Leo The Homeless Coder Is Still Homeless(businessinsider.com)
businessinsider.com
Leo The Homeless Coder Is Still Homeless
http://www.businessinsider.com/leo-the-homeless-coder-2014-5
20 comments
"The bare minimum to keep myself distracted and fed was all I did even though so much more was possible. I told myself I liked the freedom, but in truth I was just too scared and had too low of self esteem to take on a more comfortable lifestyle." I don't know whether i fit this description. But it just did resonate with me. Am not homeless but still live at my moms house (27yrs old). Never really held down a real job (9-5) for all i can rememeber. Been moving from web app after web app hoping i could build/stumble upon something that can improve my livelihood but zero and it feels like am really running out of time.
[deleted](1)
It applies to everyone.
Everyone has a internal "thermostat" of how much they deserve to make. After they get above that, then they feel bad about making more and don't usually do any work.
Everyone has a internal "thermostat" of how much they deserve to make. After they get above that, then they feel bad about making more and don't usually do any work.
Thats really cool but in a way i also admire people that get off the "I want more and need more all the time" train and work just to sustain themselfes on a basic level.
I think the key issue is to what degree this is a serious choice of a certain lifestyle, and to what degree it is through fear, insecurity, or similar 'negative' motivations.
It's not always hard to separate the two, especially not for an outside observer, but the difference is there, and I think the 'negative' motivation often leads to less happiness in the long run.
It's not always hard to separate the two, especially not for an outside observer, but the difference is there, and I think the 'negative' motivation often leads to less happiness in the long run.
You've already touched on some aspects like the fact that it's different for everyone, took the right people investing in you over and over, being patient, etc... but I'd like to hear more if you have any other thoughts. I do a lot of work with people in near-homeless situations, and I feel very helpless and frustrated when I encounter individuals that want help, but for some reason lack the internal drive to help themselves long-term when it's possible for them to do so. If you have any other thoughts about what people could have done to help you while you were in that phase, I'd like to hear more from your perspective. It's very rare that you run into a person who has been there and overcome it enough to talk about it.
It is a very long story. but I am an open book and happy to answer anything. I spent a couple years doing public speaking about my experiences and am always happy to find ways to leverage them in ways that might directly or indirectly help others.
I suppose I could throw some random thoughts out there.
I think in general what people did that helped the most, was accept me for who I was without coddling me. Showing me respect, not pity. I hated pity. I thought my balance in my life was fine, and if it got in the way of something I really wanted to do, I would make adjustments. I really valued people that would invite me places they would invite anyone else and let me pull my own weight and make my own mind up each time even if I have said no 20 times prior. Just being invited to social outings even when I had no intention of going, boosted my perceived social value each time.
As people gained my trust, they were able to challenge me on the things I said I wanted out of life, and what present aspects of my lifestyle were incompatible.
I think for me my own pride became my fuel, and a series of "challenge accepted" moments. I could never turn down a well formed challenge or someone telling me I _can't_ do something.
Smaller challenges like "holding a retail job" grew to bigger ones like "CTO", "Senior Software Engineer", "Technical Director" and eventually things I once said would never be possible like "having a healthy relationship" and "Getting married". Once the "small" challenges met success I have ever since been on a journey to find out where my ceiling is. Doing things I thought I could never do has become an addiction now, and not a whole lot scares me anymore.
I also was really stubborn/prideful and not good at accepting help, ever. Still am to a point, but getting better. Sometimes people had to help me in creative ways where I could not stop them easily. There are a number of times where I think people proved they cared about me more than I presently cared about myself, and that gave me the desire to up my own game.
Anyway. I am sure I could go on forever but this is already probably going to be a TLDR anyway.
I am happy to answer any questions here or via email/hangout etc. :)
I suppose I could throw some random thoughts out there.
I think in general what people did that helped the most, was accept me for who I was without coddling me. Showing me respect, not pity. I hated pity. I thought my balance in my life was fine, and if it got in the way of something I really wanted to do, I would make adjustments. I really valued people that would invite me places they would invite anyone else and let me pull my own weight and make my own mind up each time even if I have said no 20 times prior. Just being invited to social outings even when I had no intention of going, boosted my perceived social value each time.
As people gained my trust, they were able to challenge me on the things I said I wanted out of life, and what present aspects of my lifestyle were incompatible.
I think for me my own pride became my fuel, and a series of "challenge accepted" moments. I could never turn down a well formed challenge or someone telling me I _can't_ do something.
Smaller challenges like "holding a retail job" grew to bigger ones like "CTO", "Senior Software Engineer", "Technical Director" and eventually things I once said would never be possible like "having a healthy relationship" and "Getting married". Once the "small" challenges met success I have ever since been on a journey to find out where my ceiling is. Doing things I thought I could never do has become an addiction now, and not a whole lot scares me anymore.
I also was really stubborn/prideful and not good at accepting help, ever. Still am to a point, but getting better. Sometimes people had to help me in creative ways where I could not stop them easily. There are a number of times where I think people proved they cared about me more than I presently cared about myself, and that gave me the desire to up my own game.
Anyway. I am sure I could go on forever but this is already probably going to be a TLDR anyway.
I am happy to answer any questions here or via email/hangout etc. :)
Thank you so much for responding. I don't have any more specific questions - just looking for exactly that. Hearing that from your perspective - especially the thing about not wanting to feel pitied - it'll be easier to recognize that in someone else and respond accordingly now.
Thanks for sharing your story.
Is there an element of exploitation here from the media? It looks like Leo was on the Today show. I recall the homeless guy with a "radio voice" also got the same treatment, and ultimately, they both weren't able to normalize back into society.
The idea that homelessness is just a financial problem and that if we come up with a ad-impression friendly narrative, then we can just solve it via a little fame and a little elbow grease is crazy. I guess the system got what it wanted: the Today show got its feel good story for overfed housewives and Today show advertisers got the eyeballs they wanted. Larger, more important, narratives were conveniently ignored.
Meanwhile, the larger narrative on how the US's private healthcare system means huge barriers to entry and especially for mental health issues, gets swept under the rug. Leo doesn't want a bank account for non-rational reasons. A little money and fame aren't going to change that. The whole article seems to skirt around the obvious mental health issues here. Its just incredible we can just pretend they don't exist and come up with ham-handed rationalizations on why Leo doesn't want a bank account. Yeah, its because he's mentally ill and is unable to functional in a normal way.
The idea that homelessness is just a financial problem and that if we come up with a ad-impression friendly narrative, then we can just solve it via a little fame and a little elbow grease is crazy. I guess the system got what it wanted: the Today show got its feel good story for overfed housewives and Today show advertisers got the eyeballs they wanted. Larger, more important, narratives were conveniently ignored.
Meanwhile, the larger narrative on how the US's private healthcare system means huge barriers to entry and especially for mental health issues, gets swept under the rug. Leo doesn't want a bank account for non-rational reasons. A little money and fame aren't going to change that. The whole article seems to skirt around the obvious mental health issues here. Its just incredible we can just pretend they don't exist and come up with ham-handed rationalizations on why Leo doesn't want a bank account. Yeah, its because he's mentally ill and is unable to functional in a normal way.
> Is there an element of exploitation here from the media?
