Seattle is Dying

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · Mar 31, 2019

18 hours ago, Duranie said:
I don’t have disdain really— I have ... I don’t know what to call it, actually.... confusion, I guess. I don’t know.
There have to be strings attached— by your own argument, we support people until they can get back to a functional place in life.... so the strings are that they are going to cooperate and work toward that goal of self-sufficiency, or at least minimally-supported-sufficiency (for those with limiting disabilities)
So what do you do for those people who will not cooperate??? They have *no desire* to change their circumstances, and will not live within the programs that are being offered. You can’t enroll someone into a sheltered rehab program, but still allow them to do drugs and engage in illicit activity within their provided housing..... they have to be willing to live by the rules. They have to work their way up that hierarchy. They can’t be dragged.
Those people, who through misfortune, or bad luck, or sudden illness, etc., end up in bad situations — either through no real fault of their own, or through ignorance and poor choices that are later regretted— those people are the ones who could—and do— benefit from the supported welfare-type programs that exist.... They don’t want to be homeless, jobless, *hopeless*, etc. They want to pull themselves up out of the gutter, and they’re grateful for the hand that reaches out to help pull them to a place of safety, security, and self-reliance. Unfortunately, those people are in the minority, in many places. And more unfortunately, the programs that are offered are often structured in ways that hinder access by the very people who would benefit.
My own sister was denied welfare and food stamps when she got breast cancer, had a double mastectomy, went through radiation and chemo, and reconstructive surgeries, all while raising her disabled grandson. She was unable to work for over a year... but the state of AZ refused her benefits because she couldn’t attend the job-readiness classes they required of welfare enrollees. She explained, in vain, that she *had* a job, & she was off on long-term disability, but that it only paid ~30% of her pre-illness wages, which were meager to start with. After six months or so she was able to get SSDI (and SSI for her grandson), but the state still refused any benefits because, according to them she was “non-compliant” with the job training programs. Even letters from her doctors stating that the classes were unnecessary, and inappropriate given her medical needs, made no difference. She nearly lost her house, and car— we paid her car payment and mortgage on more than one occasion, which meant we had to juggle our own payments and got our credit dinged... but the point is that even people who *want* the help, often can’t get it because the programs are one-size-fits-all and are designed to force people into compliance with rules that may not even be appropriate for their situation.
If people who want help, and genuinely need it, can’t get it... how on earth can anyone expect to help people who don’t want assistance??

Yes, some strings, but not nearly as many as we currently have.

People who are addicted to drugs - is anything better in our society by having them live on the street? No.

Most people will live somewhere that has minimal requirements for their living there. Because no matter what, no matter how screwed up they are, it's still better than them living on the street. That's the part that most people don't get, because they're so concerned with giving people things they don't deserve. No matter what, it's better for those people to not live on the street.

You don't have to give them money, just access to food. (and real food, not just crappy food that no one will eat) and don't shut off assistance the moment they get a job - so many jobs pay so little that if they get kicked off assistance, they are "losing" money, which incentivizes them to not work.

But a lot of the homeless and people in poverty are literally just like you or I. They don't want to be poor. They don't want to live on the street. They want a better life.

There's a reason it hasn't been solved yet. It's complex. All the rules and strings are why your sister couldn't get assistance, when that should have been easy. The work requirement came because conservatives didn't want to help people if they could be working. I think in some cities, whether you call it rent control or not, there should be some sort of regulation on housing prices. Like medical care, it's not something that people can just go without, which means it is inherently not something that should be capitalism.

That doesn't mean there can't be nicer homes/houses/apartments, but there should still be rules, with it much more difficult to build apartments that cost 6k/month than it is to build apartments that cost 2k/month (shows how long I've lived in SF that 2k/month seems cheap ) The tax benefits to corporations need to stop until they start paying all their workers more. (if every single worker has a living wage and access to health care, I'll agree to lessen your tax burden) But without that, we are essentially allowing them to keep people in poverty, and rewarding them for it while still having to pay for the social services to their employees. They say "I don't want to pay a living wage, the gov. will pick up the slack, and then I'll get a huge tax break and money savings to boot."

We are constantly making the poor, poorer and the rich, richer, and then wondering why we have a homelessness problem? Something has to change.

