Return to Level1Techs.com

This LA Musician Built $1,200 Tiny Houses for the Homeless. Then the City Seized Them

#1

I feel like Ryan will love this story. Individuals finding a better solution than the government.

7 Likes

Forum Meta Discussion 2019 2nd Edition
#2

There is a similar program like that here called “little home”
https://little-home.eu

2 Likes

#3

Do you have any more thoughts on this?

1 Like

#4

You can’t just place structures all over the place.
if he’d also bought a piece of land and put them there, on his own land i’m sure he’d not have much trouble getting this initiative done.

5 Likes

#5

It is not like anyone really cares about sheds under bridges, or do you?

The city could have picked up the idea and made their city a better place, now they are making negative headlines for making people homeless again.

1 Like

#6

I don’t think sheds under bridges is a “safe” way of housing people.
The city probably does not want to encourage people to live for free in sheds under bridges
Regarding if the people have houses at all.
Better invest in homeless shelters.

4 Likes

#7

But just lying in the cold under a bridge is?

Or a village of sheds with a central bathroom and kitchen.

3 Likes

#8

I will answer with:

to shelter the homeless, good idea! like here:

essentially creating a homeless shelter. just not a conventional one.

1 Like

#9

I’d have to side with @Fawkes on this one. However, morally I’m on the side of @MazeFrame.

But we don’t want to be creating shanty towns everywhere. So the better solution would be to find a permanent fixture.

3 Likes

#10

You can’t just place structures all over the place.
if he’d also bought a piece of land and put them there, on his own land i’m sure he’d not have much trouble getting this initiative done.

Quote from the video “Most of the tiny houses have been placed on land that was donated to the project.”

The real issue I see is the lack of community buy in.

“Our community was so impacted by the structures”… “We called the councilmen to get rid of them” …“LA issued sweeps ordinance to confiscate the houses.”

It looks like the community got upset and dumped enough harassment and clout to tear it up. I guess if they are in a tent near a freeway they aren’t in their neighborhood.

IMHO The video itself is a pretty good approach to humanize the people and talk about the issue. I guess they are going to need to wait for more land or more clout of their own to resume this project and this video is an opportunity for both without being a smear campaign. Homelessness overall is a complicated issue.

On a side note I love how they call him a “Self-proclaimed starving musician” like they don’t believe him haha.

4 Likes

#13

Yeah, imagine if everybody went crazy over having tiny houses everywhere.

Still, it is a shame that LA decided to take those Tiny Houses away, guess they were in a bad spot. Like Fawkes was saying, you don’t want these under a bridge (I wouldn’t). Home Shelters would work if they were actually invested in by the town or city or if they could so that depends.

Strangely enough it’s okay for oil companies to be building pipelines in places they don’t belong in (North Dakota Pipe Line) so I see a double standard here in how things operate.

I suppose if I owned a house and a piece of land with some cash to spare I would at least entertain the idea of having a small shed or something to compliment the house.

0 Likes

#14

was a great idea was starting to solve a basic problem but jimmies were rustled so it got the axe. and good on the dude for trying to do more than the rest of his community would for fellow mankind.

1 Like

#15

If you’re not connected into the septic sewage system then what do you do about fecal material produced by the resident? Every city on the west coast is overrun with homeless living in tents on the streets of the downtown core now and they’re producing huge amounts of feces. Rats eat the feces. Huge swarms of rats are reproducing out of control, and pouring out from the city cores into even well to do suburbs. Los Angeles is getting outbreaks of typhus and tuberculosis as a result. It’s a nightmare of homelessness and the cause isn’t unemployment; it’s drugs. They’re 100% insane drug addicts who refuse to go into shelters provided by the government and charities because they’ll have to give up their weapons, their drugs and their booze at the door. And they won’t do that. There’s no point in catering to an underworld of drug addict lunatics. All you’re doing is breeding the next Black Death plague.

https://youtu.be/5nFNs9RDfCs

And it’s not just LA and Seattle; Denver, San Francisco, Vancouver, Honolulu, Portland the entire west is overrun by this problem. Drug addicts want someplace warm to indulge their vice. Building them little shacks on the street where they’ll defecate everywhere and smoke crystal meth is idiotic.
These are not nice people who have just had some bad luck; they are belligerent angry beggars and thieves with drug deranged minds who hate normal working people with a passion.

3 Likes

#16

It’s LA, it doesn’t get cold.

2 Likes

#17
1 Like

#18

some people are living under these bridges for decades. I guess the city has had more than enough time to deal with this situation and hasn’t. If someone does help these people, even though he says its only a temporary solution until LA gets their asses up to help them, why not let them live in these houses its not like tiny houses didn’t change anything at all. the "homeless are still living under the bridges, but instead of some crappy camping gear they are now living like humans in houses, having a home, having some decency.

1 Like

#19

Drove through Skid Row recently. Pretty insane. Had to dodge a woman who was pissing herself in the middle of the street. In many ways, it’s worse than poor areas of third world countries that I’ve seen (not that I’ve seen that many), mostly because of the drugs.

0 Likes

#20

As harsh as it is, you can’t just build these “homes” for the homeless and scatter them around the city. It can tend to do more harm than good, it incentivises homelessness and attracts the homeless from other areas resulting in increasing the problem rather than reducing it.

I believe other cities have had this problem in one way or another.

Just giving a homeless person a shed to shoot up in isn’t going to solve the problem, all it will do it make the rich music guy feel better about himself. Most homeless have bad health problems, and this for a large part is what is ignored but needs to be addressed.

5 Likes

#21

These are not nice people who have just had some bad luck; they are belligerent angry beggars and thieves with drug deranged minds who hate normal working people with a passion.

Really? That sounds like something Trump would say, where is your basis on that? There are some crazy drug addicts among them but I doubt most of them are that bad. Besides, they are homeless, I doubt any normal person would handle losing their home without losing their homes and getting desperate.

1 Like

#22

Just giving a homeless person a shed to shoot up in isn’t going to solve the problem, all it will do it make the rich music guy feel better about himself.

So giving a homeless person a home won’t solve homelessness? WTF kind of logic is that? It’s better than the people who sit on the internet 24/7 that claim high moral grounds that most people love to do.

Most homeless have bad health problems

No shit that’s because they are homeless. Your sitting out in the extreme cold or extreme heat depending on places and times of the year for hours.

3 Likes