Media outlets rationalize this with the, probably justified, view that both parties, as well as society at large are benefiting.
Leo very probably wouldn't have gotten close to $10,000 had there been no coverage of his story. You can't blame them for not knowing that he wouldn't be able to take the money.
As for society, we get to have this conversation and some people hopefully get a more nuanced understanding of the problem of homelessness.
You seem to want to change the narrative towards the healthcare system and it's "huge barrier to entry" by saying it's getting swept under the rug. That's an admirable position, but that's a completely different story.
How would it look if they started with Leo still being homeless, then segued arbitrarily into editorializing over health care? People would accuse them of having an agenda, and rightfully so.
Media outlets rationalize this with the, probably justified, view that both parties, as well as society at large are benefiting.
Leo very probably wouldn't have gotten close to $10,000 had there been no coverage of his story. You can't blame them for not knowing that he wouldn't be able to take the money.
As for society, we get to have this conversation and some people hopefully get a more nuanced understanding of the problem of homelessness.
You seem to want to change the narrative towards the healthcare system and it's "huge barrier to entry" by saying it's getting swept under the rug. That's an admirable position, but that's a completely different story.
How would it look if they started with Leo still being homeless, then segued arbitrarily into editorializing over health care? People would accuse them of having an agenda, and rightfully so.
>Leo very probably wouldn't have gotten close to $10,000 had there been no coverage of his story.
In the article, Patrick claims he didn't want media attention. Who knows how well the app would have performed without it. Lets say it made $7,000 instead of $10,000 but Patrick gained the privacy and dignity to work out issues with Leo without the endless media attention. Maybe that would have worked out better. Generally, media attention makes sensitive things of this nature worse, not better.
>As for society, we get to have this conversation
What conversation exactly? Are the people who are watching the Today show talking about mental healthcare? It seems like this is the cheap "make easy money now, even a homeless person can do it" narrative, except with an undercurrent of "hard work fixes all!" Apparently, it doesn't.
>That's an admirable position, but that's a completely different story.
I don't think so. I think the story is so focused on the money, but not the well-being or core issues Leo faces, most of which look like mental illness to me.
>then segued arbitrarily into editorializing over health care?
Heaven forbid we ask why Leo can't handle the idea of a bank account. The idea that its rational and sane to lose $10k is laughable. The guy clearly has problems. The question that's obvious and should be asked for by a compassionate society is why can't Leo get the care he needs? The money, fame, attention, etc are all secondary. Ironically, the money isn't helping him get what he needs because he's literally too dysfunctional to turn it into to healthcare.
In the article, Patrick claims he didn't want media attention. Who knows how well the app would have performed without it. Lets say it made $7,000 instead of $10,000 but Patrick gained the privacy and dignity to work out issues with Leo without the endless media attention. Maybe that would have worked out better. Generally, media attention makes sensitive things of this nature worse, not better.
>As for society, we get to have this conversation
What conversation exactly? Are the people who are watching the Today show talking about mental healthcare? It seems like this is the cheap "make easy money now, even a homeless person can do it" narrative, except with an undercurrent of "hard work fixes all!" Apparently, it doesn't.
>That's an admirable position, but that's a completely different story.
I don't think so. I think the story is so focused on the money, but not the well-being or core issues Leo faces, most of which look like mental illness to me.
>then segued arbitrarily into editorializing over health care?
Heaven forbid we ask why Leo can't handle the idea of a bank account. The idea that its rational and sane to lose $10k is laughable. The guy clearly has problems. The question that's obvious and should be asked for by a compassionate society is why can't Leo get the care he needs? The money, fame, attention, etc are all secondary. Ironically, the money isn't helping him get what he needs because he's literally too dysfunctional to turn it into to healthcare.
> Lets say it made $7,000 instead of $10,000 but Patrick gained the privacy and dignity to work out issues with Leo without the endless media attention.
That's a stretch. He probably wouldn't have broken a thousand.
> What conversation exactly?
The conversation you and I are having, right now. Multiply that by all the people who have followed this story.
> most of which look like mental illness to me.
You want to make Leo the poster boy for mental illness?
> Heaven forbid we ask why Leo can't handle the idea of a bank account.
They DID ask that question. That you didn't like the answer they got doesn't mean they were being neglectful.
> Ironically, the money isn't helping him get what he needs because he's literally too dysfunctional to turn it into to healthcare.
Money he never would have had in the first place without the free advertising from all the media coverage. There's no irony here. There's not as much cynicism and neglect and opportunism here as you are so eager to point out.
You can take the entire story at face value here. A smart hacker thought he could do some good by teaching a homeless man he saw every day a useful, high-demand skill. The homeless man was receptive but as it turned out, money isn't the solution.
You're making the argument that it's health care that he needs. Maybe you're right. Maybe you should go over there and offer Leo health care. It would be a damn sight better than what you're doing now, accusing well-meaning people who are taking action of neglect and opportunism because they're not jumping to the same conclusions you are. They're not warping the narrative, you are.
That's a stretch. He probably wouldn't have broken a thousand.
> What conversation exactly?
The conversation you and I are having, right now. Multiply that by all the people who have followed this story.
> most of which look like mental illness to me.
You want to make Leo the poster boy for mental illness?
> Heaven forbid we ask why Leo can't handle the idea of a bank account.
They DID ask that question. That you didn't like the answer they got doesn't mean they were being neglectful.
> Ironically, the money isn't helping him get what he needs because he's literally too dysfunctional to turn it into to healthcare.
Money he never would have had in the first place without the free advertising from all the media coverage. There's no irony here. There's not as much cynicism and neglect and opportunism here as you are so eager to point out.
You can take the entire story at face value here. A smart hacker thought he could do some good by teaching a homeless man he saw every day a useful, high-demand skill. The homeless man was receptive but as it turned out, money isn't the solution.
You're making the argument that it's health care that he needs. Maybe you're right. Maybe you should go over there and offer Leo health care. It would be a damn sight better than what you're doing now, accusing well-meaning people who are taking action of neglect and opportunism because they're not jumping to the same conclusions you are. They're not warping the narrative, you are.
> The idea that its rational and sane to lose $10k is laughable
Not obvious. Until you get his SSN or otherwise do a background check, you have no idea what's in his past, or how that $10K compares to his legal obligations. There is an unaddressed moral question for society in whether a person in a difficult situation has an implicit right to both a non-zero personal net worth and anonymity.
(again, I don't know Leo's situation either)
Not obvious. Until you get his SSN or otherwise do a background check, you have no idea what's in his past, or how that $10K compares to his legal obligations. There is an unaddressed moral question for society in whether a person in a difficult situation has an implicit right to both a non-zero personal net worth and anonymity.
(again, I don't know Leo's situation either)
Does one have a right to be free from child support obligations?
Yes. Slavery, indentures, and other conditions of involuntary servitude have been outlawed by constitutional amendment for a long time, now.
In the particular instance where a parent is obligated to labor for the benefit of a child (possibly even one that is a true genetic descendant) for a term of 18 years, however, the government has seen fit to ignore the legal niceties in order to reduce its own welfare burden for supporting single parents.
In other words, the state ignores its own rule because following it would be expensive, the victims are too poor to fight it, and no one likes deadbeat parents enough to fight it for them. Expedience!
