Where debating everything under the sun is only the beginning

So many empty houses, so many people without an house.
That's what's going on in Europe.

Please amplify. Where, why? What's going on?

and all that.

There are more houses than homeless people and all that.

Sure, but are there more vacant houses than homeless people?

Quote from: ersi on 2016-04-24, 11:32:06

Sure, but are there more vacant houses than homeless people?

According to the CBS (Central Bureau of Statistics), the Netherlands has approximately 7,5 million homes. On 1 juli 2013, 408 thousand of those were vacant, or 5,5% of all homes (p. 13 of linked PDF). In 2013 the number of homeless people was estimated to be about 25,000, while now that number is estimated to have risen to 30,000.

In any case, it's obvious that within the EU, any homelessness and foodlessness is economic, political or by choice.

24% of all the EU population (over 120 million people), are at risk of poverty or social exclusion – this includes 27% of all children in Europe, 20.5% of those over 65, and 9% of those with a job

Close to 9% of all Europeans live in severe material deprivation - they do not have the resources to own a washing machine, a car, a telephone, to heat their homes or face unexpected expenses

17% of Europeans live on less than 60% of their country's average household income

10% of Europeans live in households where no one has a job

There is a wide gap in performance between the welfare systems in different EU countries - the best reduced the risk of poverty by 60%, the least effective by less than 15% (EU average 35%)

12 million more women than men are living in poverty in the EU

Specific populations such as the Roma are especially challenged: two-thirds are unemployed, one in two children attends kindergarten and only 15% complete secondary school.

Well, that number is somewhat misleading. At least a third will be inhabited again within half a year up to about half within a year. More interesting is the long-lasting vacancy, meaning more than 1.5 years, that number being either 188 921 or 175 552 (excluding vacation homes).

The statistics on the homeless don't say whether they include squatters.

In any case, it's obvious that within the EU, any homelessness and foodlessness is economic, political or by choice.

Nope. The reason is ethics, better saying the lack of ethics.

10% of Europeans live in households where no one has a job

Naturally, by "vacant" I did not mean "empty until the family gets back from work and school".

In my view, squatters have a home, so they are not homeless. Occupying abandoned houses should be legal. And statistics works better when definitions are kept sane.

What is different about homelessness and foodlessness in the rest of the world?

And that's not what vacant means… inhabited again within six months means by different inhabitants. Like when you move and your old house hasn't sold yet. Or when it sold and the new owners haven't moved in yet. Or it might be an unlucky house and not have new tenants within six months.

It used to be legal to live in a house that had been vacant for more than 12 months. One of our ethical, compassionate Christian governments undid that.

Quote from: ersi on 2016-04-24, 14:40:29

What is different about homelessness and foodlessness in the rest of the world?

Maybe nothing, but if so then what's development aid for?

We've been using the wrong word all along. I always meant abandoned (and so did you, because you could not have been suggesting a connection between homeless people and houses that are empty merely for the time being). Summer houses and houses being sold don't quite qualify.

You mean Balkenende, the Christian Democrat? According to Wikipedia, the main force driving the squatting ban was VVD. This is not absolving Christian Democrats, but it shows that they were perhaps doing it more out of neglect than out of (com)passion.

Anyway, you said that "it's obvious that within the EU, any homelessness and foodlessness is economic, political or by choice," as if this were somehow specific to EU and that the nature of homelessness and foodlessness were different elsewhere. And now you imply that development aid is to deal specifically with the kind of homelessness and foodlessness found elsewhere in the world.

An abandoned house is not a vacant house. It is no longer cared for by anyone, which will inevitably lead to it falling into disrepair.

I could have a vacant second house for decades yet never abandon it.

The reason owners are opposed to squatters in their vacant property is precisely because they haven't abandoned said property.

Huh? I meant Van Agt back in the late '70s or early '80s. I don't recall off the top of my head whether it was in his first coalition with the VVD or his later one with the PvdA. Wikipedia fails to mention it, but until then it was explicitly legal after 12 months of vacancy. The 2010 stuff is about criminalizing it, which is worse for squatters but it's more about punishment than legality.

