Tiny Houses help address Homeless problem

[Road Guy]

because were smug/ conservative /big business/pro climate change/ elitist

 

[engineergurl]

I can see this being a benefit. Homeless people often have substance abuse and/or mental health issues, which can lead to difficulty integrating into a group like they would be in large, cramped shelter. At least here they get privacy and will consequently be more likely to stay and receive treatment, rather than being on the street and possibly a danger to others.

This is all being built with private money so why criticize how those private donors chose to spend it?

eh... I was just thinking the money could be utilized more efficiently, it's going to happen eventually that someone will complain about the trailer houses being parked in front of their own house... the whole this is a GREAT idea, but not in my backyard

 

[YMZ PE]

this is just one of those eco-smug-elitist options for saving the world with a really dumb idea..

The smug elitists are full of such ideas.

I still don't get the hate. The groups implementing this project are trying to help solve a longstanding social problem with a new approach that won't require too many resources and helps the recipients maintain dignity. How is this in any way something to be frowned upon?

The smug elitists are the ones touting this from a distance as green and eco-friendly. Maybe bash the propagandists, instead of the people working on this project who are sincerely trying to help the poor.

 

[Road Guy]

yes mam

 

[Dexman PE PMP]

It's been my experience that homelessness is only a problem for those who already have homes and jobs. It's the "elitists" who don't want to see the homeless wondering around their homes/communities/businesses/etc. Most who are homeless are that way by choice, and those who genuinely want help will seek it through shelters.

 

[Supe]

They already make these "tiny houses". They're called apartments tool sheds.

Fixed.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

this is just one of those eco-smug-elitist options for saving the world with a really dumb idea..

The smug elitists are full of such ideas.

I still don't get the hate. The groups implementing this project are trying to help solve a longstanding social problem with a new approach that won't require too many resources and helps the recipients maintain dignity. How is this in any way something to be frowned upon?

The smug elitists are the ones touting this from a distance as green and eco-friendly. Maybe bash the propagandists, instead of the people working on this project who are sincerely trying to help the poor.

That's really who i was talking about.

Quite frankly, I was glad to see the Occupy movement accomplish something through private donations. However, in the article it did note they had to keep moving the little houses to skirt some law. But, they are playing by the rules.

But as long a they aren't spending government money on the 'homeless problem' I'm pretty much cool with it.

 

[engineergurl]

Quite frankly, I was glad to see the Occupy movement accomplish something through private donations. However, in the article it did note they had to keep moving the little houses to skirt some law. But, they are playing by the rules.

This is what flagged my attention... they found a way to skirt the rules, which is good for them, but that rule was probably in place for some reason or another, so the likely hood of it being changed to address the new activity is high.

At one point in time I had to enforce right of way ordinances, most which were not a big deal, but there was one that city council had passed regarding basketball hoops in the right of way. They weren't allowed, at all. Do you know how much time and resources it took to respond to the complaints that we received about them, only to answer that unless we witnessed the BB hoop in the right of way, would couldn't do anything. (If they moved the hoop off the right of way when not in use, there was nothing we could do about it, we actually had to see it in the right of way, issue a warning and then see it again to give out the penalty). So even if one person starts complaining, it's now costing the government money to actually monitor that they are skirting the law correctly.

Call me a negative nelly, while I think it's great that people are doing something, I don't foresee it as a long term solution that will really address the problem. I am not trying to bash the people who are doing it, I just think that there are aspects and impacts of it that were not thought out as best as they possibly could have.