SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Velonews reports that former champion cyclist Twigg got a CS degree but wasn't too successful in that career, and is now homeless in Seattle, https://www.velonews.com/2019/04/news/now-homeless-twigg-opens-up-in-article-with-seattle-times_492734 A longer version of the story/interview appears in the Seattle Times, https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/olympic-medal-winning-cyclist-rebecca-twigg-is-homeless-in-seattle/
Rebecca Twigg has now been without a home for almost five years in Seattle, living first with friends and family, then in her car, then in homeless shelters and then, for a night, under garbage bags on the street downtown. She hasn't had a bike for years, and no one recognizes her anymore, she says.
Twigg, 56, agreed to share her story to convince the public that not all homeless people are addicted to drugs or alcohol; that there are many like her, who have struggled with employment and are "confused," as she said she is, about what to do next with their lives. She did not want to discuss mental health but feels it should be treated more seriously in Washington.
"Some of the hard days are really painful when you're training for racing," Twigg said, "but being homeless, when you have little hope or knowledge of where the finish line is going to be, is just as hard."
[...] She was spotted at 17 by famous cycling coach Eddie Borysewicz. After she won the world championship, he invited her to live in the Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs and train for the 1984 Olympic Games, where for the first time, women would be competing on bicycles.
Americans dominated the Olympics that year. Twigg won a silver medal, missing gold by a few inches to famous racer Connie Carpenter. She continued on her way up over the next several years, setting world records, winning world titles, and racing more than 60 times a year. She became known for her competition in individual pursuit, where two cyclists start at the same time on opposite sides of the track and each tries to catch the other. She's still among the most-decorated athletes in pursuit.
But the breakneck pace couldn't continue forever. She was married and soon after divorced. She crashed in Texas, broke her thumb and got 13 stitches in her head. The following year she felt burned out. She took a break at age 26, and that year she grew an entire inch, possibly because her body no longer had to expend so much energy training.
Twigg got an associate degree in computer science and became a programmer for a seaweed-products company in San Diego.
Twigg says the career wasn't a perfect fit. She quit and started training for the 1992 Olympic Games, winning a bronze medal in the 3,000-meter pursuit after only nine months of training. As she entered her 30s, she became regarded as the best American female cyclist.
The article has more details, she tried other IT jobs, but (not surprisingly to me) it sounds like her heart wasn't really in it.
If you were in her spot, what would you do for a second act, after such stunning early success in international sports? Some former athletes become motivational speakers or coaches, but she may not be the "self promoter" type, relying on her skill/strength for her success instead of team politics.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 18 2019, @01:38AM (14 children)
Ok. How many people is that? At these low levels of homelessness IMHO, you're speaking of people between homes and people with a lot of those comorbid factors.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday April 18 2019, @03:11AM (13 children)
Based on a rough sample size of about n=50, and with the understanding that it's biased toward the urban population here in Madison, I'd say at least 70% would be helped immediately and finally by a housing first initiative. That number may be higher or lower elsewhere. What is for certain is that the longer people stay homeless, with the world cutting them out of society and treating them as somewhere between invisible and vermin to be exterminated, the lower that number will go.
And it sounds tome like you want that to happen, like you want it to be a self-fulfilling prophecy, so you can say there was no sense in helping to begin with. Again: I wish long-term homelessness upon you in as swift a manner as possible, so that you learn.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday April 18 2019, @06:14AM (12 children)
There are two counterpoints to that. First, you have a habit of saying falsehoods though not intentionally, I think. Just because you say this, doesn't mean it's close to reality. But let's ignore that Azuma filter.
Second, I find it interesting that by US measures of homelessness, only a quarter [endhomelessness.org] of the homeless qualify as what is called "chronically homeless". That is, homeless for a total duration of a year or more over a period of three years. That is, the people who are apparently not amenable to a housing first initiative by your estimate are similar in fraction to this group which has serious problems with homelessness.
Thus, even if we assume that 70% of the homeless can benefit from free/cheap housing provided by someone, we have the situation that about the same number of homeless find housing anyway (else there would be more chronically homeless in the first place). Looks to me like I was correct on the assertion that it's people between homes and people with those comorbid factors. I grant there may well be significant economic benefit to housing first - which apparently is implemented in Canada and a number of US cities, but I'd like to see some numbers - particularly how much faster people get off the street and find jobs than when they're not on housing first. Perhaps you can supply that?
Still it strikes me that the people most likely to be successful after housing first, would be successful anyway. That's the placebo effect, but with someone else's money.
I'm used to zealots exaggerating problems and their desired solutions. So no skin off my teeth. In response, I don't wish long-term involuntary homelessness on you because it's suffering and wouldn't make you a better person.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday April 18 2019, @10:30PM (11 children)
You will say and do anything to defend that worldview, I get it.
Again: not doin' this for you, pal. You made your decision and it's going to cost you a good long time writhing in Hellfire. This is for everyone who has to deal with your shit. Think of it as a sort of airborne vaccination program. This may be the one case where vaccines *do* cause autism flareups (yours).
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Saturday April 20 2019, @12:09PM (10 children)
And you'll keep projecting, I get that.
