I think that would only further compromise our collective sustainability.
I've petitioned for this for decades. I don't think it's the answer.
I think private/personal shelter is a solution, but I don't think letting people settle long-term will help them progress. There need to be different classes of housing.
Obv. the biologically compromised need this. This is a necessity for them. They should be entitled to stability and comfort, and afforded equity.
The rest of us need to learn how to push ourselves harder. GIve me a hotel room for 3 months, then give me another hotel room for 3. Let me pay 30% of my income, but don't let me stay, settle, collect moss.
Sometimes we want to avoid the world, because we can't find the light switch within ourselves.
Packing, organising, cleaning, moving every 3 mos. subtly builds a healthy habit/routine of self-care that might not otherwise be engaged.
I think Tiny Houses would just create more urban sprawl. I love them more than traditional houses, but I think nodal/skyscraper systems are a better solution.
@SnailTeeth [quote]The rest of us need to learn how to push ourselves harder.[/quote]
I disagree this whole "push harder" is just a capitalist distortion of self improvement. There is nothing wrong with being happy where you are at and settle even for something small you don't own yourself entirely or maybe one day you get the chance to buy your small apartment.
[quote]Sometimes we want to avoid the world, because we can't find the light switch within ourselves.[/quote]
I'm clinically depressed I know all about that but that's not tied to housing.
@Gloomy Another great thing about giving ppl hotel rooms instead of apartments, is the possibility of a complimentary breakfast to further help them along in their already difficult lives. It also lends greater opportunity for community, and for people to connect over breakfast.
Some people need that extra love, until they can better love themselves.
It also discourages private buyers from rigging the market into collapse.
@SnailTeeth It's been repeatedly demonstrated that people actually become more productive and contribute more when they aren't in a desperate state of existence.
Dividends in Alaska for example has led to a stark increase in minimum wage and part time worker participation in the state. It isn't despair and need that drives people to work and contribute more. It's the satisfaction of their work actually moving them somewhere instead of grinding away to stay in the same place or immediately adjacent to it.
If I can collect welfare and have my most basic needs barely met or I can go work at a minimum wage job and have those needs barely met. Why would I go to work? Now if I can have some help for those basic needs as a garuntee whether I work or not, then I will go take that minimum wage job and be happy with it because though low paying, it is gaininh me something. It brings me to a better place.
