So... I know its unrealistic, given we cannot even make health care a right

[quakerboy]

But what would it take to make housing a right? From my perspective it appears we could house everyone without all that much difficulty. Its not like we all need mansions, nor do I want to prohibit people who can afford mansions from having them. But everyone should have access to 4 walls, a roof, a securely locking door, and a restroom, no?

Have you considered this? Is it worth talking about? Could we do it? How would you do it?

[Captain Hilts]

1. Eleanor Roosevelt was the last major political figure to really say that,

though LBJ came as close as anyone has since.

[LiberalLoner]

2. It's very much worth looking into and talking about but I have no idea how to make it

happen.

[bobbolink]

3. If you could include a kitchen with that, I would be willing to fight for it!

And, that is exactly what it is going to take--- a FIGHT.

Are you up for that?

[quakerboy]

5. I can live without a kitchen

I actually left it out on purpose, as I remember living a few places without them. The little $10 appliances are enough to sustain my needs in such situations.

Anyhow.. Who do we fight? How do we fight them?

[bobbolink]

7. I'm sure, being male, you could live without a bathroom, too.

Given that you are not interested in actually providing a true home, then, there is no point in continuing this.

Thanks for the false hope. x(

[tmyers09]

8. I am. Everybody deserves a place to call their own.

[bobbolink]

9. No, that is NOT what you are saying. And it is very offensive.

A storage locker is NOT a home.

This is very offensive and hurtful, but I'm sure that matters not to you.

No more giving any kicks to a bullshit post.

[tmyers09]

11. I wasn't the OP...

I never said anything about a storage locker. Since you inquired, I think everybody should have a home with adequate space (size of one's family), and that would include a kitchen and a bathroom.

I did not mean to be offensive or hurtful, I was not the OP. Sorry if my post came off as such!

[quakerboy]

12. No, I couldnt. Especially not if I wanted to get back on my feet

Looking for a job without having the ability to shower is challenging.

What I would want to make sure everyone has is a starting place. Perhaps that is wrong, but I do not see a townhouse as the bare minimum right. I do see a space, safe, with the basic necessities as a right. A way to cook, yes. A kitchen no.

I don't know, but as a potential discussion point, I guess it depends on what you call a kitchen. I can live in a studio, with basic ability to cook, with a minifridge and an electric burner and a griddle on a counter in the corner. I wouldn't call that a kitchen, but it was enough to get me through rough times.

What is a true home? And why is it a right, as opposed to the basics of shelter? I am interested in talking about this. And maybe I am wrong. I have lived one life, and it has lead me to think as I do, but I am far from perfect. Show me, don't just write me off.

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. This implies something interesting.

The healthcare bill establishes that every citizen has a right to healthcare coverage - but if you have income exceeding 133% of FPL you simply have to pay a share of the costs.

Do you envision a right to housing that transcends this? Is "right" synonymous with "free", as in "free beer"?

Affordable housing is a good goal. Free housing, I don't think so.

[quakerboy]

14. How does someone with nothing afford something?

Affordable to me is not affordable to someone with no job and no money and no prospects.

Why shouldn't basic housing be a right?

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. A person with nothing is given medicaid.

The health care law expands eligibility for it. If you're not poor, insurance companies are now required to honor your right to obtain coverage, at the same price as others your age.

The wealthiest country in the world should have no homeless, but "a right" is another thing entirely. A right to live where? In what conditions? At what income level should a person be expected to bear part of the cost?

[quakerboy]

19. Are they? Not always

And even nothing is relative. If you are lucky enough to have even a tiny income rather than none, then suddenly you are less eligible for help. I think you oversimplify on your charicterization as well. But health care is a separate discussion.

If the wealthiest country should have no homeless, what are you doing about it? Why should it not be a right, why is that a bridge too far for you?

As to where, conditions, that is why I started this op. I want to know what people think.

In my mind, I envision it as the minimum necessary to get along. Such that a person with no resources could start their life over, without the imminent fear of homelessness. Not a place where you would want to stay forever, but a place that you would be safe to get your feet back under you. A simple studio or the like, produced in bulk, that anyone who needed to could go get a place. No qualification other than being a citizen, a human needing a place to stay. Everyone pays in via their taxes, and just make enough to make questions of supply irrelevant, Space for anyone who feels the need to use it.

Assuredly someone would misuse it. Someone with mega bucks would use it to avoid paying rent. But what the hell. Don't put it in the trendy part of town, make it a little inconvenient, at the end of the transit line, to make it less attractive to people who don't actually need it. I strongly feel it would help more people than the ever present fear of homelessness if you miss one payment, rent or mortgage. It would mean you could get a shower and go look for a job. Or just take a while to put your mind back together when a lifetime falls apart. Or just not be afraid to fall asleep on the street. It wouldn't have to be fancy to accomplish the basic needs of shelter for people who need them.

[MIprogressive]

6. do they have electricity? who pays for that?

it all comes down to money. as bad as that sounds.... its true. this fucking world revolves around money.

[KonaKane]

10. It is correct, and absolutely doable.

One could extrapolate from the right to life (already enshrined in our system) the three necessities of life's sustanence: Food, Shelter, and Health Care.

It's morally correct, it's logic, and it would be completely fought tooth and nail by every building contractor in the nation.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

13. If you include jails, housing is already a right

Not an ideal solution, of course.

[quakerboy]

15. I do not

do you? If you lost your job, would a jail be a good place to spend the night or the month until you could get on your feet again? If you had a disability that kept you down, would jail be a good alternative? How about for a family, with kids?

Not ideal is an understatment. But I do think this is something we should address as a country. And perhaps now, with so many foreclosures and so much homelessness, is a good time to get something started.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

16. It's a dark observation, not a policy proposal

A homeless person can always get a roof over their head on short notice by hitting a cop.

It's kind of like using the emergency room for all medical care. Expensive, dehumanizing and completely missing the point of medical-care/housing.

[quakerboy]

17. sorry.

I didn't catch that first time.

So do you have an answer, or an idea, or a starting place for this?