Child support is a political beehive, vigorously defended by partisans on either side of the issue. Approach it with any intent, or even none at all, and you could get swarmed and stung just for being nearby. So I say, with a megaphone from a long way away, that whether it is right or wrong, child support laws do appear to be inconsistent with foundation law.
I consider it unlikely that is why Leo does not want his own bank account. It may be a contributing factor, but I think it far more likely that he does not believe banks to be any more trustworthy than the street thugs that steal anything even remotely of value from him and his cohort. Banking may have been a significant contributing factor in his exit from home-having society. In some ways, the bank simply allows different people to take your money.
As long as it is not attached to him directly, perhaps he feels like it is harder for anyone to steal the idea of him having $10000? If he takes possession, it will get spent or stolen, and then it would be gone, along with the idea of having it. But who could really know for sure from an article that features precious little commentary from its main subject? It may be worth more to him as a floor on his self-worth ("Well, I'm worth at least $10000.") than as cash in hand.
In the particular instance where a parent is obligated to labor for the benefit of a child (possibly even one that is a true genetic descendant) for a term of 18 years, however, the government has seen fit to ignore the legal niceties in order to reduce its own welfare burden for supporting single parents.
In other words, the state ignores its own rule because following it would be expensive, the victims are too poor to fight it, and no one likes deadbeat parents enough to fight it for them. Expedience!
Child support is a political beehive, vigorously defended by partisans on either side of the issue. Approach it with any intent, or even none at all, and you could get swarmed and stung just for being nearby. So I say, with a megaphone from a long way away, that whether it is right or wrong, child support laws do appear to be inconsistent with foundation law.
I consider it unlikely that is why Leo does not want his own bank account. It may be a contributing factor, but I think it far more likely that he does not believe banks to be any more trustworthy than the street thugs that steal anything even remotely of value from him and his cohort. Banking may have been a significant contributing factor in his exit from home-having society. In some ways, the bank simply allows different people to take your money.
As long as it is not attached to him directly, perhaps he feels like it is harder for anyone to steal the idea of him having $10000? If he takes possession, it will get spent or stolen, and then it would be gone, along with the idea of having it. But who could really know for sure from an article that features precious little commentary from its main subject? It may be worth more to him as a floor on his self-worth ("Well, I'm worth at least $10000.") than as cash in hand.
Yet, should child support obligations make it impossible for somebody to participate in society (and earn money)?
There is an optimum point here, but people seem unable to arguee for anything that is not extreme. And that seems to be a problem with our communication in general, not restricted to this one issue.
There is an optimum point here, but people seem unable to arguee for anything that is not extreme. And that seems to be a problem with our communication in general, not restricted to this one issue.
Exactly. I think there should be some level (above $10K) at which people can still operate under the radar, but around $30-50K the question becomes considerably less clear.
If he can't handle the money, what makes you think he would've accepted the health care?
People who lack capacity to make choices often only lack capacity for a narrow part of their life. Thus, they may not be able to make choices about housing bt fine about everything else.
This is written into English law in the Mental Capacity Act. There was a parliamentary report ("The Cornwall Report") which covered some abuse and some people who had their liberty unreasonably restricted. Importantly people are allowed to make unwise choices if they have the capacity to make that choice and you should not stop them even if you have their best interests at heart.
This is tricky to sort out when working with people with limited capacity and there's some discussion about people not checking that someone actually does have capacity to make choices.
This is written into English law in the Mental Capacity Act. There was a parliamentary report ("The Cornwall Report") which covered some abuse and some people who had their liberty unreasonably restricted. Importantly people are allowed to make unwise choices if they have the capacity to make that choice and you should not stop them even if you have their best interests at heart.
This is tricky to sort out when working with people with limited capacity and there's some discussion about people not checking that someone actually does have capacity to make choices.
I've gone through a bunch reviews in the Google play store. 100% of them rated 5* for his inspiration effort. 0% rated it 5* because the app is useful. In fact many commenters say outright they have no intention to use the app and they only buy it for support.
This is not to be critical of Leo. By publishing the app and making the the promotion website and video he is ahead of even many professional developers. I'm more annoyed by the tech hype and the media narrative. The idea is any kid can write a mobile app and solve some of the world biggest problem just like that. Together they create some myth that disappoints if you really look into the detail.
This is not to be critical of Leo. By publishing the app and making the the promotion website and video he is ahead of even many professional developers. I'm more annoyed by the tech hype and the media narrative. The idea is any kid can write a mobile app and solve some of the world biggest problem just like that. Together they create some myth that disappoints if you really look into the detail.
> Despite the pressures of his surge to fame, which at one point prompted a relapse, Williams ("radio voice") remains steadily employed by Kraft
-- http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2014/03/14/catching-up-...
> Leo doesn't want a bank account for non-rational reasons.
I'd really like to see some discussion on this point.
Specifically, what discrete banking options should be available if someone is homeless, owes child support, and maybe has open warrants someplace.
I don't know the situation in this case of course, but that's not an uncommon scenario.
-- http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2014/03/14/catching-up-...
> Leo doesn't want a bank account for non-rational reasons.
I'd really like to see some discussion on this point.
Specifically, what discrete banking options should be available if someone is homeless, owes child support, and maybe has open warrants someplace.
I don't know the situation in this case of course, but that's not an uncommon scenario.
> Specifically, what discrete banking options should be available if someone is homeless, owes child support, and maybe has open warrants someplace.
I used to publish a street paper and have been trying to solve this problem for the past six years. Street papers are theoretically great because they solve many of the problems associated with homelessness. However, their efficacy is being cut because more and more people don't carry cash. Unfortunately, to take part in a cash free economy, you need things like a bank account, credit, or a device.
Another problem was cash management. We would launch an issue and out vendors would start selling. Then, after four hours, they might have made $80. This was problematic because some of the problems that lead to homelessness can usually be exacerbated by a sudden surge of cash.
In my experience, paranoia and/or fear of the system is the biggest barrier to discrete banking. Homeless people are disproportionately affected by laws banning camping in public parks, or that 'close' public parks at 11pm. When society continuously passes laws making it harder for you to live, it doesn't take long before it's hard to trust society. Add in schizophrenia (which is an epidemic amongst homeless populations), and banking is very hard.
Some of the ideas we came up with include:
- selling ads to cover 100% of the magazine's cost, thn 'selling' the paper to vendors for $1 a copy. We'd hold this amount collected in our bank account and hand it out on request. We abandoned this idea because it felt too much like enabling addictive behaviours.
- building a new payment card system. If you buy a magazine, you would put cash onto a vendor's card. Then, we'd have a list of merchants (ie - grocery stores, landlords) who would accept it. Not only is this idea insanely difficult to pull off, but it attacks dignity. A loss of dignity is a cause of continuing homelessness.
This entire question is complex and if you explore it deeply enough, you quickly run up against money laundering/banking regulations. But, if we can solve it, we can solve a huge problem.
Consider social assistance cheques. If you don't have a bank account, you have to use cheque cashing services instead. Cheque cashing companies charge a large premium to cash cheques. In the case of government cheques, there is virtually no risk other than counterfeiting.
Thanks for bringing this up!
