Homeless in NZ

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Homeless in NZ

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15

987 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1828523 24-Jul-2017 16:12

Rikkitic:

It is maybe worth asking why a 'first world' country like New Zealand allows mentally ill people to live on the streets in the first place. Very many years ago I worked for a time in a halfway house set up specifically to help those released from mental institutions to ease back into society. Surely this country is capable of such a thing?

Many people who are homeless and called 'mentally ill' could be fine in a supportive stress free environment.

Their mental health problems are exacerbated by relationship failures, job loss, financial stress, alcohol & drug use, or even the old 'I'm perfectly good now, I don't need to take XXX medication any more"

I volunteered for an organisation helping get people off the streets (overseas), and often their stories included a key event that they just didn't recover from.

There was a slippery slope to street living, with effort and assistance required to climb back up...

MyHeritage DNA

Affiliate link

Affiliate link: MyHeritage DNA test kit helps you discover your ethnicity results, DNA genetic groups, family relatives.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1828526 24-Jul-2017 16:15

networkn:

Rikkitic:

It is maybe worth asking why a 'first world' country like New Zealand allows mentally ill people to live on the streets in the first place. Very many years ago I worked for a time in a halfway house set up specifically to help those released from mental institutions to ease back into society. Surely this country is capable of such a thing?

These facilities still exist. You can't keep people against their will unless they fall into the "danger to themselves or others" and even then it's tenuous.

De-institutionalisation and integration in the community was a deliberate and good objective of reforms.

But it came in two parts:

1) turf them out of institutions

2) integrate them in the community - and provide an appropriate level of care.

We did well on part 1) - part 2) not so much. A cynic might say that some always saw this as an opportunity to save money - when others might say that it never could have saved money if improved outcomes for the patients was the primary objective.

Anyway, at a lower end of the scale for "mental health issues" (from the de-institutionalised) , I have serious doubts about how the "welfare" system works for them. I don't imagine that if you had "issues", then you'd have much luck navigating the welfare system. IMO one problem is that we expect a return from welfare - unlike true "charity" - which should be unconditional. Despite those conditions appearing to be reasonable in terms of assistance to get a job, or training etc, many won't accept that and/or won't meet conditions imposed to receive benefits, due to substance abuse problems, depression, etc.

MikeB4

17146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1828527 24-Jul-2017 16:15

networkn:

Rikkitic:

It is maybe worth asking why a 'first world' country like New Zealand allows mentally ill people to live on the streets in the first place. Very many years ago I worked for a time in a halfway house set up specifically to help those released from mental institutions to ease back into society. Surely this country is capable of such a thing?

These facilities still exist. You can't keep people against their will unless they fall into the "danger to themselves or others" and even then it's tenuous.

There are and they do a good job but the task of reintegration is complex. Community treatment tries to eliminate the need to reintegrate. However, mental illness is just one factor in many that affects homelessness or lack of appropriate housing.

networkn

27625 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1828533 24-Jul-2017 16:28

MikeB4:

networkn:

Rikkitic:

It is maybe worth asking why a 'first world' country like New Zealand allows mentally ill people to live on the streets in the first place. Very many years ago I worked for a time in a halfway house set up specifically to help those released from mental institutions to ease back into society. Surely this country is capable of such a thing?

These facilities still exist. You can't keep people against their will unless they fall into the "danger to themselves or others" and even then it's tenuous.

There are and they do a good job but the task of reintegration is complex. Community treatment tries to eliminate the need to reintegrate. However, mental illness is just one factor in many that affects homelessness or lack of appropriate housing.

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once. Immigration is a contributing factor to the pressure on our number of homes, which leads to infrastructure issues, which leads to not enough skilled people to not do the work, so then there are calls to continue the current numbers of immigrants or even increase it, and then we are back at the start. Put in the mix that we need to fix mental health issues, keep housing affordable, keep inflation at reasonable levels and pay workers more to keep up with rising house prices and it's all of a sudden not looking so easy. Running a country is a balance, and if attention is given to the "homeless" problem, then something like Healthcare or Education will get less attention. If everyone was on the same page as to what needs the most attention then it would be easier to keep people happy, but with such a mix of opinion as to whats important, there will always be large numbers of people who are unhappy.

A change of Government right now seems like a bad idea on so many fronts, the biggest being that it would take a new Government at least a couple of years to get on top of understanding what is currently happening before meaningful plans can start to form. Basically, everything would slow down.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1828536 24-Jul-2017 16:33

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

networkn

27625 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1828538 24-Jul-2017 16:35

Fred99:

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

I agree, not required, I'd rather the money be spent on other things.

MikeB4

17146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1828539 24-Jul-2017 16:36

Fred99:

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

I don't want to see tax cuts however on the other hand I don't want to see tax increases. We need a bigger tax take but that needs to be gained from growth in the economy, sustainable immigration, education and investment.

edit; and we need to stop Central Government and local Government waste.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1828540 24-Jul-2017 16:37

Fred99:

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

tax cuts are always a good thing, they improve the economy by boosting spending.