Also, the Wikipedia article is complete and utter bullshit. The criminalization was proposed by the coalition government consisting of CDA (Christians), PvdA (Labor, i.e. socialists), and ChristenUnie (Christian socialists), not VVD (liberals). See e.g. http://www.nu.nl/algemeen/2073495/kabinet-werkt-aan-kraakverbod.html NB I'm not saying VVD was opposed to it — they weren't — but they were not the driving force. I've seldom seen such clearly pronounced Christian-socialist hypocritical blame-shifting.

In June 2006, ministers Sybilla Dekker and Piet Hein Donner from the Dutch government proposed a plan to criminalise squatting.

No, I imply that the EU is rich and has plenty of resources to spare for all kinds of things all by itself. The same applies to other affluent nations like the US, but it may not apply to countries Haiti or Bangladesh.

Sybilla Dekker is VVD. Piet Hein Donner is CDA.

Several parties, notably the VVD party, were vocal critics of squatting. Backed by the leader of the PVV, Geert Wilders they moved to outlaw squatting.[7] The new squatting ban was passed by the House of Representatives on 15 October 2009 and the Senate on 1 June 2010, and became law on 1 October 2010. The penalty is one year's imprisonment, or more if violence is involved.[8] The mayor of Amsterdam, Eberhard van der Laan, and police commissioner Leen Schaap stated their intention to clear roughly 200 of 300 squats in Amsterdam, and to treat squatting as a criminal offence.[6][9][10]

A government which took power on 14 October 2010 could hardly have passed a squatting ban which was passed into law on 1 October 2010 and had been agreed upon by both the Dutch House of Representatives on 15 October 2009 as well as the Dutch Senate on 1 June 2010. This article seems to have been created by squatters or proponents of squatting and thus has a severe NPOV issue. SpeakFree (talk) 12:04, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Let's say that this is what you meant by "..."it's obvious that within the EU, any homelessness and foodlessness is economic, political or by choice." What adjectives would you use to describe homelessness and foodlessness in Haiti or Bangladesh?

What a stupidity.
There's absolutely no relationship between the number of houses and homeless people.

Homeless people are a direct result of no moral economic system, nothing else.

Actually, the relationship between the number of houses and homeless people is that it makes the morality of the socioeconomic system measurable.

Quote from: ersi on 2016-04-26, 00:00:14

Actually, the relationship between the number of houses and homeless people is that it makes the morality of the socioeconomic system measurable.

Is the suicide rate an equally valid measure?
How about the abortion rate?

Concluding remarks

The lack of any clear relation between suicide and happiness remains a disturbing and unresolved puzzle. Perhaps it is simply that suicide is hard to explain. But perhaps we should also be cautious giving too much weight to self-reports of life satisfaction.

Pipa på hustaket ho e på raus,
en stein ligg i grase og slæng
Torvhaille sprengt sæ, jernan e laus
Tel års så vil torvtaket hæng

Det sku bo folk i husan, husan e som folk
Folk træng hus og hus træng folk i all si tid

Et vindu på sørvæggen slepte inn sola
nu e det åpent førr regn
Når vøta kjæm inn vil det snart komme floa
av råte og mått ifra næraste eng

Det sku bo folk i husan, husan e som folk
Folk træng hus og hus træng folk i all si tid.

Døra mot nord e skjeiv i karmen
førr sylla puin bislaget tærtes bort.
Ingen går inn førr å komme i varmen
I dørlause hus man kjølne fort.

Det sku bo folk i husan, husan e som folk
Folk træng hus og hus træng folk i all si tid.

Grunnmurn e sprukken, hell ikkje stangen
Tela har hevve han opp og ned
Et stormkast blir tel begravelsessangen
Når heile huset går bort - i fred

Det sku bo folk i husan, husan e som folk
Folk træng hus og hus treng folk i all si tid.

Incidentally, I would agree that the homes-homeless relationship isn't the best measure of the morality of the socioeconomic system. But it is an indication of society's ability to provide.

Shelter is pretty crucial in Northern Europe, mind you. No shelter, no Northern Europeans