide it. That’s the job of society writ large, one that it is failing at miserably. 

    Every one of us is a few missed paycheques or a bit of bad luck away from being homeless. Any one of us could be sleeping rough. Any one of us could have to consider turning to drugs to try to stay awake so we don’t get robbed, raped, or set on fire. Any one of us could have to consider which was riskier, a shelter full of desperate people or freezing to death outside. 

    Yet as a culture we tend to blame the homeless for being homeless. I know people who look down on them, call them street rats, and worse.  I know it’s almost impossible to get a job without a permanent address. It’s a trap that society has made and reinforces every day. 

    That’s the reality of homelessness. 
    No.  A place to live is not a human right.  A place to live is a commodity that someone else has to provide.  Once you start proclaiming things "rights," you inherently argue to take those things from the people who produce them.  

    [...]

    We need massively expanded drug, alcohol and mental illness inpatient centers.  Thousands and thousands more beds in short-term shelters.  And yes, we should care for those who cannot care for themselves.
    Are these two thoughts not in direct conflict with one another?
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 15 of 19
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,166member
    docno42 said:
    "If they end up on the streets, that is entirely Apple's fault. That is Apple's shame," Cartwright declared.
    I sincerely hope there is some missing context to this quote; otherwise it seems incredibly ungrateful.  Is Apple supposed to be these people's perpetual guardians simply because they once squatted on Apple's land?

    Good god!
    Apple’s first mistake is that they listened to these activists who haven’t the first clue as to how to solve this problem.  Clearly lacking ‘adult supervision,’ these homeless advocates have been primarily responsible for creating this problem in the first place.

    How many millions did Apple spend on these 56 homeless people?  If your measure of success is based on outcomes then eight people placed in actual homes is an unconditional fail.

    For a fraction of what they spent Apple could have bought 56 mobile homes for these people and placed them in a trailer park.  But homelessness was never the problem.  It was, and remains, drug addiction and mental illness.  Without proper identification of the problem one is doomed to come up with ineffective solutions.
  • Reply 16 of 19
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,166member
    sdw2001 said:
    DAalseth said:
    jdw said:
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    Well said. A place to live is a human right, but it’s not Apple’s job to provide it. That’s the job of society writ large, one that it is failing at miserably. 

    Every one of us is a few missed paycheques or a bit of bad luck away from being homeless. Any one of us could be sleeping rough. Any one of us could have to consider turning to drugs to try to stay awake so we don’t get robbed, raped, or set on fire. Any one of us could have to consider which was riskier, a shelter full of desperate people or freezing to death outside. 

    Yet as a culture we tend to blame the homeless for being homeless. I know people who look down on them, call them street rats, and worse.  I know it’s almost impossible to get a job without a permanent address. It’s a trap that society has made and reinforces every day. 

    That’s the reality of homelessness. 
    No.  A place to live is not a human right.  A place to live is a commodity that someone else has to provide.  Once you start proclaiming things "rights," you inherently argue to take those things from the people who produce them.  

    [...]

    We need massively expanded drug, alcohol and mental illness inpatient centers.  Thousands and thousands more beds in short-term shelters.  And yes, we should care for those who cannot care for themselves.
    Are these two thoughts not in direct conflict with one another?
    How so?  A short term shelter is not the same as a home.
  • Reply 17 of 19
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,864member
    sdw2001 said:
    DAalseth said:
    jdw said:
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    Well said. A place to live is a human right, but it’s not Apple’s job to provide it. That’s the job of society writ large, one that it is failing at miserably. 

    Every one of us is a few missed paycheques or a bit of bad luck away from being homeless. Any one of us could be sleeping rough. Any one of us could have to consider turning to drugs to try to stay awake so we don’t get robbed, raped, or set on fire. Any one of us could have to consider which was riskier, a shelter full of desperate people or freezing to death outside. 

    Yet as a culture we tend to blame the homeless for being homeless. I know people who look down on them, call them street rats, and worse.  I know it’s almost impossible to get a job without a permanent address. It’s a trap that society has made and reinforces every day. 

    That’s the reality of homelessness. 
    No.  A place to live is not a human right.  A place to live is a commodity that someone else has to provide.  Once you start proclaiming things "rights," you inherently argue to take those things from the people who produce them.  

    [...]

    We need massively expanded drug, alcohol and mental illness inpatient centers.  Thousands and thousands more beds in short-term shelters.  And yes, we should care for those who cannot care for themselves.
    Are these two thoughts not in direct conflict with one another?

    Not even remotely so.  A "Right" is something that one is endowed with from birth.  It is inalienable.  It is natural law.  Many of these rights are codified in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (in the U.S.).  We have the Right to freedom of speech, freedom of association, religious expression and practice, self-defense, and of privacy, to name a few.

    Housing is not a Right.  Clothing is not a Right.  Food is not a Right.  However, that does not mean that we should not use public resources to help people, especially those who are facing addiction, mental health crises, or short-term hardship.  Our political debates are often focused on the degree to which public resources (e.g. tax dollars) are used to provide assistance.  Opinions will vary, but mine is that we should be addressing the issue of homelessness.  It's bad for society as a whole, and certainly bad for those in its grasp.  My suggestions relate to how we address the problem.  Put simply, the issue isn't just a lack of "affordable housing."  It's drugs, alcohol, mental illness and policies that encourage things like massive encampments along sidewalks on on public land.  