MikeB4

17146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1828544 24-Jul-2017 16:39

Wiggum:

Fred99:

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

tax cuts are always a good thing, they improve the economy by boosting spending.

No they don't, the best they achieve is a small amount of additional investment. Those on high income will just add to the pot those on low income are generally already spending it.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1828546 24-Jul-2017 16:45

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

Fred99:

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

tax cuts are always a good thing, they improve the economy by boosting spending.

No they don't, the best they achieve is a small amount of additional investment. Those on high income will just add to the pot those on low income are generally already spending it.

I think both sides of that argument are actually valid. What do you mean those on low income are generally already spending it?

MikeB4

17146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1828548 24-Jul-2017 16:47

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

Fred99:

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

tax cuts are always a good thing, they improve the economy by boosting spending.

No they don't, the best they achieve is a small amount of additional investment. Those on high income will just add to the pot those on low income are generally already spending it.

I think both sides of that argument are actually valid. What do you mean those on low income are generally already spending it?

Living on loans and overdraft.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1828550 24-Jul-2017 16:48

MikeB4:

Living on loans and overdraft.

Only low income earners do that?

Many high earners live very close to the breadline too. Huge mortgages, car finance, maxed out credit cards etc.

MikeB4

17146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1828554 24-Jul-2017 16:55

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Living on loans and overdraft.

Only low income earners do that?

Many high earners live very close to the breadline too. Huge mortgages, car finance, maxed out credit cards etc.

I did not say that

mattwnz

18751 posts

Uber Geek

#1828556 24-Jul-2017 17:00

networkn:

MikeB4:

networkn:

Rikkitic:

It is maybe worth asking why a 'first world' country like New Zealand allows mentally ill people to live on the streets in the first place. Very many years ago I worked for a time in a halfway house set up specifically to help those released from mental institutions to ease back into society. Surely this country is capable of such a thing?

These facilities still exist. You can't keep people against their will unless they fall into the "danger to themselves or others" and even then it's tenuous.

There are and they do a good job but the task of reintegration is complex. Community treatment tries to eliminate the need to reintegrate. However, mental illness is just one factor in many that affects homelessness or lack of appropriate housing.

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once. Immigration is a contributing factor to the pressure on our number of homes, which leads to infrastructure issues, which leads to not enough skilled people to not do the work, so then there are calls to continue the current numbers of immigrants or even increase it, and then we are back at the start. Put in the mix that we need to fix mental health issues, keep housing affordable, keep inflation at reasonable levels and pay workers more to keep up with rising house prices and it's all of a sudden not looking so easy. Running a country is a balance, and if attention is given to the "homeless" problem, then something like Healthcare or Education will get less attention. If everyone was on the same page as to what needs the most attention then it would be easier to keep people happy, but with such a mix of opinion as to whats important, there will always be large numbers of people who are unhappy.

A change of Government right now seems like a bad idea on so many fronts, the biggest being that it would take a new Government at least a couple of years to get on top of understanding what is currently happening before meaningful plans can start to form. Basically, everything would slow down.

You would hope that the opposition would have been going over everything during their term in opposition, as well as looking at the governments books, so they can step right back in. They are making campaign promises based on numbers from actual costings, rather than making them up. IMO 3 year term is hopeless anyway, as far too much of the term is spent campaigning relative to teh actual term length. Needs to be 4 years min.

There are lots of potential fixes to the housing crisis. But there isn't just one single fix, as it was caused by a range of factors. However almost everyone it seems has some financial interest in housing, so that any changes could affect their equity or earnings they are making. Basically if you are a home owner, then you have a financial interest which would affect your policy decision making on the topic. We actually need to bring down teh cost of housing, not just make them affordable. Affordability could just mean giving people extra grants to buy, or reduce interest rates, but it doesn't fix the underlying high price problem. There is really no reason why our houses in NZ are costing so much to built. In other countries, including Oz, they can build them substantially cheaper. They are building better looking, larger houses, for cheaper prices. Partly becuase their material prices are so much cheaper. You only have to compare the websites of the NZ and Oz chains, to see how different the prices they are.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1828559 24-Jul-2017 17:08

networkn:

Fred99:

networkn:

Exactly. In this thread I see a lot of whining from a lot of quarters and gnashing of teeth we aren't doing enough, but simply put there are not enough resources for everything to be attacked at once.

Yes - but tax cuts....

I agree, not required, I'd rather the money be spent on other things.

I'd rather see prudent financial management of the economy to include some buffer against the next inevitable downturn.

The present bull market has run 8 years - they never last.

When it comes to an end, there's no way for the government to stimulate the economy through interest rates cuts, and the combined negative effect on perceived wealth (and consequent high level of spending) from Mum and Dad NZer's who've grown accustomed to seeing 10% returns on their kiwisaver and home values, will be drastic.

The time that drastic action was needed - to prevent the bubble economy we've got - was about 6 years ago.

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15