An unbelievable number: New York worse than a 3rd world country
Wall Street, New York, is the place for the most famous stock exchange in the world. Stocks are not what is traded the most in New York, though.
Speculation trades with everything, including houses. The last worldwide economic crises (the second worst after the one of 1929), has it’s root there. The housing crises made new millionaires – and millions of people lost their houses when the bubble burst.
But those millions are not the number I want to talk about today, even if they are related. Today’s number is a different one. Smaller in size and still as unbelievable.
It is an incredible number, one I honestly cannot understand. It is a number so scary and bewildering it just won’t fit into my head.
The number is:
It is the number of homeless students in New York City.
Think about it: 114’659 children have had to use some temporary housing, like shelters, in the last year.
114’659. Students. IN NEW YORK!
This is not Kalkutta or a poor African town or a Brasilian favela. This is in one of the richest towns in the world.
114’659 homeless students.
Most of them go to school in the Bronx.
District 10 in the Bronx served the most homeless children of any of the city’s 32 school districts last year. The district includes Kingsbridge International High School, where about 44 percent of students who attended the school over the last four years were homeless at one point.
But surely there is a lot the city does?
Well, they pay for social workers. One for 1660 homeless students.
You want to make America Great Again? Dude, here is a point to start!
114’659 students. Homeless. In New York.
Sorry, I am out of words.
We are living in an antiquated land ownership model.
The 80/20 rule applies to almost everything. Thus, 20% of the people will end up with 80% of the land. And over two generations, it will be 20% of 20%. And since this has been going on for a couple hundred years, it is now down to 1%.
It used to be that you just had to run out there and stake it, in order to get some property. Then it was you just had to work hard to get some property. Now, property ownership is out of reach of generation Z. Their entire life salary won't buy them what they need to live.
Of course, we can't go completely the other way to solve this. Having everything be public just means mass destruction of the commons.
My solution is that when a person comes into being, they should have room made in the community for them. When they reach the age of majority, they should be given a piece of property. Denying the young man a space to dwell should be considered the cruelest of cruel.
Unfortunately, in many communities, where they do not have room to spread out, this means that for every child born, everyone has to give up some of their space for the new person.
Further, most of our "welfare" goes to pay those 1% who own all the property. Which is just a huge money grab. Welfare is just a govern-cement program to make the rich richer.
There is an option to public ownership which is a mutual society. Basically all customers and suppliers are mutual owners who have an equal say in how the society is governed.
The thing missing in these types of scenarios is "skin in the game".
The number one upside to private ownership is that the owner is the most committed in keeping up the property.
However, communal ownership solves most of the problems of someone having nothing.
We will see in the future better ways of combining the best traits.
But, it will be weird from our perspective.
It will be sorta like saying to a future person, "don't you have armies?" and the future person saying, "what would you need an army for?" There will be no war in the future, but the path of getting there is not via everyone giving up their guns. In fact, it would be closer to correct to say that giving everyone guns is the path leading to no war. But, although correct, it misses the real key pivotal concept that gets us there.
Yes it's a sad statistic, but that is what happens when there is such a divide between rich and poor.