I used to publish a street paper and have been trying to solve this problem for the past six years. Street papers are theoretically great because they solve many of the problems associated with homelessness. However, their efficacy is being cut because more and more people don't carry cash. Unfortunately, to take part in a cash free economy, you need things like a bank account, credit, or a device.
Another problem was cash management. We would launch an issue and out vendors would start selling. Then, after four hours, they might have made $80. This was problematic because some of the problems that lead to homelessness can usually be exacerbated by a sudden surge of cash.
In my experience, paranoia and/or fear of the system is the biggest barrier to discrete banking. Homeless people are disproportionately affected by laws banning camping in public parks, or that 'close' public parks at 11pm. When society continuously passes laws making it harder for you to live, it doesn't take long before it's hard to trust society. Add in schizophrenia (which is an epidemic amongst homeless populations), and banking is very hard.
Some of the ideas we came up with include:
- selling ads to cover 100% of the magazine's cost, thn 'selling' the paper to vendors for $1 a copy. We'd hold this amount collected in our bank account and hand it out on request. We abandoned this idea because it felt too much like enabling addictive behaviours.
- building a new payment card system. If you buy a magazine, you would put cash onto a vendor's card. Then, we'd have a list of merchants (ie - grocery stores, landlords) who would accept it. Not only is this idea insanely difficult to pull off, but it attacks dignity. A loss of dignity is a cause of continuing homelessness.
This entire question is complex and if you explore it deeply enough, you quickly run up against money laundering/banking regulations. But, if we can solve it, we can solve a huge problem.
Consider social assistance cheques. If you don't have a bank account, you have to use cheque cashing services instead. Cheque cashing companies charge a large premium to cash cheques. In the case of government cheques, there is virtually no risk other than counterfeiting.
Thanks for bringing this up!
Cash in a safety deposit box, generally. Lots easier than opening a bank account. Take out what you need.
Also Patrick could put the money onto a debit gift card.
As I wrote above, there are larger issues here. If Leo can't handle this money, in any form, then he'll need a caretaker. Be that a relative, social services, friend, etc.
Also Patrick could put the money onto a debit gift card.
As I wrote above, there are larger issues here. If Leo can't handle this money, in any form, then he'll need a caretaker. Be that a relative, social services, friend, etc.
There are strict rules around things like Green Dot prepaid cards too, not to mention the personal risk associated with having possessions of any value on the street.
>I guess the system got what it wanted: the Today show got its feel good story for overfed housewives and Today show advertisers got the eyeballs they wanted.
This is the beginning and the end of the story. All you need to add for a complete understanding is that change was avoided on all sides. The status quo is, as always, self-preserving. Crucially this includes unchanging moral certainty for the housewives, as well as unchanging poverty for Leo and unchanging profit for the media/various related industries. The circle of life continues.
This is the beginning and the end of the story. All you need to add for a complete understanding is that change was avoided on all sides. The status quo is, as always, self-preserving. Crucially this includes unchanging moral certainty for the housewives, as well as unchanging poverty for Leo and unchanging profit for the media/various related industries. The circle of life continues.
The status quo is, as always, self-preserving
Of course it is! Much like how the only species that last are the ones that reproduce, any lasting system has trended towards the solution that is stable. The systems that didn't trend towards stable probably fell apart.
It wouldn't be the status quo if it wasn't self-preserving.
Of course it is! Much like how the only species that last are the ones that reproduce, any lasting system has trended towards the solution that is stable. The systems that didn't trend towards stable probably fell apart.
It wouldn't be the status quo if it wasn't self-preserving.
The interesting thing here is that we've demonstrated that the reason the status quo is self-preserving in this case is not simply a lack of access to marketable skills on the part of the poor.
I feel like you would enjoy thelastpsychiatrist.com
You don't think I make this stuff my myself do you? ;)
I do wonder sometimes if his stuff is deep insight or raving mania. His basic point about "the system" just being a sum of the force vectors representing everyones desire for a stable self is pretty correct I think. A lot of stuff certainly makes sense through that lens, but I suppose that isn't the best heuristic for truth.
I do wonder sometimes if his stuff is deep insight or raving mania. His basic point about "the system" just being a sum of the force vectors representing everyones desire for a stable self is pretty correct I think. A lot of stuff certainly makes sense through that lens, but I suppose that isn't the best heuristic for truth.
Even in a city like Stockholm (with a very strong social health system), there are homeless that might not fit in well with society -- granted the social net is much better.
I've only seen one or two in my brief winter visits, but my last trip a couple of weeks ago, there was a "tent city" under one of the bridges near Gamla Stan as well as assorted out of the way individuals (camped out near buildings) in Normmalm/Kungsholmen. With nice weather, I did a lot more walking/exploring this last trip.
I've only seen one or two in my brief winter visits, but my last trip a couple of weeks ago, there was a "tent city" under one of the bridges near Gamla Stan as well as assorted out of the way individuals (camped out near buildings) in Normmalm/Kungsholmen. With nice weather, I did a lot more walking/exploring this last trip.
Luckily, the radio guy seems to be doing relatively well, although he's still got issues to deal with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Williams_%28voice-over_arti...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Williams_%28voice-over_arti...
[deleted]
>ultimately, they both weren't able to normalize back into society.
It's been 8 months.
>Leo doesn't want a bank account for non-rational reasons.
You're making an assumption based on what you think of Leo. Have you met him?
It's been 8 months.
>Leo doesn't want a bank account for non-rational reasons.
You're making an assumption based on what you think of Leo. Have you met him?
> I guess the system got what it wanted: the Today show got its feel good story for overfed housewives
That comment is as narrow minded as the people that yell at homeless people to "stop being lazy and get a job".
This story has the possibility to change perceptions about homeless people and the challenges they face living in our society.
Setting up a new bank account is a pain in the ass (at any bank I've every used). Finding a reasonable place to live can be stressful as well. If you really think about it, the things we do as part of our life can be very frustrating or stressful, and it's even worse if you don't have friends or any kind of support network to help or give advice.
That comment is as narrow minded as the people that yell at homeless people to "stop being lazy and get a job".
This story has the possibility to change perceptions about homeless people and the challenges they face living in our society.
Setting up a new bank account is a pain in the ass (at any bank I've every used). Finding a reasonable place to live can be stressful as well. If you really think about it, the things we do as part of our life can be very frustrating or stressful, and it's even worse if you don't have friends or any kind of support network to help or give advice.
This is a great article to elucidate the complexities of homelessness.
Despite having intelligence and a talent, resulting in an income sufficient to 'get started' on the social ladder and rejoin mainstream society, the prospect is very daunting to Leo.
Even when given access to support and then a 'deadline' to push him (and being accompanied to a bank to deposit the money), it gets too much and he backs out.
Homeless people are not just hopeless drunks or weirdos. They often have an array of complex and intractible fears and issues and are incapable of functioning in mainstream society - even with large amounts of help.
I don't see any blame here - but it does sadden me that someone with so much clear and semi-realized potential can struggle so much. Consider for a moment how homless people less 'fortunate' [I can't help feeling that's the wrong word] must struggle every single day.
I've never thought through the 'teach a man to fish' in this way; life's not actually that simple.
Sadly, I don't see a solution. But I wish there was one.
Despite having intelligence and a talent, resulting in an income sufficient to 'get started' on the social ladder and rejoin mainstream society, the prospect is very daunting to Leo.
