CM, in the last sentence, did you intend to place a 'from' after the word 'form'?

The photo shows campers in the public parking lot along Beacon Avenue by the VA. I assume that most of those people are either there for treatment at the hospital, or are family of someone who is getting treatment. I think the VA should put in an RV park for those folks, so that they have power, water and sewer hookups.

And how do you keep the poor from rebelling? Give them a steady supply of cheap debilitating drugs. When Seattle's progressive community decides to deal with the cause (eg the distribution networks and the support of the debilitating drug industry through their own consumption and sales), this will only get worse. When hipsters openly use coke, a product of Trump's America, and ignore their contribution of the underground drug industry that kills poor people, they are complicity in their oppression and their deaths--not to mention the cartels and authoritarian regimes which enable production.

@4 Ah well, when non-hipsters vote for the authoritarian regimes that perpetuate the drug war they are sure not doing the poor any favors either.

@4 "How do you keep the poor from rebelling?" - Tell the poor that their problems stem from other poor people, especially people who are from different races and cultures.
Sadly, Trump has been masterful using this method of divide and conquer.

let me guess, late capitalism? or something even more amorphic and epic?

@1) no, i see now it was tricky sentence. i fixed it

@6

"I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half." Jay Gould

"The return of the slum in rich Western cities is becoming inevitable."
Provocative thesis, well-framed.
I find it difficult to dispute.
Evidence abounds with no viable counter-narrative.
So efforts to grow our way out of the problem are futile, both from the 'build-more-cheap-shitty-housing' angle and the 'let's-boom-the-economy' angle.
Likewise, more liberal employment of the stick to get the rabble to move along are doomed as well.
Our beautiful city afflicted with slums- pretty much inevitable.
The only corresponding benefit to such is to be found in the lyrical beauty of the lives of the poor and the occasional tastes of an exhilarating freedom unknown to most of us. I predict a lot of compelling art, music and film will in the future come from the stories of the folks living in those campers and tarp tents.

A floating slum?? What's floating the RVs?What I've read, there are approximately one million people who live year-round in their RVs. Some because of necessity, others by choice. Providing an affordable, clean RV park would go a long way in helping.

@3 not so sure. If you need to travel from a remote location to receive treatment at a VA hospital they will pay for your hotel.

When your country's GINI index is 1 point above Argentina and 1 point below Mexico, is it any surprise that we have slums? It's surprising we don't have more of them (they're coming).

We don't want your handouts. Just give me a place to park.

It's obvious that Rvs are a desirable inexpensive housing choice. For more affordable housing built fast, put in full hook up rv parks with low rent on the space. It may not be pretty to some, but it is fast and cheap and plainly desireable.
Elitist cities decided that mobile home parks were a slum. So they did everything they could to stop new ones from going in and applauded when developers chased out all of the tenants and converted to high priced condos or other housing. City planners got tent cities and rvs with no sanitary hookups in exchange.
But it is all Amazon's fault apparently. Ha.
None of this is floating however. Stupid way to describe mobile vehicles with wheels.

(Raising the PBR in jublious celebration) “WELCOME TO SEATTLE! Shitter’s full”!

@16: "I don't want your handouts. Now hand me out some free land."

in Seattle, a city that has no real memory of slums.

Seriously dude? We have a long history of slums. We had one of the biggest "Hoovervilles" in the country. According to Wikipedia, we had eight, but the big one (the one that was used in all the pictures) was where the stadiums are now.

Then we had Nickelsville. A tent city when tent cities were rare.

This might be a podunk, provincial little town, but we've seen it all here. From skid road to the gold rush, we've seen our share of good times and bad. What makes this period unusual is that we are seeing both at the same time. I guess you can thank the sudden lurch to the right 38 years ago for that. We still haven't gotten back to the middle, when someone like Dwight Eisenhower would interrupt the string of Democrats in the Oval Office.

The Prob is NOT going away any time soon.
May as well get used to it.

These people have an actual home to live in (and simply because of that, are ahellova lot better off than vastly too many others). Why not treat them like Human Beings and get them power water septic and maybe, just maybe an outdoor, covered cookery.

In the Richest damn country on the Planet, how the Fuck have we sunk so far?

Do those like Bezos,* coffee salesman Howard Schultz and the Microsoftys et al ad nauseum have no Shame? How much is too much? Will we never ever find out?

*Pays many of his employees shit wages, yet richest man on Planet. Lucky man, eh?

@18 “nasty sewage dumping”

herez a headz’up, Thang: EVERYBODY’s shit stink

“non-tax paying “

Except for, of course, Sales tax Gasoline tax Payroll tax

“contributing little to nothing to the community,”

Bussing your table; flipping your burgher; maiding your hotel

“shall i go on?”

I Love it when you do…

Communist economist... Must be an oxymoron!