What I find interesting is that the only time you've attempted any sort of rational argument with me in the past few weeks, you a) don't follow through with any sort of support for your argument other than a personal observation which could be very wrong due to your past issues with delusion, b) immediately abandon the approach, indicating you weren't serious, and then c) brag about how you tried and it didn't work.
The obvious rebuttal here is that if you're going to use an economics argument, then show this housing first approach actually works in the way you claim it works. It looks to me like even in the absence of such an approach, more than half of the homeless population on their own gets housing of some kind which is very close to the potential success rate from your observations of your local population of homeless. In other words, does it do something or is it a placebo? Supporting programs that don't work can generate more homelessness (through redirection of resources via taxes and such).
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday April 20 2019, @12:29PM (9 children)
I already told you: Salt Lake City.
And, again, why do I (and all other properly functioning human beings) have to debase myself down to "here's a purely mathematical, monetary argument for why this works" anyway? You're a failure, a skinwalking reject that just looks like it has a human shape, something that feeds on the suffering of others. You have no place in this discussion. If you don't see why caring about other human beings has a benefit beyond simply cash in hand (or cash in ledger, whatever) then you don't belong anywhere near any discussion, and God forbid any policymaking, on the subject.
tl;dr: go away, we're done with you pissing in the gene pool.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday April 20 2019, @12:33PM (8 children)
I hear it's a city. What about them?
Because otherwise there's no point listening to you? You have a history of saying whatever to validate your worldview. That good enough?
This is an example of how you just say shit. I care about human beings, but I recognize the existence of cost. For example, helping a human being by hurting two more isn't a good tradeoff for me. How about you?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday April 20 2019, @12:41PM (7 children)
You're full of shit, and worse, you gussy it up by pretending to be reasonable, moral, and concerned with cost. We can all see this.
I only keep this up in order to get you to keep exposing yourself, so people can see you degenerate to exactly this sort of post: stripped down to bare willful ignorance, hypocrisy, and outright bullshitting. Whatever the opposite of "virtue signalling" is, you're doing it, and you actually think it's signalling virtue.
Keep it up, Hallow. Your corrosive inhumanity can't touch me, and the more you display it and double down on it, the more it becomes obvious to anyone watching what kind of walking septic tank you are. Keep it up.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday April 20 2019, @12:49PM (6 children)
Why are you telling the rest of us this? I wonder if there's anyone who actually believes you any more?
Your natural level, of course.
On the earlier topic, I googled around and the housing first thing seems to be a Canadian policy. They claimed all kinds of nice things for the policy, but I couldn't find independent evaluation of the policy. As I've noted before, a first step to policy advocacy should be showing that it's better than not doing anything. So is that true here? Is housing first better than not doing anything?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday April 21 2019, @12:02AM (5 children)
I'm pretty sure "the rest of us" know this and are on board :) You don't have anywhere as many supporters or friends as you think you do, and part of the reason why is your utter lack of common humanity. Most people can sense this and steer clear, because we know, if only subconsciously, that people like you are poison to a functioning society.
The data are out there. Look them up. I am not going to do your homework for you, and you have no one to blame but yourself for refusing to. And "the rest of us," of course, will see that you don't, which further erodes your credibility.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Sunday April 21 2019, @02:56AM (4 children)
In other words, you don't know that it's any better. You merely assume so.
Uh huh. You're not the rest of the internet.
Too bad. It's your opinion.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday April 21 2019, @03:52AM (3 children)
Facts are not opinions. Educate yourself. The data is out there; you refuse to assimilate it because it breaks your worldview over its knee like the flimsy piece of kindling it is. You did exactly what I predicted you to do, almost down to the word, and it's not helping your case any, despite what you may think.
Buddy, I don't *need* to be "the rest of the internet." You will find people who agree with you online, sure, but it's *where* you find them that's most telling. Let's just say between the two of us, I am not the one who will find her fellow travelers on Gab or Stormfront. You will, because your kind of economic "thinking" is popular with that crowd for reasons which ought to be fairly obvious.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 21 2019, @05:36PM (2 children)
There's way too much of this bullshit on the internet where people assert stuff and then tell me to back it up for them. Sorry, it's your job to sell your fucking arguments with those alleged facts. Just do your job.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday April 21 2019, @06:05PM (1 child)
The very first search result from DDG is this story from 2015 from NPR: https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how [npr.org]
Of course, some more recent articles attempt to dispute this, but they all follow a similar track: conflating the "chronically homeless," who are the hard cases mentioned before, with all homeless people. The media itself seems to want to make the very poorest of us suffer; it's the main reason I trust virtually nothing they say when it comes to money. Pareto ratios pop up all over nature; any program that wants to make real headway here has to factor that in to begin with.
How goddamned lazy can you be? I know, I know, as lazy as it takes not to ever have to change your views or accept new facts. Your mind is petrified, and you like it that way. You think it's a brain boner. If beliefs remain ossified for upwards of 4 years, see a psychiatrist.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 22 2019, @08:23PM
He's almost as lazy as someone who said most homeless people aren't mentally ill.