Even when given access to support and then a 'deadline' to push him (and being accompanied to a bank to deposit the money), it gets too much and he backs out.
Homeless people are not just hopeless drunks or weirdos. They often have an array of complex and intractible fears and issues and are incapable of functioning in mainstream society - even with large amounts of help.
I don't see any blame here - but it does sadden me that someone with so much clear and semi-realized potential can struggle so much. Consider for a moment how homless people less 'fortunate' [I can't help feeling that's the wrong word] must struggle every single day.
I've never thought through the 'teach a man to fish' in this way; life's not actually that simple.
Sadly, I don't see a solution. But I wish there was one.
It may sounds trite, but there is a solution: very strong family structures. Where I live, homelessness is essentially unheard of. Yes, many people live in dirt-floor huts, but they live together, often as large extended-family units. The lone vagabond sleeping in a box in a random city alley just doesn't happen. No family would let it happen...
This likely helps the problem, yes. It might not fix the underlying issues, but at least the unfortunate person's personal problems aren't compounded by losing a stable place to stay.
This is the truth about homelessness - and it's what most people fail to understand, so put people who are homeless in a drug addict / drunk / crazy box so that they don't have to think about them as people.
I feel like there's a lot missing by saying Leo "for whatever reason" does not want a bank account. What reason? Surely he has one. Could they not ask him what his reason is?
They give a bunch of justification about humans being creatures of habit. Nonsense. I'm sure Leo has some notions about everything a bank account is going to entail, and it's intimidating, but I don't see why it couldn't be overcome and this article does nothing to explain that. If Patrick can teach him to code, he could teach him the logistics of setting up a bank account, finding an apartment, etc. etc.
They give a bunch of justification about humans being creatures of habit. Nonsense. I'm sure Leo has some notions about everything a bank account is going to entail, and it's intimidating, but I don't see why it couldn't be overcome and this article does nothing to explain that. If Patrick can teach him to code, he could teach him the logistics of setting up a bank account, finding an apartment, etc. etc.
For people without stable incomes or a large starting balance to serve as a buffer, bank accounts can be incredibly expensive, and confusing.
If you can easily maintain a few thousand dollars in positive balance, the weird rules around NSF and overdraft fees never really impact you. If you are living paycheck to paycheck, however, a single overdraft can wipe you out.
Here's a few articles that look at why low income individuals may choose to avoid banks:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/currency/2013/10/the-h...
http://www.publicbooks.org/nonfiction/ritecheck-12
If you can easily maintain a few thousand dollars in positive balance, the weird rules around NSF and overdraft fees never really impact you. If you are living paycheck to paycheck, however, a single overdraft can wipe you out.
Here's a few articles that look at why low income individuals may choose to avoid banks:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/currency/2013/10/the-h...
http://www.publicbooks.org/nonfiction/ritecheck-12
He probably has plenty of unpaid fines from the police too, as every homeless person is typically hounded with loitering and other petty fines that a collection agency would grab from his account.
I find the whole 'overdraft' issue from US banks puzzling.
Brazilian banks usually have an overdraft limit. That is subject to interest, based on the time the account was negative. Some banks even give you a few days to sort it out before charging interest. Once the limit is exceeded, all operations are simply denied, be that from a ATM, a debit card, automatic bill payments, etc.
Yes, the interest rates are ridiculous, but they only matter if you spend a month or more with a negative balance.
Now, bounced checks are another story and are much more similar to how US overdraft works. Which is why checks are very rarely seen nowadays.
Brazilian banks usually have an overdraft limit. That is subject to interest, based on the time the account was negative. Some banks even give you a few days to sort it out before charging interest. Once the limit is exceeded, all operations are simply denied, be that from a ATM, a debit card, automatic bill payments, etc.
Yes, the interest rates are ridiculous, but they only matter if you spend a month or more with a negative balance.
Now, bounced checks are another story and are much more similar to how US overdraft works. Which is why checks are very rarely seen nowadays.
It's not the first time I stumble upon a mention of a high barrier to entry into becoming a bank customer for poor people.
In Africa, technology seems to be solving this problem with mobile money, see e.g. very successful M-Pesa[1].
Perhaps this is a solution the American poor could benefit from, too.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-Pesa
In Africa, technology seems to be solving this problem with mobile money, see e.g. very successful M-Pesa[1].
Perhaps this is a solution the American poor could benefit from, too.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-Pesa
Nonsense, he can get a prepaid card that comes with a bank account with no fees, and even a full fledged account - many banks (Capital One and Fifth Third for sure) offer accounts with no overdraft and no monthly fees.
You ignore the whole part about joining the system. Grand has only been homeless for three years, so I'm sure he vividly remembers the struggle of maintaining a "normal" life—the daily struggle of making enough to pay for food and housing. It's not easy. In a city like New York, it's even harder. These are the chains that bind the non-homeless. We're basically running on a mouse wheel till we die.
It seems to me that having a bank account is barely "joining the system". We're not talking about having a house, paying taxes or working a regular job. We're just talking about having a bank card that can get money at the ATM. He doesn't even need to put money back in the bank account.
The story looks very suspicious / incomplete because of that. But then again, I'm not in his shoes. Maybe I'd understand if I was.
The story looks very suspicious / incomplete because of that. But then again, I'm not in his shoes. Maybe I'd understand if I was.
You need to imagine the personal torment that occurs when a person becomes homeless. It is not a quick process. It takes time, perhaps years of struggle just on the brink before a series of setbacks collapses the person's shallow safety net. During this time, a person will be a shamed, emotional wreak, whose every waking moment is a panic. Now, imagine being in this situation. Not just casually. Really imagine the loss of support from everyone you know, including your family. Now, that prior non-homeless life is a memory of struggle and failure. You can get by here on the streets. You're alive, on the streets, and that is an incredible success in itself. Would you want to return to that non-homeless life that you failed?
> Would you want to return to that non-homeless life that you failed?
You're eating burgers from restaurants from "that life", you're sleeping on a park bench from "that life", you're wearing used tshirts from "that life", you're watching tv at the shelter and the news are about the politics from "that life", you're getting napkins from a shopping mall from "that life" ...
This is why I don't get the bank account thing. It's definitely one foot in "that life", but so are a ton of other things in a homeless person's life (as I picture it).
You're eating burgers from restaurants from "that life", you're sleeping on a park bench from "that life", you're wearing used tshirts from "that life", you're watching tv at the shelter and the news are about the politics from "that life", you're getting napkins from a shopping mall from "that life" ...
This is why I don't get the bank account thing. It's definitely one foot in "that life", but so are a ton of other things in a homeless person's life (as I picture it).
