LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Not sure who you're trying to convince here.
Just so we're clear, this is what temporary accommodation often means.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I think part of the issue is that many people conflate homelessness with rough sleeping.
I suspect that was the point FA may also have been making, some countries may only count those who are sleeping on the street as being homeless whereas the UK legal definition includes various examples including someone who has no legal right to stay in their accommodation like the sofa surfer.
0 -
I posted a graph on this particular point upthread.
0 -
Yeah I saw, it was more a general comment (in agreement with Rick for once!) that people equate homelessness with living on the streets. As your chart shows we’re not as bad as some others on that point, though still way too high, but the overall number with no legal home of their own is way too high.
0 -
Yes, but also how the data are collected in the first place. i.e. the extent to which the number of homeless is actually the number of homeless people you know about. How large is the known unknown, of you like.
0 -
But... if the counting system in the UK hasn't changed since before 2010, whilst the comparison with other nationalities could be questioned, the uptick in UK homelessness is significant, surely?
0 -
Yes. I just took there to be two types of hand wringing going on. 1. The Tories, again 2. The UK is shit compared to everywhere else, again.
1 -
Do you think it's possible that the person compiling the data might have been almost as clever as you and already considered this problem, researched it and made allowances for any differences in methodology?
How many substantively different definitions of homelessness can you think of?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
No, I don't for a second think a journalist on twitter is likely to have applied much critical thinking, and that's the point.
Do you actually think the UK has two or three times the homelessness levels of those other counties?
This sort of thing is ripe for misleading headlines, because "UK homelessness getting worse but still fairly average" isn't all that likely to get clicks is it?
0 -
Do you really not know anyone who sofa has sofa surfed? Or spent time in homeless accommodation?!
0 -
No. Wife grew up on a council estate, does that count?
(Actual answer is yes, but since you've so clearly missed the point, I thought I'd try to annoy you)
0 -
If you haven't got an argument there's always snobbery 😁. The legal definitions of homelessness are practically identical in the UK and US. Given that homelessness falls under local authorities duties, several of them are effectively bankrupt and the rest are in severe financial straits, a significant worsening of the general homelessness problem is exactly what you would expect. We've also reduced the level of housing benefit provided to people in the private rented sector.The surprise would be if it wasn't this bad.
You can find data on the UK homelessness very easily. Numbers receiving assistance from local authorities have tripled since 2011. This excludes those who are homeless but do not meet the criteria for assistance.
In contrast the US has been fairly steady over the same period. There are various figures but the homeless population of the US is consistently around 600,000. The UK is currently around 300,000. Doesn't take a PhD to see that that's a much higher rate given the US population is about 5 times the UK.
So yes. It is that bad. You can verify this for yourself in about 5 minutes.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
You should work for Our World in Data, because you've got it more figured out than they do.
0 -
-
In terms of trends or absolute numbers?
0 -
-
Other than your trip to Chicago when it was cold, on what data are you basing your assertion that it's not that bad?
I get that it's counterintuitive, but you don't need to read around the subject very much to see that it's correct. It's not even really news. This has just presented data that was already available in a striking way.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I'm just asking questions. Who is more foolish, the person who says they don't know, or the person who thinks they do?
1 -
What are you asking?
We've been here before on the forum. Remember the data underpinning ULEZ?
1 -
Classic scientist, thinks the data needs to be perfect, even if the blindingly obvious is staring you in the face.
I’ll save you some effort in the future. Any data that relates to lots of people; alway inaccurate. Always. Stuff that’s history? Mega inaccurate.
80% of what we “know” about the ancient period? Comes from about 500 texts, none of which were especially preoccupied with recording things accurately.
You’re gonna have to get over that if you want to actually evaluate stuff.
Here’s a clue. If the lines on a chart diverge more than your margin for error, something’s happening.
0 -
What's the margin of error?
0 -
Can we please have plenty of comments in short order so I don't keep scrolling past RJS's overflowing toilet?
0 -
0 -
-
Apologies for the blunt image, but I thought it made the point about temporary accommodation fairly succinctly.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
This has happened before on the forum as well. If you disagree at all, you disagree entirely, apparently.
0 -
I honestly don’t get the interest in nitpicking data which we all know is imperfect anyway, if it’s irrelevant to the obvious conclusion.
Absolutely baffles me. Honestly, I’d love to see you spend a month in the archives digging up some 17tj century data to evaluate whether your argument holds water. You’d absolutely lose your f@cking mind.
0 -
I guess there are a couple of options: take my word for it (unlikely); spend 5-10minutes looking up fairly easy to find information. Like I said, there are various figures for the UK, the lowest I found was 280,000, the highest 340,000. That's roughly 310,000 ±10%. Similarly I've found figures between 584,000 and 650,000 for the US. In both cases it depends whether you are counting the numbers officially registered or estimating the total homeless population. For both countries, the figures for each year are also consistent with each other - i.e. gradual or more accelerated change but no 'zigzagging'.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition-1 -
So has dismissing things because
- it was on Twitter
- RC posted it
- it's not a problem where they live.
- they went there once and don't remember it being like that.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
If 17th century data is unreliable, I guess that's it then.
0
