It seems to me that most studies show that the medical field, rather
than economics, is the source of explanation for homelessness. I have no
studies at hand, but I think it is pretty well established that well
over half of homeless people are severely mentally ill and/or drunks or
drug users.
John Cunningham
Daljit Dhadwal wrote:
>
> I've been reading Steven Landsburg's "Fair Play: What your child can teach
> you about economics, values, and the meaning of life."
>
> In it he writes: "[his daughter] understands too, as incredibly, many
> adults do not, that the reason there are homeless people is that-- for
> whatever reason-- some people prefer not to acquire homes. That is to say,
> either they prefer not to earn enough income to acquire a home or they
> prefer to spend their income in other ways. She scoffed when she heard a
> television commentator suggest that the problem is a "shortage" of
> housing; she's old enough to understand that when people offer to buy
> houses other people will offer to build them."
>
> I understand this argument, but is this the best economics can do in
> explaining why people are homeless? Do explanations dealing with
> government cutbacks of services for mentally-ill people, or banks refusing
> to lend to certain groups of people because it's easier to ignore the
> entire group than sort out good risks from bad risks not count as
> economic explanations? It seems to me using Landsburg's argument you could
> claim that people starve because the prefer not to earn enough income.
>
> Daljit Dhadwal
--
John Cunningham, Contract Administrator
United Academics AAUP/AFT
Room 109 B, Bunnell Building
PO BOX 755895
Fairbanks AK 99775-5895
Toll Free 877. 474.2461 [in state only]
Phone 907.474.2461 FAX 907.474.2465
http://www.alaska.net/~academe
