What are the most progressive policies? Under our definition (helps poor more than rich) cutting bus fares tops the list, with 66% of Brits believing it would do more to help the less well off (compared to 29% for train fare cuts) https://t.co/r5lK0o1rKW pic.twitter.com/KeuE1xP6Cm
— YouGov (@YouGov) January 30, 2018
I cherry picked data again by plotting it in full using the data labels and headings in the data tables at the original data source. I stand accused.
Max Rashbrooke is the latest to spit the dummy when reminded that the Otago report on homelessness actually was about the seriously housing deprived; their words, not mine.
UOW researcher Dr Kate Amore, from the Health Research Council-funded He Kainga Oranga/Housing and Health Research Programme, measured the “severely housing deprived” population.
Table 2 below is from the media release Rashbrooke suggested I read to enlighten myself as to what homelessness is and is not. I am going to commit my third strike at cherry picking with snap-shots of the tables from the original source. I am a recidivist cherry picker.
Labour, the Greens and Max Rashbrooke all conflated living with friends and family or in commercial accommodation with homelessness. Saying that serious housing deprivation has gone up is not much of a sound bite compared to claiming homelessness is up with the associated images of people living rough or in cars. Who is spinning, who is cherry picking and who just can’t handle the truth? Homelessness has not increased under the National party government.
A statistical definition of homelessness that includes 70% of data observations as people living with friends and relatives on a temporary basis is miles away from sleeping rough, in a car or emergency accommodation such as a shelter or refuge run by an NGO. But at one point the Otago study does include these vastly different social situations under the same heading
“If the homeless population were a hundred people, 70 are staying with extended family or friends in severely crowded houses, 20 are in a motel, boarding house or camping ground, and 10 are living on the street, in cars, or in other improvised dwellings. They all urgently need affordable housing.”
Definitions are supposed to clarify, not confuse but the Statistics New Zealand definition does
Homelessness is defined as a living situation where people with no other options to acquire safe and secure housing are: without shelter, in temporary accommodation, sharing accommodation with a household, or living in uninhabitable housing.
The Oxford dictionary definition of homeless is “ (Of a person) without a home, and therefore typically living on the streets”.
Homelessness is different from those living in a hotel paid for by WINZ pending rehousing. Sleeping in the streets, in a car or living in emergency accommodation and waiting in a hotel for social housing are separate policy problems.
Some of the seriously housing deprived data from the Otago study show the system failing, such as sleeping rough or in a car. Other parts of the data shows the social safety net working when people are in a hotel or emergency accommodation pending a move to better quarters.
Including in the same definition of homelessness someone who is sleeping in the street or in a car with someone who is in the queue for social housing but booked into a hotel insults those who are homeless. This spin mixes up situations where the social safety net has failed with situations where it is working to help those down on their luck but perhaps not to our full satisfaction.
I cherry picked my previous data on homelessness if the New Zealand sub-Reddit is to be believed and from which I am banned and cannot reply. Plotting the data in full is to cherry pick it. The chart below is simply the first two rows of the source data. The subsequent rows deal with those in emergency accommodation and in temporary accommodation.
When I shared this data on Carmel Sepuloni MP’s Facebook page, she rightly and constructively said
Thanks for your comment Jim. Unfortunately the number living rough has increased since 2001. We want to focus on improving the future, which is why we are holding our homeless inquiries so we can best understand and address this issue:
Rather than pointscoring, the issue is what to do to fix the problem. How desperate is much of the rest of the Left to beat up this issue as the fault of John Key. This is an an important issue that should not be used for point scoring by sufferers of John Key derangement syndrome.
Homeless people are those who I charted above. They are sleeping rough or in a car. They have slipped through the social safety net which is obviously not working for them. If you are in emergency accommodation, the social safety net is working. The issue is making that safety net work better in terms of moving quickly into more permanent accommodation..
People living rough doubled under Labour! Fell under the National Party led government despite the global financial crisis and the return of neoliberal oppression.
There is a difference between not having a roof over your head and being in emergency or temporary accommodation. It disrespects those who lack a roof over their head tonight to equate their grave misfortune with those fortunate enough to already be in emergency accommodation. Once they are in emergency accommodation, that shows that the system is working. Finding them somewhere to stay pending finding something more permanent.
The Twitter Left is doing its best to attribute the surge against globalisation and immigration to inequality. This is despite the main beneficiary at the ballot box is right-wing populists.
The beneficiaries in the last few years were UKIP, the French National Front, Alternative for Germany, various pro-welfare state but anti-immigration parties in the rest of Europe, Pauline Hanson and Donald Trump. Barely a left wing party in sight outside of Greece.
Bernie Sanders is a fake left-wing populist because much of his support comes from college students and the university educated, not the aroused working class. These college students are unwilling to pay more than $1000 in taxes for the socialist revolution especially if they have a job.
At the last New Zealand election, two-thirds of the electorate voted for other than centre-left and left-wing parties. The hard left party, Mana-Internet, won 1% of the party vote despite having millions of dollars in campaign donations from a criminal fugitive hoping to avoid extradition.
These right-wing populists combine a heady brew of nationalism and social conservatism, scepticism about market competition, strong support for social security and old-age pensions but not welfare dependency, and opposition to immigration, imports and cultural change. The rise of the parties are not the first signs of an aroused working class seeking to overthrow capitalism. Face up to it.
When I first moved to Canberra and when I moved back, I stayed with friends. Some regard that as being homeless under the Statistics New Zealand definition, much to my own surprise.
I qualify because I shared accommodation . Having shared or short-term accommodation is not homeless. The descriptions shared and short-term accommodation quite adequate to the task.
People living in temporary accommodation including with friends are not homeless. Their situation is unsatisfactory but describing it does not justify butchering the English language by conflating their inconveniences with the few hundred people who live rough each night.
Those that conflate having a roof over your head tonight with living rough take advantage of the great sympathy people have for those living rough for people in far less dire situations.
A universal basic income in New Zealand will have to be financed by a great big new tax because the existing ones are not enough according to the Economist calculations below.
HT: Paul Kerby.