Little Houses

Posted by: jgw

Little Houses - 07/08/20 07:04 PM

Seattle has been buying little houses for the homeless. They are cute and I suspect they pay something like 20,000.00 for each one. You can get an Ikea Shelter for about 1,000.00. That does not have a toilet but I betcha you can get something for less than the 19,000.00 difference?

Oh, these things are also cheaper than sheds of the same size as well. Just came across and am sharing. Never knew about them.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Little Houses - 07/08/20 08:26 PM

Nice price, but I bet the shipping charges make them impractical in the US.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Little Houses - 07/08/20 08:32 PM

Tiny houses can be integrated into communities and provide permanent long lasting houses for those who would otherwise be homeless. Those look like great refugee shelters, but not so much a fix for the housing crisis.

Which is a polite way of saying those things are uglier than a mud fence and NO community would allow them. They have the look of makeshift latrines. That's why they're cheap.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Little Houses - 07/09/20 06:04 AM

They really are hard-walled tents. No cooking and no bathroom facilities. Okay for a refugee camp, though. Or even a summer camp, if you put some bunk beds in them.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Little Houses - 07/09/20 07:22 PM

Yep, for homeless housing they are going to have to build big to house them all. I think I mentioned it but we did that before, in the 50's I think and they were called "the projects". Two things went wrong and, I think, they have now blowed them all up. The first problem was that many moving in came from shacks and they had no idea about stuff like garbage shoots, bath tubs, shower, and even toilet. So if they do it again they are going to have to demonstrate everything to the occupants. The second thing was security. Homeless encampments, for instance, don't have security which means that rape, beatings, drugs, theft, illness, etc. are common and they are simply not safe. Somebody is going to have to figure out security that will work for the occupants, control gangs, etc.

None of this is going to be easy but demand (from all sides) will force the issue and occupants themselves are going to have to be organized and trained.

Anyway ............
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Little Houses - 07/09/20 09:42 PM

Fortunately, video cameras are now dirt cheap and very tiny. And you can have an AI watch them all and alert human security if it looks like anything bad is happening. That AI is so advanced now they could actually do facial recognition and refuse entry to anyone not in the system until they have been vetted by a resident.

It would be "big brother watching" but if anybody doesn't like it they can go back to the streets.
Posted by: Ujest Shurly

Re: Little Houses - 07/10/20 10:11 AM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
That AI is so advanced now they could actually do facial recognition and refuse entry to anyone not in the system until they have been vetted by a resident.

It would be "big brother watching" but if anybody doesn't like it they can go back to the streets.

Except for Black, Brown and other dark skinned people. The very people eligible for this housing...
Posted by: jgw

Re: Little Houses - 07/10/20 06:10 PM

True, there seems to be a problem with facial recognition and black and brown subjects but, I am sure, that's gonna get fixed pretty quick.

The problem is the human that oversees it all. I suspect, however, that we will find out pretty quick how it works or doesn't....

Oh, then there is the problem of being spied upon but whatever and the resistance therein I can almost hear the rage already. This would be yet another instance of some simply not recognizing what their own best interest is until they need, and don't have security until its too late.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Little Houses - 07/10/20 07:52 PM

I bet using infrared light to look at human faces would not even pick up the skin pigments. Skin color is easily faked by using makeup, so not so useful for facial recognition. And cheap video cameras are so sensitive to infrared, they have to add infrared cut filters so you don't get a blurry image from chromatic aberration. They just need to use different filters for infrared-only. And infrared LED light sources are dirt-cheap.

The issue of being spied upon is relieved by making residence in the building voluntary, signs in the lobby, and rental contracts that spell it out in plain large print. Just like you can have security guards and metal detectors at the entrance to a gun-free building, even though concealed carry might be legal in that state.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Little Houses - 07/10/20 08:44 PM

My problem is that there are some people who would even fight what you are suggesting. They simply do-not-get-it and resent any thought that somebody will always do them over no matter what. The some of the Democratic purists are part of this kind of attitude and it drives me nuts. Just saying - and, I guess, whining........

All that being said I still think its gonna happen and, hopefully, they will also get some security to go along with it. I can remember reading reports, in the NY Times (I used to subscribe when I was rich). There were reports of lids playing in the garbage shoots, barbecues in the bath tubs, etc. due to, basically, ignorance. Whether we like it or not we do have a seriously ignorant lower class which is flat out ignored and many don't believe exist. I consider it just yet another example of societal failure of which we have a lot of. Another one would be healthcare - there are others as well.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Little Houses - 07/10/20 09:06 PM

We don't lack housing. We lack affordable housing.