guest974915 · Mar 31, 2019

53 minutes ago, LilPeanut said:
Yes, some strings, but not nearly as many as we currently have.
People who are addicted to drugs - is anything better in our society by having them live on the street? No.
Most people will live somewhere that has minimal requirements for their living there. Because no matter what, no matter how screwed up they are, it's still better than them living on the street. That's the part that most people don't get, because they're so concerned with giving people things they don't deserve. No matter what, it's better for those people to not live on the street.
You don't have to give them money, just access to food. (and real food, not just crappy food that no one will eat) and don't shut off assistance the moment they get a job - so many jobs pay so little that if they get kicked off assistance, they are "losing" money, which incentivizes them to not work.
But a lot of the homeless and people in poverty are literally just like you or I. They don't want to be poor. They don't want to live on the street. They want a better life.
There's a reason it hasn't been solved yet. It's complex. All the rules and strings are why your sister couldn't get assistance, when that should have been easy. The work requirement came because conservatives didn't want to help people if they could be working. I think in some cities, whether you call it rent control or not, there should be some sort of regulation on housing prices. Like medical care, it's not something that people can just go without, which means it is inherently not something that should be capitalism.
That doesn't mean there can't be nicer homes/houses/apartments, but there should still be rules, with it much more difficult to build apartments that cost 6k/month than it is to build apartments that cost 2k/month (shows how long I've lived in SF that 2k/month seems cheap ) The tax benefits to corporations need to stop until they start paying all their workers more. (if every single worker has a living wage and access to health care, I'll agree to lessen your tax burden) But without that, we are essentially allowing them to keep people in poverty, and rewarding them for it while still having to pay for the social services to their employees. They say "I don't want to pay a living wage, the gov. will pick up the slack, and then I'll get a huge tax break and money savings to boot."
We are constantly making the poor, poorer and the rich, richer, and then wondering why we have a homelessness problem? Something has to change.

I like your perspective and I entirely agree. I would also add that our elected officials that paved the way for large corporations to shutter so many US factories and move their operations overseas to capitalize on cheaper labor forces ( NAFTA), share culpability. The loss of hundreds of thousands of well-paying blue collar jobs has had lasting devastating personal and societal effects that continue to contribute to this tragic situation.

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · Mar 31, 2019

3 hours ago, morelostthanfound said:
I like your perspective and I entirely agree. I would also add that our elected officials that paved the way for large corporations to shutter so many US factories and move their operations overseas to capitalize on cheaper labor forces ( NAFTA), share culpability. The loss of hundreds of thousands of well-paying blue collar jobs has had lasting devastating personal and societal effects that continue to contribute to this tragic situation.

NAFTA, at worst, was probably a neutral force in our economy. That's part of the issues we're struggling with as a country. Many blue collar positions are going away. Nothing is going to bring them back. The factory Trump "saved" from going to Mexico, stayed in the US, and still laid off most of its staff because they automated it. It's not a popular answer that many jobs have gone the way of the dodo, or wheelwright or carriage maker. The factory jobs won't come back, because even overseas, there are fewer and fewer people doing the jobs, because of automation.

But it's super unpopular to say "I know you spent your life making this widget on an assembly line, but the fact is that a person isn't needed to do that job anymore. You're going to need to learn a new skill, and it might be really hard for you and maybe you'll have to move your whole family to a location for better opportunities. Sorry." But, that's the truth. It's easier and more expedient to lie.

And people in jobs that are soon to go away, either from automation or changing focus from fossil fuels to clean energy, they need to start looking at what they would be interested in doing next and start learning a new trade.

It really sucks for those workers, but throughout history, there are industries that rise and fall. 70 years ago, no one would have been able to imagine that making computers, programs and tech in general would be the monolith it is. Some day, it too will go away and be replaced by something else. Jobs that take critical thinking and human emotional intelligence are the ones that are unlikely to go away.

kbrn2002, ADN, RN · Apr 2, 2019

On 3/27/2019 at 8:07 PM, Susie2310 said:
The problem is a complex one. Costs of living are high, rents are very high, and buying a house is unaffordable for all but the highest paid workers. Salaries/wages have not kept pace with the costs of housing, and there are a limited number of decently paid jobs (many of which require a substantial amount of expensive college education).

I agree with this. I am originally from the area and still have relatives that live in and around Seattle. I looked into moving back there several years ago and quickly changed my mind. There was no way in Hades I could have afforded to live there anywhere near my standard of living and that was years ago. It's only gotten worse since then.

OldDude · Apr 2, 2019

On 3/27/2019 at 8:07 PM, Susie2310 said:
The problem is a complex one. Costs of living are high, rents are very high, and buying a house is unaffordable for all but the highest paid workers. Salaries/wages have not kept pace with the costs of housing, and there are a limited number of decently paid jobs (many of which require a substantial amount of expensive college education).

1 hour ago, kbrn2002 said:
I agree with this. I am originally from the area and still have relatives that live in and around Seattle. I looked into moving back there several years ago and quickly changed my mind. There was no way in Hades I could have afforded to live there anywhere near my standard of living and that was years ago. It's only gotten worse since then.

It is my understanding, somewhat like supply and demand, that the salaries/income of any area controls the cost of housing. What is driving the housing cost in Seattle up if the salaries aren't there to support the increase? No sarcasm or snark intended...truly interested.

NuggetsHuman, BSN, RN · Apr 2, 2019

Tech industry jobs are really driving the market.

