Finland - No Homeless

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I am sort of curious about how we are going to measure capability as well, and where we set the bar of sufficient capability to blame someone's homelessness on indolence.

Indeed, the very sorts of people who have deep struggles deciding what constitutes a man or a woman have very serious concerns over how “capability” could ever be decided.

Behold the intellectual genius class at work.


Here’s a crazy thought from a snake-handling, flat-Earth, Stone Ager - Capable is the default. You don’t prove capability. You prove incapability.

Holy shit. It wasn’t the unsolvable intellectual puzzle our resident geniuses assumed it to be.

Who said anything about proving or disproving?

I'm asking about measuring capability, something which I think is pretty obviously on a scale.

For instance, I am 'capable' of snarky misdirection, but if you and I are competing for a job in a competitive snarky misdirection market, I might find myself unemployed, and thus struggling mightily for a stable living situation.

[DBTrek]

I guess we should probably shake the magic money tree down and keep handing out cash to whoever feels uncompetitive until you figure out your sliding scale. I mean, it’s the only option, obviously.

Until HM has decided a way to rate everyone’s capability in every conceivable industry we’ll just have to take people’s word for it.

“Can’t get a job man”
“Have some cash”
“Me too”
“Have some cash”
“Holy crap, me three”
“Cash”
“Uhh, I don’t have a job either”
“Cash”

Great plan. I see why you all consider yourselves the intellectual class.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I guess we should probably shake the magic money tree down and keep handing out cash to whoever feels uncompetitive until you figure out your sliding scale. I mean, it’s the only option, obviously.

Until HM has decided a way to rate everyone’s capability in every conceivable industry we’ll just have to take people’s word for it.

“Can’t get a job man”
“Have some cash”
“Me too”
“Have some cash”
“Holy crap, me three”
“Cash”
“Uhh, I don’t have a job either”
“Cash”

Great plan. I see why you all consider yourselves the intellectual class.

It isn't my idea to base welfare on abstract capability.

I mean, it would seem that I am proving to you that I am functionally retarded with every post... so if you were the boss of the money tree, perhaps you would see fit to shake me out some dosh. If you think that, moron that I obviously am, I am still undeserving of gibs-for-the-incapable, you might want to pin down that capability metric a little better.

[DBTrek]

No, again my simple solution eludes you.
You’re capable. Default.
Now if you want the gibs, onus is on you to prove you’re incapable.

Let the wailing commence.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

No, again my simple solution eludes you.
You’re capable. Default.
Now if you want the gibs, onus is on you to prove you’re incapable.

Let the wailing commence.

Being consistently befuddled by these simple solutions doesn't count as proof?

If you are homeless, that is pretty much proof you can't get a stable living situation as long as your answer to the question (presumably, the only relevant question on the gibs application given this extremely simple vetting process) "are you homeless on purpose because you are either lazy as fuck or just think it is rad to eat garbage and smell like someone who eats garbage?" is "no."

[DBTrek]

One of the people living there, Melissa Burns, said she and her boyfriend came to Seattle from West Virginia because “we appreciate Seattle's liberal vibe.”

Burns and her boyfriend were previously contacted by Seattle’s Navigation Team -- a group of outreach workers teamed with specially trained Seattle police -- last month when they lived a block away.

"We don't want to change our lifestyle to fit their requirements," she said.

The city navigation team said only 37 percent of homeless people they contact accept offers of shelter. . . .

Burns and her boyfriend said they’d move along when that happens. But they don’t expect to go far – possibly two blocks away, which is similar to their last move.

When Burns was asked earlier this month if she would accept permanent housing offers, she said she wouldn’t likely accept them.

"We intend to stay here," she said. "This is the solution to the homeless problem. We want autonomy, right here."

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/homele ... /729916774

“But how can we know if they’re capable?!?!”

Liberalism.
Not even once.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

400 illegal unsanctioned encampments.

It seems this article isn't about who gets handouts, but if it should be illegal to be outside all the time in the same place.

[DBTrek]

Seems you herp a mean derp.

Deflection would’ve been a good tactic before presenting “capability” determination as an intractable problem. Now it’s a little late.

[Montegriffo]

I am sort of curious about how we are going to measure capability as well, and where we set the bar of sufficient capability to blame someone's homelessness on indolence.

Yeah, I thought it was a reasonable question. Maybe that's why DB avoided answering it.

[DBTrek]

I am sort of curious about how we are going to measure capability as well, and where we set the bar of sufficient capability to blame someone's homelessness on indolence.

Yeah, I thought it was a reasonable question. Maybe that's why DB avoided answering it.

Maybe that’s why I’ve answered it twice, and our intellectual class still can’t find the answer. Hmmm. So many befuddled geniuses who can’t find plainly stated solutions, yet they know how to fix society.