Oh, it's joining the system. It's having your financial activity monitored by the IRS (if just by proxy); the mere act of depositing the $10,000 will be reported thereto and documented for closer inspection (as in "how did a homeless guy suddenly come by a $10,000 deposit?") and require tax reporting (anything over $5,000 gets scrutinized for "drug violations"), which in turn will lead to documented addressing of quarterly payments (may be $0, but prove why). It's having your money held by people you don't trust behind an impersonal machine accessible only by a magic plastic card (which, under the circumstances, is almost as risky to have as the whole amount on hand in cash). Having the card, it's hard to not get sucked into using the card instead of cash (how many here experienced the abrupt realization we haven't carried cash for _months_?), leading to further data-mining by the system; not having instant/quick access to bank software, becomes harder to keep track of how much money one actually has on hand - risking expensive overdraws, which fire all kinds of additional attention from the system. You likely can't open an account without a fixed address (where to send official notices?); finding a sympathetic soul to provide one, now you're chained to that person, each at risk of consequences of the other doing something suspect. Who knows what other legal obligations he faces - the moment he opens the account, someone else may have immediate notification & right to seize the funds (tax delinquency, child support, etc). Further issues abound.
Easier just to have cash. Except that someplace like App Store isn't going to mail you an envelope of cash, they'll want a bank account to deposit in ... and now Leo is dealing with someone else holding his $10,000 and won't give it to him; that alone is enough to crush any faith in the system.
Easier just to have cash. Except that someplace like App Store isn't going to mail you an envelope of cash, they'll want a bank account to deposit in ... and now Leo is dealing with someone else holding his $10,000 and won't give it to him; that alone is enough to crush any faith in the system.
> Who knows what other legal obligations he faces - the moment he opens the account, someone else may have immediate notification & right to seize the funds (tax delinquency, child support, etc).
Yes, and I would have liked to read about this instead of reading about some vague uneasiness concerning banks that this poor guy developed by being homeless for so long.
Then it would turn into a story about how the System is giving no chances to a man who deserves a chance, about the "entry fee" to get back into the System, instead of it being about him feeling awkward about what it would mean to open up a bank account like a non-homeless person.
Yes, and I would have liked to read about this instead of reading about some vague uneasiness concerning banks that this poor guy developed by being homeless for so long.
Then it would turn into a story about how the System is giving no chances to a man who deserves a chance, about the "entry fee" to get back into the System, instead of it being about him feeling awkward about what it would mean to open up a bank account like a non-homeless person.
Have you gotten a bank account without a state issued photo id, a SSN, and a mailing address?
Have you gotten a photo id without a birth certificate?
Have you gotten a photo id without a birth certificate?
I have not, but that doesn't seem to be the point of the article, unfortunately.
The article says that this might be complicated because you might need an address, but then it goes on about how it is some kind of mental state of disconnection that prevents this guy from someone realizing the value of the $10k in the bank.
The article says that this might be complicated because you might need an address, but then it goes on about how it is some kind of mental state of disconnection that prevents this guy from someone realizing the value of the $10k in the bank.
Just a thought - do you need a permanent residence to have a bank account?
Generally yes. Some Credit Unions may be willing to open an account without the same level of documentation, but opening a bank account can be a real hassle.
P.O. Box should do it... cost someplace between $30-$75 a year for a small sized one.
Leo could stay "homeless" if he chooses, but should at least have the comfort of knowing he has a hot meal if he chooses.
Leo could stay "homeless" if he chooses, but should at least have the comfort of knowing he has a hot meal if he chooses.
The first bank application I checked requires a "residence or street address" and specifically forbids PO boxes. You also need to have current, government-issued ID, which also requires proof of residence.
It's simply not easy at all to participate in the modern economy if you are a transient or anyone else without a permanent address.
It's simply not easy at all to participate in the modern economy if you are a transient or anyone else without a permanent address.
A while back, I had a mailbox at one of those Mailboxes etc. businesses, and I was able to have all sorts of things that don't allow PO boxes sent to it, since it looks like an apartment address. Worth a try for anybody in that situation.
Using such an address as your "permanent residence" could very well constitute fraud. You certainly don't live in a Mailbox store. Just because you can receive mail there, doesn't mean it's your address.
Know your customer requires a documented place of residence. These regs apply to all types of banks and credit unions.
I went through this hell. to get the PO box you need a residential address, you need ID with an address. I moved to a new state and was temporarily without residence or local ID, and as an experiment I tried to see how much I could accomplish without giving up an address and/or phone. It's impossible, or very nearly so.
I did find options though. One thing that might work is, find a Catholic church. Some of them will let you have your mail sent there for you if you're homeless. It didn't work for me because I knew I would be taking advantage of a good will service for people who are actually unprivileged.
I did find options though. One thing that might work is, find a Catholic church. Some of them will let you have your mail sent there for you if you're homeless. It didn't work for me because I knew I would be taking advantage of a good will service for people who are actually unprivileged.
The whole article reads as though McConlogue was the sole source. There's one quote from Grand, about how he "actually likes to code", but his voice is noticeably absent from a piece that is almost entirely about homelessness – an experience that Grand is actually living and probably qualified to comment on. Instead, the article is just the author's speculation about his motivations. Weird.
If you haven't met someone who does something "for no reason" then you haven't met enough people yet.
In a strictly cause-effect sense, of course he has a reason for not wanting a bank account. That is a sentiment and some finite set of causes resulted in him feeling that way. But "for no/whatever reason" is not a philosophical statement, it's just shorthand for "for reasons he/she doesn't want to disclose" or "for reasons he/she isn't even aware of."
If a thousand tiny but unknown (to the reader) experiences have given Mr. Grand a deep emotional aversion to financial institutions, "for whatever reason" is about the best you can do as a description.
In a strictly cause-effect sense, of course he has a reason for not wanting a bank account. That is a sentiment and some finite set of causes resulted in him feeling that way. But "for no/whatever reason" is not a philosophical statement, it's just shorthand for "for reasons he/she doesn't want to disclose" or "for reasons he/she isn't even aware of."
If a thousand tiny but unknown (to the reader) experiences have given Mr. Grand a deep emotional aversion to financial institutions, "for whatever reason" is about the best you can do as a description.
Not to be insensitive, but any social worker could have told you all this. It's a pretty well established fact that the single biggest challenge in getting the long-term homeless back on their feet is not resources, it's repairing the damage done to their psyche.
For a greatly simplified explanation, consider that studies show positive emotions have a huge impact on psychological resilience, and homeless people do not have significant amounts of positive emotional reinforcement - though they do have plenty of adverse and stressful life experiences. Children who grow up in negative, impoverished, or homeless situations are found to become developmentally stunted, though some of the effects can be reversed in quality foster care.
For a greatly simplified explanation, consider that studies show positive emotions have a huge impact on psychological resilience, and homeless people do not have significant amounts of positive emotional reinforcement - though they do have plenty of adverse and stressful life experiences. Children who grow up in negative, impoverished, or homeless situations are found to become developmentally stunted, though some of the effects can be reversed in quality foster care.
> Patrick McConlogue, for all intents and purposes, did not "solve homelessness."
The result seems to echo the statements made by the project's biggest critics — not everyone wants to be saved. Fixing homelessness is a lot more complicated than everyone thinks.
If you try to help a homeless person, then you must also end all homelessness or accept that you're just a naive failure, apparently.
The result seems to echo the statements made by the project's biggest critics — not everyone wants to be saved. Fixing homelessness is a lot more complicated than everyone thinks.
If you try to help a homeless person, then you must also end all homelessness or accept that you're just a naive failure, apparently.
If you try to help a homeless person, then you must also end all homelessness or accept that you're just a naive failure, apparently.
