You can visit a city like Helsinki: and yet, there’s barely any homeless people around (of course, homeless people still exist) while comparing that to Los Angeles, it’s a fucking joke. It’s because they prioritize housing for everyone indifferent to their circumstances (even those addicted to drugs or with mental health issues are also sheltered) as they recognize that housing is a human right.
The housing is managed by the state, while Finns pay A TON in taxes at least it’s heading to cover expenses for getting people off the streets. It’s because the Finnish government is on board with putting them into housing while American government demonizes their existence as a whole not even considering them as human beings at all, like WTF is wrong with their mindset?
Because it’s actually cheaper to just house homeless people than it is to take care of them on the street
What’s really your question here? This is all over the place. I feel like you’re upset about this, which is totally valid and I feel you, but it’s making it hard to understand exactly where you’re coming from.
What the fuck is this and where are the mods?
Agreed the US system is a joke but so is the trying to pitch this post as a question
Famously cold winters + not having a home to shelter in = not many homeless :(
It’s cold and homeless people spend nights in public indoor places like airport lobbies and train stations.
Also if you try to spend the night in a station in America a guy with a gun will kindly see you back into the cold
My guess is ‘empathy’ and ‘honour’.
The United States doesn’t even consider food a human right, so why would they give a single flying fuck about housing?
Pedophilia is apparently, however, a right that is guaranteed by the US Constitution.
food
It’s not even food at all, more like chemicals (i.e. “beef” injected with hormonal drugs) or bread that never gets moldy.
You can’t talk about homelessness in America without talking about Ronald Reagan.
When Reagan was elected Governor of California, the state had a large number of mental hospitals in place. They weren’t perfect, but treatment was available. reagan thought these places were a waste of tax payer money and had them closed. California now had a lot of homeless folks. They annoyed the locals, so the state had to hire more cops and build more jails.
This worked so well that Reagan did exactly the same when he became President.
My family lived in New York during that era. We went from a few homeless folks down on the Bowery to literally thousands. Every park was full.
Woah - there was good reason to get rid of those ‘mental hospitals’. There were terriballp abusive. On the streets was more human for most.
while Finns pay A TON in taxes
Looks up Finnish tax brackets… Compares Dutch (my) tax brackets… O-kay.
Finland 2025 State Tax Brackets (Earned Income)
€0 – €21,200: 12.64% €21,200 – €31,500: 19.00% €31,500 – €52,100: 30.25% €52,100 – €88,200: 34.00% Over €88,200: 44.00%Dutch tax brackets.
Bracket 1: 35,75% (0 - €38.883). Bracket 2: 37,56% (€38.884 - €78.426). Bracket 3: 49,50% (above €78.426).It’s much harder to get large swaths of the public addicted to opioids due to pesky red tape from Brussels. And there are far fewer veterans you can abandon to their battle PTSD in tent camps.
I read about a Finnish initiative to just get everyone they could find on the streets of Helsinki without an abode into apartments, give them money, and help them sort out their lives and get them into jobs wherever possible. That’s socialism bordering on communism to American ears. That’s quite lefty even by European standards, sadly.
In America’s defense it’s easier to do in a country of 5 million people than in one of 340 million. That’s not a reason not to try though.
The gdp per capita of the USA (US$84,534.0) is a lot higher than Finland (US$53,149.8) source: world bank. Finland chooses to prioritize the good of society. USA prioritizes the good of the individual (billionaire).
In the USA there’s that traditional puritanical work ethic means that illness, mental health, addiction, and unemployment are signs of laziness so the homeless shouldn’t be helped.
ah but you see the average wealth of people is $620,654 for the us and $179,986 for finland but that is not the whole story. You see the median is $124,041 for the us and $84,093 for finland. You see the problem don’t you. The folks with money in the us didn’t get it by housing the homeless or not having sex with children.
“Why are Finnish people happier than Americans? Must be sauna.”
In America’s defense it’s easier to do in a country of 5 million people than in one of 340 million.
Bullshit. There’s no reason why whatever Finland is doing can’t be scaled up. In fact, a large, unified country ought to be able to achieve the same results as a small country for cheaper due to economies of scale.
The only reason America can’t do what Finland does is because America is a sociopathic society that doesn’t understand the concept of common good.
I see your bullshit and raise you horse manure. Speaking from an administrative point out view, it is indeed harder to run a program like that spread out over a much larger area with a much larger population to deal with. A complication in the US is also in differing state laws. This probably wouldn’t work EU-wide either.
Also Finland didn’t start from a large pool of homeless people due to mental illness or medical bankruptcies because there were other social safety nets spun before this one to catch a lot of the people before they became homeless.
Blame the US for not trying. I do too. But “economies of scale” are not going to help a program that for it to run well cannot be run like a business.
The us is trying. We had shelters for many years and the abuse in them was far worse than anything on the streets. Sure a few freeze to death on the streets which isn’t good, but don’t forget how much worse it was / can be.
don’t let that be an excuse for not doing better either but don’t lose sight of the possibility for worse.
America seems to prioritise profits for the wealthy and oppression for the lower classes while Finland does not… at least not to that extent. Finland calls it some sort of, regulated capitalism, welfare or socialism, while Americans would probably call that straight up communism or whatever.
Finland has actually tried to do something about it, contrary to USA where homelessness is borderline illegal, and the main policy against it is harassment to make them go somewhere else. Finland is a civilized society, USA is a sociopathic society.
That said, homelessness is a challenge, but Finland has a program they call “housing first” to help prevent it, that has turned out to work better than what most countries do.
WTF is wrong with their mindset?
Unchecked capitalism and individualism.
Basically: “why should I help the others with my taxes if I’m doing ok?” and “profits over anything else”.
Just like Jesus would tell them to do it 😌
Have you been to Finland?
6 months of the year, homeless people would freeze to death in short order if they were left outside.
Finland has homeless people, just not on the street.
Finland winter ranges from 23F to -4F
Similar to Northern US states.
Same is true for much of Canada yet we can’t seem to shelter them either. It isn’t just the weather, the finnish government is far more compassionate towards homeless people than any other government I know of.
6 months of the year, homeless people would freeze to death
True, but that does surprisingly little to prevent homelessness.
In Nordic countries homelessness is mostly due to mental illness and drug abuse.
In USA you can end up homeless because you got just a little bit unlucky, and got sick and lost your job, and can’t pay even the basic bills. By a little bit unlucky, I mean it may be very bad in USA, but here we at least have healthcare for all, and we have regulation that ensures we get paid during sick leave.True, but that does surprisingly little to prevent homelessness.
Yes, but it does a LOT to keep people experiencing homelessness of the streets and in shelter. In US cities that have harsh winters, they also have many fewer homeless folks visible on the streets than you’d find in California or Texas, where people can pretty much live outside in perpetuity
So you’re saying homeless people have, um, homes?
Being in a shelter hardly qualifies as having a home. Unless you like shelters maybe…
If you have a room in a shelter every day, you’re not homeless. It’s not nice, but it’s not homeless.
“not nice” is doing some competition level heavy lifting. Getting barely enough food, just that little bit of hygiene, all your things in one bag, surrounded by helpless or crazy people and desperation so great you are constantly paranoid you might get abused or robbed. All of the safety and security you want a home for is hardly available in a homeless shelter.
It’s like saying being in prison is also living. Sure, on a technicality. But in real life no one would agree - prison makes people age faster for all the wrong reasons.
My immediate thought too. We have homeless people here in Norway too. Homeless does not mean without housing or shelter.
