In the 1990s, homelessness was virtually non-existent in Sweden. But by around 2014 to 2016, there were some young adults having to sleep through the winter without real shelter, something that would have been totally unimaginable 15 years earlier. It's getting harder for young adults to get an apartment in the major city areas. I think there were already some indicators of problems even before then, maybe going all the way back to 2004, or even how the country's economy began showing signs of stalling out in the 90s before having a temporary reprieve from 1998-2002. But significant levels of homelessness did not begin until later. Look, as I told you, that's a discussion for a separate thread.
By 2011, the homeless numbers were four times what they were in 1999. (Sweden) (graph here) But I think at first a large share of those homeless were immigrants. It wasn't until a few years later that Swedish people began to compose a growing portion of the homeless population. So we're talking about maybe 2015, 2016, 2017.
Ah, the ever present race argument. Heh. Facts: Finland had a homelessness problem (as per your argument, they were all white) and in the 1980s they decided to do something about it, and by now the problem is eradicated. The point: The problem can be fixed, if the will power is there. I doubt either claim is true. How could their climate be any different then Sweden or Norway, when they are right next to each other?
Fair enough. I'm one of those people that gets held up in traffic when there are protests. My previous sympathies, under that circumstance, can change pretty quickly. Nevertheless, I still view endemic homelessness and despair as a societal problem more than an individual problem - as evidenced by the fact that some countries get it together and others don't. I don't see a genetic difference. In another lifetime it could be me or you on that footpath being stepped over.
I read about it, which is something anyone can do. It seems prevention and early intervention are key ingredients in the solution. Eradicating Homelessness in Finland https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-international-philanthropic-071123.html In the latter years of the 2010s, the nation of Finland positioned itself as a global leader in combating homelessness. Through an innovative public policy strategy that has virtually eliminated homelessness within its borders, Finland has redefined how nations can address homelessness. By focusing on prevention, early intervention, and a comprehensive support system through wraparound services, Finland has shown the world that homelessness is a solvable problem. Read more in link, - also "Applicability in the United States" Where there is will, there is a way. All problems have solutions, but often times people are not interested in solving them. Some shrug and say "oh, they're just blacks and immigrants", and focus on using homeless stats to make political arguments.
Then you should be able to find a country in Latin America or Africa that decided to "do something" about their homelessness problem. (That's 87 countries for you to pick through) But certainly, one of the countries with high levels of immigration must have decided to "do something" about their homelessness problem. Right? You know, I do have one idea. And it's a pretty simple one. Pass a law that immigrants have to live in new homes that were constructed within the last 6 years. And they would also not be allowed to live in "higher demand" areas that are experiencing housing shortages. I'm sure that will never be implemented into public policy, of course.
How is that relevant? But sure, Costa Rica has very few homeless Um.....I guess. Switzerland had massive foreign born population and homelessness is not much of an issue Least homeless Denmark. ... Ireland. ... Finland. ... Japan. Norway. Slovenia. Israel. Costa Rica. Yes, it's an "idea". Too bad it doesn't make any sense.
Two things. First, Costa Rica is one of the two Latin American countries with a population that is majority white. And second, you might want to read this: "More than 1 million Costa Ricans live in severe poverty, and approximately 52% of the population suffers from insufficient and unstable living conditions."Creative Solutions for Homelessness in Costa Rica - The Borgen Project
Actually, things are not so economically good in Ireland right now. Many Irish are protesting since they cannot afford to live in Dublin, and outside Dublin there are not very many good job opportunities or any major "big city" areas. Living standards are subpar (by European standards) and unemployment high for a large section of the Irish population. Although Ireland has seen large levels of immigration in recent years, still it is estimated that 90% of the Irish population is White. Japan has many abandoned homes and is experiencing population decline. The government is even giving away older dilapidated homes for free (with the caveat that you have to live in it, fix it up, and pay taxes, and of course most of these homes are not near the most desirable bigger city areas). If there's a low homelessness rate in Japan, it's not because of any intentional government policy (unless we count their restrictive immigration policy). Actually, before about 10 years ago, the amount of immigration Switzerland let in was rather low, and more than half of the foreigners who are permitted to move there are skilled middle class professionals or wealthier people.
That is a misrepresentation of what I meant. I was talking about persons of Spanish ancestry, persons of German immigrant ancestry, and the many White people who have moved there from the United States. Costa Rica would still be "majority white" even if we didn't count the persons who were more than one eighth non-white as white.
I know everything is all about white / non-white with you, so, is them being so white the reason for the problems you described: "More than 1 million Costa Ricans live in severe poverty, and approximately 52% of the population suffers from insufficient and unstable living conditions."
You are the one who pressed me about that, so I was just getting back to you about the specifics. I explained that your assumption, viewing me as a hypocrite for counting Hispanics in Costa Rica as "white", while not counting Hispanics in the U.S. as white, was incorrect. That was the only point in me getting into the specifics.
I didn't press, you volunteered it. You always bring up white vs non-white, and blame race on any given problem, including homelessness. So, you said Costa Ricans are white, and before that you listed a slew of big problems in that country, so the obvious question is whether or not them being white is the root cause.
This is very dumb of you. I said that Costa Rica was "majority white" (above 50%), not "almost entirely white". Now, if you want to discuss specific situations in other countries in the world, I suggest you start a separate thread.
