Rather than just lambast the people in the past for being stupid, it's often wise to think on why they did what they did.

In this case, the article contains the reason:

"as SROs disappeared, ... homelessness exploded nationwide."

Looks like SROs weren't being used by scientists and scholors.

▲

mnw21cam 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'm a scientist and a scholar, and I am right now living in a HMO with some lovely/interesting/weird housemates while I sort out my horrific divorce and fight through the courts to get my house that I own back. For legal reasons, I have had to pay all the normal bills for my house while my spouse has enjoyed the benefits of that. My salary can't stretch to running two separate full households, and so my temporary accommodation has been the cheapest respectable arrangement available.

People fleeing domestic abuse with reasonable means need to have options, because the domestic violence shelters can't be expected to accommodate everyone for the whole time a divorce takes (which in some situations can be multiple years).

▲

3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

triceratops 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> the article contains the reason: "as SROs disappeared, ... homelessness exploded nationwide."

You're saying SROs were banned specifically to increase homelessness? Is this a discarded Bond movie plot?

▲

wat10000 3 days ago | parent [-]

People don't specifically aim to increase homelessness, but people do often attempt to make "those people" go elsewhere, and whether that "elsewhere" involves a permanent structure is often not a concern.

	▲	triceratops 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Well sure but the person I responded to put the two together and implied that was the motive.

▲

pavel_lishin 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

... and those people living on the street is better than them living under a roof?