I have to add our famous "Skid Row" and Pioneer Square is where the term originated, though Portland may disagree. Go to the Bay Area and you see nice $40K SUVs at night in strip mall parking lots with service workers living in them. Maybe it's time for Charles (and myself) to give Future Shock another good read as times are a changin' faster and faster.

BTW, I almost snarked that the Stranger doesn't pay Charle's enough, but someone this prolific could make plenty of money elsewhere.

Yes, maybe no memory, but Seattle has had this problem before:

http://depts.washington.edu/depress/hooverville_seattle.shtml

Or at least this symptom.

@2 "She is also part of an enterprise, a system, that is spreading misery across the globe in the guise of opportunity, modernization, and efficient business practices." (A.O. Scott reviewing "Toni Erdmann")
@6 and 11 "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pockets. Hell, give him someone to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." LBJ

We must always remember that American history begins when Charles Mudede arrives in America, and Seattle's history begins with the arrival of Charles Mudede in Seattle.

If there were Americans living in carts or wagons or trailers prior to Charles Mudede's arrival in America, it is of no consequence. Those people simply can not be counted as real people.

If there were slums in Seattle before Charles Mudede arrived in Seattle, then they are of no consequence. The primitive creatures who lived in those slums were just not people. It is as simple as that.

Is it too much trouble, or too scary, to cross the street and talk to a few of these people?

In a furious rush to discredit Mr. Mudede, none of the, “what about Hooverville and Skid Row?” commentators manage to describe their ‘real memories’ of those places. I’m guessing it is because there is no ‘real memory’ of those times and places, just black and white photos you happened to see while flipping through a book.

At least there is @23, who gets it.

Seattle is gearing up to have a phase of reactionary rage. I guess it is predictable, but it is not admirable and it will do nothing to stem the tide. This is a societal problem. Seattle could strive to be a national or global leader on this issue. $15 Now is a good example. Alternatively, Seattle could revert to being a self-absorbed provincial city of little consequence. The thing is, Seattle’s homeless population will continue to grow, until growing income inequality is reversed. Reactionary Seattle can carp and moan endlessly and probably win elections, yet the inequality will still be growing the class of capitalism’s casualties.

Listen to Charles. Don’t try to defeat his argument by talking about the time you flipped through an ‘Olde Times’ book at the Barnes & Nobles.

"Seattle is gearing up to have a phase of reactionary rage."

Yet another head tax supporter understands that the tax many well be repealed by a landslide, and is, in advance, manufacturing soothing, comfy reasons for this stunning defeat -- reasons which absolutely and most definitely do not, can not, and will not involve liberal citizens questioning how their previous expenditures to house the homeless made the problem worse.

"Don’t try to defeat his argument by talking about the time you flipped through an ‘Olde Times’ book at the Barnes & Nobles."

Yeah, comparing Charles' arguments to documented reality rarely bodes well for Charles' arguments, now does it?

I remain impressed by how he turned an afternoon of day-drinking squalor tourism on our modern Skid Row into not one, but two pretentiously ponderous yet vapid) didactic posts. Bravo, Charles!

@33 -- I also mentioned Nickelsville, which I do remember. It is also likely that there are plenty of people that remember Hoovervilles, but just don't comment (or even read) Slog. Go ahead and ask anyone who remembers the great depression (admittedly there are fewer and fewer as the days go by). But Nickelsville? Holy shit, that was like yesterday.

Again, the only thing unusual about this is that it is all happening at the same time. The boom and the bust, together at the same time. That is what is unprecedented, not slums in Seattle. The blame for that is not capitalism, but the type foisted upon us by a greasy haired B-grade actor. The problem is that the Republican Party has managed to go to the right of that asshole -- in just about every way -- while the Democrats move towards them in a desperate attempt to appeal to the few sensible and free thinking moderates. Dwight Eisenhower, Gerald Ford -- even fucking Nixon were far to the left of Paul "Let's just raid the pension fund and get rid of Social Security" Ryan. They would all be Democrats now (except maybe Nixon, he was a paranoid fuck that might have fallen in love with Trump). Except Nixon wasn't that stupid. The combination of stupidity and right wing extremism within the Republican Party -- the Party that controls every single aspect of the federal government as well as most state legislatures and most governorship -- is the route of this fucking mess.

We don't need to have a fucking socialist government. We just need the kind of moderate, sensible approach that built the biggest middle class the world has ever known. I'm not too hopeful -- we have way too many mentally lazy fuckers in this country who don't bother learning the basics now, even though it has never been easier. You can read policy papers of every candidate, or read information about any subject from trusted, impartial sources (e. g. Wikipedia) without getting up off your ass. But most would rather diddle around reading Facebook, while being swayed by trite, meaningless phrases like "Hope and Change" or "Make America Great Again".

@35 “We just need the kind of moderate, sensible approach that built the biggest middle class the world has ever known.”