    Regardless, addressing these issues doesn't make housing a Right.  I don't have a Right to drive on a paved road every day, but I do...because we have acted through government to provide it.  The same argument applies with healthcare. Healthcare is a service, one that others must provide.  Given that it's a service (and a commodity), there are only two ways to distribute it: A market price system, or rationing.  That's it.  Those are the two ways ANY resource can be distributed.  So if healthcare is a Right, it must be rationed in some form.  If it's not, it is subject to a market price model. The latter has shown to be the best way to create better quality and lower costs for nearly everything.  

    It's easy to pronounce things "rights."  Everyone has the right to broadband! Everyone has the right to a clean, comfortable and safe place to live! Everyone has the right enough food! And to healthcare! And to a job! The problem is that all of those things must be gotten from the fruits of someone else's labor.  
  • Reply 18 of 19
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 1,280member
    jdw said:
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    Well said.. and thank you.

    I have some pretty out of line and out of touch comments on the homeless, and this situation specifically here on AI in the past. You're response is reality, not an excuse for the homeless as I am sure some folks will think.

  • Reply 19 of 19
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 6,102member
    sdw2001 said:
    sdw2001 said:
    DAalseth said:
    jdw said:
    Interesting to see people bash Apple, after it spent "millions" trying to help, but such comes as no surprise.  It's the same with American public schools, no matter how much more people give through taxation or donation, they always need or expect more.  

    As to the commenter who spoke of "finding them jobs," it's important to realize that drug addicts and the mentally ill comprise a large part of the homeless population, and because America thinks it improper to institutionalize folks that that anymore, we end up with them on the streets or on private property.  For many, holding a normal job is not realistic, and even when you have a job, the pay is not going to be white collar level, and in California where the cost of living is so high, you end up with such an unworkable situation that many continue to live on the streets.  Also keep in mind that holding down a real job involves having several changes of nice, clean clothing, the ability to shower daily, AND the ability to have PROPER TRANSPORTATION to get to work on time.  People who lack understanding about the homeless fail to take those things into consideration. Invisible People on YouTube is a great channel to take a deeper look into this complex problem.

    Apple probably would have faced the same criticism had they done little to nothing and just had the cops "evict" those folks from Apple's private property.  But at least Apple can now say they tried, and so even though they will get bashed for having to move the rest of the people off its land, it's not like they didn't do anything at all to help.  At some point, the hard choices must be made.
    Well said. A place to live is a human right, but it’s not Apple’s job to provide it. That’s the job of society writ large, one that it is failing at miserably. 

    Every one of us is a few missed paycheques or a bit of bad luck away from being homeless. Any one of us could be sleeping rough. Any one of us could have to consider turning to drugs to try to stay awake so we don’t get robbed, raped, or set on fire. Any one of us could have to consider which was riskier, a shelter full of desperate people or freezing to death outside. 

    Yet as a culture we tend to blame the homeless for being homeless. I know people who look down on them, call them street rats, and worse.  I know it’s almost impossible to get a job without a permanent address. It’s a trap that society has made and reinforces every day. 

    That’s the reality of homelessness. 
    No.  A place to live is not a human right.  A place to live is a commodity that someone else has to provide.  Once you start proclaiming things "rights," you inherently argue to take those things from the people who produce them.  

    [...]

    We need massively expanded drug, alcohol and mental illness inpatient centers.  Thousands and thousands more beds in short-term shelters.  And yes, we should care for those who cannot care for themselves.
    Are these two thoughts not in direct conflict with one another?

    Not even remotely so.  A "Right" is something that one is endowed with from birth.  It is inalienable.  It is natural law.  Many of these rights are codified in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (in the U.S.).  We have the Right to freedom of speech, freedom of association, religious expression and practice, self-defense, and of privacy, to name a few.

    Housing is not a Right.  Clothing is not a Right.  Food is not a Right.  However, that does not mean that we should not use public resources to help people, especially those who are facing addiction, mental health crises, or short-term hardship.  Our political debates are often focused on the degree to which public resources (e.g. tax dollars) are used to provide assistance.  Opinions will vary, but mine is that we should be addressing the issue of homelessness.  It's bad for society as a whole, and certainly bad for those in its grasp.  My suggestions relate to how we address the problem.  Put simply, the issue isn't just a lack of "affordable housing."  It's drugs, alcohol, mental illness and policies that encourage things like massive encampments along sidewalks on on public land.  

    Regardless, addressing these issues doesn't make housing a Right.  I don't have a Right to drive on a paved road every day, but I do...because we have acted through government to provide it.  The same argument applies with healthcare. Healthcare is a service, one that others must provide.  Given that it's a service (and a commodity), there are only two ways to distribute it: A market price system, or rationing.  That's it.  Those are the two ways ANY resource can be distributed.  So if healthcare is a Right, it must be rationed in some form.  If it's not, it is subject to a market price model. The latter has shown to be the best way to create better quality and lower costs for nearly everything.  

    It's easy to pronounce things "rights."  Everyone has the right to broadband! Everyone has the right to a clean, comfortable and safe place to live! Everyone has the right enough food! And to healthcare! And to a job! The problem is that all of those things must be gotten from the fruits of someone else's labor.  
    I was talking about the discrepancy between "take those things from the people who produce them" and "we should care for those who cannot care for themselves" which of course is also taking from those who produce them, and it seemed like you were contradicting yourself. You've made your point a lot clearer to me here, thanks.
    muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.