Not at all. But when you (to some extent) and others (to a much, much greater extent) hold up a project or strategy as being a solution to a problem, it is important for the outcome to be publicized, whether that outcome is success or failure (or some of both).
This situation got a lot of attention when it started, so it needs just as much, if not more, attention now that it has (more or less) concluded. I recall there being a lot of implicit, and some explicit, suggestions that this sort of thing could "scale". Turns out it can't. That's an important piece of knowledge to have for the future.
Edit: formatting
Not at all. But when you (to some extent) and others (to a much, much greater extent) hold up a project or strategy as being a solution to a problem, it is important for the outcome to be publicized, whether that outcome is success or failure (or some of both).
This situation got a lot of attention when it started, so it needs just as much, if not more, attention now that it has (more or less) concluded. I recall there being a lot of implicit, and some explicit, suggestions that this sort of thing could "scale". Turns out it can't. That's an important piece of knowledge to have for the future.
Edit: formatting
Indeed, the experiment is very skewed because he only managed to make 10 grand because he was homeless and the whole story got publicized.
His app is fairly common, and without the "media story" around it he would probably have made a bit more than $20 over the same span of time. Just like most app developers.
His app is fairly common, and without the "media story" around it he would probably have made a bit more than $20 over the same span of time. Just like most app developers.
Maybe black or homeless people only exist as symbols, and not people. This can't be about Patrick helping Leo, but has to be about society helping the abandoned.
I'm usually really critical about the tone-deafness when it comes to tech people and poverty, but I'm not sure what there is to criticize about a friendship between two people that has been so obviously mutually beneficial. Instead of being a symbol of middle-class people reaching out to marginal minorities without society bothering to strengthen the 'safety net' or attempting to mitigate the effects of racism in society, it can be a example of how intercultural friendships can greatly improve your quality of life.
I'm usually really critical about the tone-deafness when it comes to tech people and poverty, but I'm not sure what there is to criticize about a friendship between two people that has been so obviously mutually beneficial. Instead of being a symbol of middle-class people reaching out to marginal minorities without society bothering to strengthen the 'safety net' or attempting to mitigate the effects of racism in society, it can be a example of how intercultural friendships can greatly improve your quality of life.
Pretty appalling in my eyes setting him an ultimatum. I would imagine Patrick would have the lawyers out if someone gave him an ultimatum that he would struggle to meet like that.
Homelessness is an intensely difficult problem to solve and won't be solved overnight by giving people a laptop and some books.
Homelessness is an intensely difficult problem to solve and won't be solved overnight by giving people a laptop and some books.
Its my sincere hope that it is a "soft" ultimatum. That is, if the deadline is reached, that Patrick will just extend it with another deadline. I think Patrick is just trying to apply some pressure to help Leo take the money in one form or another (now if that's a good idea or not...)
Of course I have no idea what Patrick will do if it comes down to the deadline but I truly hope he's not going to force some sort of resolution.
Of course I have no idea what Patrick will do if it comes down to the deadline but I truly hope he's not going to force some sort of resolution.
[deleted](2)
> Patrick McConlogue, for all intents and purposes, did not "solve homelessness."
No, but he solved what Leo saw as the worst problem of the homeless man by being his friend. He's happy now.
No, but he solved what Leo saw as the worst problem of the homeless man by being his friend. He's happy now.
Maybe he could receive the money in Bitcoin and spend it as he needs?
What a nice and insightful follow up though. Too often, we think our job is done and move on to the next keyboard warrior crusade.
This experience is reflection of how we don't always think about how people who are truly less fortunate can be tied to money as much as people who have more of it.
Everyone has the right to have the opportunity to work through their stuff. Not being able to have the basic necessities similarly can prevent you from pursuing one's inner growth, when the next place to eat or sleep is the real struggle.
It's a collective failure of our society in many ways, if we are quick to judge and trivialize anyone's experience of their existence without taking a minute to turn any stranger into a person by learning their story and participating in humanity by treating others with unconditional dignity.
There was good in this journey that should continue:
- The heart was in the right place. Giving in the right mindset is all one can do.
- Something positive came of this, namely someone has learned a new skill. We all feel more empowered when we can create the smallest new habit, let alone a new talent altogether.
- Like everyone deserves, they are working through their stuff.
I can't help but wonder if there's more like this that could be happening in other cities. Ultimately it will reach who is ready to find and take their next step, and it's not our job to create change, only help plant seeds and encourage the gardener to give it the water and sunshine it needs.
At the end of the day only we can learn our own lessons, and we have a choice in supporting and encouraging each other to do so. Sounds hokey to some, but once you have the right supportive circle in your life, there's nothing like it.
Hopefully the sharing of this experience doesn't turn people away from trying to improve it, no effort is perfect the first time.
There are few skills like programming that can turn someone's fortunes around this day in age, whether we are homeless, or not, and everyone deserves an opportunity to see what they can be, and become.
What a nice and insightful follow up though. Too often, we think our job is done and move on to the next keyboard warrior crusade.
This experience is reflection of how we don't always think about how people who are truly less fortunate can be tied to money as much as people who have more of it.
Everyone has the right to have the opportunity to work through their stuff. Not being able to have the basic necessities similarly can prevent you from pursuing one's inner growth, when the next place to eat or sleep is the real struggle.
It's a collective failure of our society in many ways, if we are quick to judge and trivialize anyone's experience of their existence without taking a minute to turn any stranger into a person by learning their story and participating in humanity by treating others with unconditional dignity.
There was good in this journey that should continue:
- The heart was in the right place. Giving in the right mindset is all one can do.
- Something positive came of this, namely someone has learned a new skill. We all feel more empowered when we can create the smallest new habit, let alone a new talent altogether.
- Like everyone deserves, they are working through their stuff.
I can't help but wonder if there's more like this that could be happening in other cities. Ultimately it will reach who is ready to find and take their next step, and it's not our job to create change, only help plant seeds and encourage the gardener to give it the water and sunshine it needs.
At the end of the day only we can learn our own lessons, and we have a choice in supporting and encouraging each other to do so. Sounds hokey to some, but once you have the right supportive circle in your life, there's nothing like it.
Hopefully the sharing of this experience doesn't turn people away from trying to improve it, no effort is perfect the first time.
There are few skills like programming that can turn someone's fortunes around this day in age, whether we are homeless, or not, and everyone deserves an opportunity to see what they can be, and become.
While I (sort of) understand someone in Leo's position having an aversion to walking in and opening a traditional bank account, in today's society we have very good solutions for the 1 in 12 people in the US that are "unbanked". The guy holding his money could just buy him a reloadable prepaid Visa/Mastercard and load the money on there. No banks, social security cards etc. That way he isn't walking around with $10K cash, and he can go to an ATM at night when no one is around if he is afraid of people.
There may be issues I'm not aware of. Perhaps Leo is a former drug addict and doesn't trust that he can stay clean (or alive for that matter) if he has a sudden influx of cash. Even that could be dealt with though, as his benefactor could simply transfer money to the card in small increments. It just seems that there are easy solutions to whatever issues exist, and that they haven't been explored (based solely on the information in this article).
There may be issues I'm not aware of. Perhaps Leo is a former drug addict and doesn't trust that he can stay clean (or alive for that matter) if he has a sudden influx of cash. Even that could be dealt with though, as his benefactor could simply transfer money to the card in small increments. It just seems that there are easy solutions to whatever issues exist, and that they haven't been explored (based solely on the information in this article).