With a ninety percent tax on the Wealthiest, and Corporations paying fully 1/3 of the tax burden, plus Unions, standing up for the working class, it’s true -- America once had the money to invest in its Citizens. But, sadly, that is no longer the case.

What we now have is one-party Rule – a party no longer beholden, in any way, other than verbal, to the Majority of its Constituents. Not to mention, Dems and Independents.

“We don't need to have a fucking socialist government.”

Unbridled Capitalism has Won.

We, the People no longer have political representation – we have Corporations and Billionaires calling the shots (thanks, Corps-are-peeps-too!). And yet, they still have quite a ways to go, in making sure to wring out the very last Dollars from OUR Economy.

With an unhinged "Billionaire" President, a far-alt-right stacked Supreme Court, and a complicit Congress, I can’t see it getting better anytime soon.

We are not on the cusp of “reactionary rage”. Seattleites are content to tax themselves (there’s going to be another school tax levy this fall, and I’m certain it will pass) but they don’t like people’s livelihood taxed, or the prosperity of the region threatened. It’s that simple.

@37: Of course you are correct, our Dear Mrs. Catalina. As I noted above, the “reactionary rage” tag is pre-emptive propaganda against the possibility we vote to repeal the head tax. Unable to admit our opposition originates in the reasons you gave, proponents of the head tax must construct their comforting fictional narrative. (Should the Referendum qualify and pass, I’m expecting proponents of the head tax to cry “voter fraud!!1!” to ‘explain’ their landslide defeat.)

In 2017, Boeing paid 13.3% in taxes on profits of $9.6 billion.
Microsoft has $138.5 billion in cash stashed in overseas banks.
Amazon paid zero in federal income tax in 2017, and also received a $700+million benefit from the new "tax" law.
And yall wanna pick on the people who have to live in their cars? Fuck off.

Thanks for that cogent, thoughtful analysis of the situation, giantmeteor2016 dear. It's always so good to see one defend their side of an argument like an adult.

I think what you and other angersloggers miss in the discussion about housing is that what we are doing now is not working. I personally don't care if there's a head tax, because as you point out, the companies have a lot of money and a lot of their bluster is just that. Amazon is not going anywhere. HQ2 is a good thing for both the company and Seattle, because we don't want to end up being a company town again. Both Seattle and Amazon need to diversify.

What I, and many others, object to is that we have been trying to "end homelessness" in Seattle for well over a decade, and nothing is helping - and there really doesn't seem to be much of a plan. That's because this isn't all about housing. It's about housing policy (zoning, rental policies, affordability, access to transit in outlying areas, congestion), healthcare (both mental and physical), addiction services, and a bloated and siloed private sector charity industry that really doesn't care much about changing the status quo. Union Gospel Mission et al have got theirs. They don't want to upset the apple cart.

Until we fix that - and most of that is governmental policy - we shouldn't continue to throw money at a problem. And we shouldn't pick on local employers, because those employees (and the people whose livelihood is dependent on those employees) feel like they are being attacked. Make of that what you will, but that is the reality of the situation.

Homelessness is not a Seattle problem. It's a national problem, which is hitting our region particularly hard. Other cities in the Puget Sound need to work with Seattle on resolving this.

Swamp Thing (Your real name?) You haven’t noticed all the corporate welfare benefits given out to the super rich companies, bankers and other very wealthy leeches including the owners of the private prison complexes? They aew answerable to no one.They own the means of production. We don’t. We get crumbs.

Why do you hate down and out people so much that are being victimized by this system?
Is it too difficult to face the real causes? This hate campaign against folks trying to survive is so ignorant and tedious. Name calling is so childish.

If governments really wanted to end homelessness they could do it practically overnight but their owners might not like that. Some of them are owners example Herr Trump.

Ivy, I'm curious, how would the government end homeless overnight?

Mrs. Vel-DuRay @40: “I think what you and other angersloggers miss in the discussion about housing is that what we are doing now is not working.”

Indeed, to hear the proponents of the head tax tell it, everything has gone swimmingly, and once we dedicate revenues from the head tax to the problem, we’ll have everyone housed. Therefore, any opponents of the head tax simply must be brutally cruel, short-sighted persons who hate the homeless, secretly believe in fascism, and admire Donald Trump — all of this in Seattle! It’s a divorce from reality we’re used to seeing from the Rapture Right.

(This weekend, at a street fair adjacent to a local park, I saw three persons wearing fresh colored T-shirts with the legend, “Bring Seattle Home - Decline to Sign”. Signature-gatherers for the Referendum to repeal the head tax were nowhere in sight - a spokesman for that effort had said, earlier in the week, that they expect to qualify the Referendum easily.)

@44: Ivy has no idea. Her entire shtick involves coming here and making bitter, whiny complaints, then fleeing when challenged.