Seattle has many large and small tech firms that often will start their full time programmers at upwards or $100k or more.

LilPeanut, MSN, RN, NP · Apr 3, 2019

12 hours ago, OldDude said:
It is my understanding, somewhat like supply and demand, that the salaries/income of any area controls the cost of housing. What is driving the housing cost in Seattle up if the salaries aren't there to support the increase? No sarcasm or snark intended...truly interested.

It's a little bit from column a and b. The salaries are driven up because the housing is going up. A lot of the issues we have in SF come from people who want to buy cash outright as an investment, or have a pied a terre in the city, but not actually live here. Or they want to run it as an airbnb style thing.

Complex ?

kbrn2002, ADN, RN · Apr 3, 2019

16 hours ago, OldDude said:
It is my understanding, somewhat like supply and demand, that the salaries/income of any area controls the cost of housing. What is driving the housing cost in Seattle up if the salaries aren't there to support the increase? No sarcasm or snark intended...truly interested.

The supply and demand chain unfortunately isn't solely income driven, it's also population driven and there's a lack of available housing for the population that falls within lower to middle class income brackets. There's just too many people there in that income bracket competing for properties in their price range. People move there for the available jobs with comparatively higher pay than they were receiving before without necessarily realizing how much the cost of living there wipes out any advantage the higher pay got them.

OldDude · Apr 3, 2019

4 hours ago, LilPeanut said:
It's a little bit from column a and b. The salaries are driven up because the housing is going up. A lot of the issues we have in SF come from people who want to buy cash outright as an investment, or have a pied a terre in the city, but not actually live here. Or they want to run it as an airbnb style thing.
Complex ?

3 minutes ago, kbrn2002 said:
The supply and demand chain unfortunately isn't solely income driven, it's also population driven and there's a lack of available housing for the population that falls within lower to middle class income brackets. There's just too many people there in that income bracket competing for properties in their price range. People move there for the available jobs with comparatively higher pay than they were receiving before without necessarily realizing how much the cost of living there wipes out any advantage the higher pay got them.

Hmmm...interesting. The first thing that popped into my mind was the California Gold Rush and how that played out.

Emergent, RN · Apr 3, 2019

This has been such a great discussion, thanks everyone!

momofm1998 · Apr 3, 2019

3 hours ago, kbrn2002 said:
The supply and demand chain unfortunately isn't solely income driven, it's also population driven and there's a lack of available housing for the population that falls within lower to middle class income brackets. There's just too many people there in that income bracket competing for properties in their price range. People move there for the available jobs with comparatively higher pay than they were receiving before without necessarily realizing how much the cost of living there wipes out any advantage the higher pay got them.

The information on this post is such a valuable tool for a discussion about what is happening in other parts of the country and somehow those areas are so close minded and have such lack of foresight that they just dont see this coming or think they are immune to this type of phenomenon. This discussion reveals so much about the amazing insight and high intellect of nurses and PA's. We see life in a real light that our supposed "leaders" are so blind to. Healthcare providers see the real picture and are the ones who need to run for office, change stuff.
I am living in an area that is rapidly morphing into a "Seattle". kbrn2002 described what is happening in the middle Tennessee area. Rapid migration into the area to seek higher pay in very specific fields, (tech mostly). Middle class get there seeking better pay and find they cant afford the cost of housing. Around Nashville appx 20% are living in poverty. Homelessness is in the thousands and 10% are veterans. And the home prices keep rising, developers and realtors keep pushing the envelope. The city leaders keep pushing their elite agenda ignoring what is going on. Middle class are fleeing to surrounding smaller towns for lower cost of living, but wind up with 2-3 hours/day commute time. The population of certain areas of middle Tennessee is slowly changing from upper, middle, lower to extreme wealth and poverty. The middle class keep getting taxed at higher rates and all it takes is for a job loss, a medical emergency, or any other large expense and anyone of average means can be impacted. Healthcare providers cant afford to commute because of the fuel cost, childcare and the very low pay for the healthcare field in this part of Tennessee, so they eventually leave. One cant afford to pay over 65% of net income for housing, childcare and fuel without dire results. This applies to teachers, law enforcement and first responders also.

ruby_jane, BSN, RN · Apr 3, 2019

On 4/2/2019 at 3:15 PM, OldDude said:
It is my understanding, somewhat like supply and demand, that the salaries/income of any area controls the cost of housing. What is driving the housing cost in Seattle up if the salaries aren't there to support the increase? No sarcasm or snark intended...truly interested.

When we lived in the PNW, Mr. Ruby Jane (a nurse) made $15k more than he would have here in the NTX transferring in as a nurse with 5 yrs ER experience. I was not a nurse then but I was easily making $10K more than any health educator here. But - we bought a small house (that we sold at a profit, which is now worth a quarter mil). No way we could afford to live there now, even with the salary differential.