I'm impressed by the article, as usually I expect articles on these issues to skew towards a complete misunderstanding of homelessness, often at best with a tone of exasperation.
From my experience around homeless or border-line homeless people, it's always more complicated than it seems.
And yet, simply being kind, even if just acknowledging their existence without making them feel judged, seems to me like a great start. Even if the underlying motivations might be misguided.
Here in The Netherlands we have some systems that help those who are homeless, or those who are in danger of becoming homeless. While there is plenty of criticism, and plenty goes wrong, there are also plenty of examples of people getting back on their feet because we have strong support structures. I really hope stories such as these will help to increase initiatives like that, or at least funding of existing (result-based) programs.
I feel there are some serious societal issues underlying the phenomenon, but something is better than nothing.
From my experience around homeless or border-line homeless people, it's always more complicated than it seems.
And yet, simply being kind, even if just acknowledging their existence without making them feel judged, seems to me like a great start. Even if the underlying motivations might be misguided.
Here in The Netherlands we have some systems that help those who are homeless, or those who are in danger of becoming homeless. While there is plenty of criticism, and plenty goes wrong, there are also plenty of examples of people getting back on their feet because we have strong support structures. I really hope stories such as these will help to increase initiatives like that, or at least funding of existing (result-based) programs.
I feel there are some serious societal issues underlying the phenomenon, but something is better than nothing.
It's very strange how people approach this story. The entire mentality of "He's still homeless so obviously this was a waste of time." is dumb. Yes, there are multiple issues that need to be dealt with when you talk about re-integrating someone into society, but one of the biggest issues (perhaps second after any mental/emotional trauma) is the ability to earn money.
Leo has been taught a skill that has earned him money, and one where he can continue to develop this skill and make more money.
Leo has been taught a skill that has earned him money, and one where he can continue to develop this skill and make more money.
I'm really glad they did a follow-up on this. Seems much more insightful than just throwing an idea like "Let's teach them to code!" out there, trying it for 10 minutes, and then moving on to the next story. This does a much better job of illustrating how complex the issue is, and how just throwing money at it may not help much.
Reasons for poverty extend beyond lack of a marketable skill. News at 11.
"Give a man to fish."
You know how it goes.
Give a man to fish, and today is eating; teach him a fish, and he forevers.
Give a man to fish, and today is eating; teach him a fish, and he forevers.
This really shows how much humans are creatures of habit.
Bitcoin?
Patrick deserves a lot of credit for taking this problem on. Say whatever about naivete, but he at least fucking did something.
Most HN posters in the U.S. probably haven't experienced true financial stress. It's toxic. It makes you paranoid. Benzos don't help (and they're a terrible long-term solution anyway). You have a constant cold because your immune system is shot. And you never get used to it. It never gets better. The cognitive load is both intense and purely negative. There is no good in it. People who romanticize "poverty" are usually talking about something like grad student life (little money, little expense). Financial stress is as poisonous as ingesting paint thinner, and even a few weeks of it can permanently fuck someone up.
I think that most homeless people have severe mental illness that is not their fault (and that deserves compassion and treatment, not stigma or abuse). If they didn't have it beforehand, they'll have it after a few months of that life.
I think it's damn heroic that Leo was able to summon the cognitive clarity, after that kind of long-term damage, to build something. Unfortunately, that's not going to be enough to get him anywhere near the level of mental health that would enable him to hold down a typical white-collar job. That's a fucking long road.
Most HN posters in the U.S. probably haven't experienced true financial stress. It's toxic. It makes you paranoid. Benzos don't help (and they're a terrible long-term solution anyway). You have a constant cold because your immune system is shot. And you never get used to it. It never gets better. The cognitive load is both intense and purely negative. There is no good in it. People who romanticize "poverty" are usually talking about something like grad student life (little money, little expense). Financial stress is as poisonous as ingesting paint thinner, and even a few weeks of it can permanently fuck someone up.
I think that most homeless people have severe mental illness that is not their fault (and that deserves compassion and treatment, not stigma or abuse). If they didn't have it beforehand, they'll have it after a few months of that life.
I think it's damn heroic that Leo was able to summon the cognitive clarity, after that kind of long-term damage, to build something. Unfortunately, that's not going to be enough to get him anywhere near the level of mental health that would enable him to hold down a typical white-collar job. That's a fucking long road.
> I think that most homeless people have severe mental illness
This is another stigma that's counter-productive. The real number is somewhere between 20-25% suffering from severe mental illness, which is still very high, though not so high when you consider 22% of Americans suffer from some kind of a mental illness (only 6% of Americans are severely mentally ill). Mental illness is only the third largest cause of homelessness for single adults.
To add to your point: poverty causes something like a 13% drop in the IQ, similar to pulling an all-nighter every day for a week.
This is another stigma that's counter-productive. The real number is somewhere between 20-25% suffering from severe mental illness, which is still very high, though not so high when you consider 22% of Americans suffer from some kind of a mental illness (only 6% of Americans are severely mentally ill). Mental illness is only the third largest cause of homelessness for single adults.
To add to your point: poverty causes something like a 13% drop in the IQ, similar to pulling an all-nighter every day for a week.
Here's the source I think you are citing: http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/Mental_Illness.pd...
20-25% is a pretty high number, especially when you compare it to the 6% of Americans with a severe mental illness. I can't find any good estimates for the percent of homeless with any form of mental illness.
A good question (which I can't find an answer to) is what is the percentage of the long term homeless population that suffers from severe mental illness?
20-25% is a pretty high number, especially when you compare it to the 6% of Americans with a severe mental illness. I can't find any good estimates for the percent of homeless with any form of mental illness.
A good question (which I can't find an answer to) is what is the percentage of the long term homeless population that suffers from severe mental illness?
What definition of mental illness do you use for serious mental illness? Substance abuse is formally classified as a mental illness in the DSM.
I would argue that being homeless and under financial stress causes mental illness in people who'd otherwise be healthy. It deserves compassion, not stigma.
[deleted](2)
During my homeless days I had a laptop for a while. I would do web programming for various online clients on it, and when that got stolen I would work from a local college forging student ids to use library computers.
I made enough for fast food dollar menus, and to keep a little bit of gas in a somewhat-running car I bought for $100.
The bare minimum to keep myself distracted and fed was all I did even though so much more was possible. I told myself I liked the freedom, but in truth I was just too scared and had too low of self esteem to take on a more comfortable lifestyle.
Even when I found a home I picked a ghetto camper in the woods, and took only enough gigs to pay bills. I would make a couple grand on a programming/consulting contract, live on it till it ran out, then take on a new gig.
It took a lot of the right people investing in me over and over, and being patient, before I started to decide that I deserved more, that I wanted more. That it was worth working hard for.
It takes more than just teaching marketable skills to get someone off the streets. It takes them seeing themselves as worthy to do more with their lives. At the end of the day, they have to make that choice to change, and triggering that is going to be different for everyone.
I am sure teaching this man to code was huge for his self-worth, but there are a lot of deeper emotional issues why he is there that are probably going to take a lot of time and patience to uncover one step at a time.