top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 136 points 3 years ago (46 children)

I don’t think anybody thinks that.

  • source
  • hideshow 46 child comments
  • [–] 91 points 3 years ago (9 children)

    Not explicitly, maybe, but implicitly, absolutely, and in multiple ways:

    • Supporting the system that creates one over the other
    • Having 'bootstrap' attitudes about the poor
    • Worrying about property value over utilization
    • Complaining about the homeless rather than the lack of action on housing
    • Voting against people who run on public housing

    In so, so many ways, people say they prefer the latter over the former. Usually just with the caveat that the homeless people also be invisible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 68 points 3 years ago (18 children)

    In the United States at least, your local government's public hearings for new housing developments kinda begs to differ.

    People will demand the homeless be eliminated from their area while simultaneously opposing development of housing or shelters for the homeless in their area.

    So maybe you're right though: they don't hate the apartments more, they simply can't make up their mind on which they hate more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • load more comments (18 replies)
  • load more comments (17 replies)
    [–] 133 points 3 years ago (31 children)

    The world will never recover until poverty is seen not as a character flaw, but as a failure of society itself to provide for the most vulnerable.

  • source
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    My freaking God. I volunteered at a local charity org a bit this summer and one of the first things they told us in orientation was that "most people think that poverty is about what people lack. But it's actually a mindset." That pissed me the heck off not gonna lie.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 79 points 3 years ago (71 children)

    I hate how when there is any picture of Soviet blocks it's always shot in autumn or winter when it's overcast. I live in an ex Soviet country and when these bad boys are maintained they can outperform new apartments, be it in functionality, amenities or price.

  • source
  • hideshow 71 child comments
  • load more comments (71 replies)
    [–] 66 points 3 years ago (19 children)

    I'd gladly live in one of those apartments in the first picture if it meant that everyone could have a home

  • source
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 3 years ago (8 children)

    I’d gladly walk my ass out to the wilderness rather than live in an apartment block, but at least then there’d be an extra spot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 53 points 3 years ago (14 children)

    The USSR didn't do much good but those apartment buildings are definitely good. I used to live in a soviet apartment building and the funny thing about that was that every wall was a load bearing wall since all of them could hold up everything. They were thick as hell and fully concrete.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

    Okay, I just went from "eh, commie blocks are gross but better than tents" to "fuck all the other apartments, bring on the commie blocks". Buildings in the US are built so ridiculously cheaply that in a lot of lower-rent buildings you can hear everything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
    [–] 38 points 3 years ago* (9 children)

    This is kinda like saying we need more farms to solve hunger.

    The cost of housing is very detached from supply. For rentals, companies bought up housing and just jacked up the price, because renters are a semi captive client base.

    New construction sometimes doesn’t even help, when developers knocks down an old affordable 12 unit apartment building and build a luxury 36 unit building, you’ve created -12 units of affordable housing.

    Even for home buyers, they’re facing a major up hill battle going against existing home owners who have access to the capital of their current homes, and even worse corporate home buyers.

    This isn’t to say supply isn’t an issue and we can ignore it, but we need to stop housing from just being an investment vehicle. Otherwise we’re just going to get garbage housing at prices no one can afford.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 38 points 3 years ago (8 children)

    Don't worry, they've outlawed homelessness. Problem solved!

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    Literally though. And there's a whole practice of hostile architecture that makes it harder and more uncomfortable to be homeless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 37 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    I don't think: "ah, buildings again. I'd rather live in camps featuring trash scent."

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 33 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I understand the point. But France has done this and ended up with giant ghettos filled with si much crime that no emergency services whatsoever go there anymore.

    In the US, they built giant housing projects like this where poverty was concentrated and the same thing happened. Crime installed itself in those projects and these neighbourhoods became dangerous ghettos.

    Picture 1 is not the solution you think you want.

    The condo building where I live is not so big. And it was built with 25% dedicated to social housing where poor families and underpaid workers can live comfortably in an apartment unit as big as my condo unit, which I paid nearly $400k CAD, for the price of about $650 CAD per month. This allows them to integrate with everyone else and live with everyone else and near where all the jobs are.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 28 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Capitalism has you thinking that these are our only options

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 27 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (7 children)

    I don't get people that have such a visceral reaction to apartments (the horror). What they write is frankly hilarious how they think. Right up there with what they write about transit (ohhh noooo) and electric stoves [sobbing noises].

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
    [–] 24 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (8 children)

    never fails to amaze me how "progressive" types do a complete 180 as soon as someone mentions solving the homeless problem by giving them homes

    edit: i rest my case

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    I don't think "progressives" have any issue with housing the homeless. The issue is where.

    Go to a conservative (or indeed any) neighbourhood and tell them you'll be building 200 apartments nearby to house rough sleepers, see how that goes down.

    Most homeless are invisible to us anyway. They hold down jobs, they have gym memberships, they just sleep in their car, or on a mate's sofa every so often. Nobody would have a problem with them moving in nearby.

    It's the aggressive beggars, addicts, and shitting in shop doorways (and these three are the same person) that nobody wants anywhere near them. These are who most people think of when they hear the word "homeless". Most of them need more treatment than just a roof. We don't have enough of that either.

    I've no issue with my taxes helping all these people. I'm happy to pay tax to reduce the chances of me personally being robbed by somebody in desperate poverty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 24 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    Yeah, but I didn't have to pay anything for those people to live in tents. I keep my money out of their lazy hands.

    /s, deeply, if it isn't obv.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children)

    /s

    And for those unaware, the cost of homelessness does exist, and it is quite high. We pay for it through emergency services (police, doctors, ambulance, hospital beds), waste removal services, etc.

    The problem needs fixed, and part of the solution is commie blocks unironically.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 22 points 3 years ago

    Pretty sure that’s just NIMBYs.

  • source
  • [+] 20 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)
    load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 14 points 3 years ago

    Uh, the billionaires don't see that. Even the millionaires can avoid seeing that.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›