Some of the homeless have jobs and families. They just can't afford to rent or buy a home.

Some of them are insane. Many are addicted to drugs and alcohol. Treatment is needed for them more than high tech security.

I saw something a while back about an Orlando developer planning buildings full of 200 sq ft apartments. Hive homes of a sort. I think that's more viable than individual tiny houses, but a lot can be done with modular housing these days.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Little Houses - 07/11/20 04:52 PM

I assumed that we were talking about affordable housing. Sorry, should have said so.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Little Houses - 07/11/20 07:41 PM

I assumed we were talking about housing the homeless.

When all rentals are private and all landlords want to make the most money for the least investment, then rents are going to continue to outrun the earning capacity of the lower tier workers. Like health insurance, like many other things.

New housing is built for the well to do, old housing is gentrified for the well to do. Communities of tent and auto dwellers are growing like the Hoovervilles of yore.

There has been talk of manufacturing tiny homes for them, of building communities of tiny homes for them to live in...But Urban property is expensive and what the city owns they usually devote to projects for the well to do.

Shipping containers would be a good platform to start with.

But there is currently no political will to help the truly poor.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Little Houses - 07/11/20 08:41 PM

I fear that the homeless numbers will seriously increase in the next year. We already have waaay too many to house one (person or family) to a single house. Its gonna take buildings to do the job. That's just the tip of the coming disaster.

As far as I can tell anybody who has been judged positive for Covid-19 is not going to survive without serious physical problems of one sort or another. I watched one doctor note that they started x-raying younger infected and every one of them had scarred lungs and that's just for starters. Given the numbers of infected our entire healthcare system is going to have to be overhauled so that its functional under such circumstances.

Hopefully there are those who are already thinking on this stuff. The trick will be to get it done. If it doesn't then, I suspect, there will be blood in the streets in the not too distant future.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Little Houses - 07/11/20 09:34 PM

I think the high-tech security will be a tiny fraction of the cost to build housing projects, and could solve all the security problems inherent in housing projects of the past. There are a lot of economic things that favor building multistory buildings over tiny houses. Heating and cooling costs, for one thing. Tiny houses have a MUCH higher surface area to volume ratio, so they cost a lot to heat and cool. Big projects have a much better ratio and a lot of thermal mass. Doesn't matter much in Southern California. Huge deal in Chicago.

There is no reason we can't build a project with 100-200 square foot micro-apartments for the homeless. We used to do that all the time: They were called State Mental Hospitals.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Little Houses - 07/12/20 05:29 PM

I'm in favor of the hive home model too. Particularly in areas with dense populations.

We DO need the mental asylums

We need subsidized housing for the working poor too because your average burger flipper can't afford an apartment but somebody's gotta flip the burgers. A house in the 'burbs and an SUV to ferry the kids to dance and soccer is out of the reach of the service staff that those folks depend on to empty their trashcans and deliver their lunch.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Little Houses - 07/12/20 06:03 PM

Its not the expense of security and the problem with the previous effort is that they had no security at all! They just built them and started filling them up and hoping for the best.

Sometimes we need regulation to make something work and low cost housing for the homeless, poor, uneducated, etc. needs regulation and security. If you ask them, and they are not predators then, in that society, they are victims. If you don't believe me go talk to a couple of homeless and ask them. This is not secret!

The secret, I suspect, is that gov will have a tendency to go too far and piss everybody off. They will also have to organize the tenants for some kind of oversight if nothing else.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Little Houses - 07/12/20 07:06 PM

somebody's gotta flip the burgers

Absolutely, and the hive housing would not be the same place as the state mental hospital. The mental hospital is where you go when the Hive Councils all kick you out for crazy obnoxious behavior. The problem with The Projects is when you are unfit to live there, the only options are jail or the streets.

Now more than ever, it's a public health issue: How can you isolate people if they have no place to isolate?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Little Houses - 07/13/20 12:53 AM

The housing projects and the mental/rehab units would be identical buildings, they'd just put a wall around the one for crazies.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Little Houses - 07/13/20 12:56 AM

gov will have a tendency to go too far and piss everybody off.

That's how Perotista feels...that if government attempts to do anything at it will do too much and the party trying to do something...anything...will get voted out and the party most famous for doing nothing will take over again. And then vice versa two years later. It's a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Little Houses - 07/13/20 07:04 PM

Are you referring to prisons?