Hacker News Reader

There are plenty of people, today and in the past, who do not have compassion for the homeless.

I think that’s true but those numbers are inflated, falsely IMO, by those who disagree on what’s effective/who should be compelled/what’s the root cause.

For instance, if you say that we should both give twenty quid to a homeless bloke we see, and I disagree because I genuinely don’t think it’s a good way to help, you (if you were so inclined) might call me uncaring but that wouldn’t be true. Then you argue that I should be compelled to give the money and I’ll fight you on that, for several reasons, and before you know it you’re casting me as evil.

This is literally a strawman argument.

If we're keeping score on fallacies, roenxi is pointing out an association fallacy.

Do go into detail.

Compassion is worthless unless it results in a roof overhead and food on the table, and/or mental health care. We've seen plenty of "compassion" from behind locked gates however, and it is worth every penny. i.e. none.

My experience with the homeless is limited, but I feel this isn't true.

I've heard from friends that work with the homeless, as well as from reading online, that many of the homeless feel invisible. People don't stop to talk to them, they don't make eye contact, they don't say "hello" while passing on the street.

From this I feel that treating the homeless as people -- even if it isn't something that tangibly benefits them -- is beneficial. Making small talk, or even just making eye contact and saying "good morning" while walking by would make them feel a little more human.

Obviously this doesn't solve the problem, and I expect that most homeless would prefer food and shelter over chit-chat, but when we're talking about "compassion for the homeless", I think that this fits perfectly in that hole.

> The political debate is 100% about

Not sure your list is equaling 100%. As a life long Texan, the red and blue lines are far and wide here and purple is thriving in certain areas; largely based on transplants. The purple, and especially the blue part that is changing the gradient; is to be feared by the MAGA republicans. Even people I consider non-extreme GOP Texas standard politics over past ~50 years type people do not want to tolerate the reality of modern day homelessness. Our culture in Texas is very NIMBY on this topic. Zero tolerance as in "I will pull out my shotgun if you step on my property." Nearly every pre-Y2K teenage boy has a story to tell about that if they grew up in Texas.

I suppose I consider this part of the cultural phenomenon that comes with growth. Although, fused within politics. Also, economics because the reason this is even happening is the city of Dallas has been losing to it's suburbs in the economic department. That's why so much office space is vacant. The pandemic ruined it for sure but it has been bad for a long time.

> Even people I consider non-extreme GOP Texas standard politics over past ~50 years type people do not want to tolerate the reality of modern day homelessness.

Can we blame them? Who should tolerate homelessness and poverty issues? Aren't people in deep blue urban areas getting their own anecdotes about homelessness right now? Aren't we seeing people avoiding situations and neighborhoods there as a result?

Personally, and I can definitely be wrong here, I expect that relevant mental health issues aren't going to be simple enough to just throw earmarked housing, destigmatizing, etc. at. Local government is going to have to take some responsibility for the behavior of the mentally ill one way or another.

> pre-Y2K teenage boy

I'm not sure what you mean by that. It's been 22 years since the year 2000, so it sounds like you're describing a temporal impossibility.

It sounds like the ambiguity should be resolved the other way around, as "person who was a teenage boy before Y2K", rather than "person from before Y2K who is a teenage boy".

Ah, thanks

Almost everyone would give lip service, at the right time and place, to values like charity and compassion for the homeless.

But there are many, many people who would never for a second even consider the welfare of homeless people as a factor in any decision they ever make, personal or political.

So for all practical purposes charity is definitely not a universal value.

Wow yeah I guess those people might exist but we'll never know. They might just not tell you that they care.

Right. Out of billions of people, you can always find an opinion. Even truly absurd opinions.

It's also easy to call experts until one agrees with you.

> everyone of every stripe has compassion for homeless people

The conservatives in my hometown of Seattle are fairly vocal about not giving a fuck. It's sort of their defining feature. As in, they differ not at all from the liberals except on homeless issues.

Conservatives tend to be transparent when they don't care about things. But that doesn't mean they care less - because that is a relative thing.

I gather homelessness in Seattle has been getting worse for years [0] and that the city is something of a liberal stronghold. So the question is open - are the liberals more compassionate, or are they merely identifying ineffective policies as compassion? Because I would expect real compassion would cause homelessness to decrease. More compassion -> less homelessness is the link I'd like to see if I were out there being compassionate. Or at least growth in line with population rather than exceeding it. Compassion implies that people are about to do something useful.

In short, what you observe is consistent with conservatives being less compassionate, but also consistent with conservatives being equally compassionate but more realistic about policy effectiveness.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Seattle#Measur...

Try to put up a shelter and watch the true colors of so-called liberals emerge. Happened here. Nimbys too when someone tries to build an apartment. Looks like one side is better at hiding human nature.

Seems like these days it's hard to police "small" crime as well. Guess who's most affected by theft, misdemeanor violence, etc.?

The poor and potentially soon to be homeless.