“Only” 3400 homeless people in whole country.
So compared to alot of countries its great.
But in general its extremely hard to become homeless in Finland unless you have severe addictions or problems you refuse to seek help.
No, it’s not true. We have a lot of homeless people
Yes its true that it is largely eradicated, not completely but largely.
Most homeless people messed up their things themselves. Ofc there are few who just had bad luck with stuff, but mostly its about getting money from government to pay the rent, but instead of paying the rent they spend the money on drugs and get evicted.
There has been news in Finland that homelessness has been increasing over the past year and a half.
Many who are homeless in Finland are homeless because of refusing help. So in other words yes, homelessnes exists but there are programs and organizations that help if you seek help.
In a sense yeah.
There’s a strong support system for people going through difficult times and a lot of resources/social services available, so it’s actually very rare for someone to end up homeless unless all help is refused or certain conditions apply. Becoming homeless is really difficult here because the system is designed to catch you before that happens.
Kind of? I mean, yeah, we don’t have people living on the streets in tents and whatnot, but still. If you’re broke, you’re broke. We’re talking bottom of the barrel benefits here, just enough to survive, and a small apartment.
Pretty much the homeless people you see fall into one of two categories, those who refuse to help or to change themselves (aka they trash the place or don’t follow rules and get kicked out), these people are most often addicts of some form.
The second category are people who refuse to seek help, either out of some personal beliefs, not knowing how or fear of repercussions. These people are often foreigners most notably the last bit.
Finland has made great efforts to help people in need (not only homeless), and it has worked to great success that they were able and willing to cross political boundaries and work together.
That said, neither has homelessness completely disappeared (far from it!) nor is it clear if the progress will be sustainable, now that many social programmes face funds reductions…
But most of all – it is probably not a scheme that can be transferred 1:1 to many other countries. It worked because of the specifics of Finland, where people are more ready to give support to fellow countrymen and -women, because many other safeguards are already in place, and also because the economic situation allowed for this effort.
So all in all, it is maybe half-true. But it is at least a lot truer than for other countries. And I think the Finns should be prouder of this achievement than what they seem if you go by the comments here.
Not Finland per say.
Winter did.
You can’t be fully homeless in Finland, Norway or Sweden, it’s too cold for that, and unlike Siberia, there’s no hot pipes to make shelters around, in Canada you have homeless shelters where people living there are qualified homeless; in the end it is the cold that reduces homelessness; because even in Siberia, the hot pipes can only take so many people.
I don’t like posts where a country did this or that, without realizing the major differences; even the attitude usually seen in the Nordics, is the product of weather; take a group of Finns to say, Argentina, and make them live on their own, and soon enough they’d be indistinguishable in attitudes from Argentinians; oh wait, that actually happened, I read about it from an old Spanish book, without any external influence, because they spoke Finnish and Swedish, they became a tigher community and changed their customs, the way they built, the food they eat, until, they all decided to leave the isolated village because they realized they identified more with Argentina than Finland as generations shaped them even without any Argentinians living there but themselves (now considered Argentinians as born there), and nothing but the ancient remains of the village of the Finns remain, a story forgotten and that likely will die with that book, because it’s a story as old as time.
People don’t seem to understand how much something like weather can affect the way society organizes itself, and affects each individual; this is how the Nordics can have great infrastructure, Russia worse because so rich in oil so who cares if heating is inefficient, and a warm country they just put four sticks and roof and call it a day; equally, something like the cold, will simply, on its own, reduce homelessness to a ridiculous degree.
There is less homelesness than in many other countries, that’s true. But is the situation perfect? No.
It’s because there are multiple levels of social safety nets. If you get unemployed, you get unemployment benefits that are almost as high as your salary for some time. After that you get smaller benefits. If your income is low, you can get housing subsidies. If you situation is really bad monetary wise, you can get toimeentulotuki and some other benefits.
So for a normal, mentally healthy person, it’s hard to become homeless, because you can get by with housing subsidies and toimeentulotuki even when you don’t have a job at all. It’s not a wealthy life, you have to life frugally. And you have to move to a small and cheap apartment. But these social benefits are the largest reason why people don’t turn homeless if they lose their job or face other problems.
Then there are people with mental health/alchohol/drug problems, and probably most of the homeless are having these kind of problems. There are publicly owned social housing for them, because it could be difficult to find apartment from housing markets.
Is the system perfect? No. It’s probably better than in many other countries though. That photo said “mental health support”, but that’s quite optimistic. There is not enough mental health support/aid, there are many who are not getting the help they would need.
80% Reintegrate into society succesfully… press (littlebit of) x to doubt.
I wonder how that is calculated.
I mean if it form everyone needing benefits, then quite possibly yeah, but then they were not necessarily really missing those things in first place, potentially just getting unemployed for while, or studying and needing benefits for that reason, so I would not really consider them yet unintegrated from society, and as result would not count them really into “reintegrating into society” statistic.
If we think of those who are actual really about to become homeless without last safety nets, and are actually already unintegrated from society, dealing with addictions and so, I would be kind of surprised if 80% reach sobriety, at least like more strict one, if we talk “nordic sobriety” where one might still drink quite some casual beer, then maybe.
But generally there are homeless people, but not much, and % of people who just choose to be homeless (aka are not necessarily even under financial hardship, but lifestyle of living in tent in forest and so appeas to them at that point of thei rlife) actually is not so massively insignificant it would not be possible to see in some statistics, that generally might be seen as being kind of positive indicator.
I would say that it is still remarkable how little we have rough sleeping here. This has been a major success. However the current trend is really alarming and the current government does not care. Especially cuts to building social housing will be a major problem.
This is not good.
Where is this no condition mental support for a working person as myself? They told me you have to cover half the price for therapy in any case. And if you have any substance abuse problems – they won’t help you (not my case but I find it irritating)
Kind of a gray area to claim 100%. I don’t think that’s humanely possible. But even the homeless people often live in homes. I’ve been to a few due to my job. They have food, bunks and activities, social workers there.
So it’s kinda murky. Not 100% homeless free, but only a fragment of “homeless” live outside.
In addition, half-way houses still exist, usually run by the city or the Salvation Army.
Also, there are people who don’t have an official address, just a mail address, where they “visit” on a daily basis.
You see sad stories about homeless in Helsinki, witch is insane, its the most expensive city to rent, theres not enough apartments etc. You would get a place to live immediatly If you would move to a smaller city, choosing to stay on example in Helsinki as a homeless is idiotic, naturally mental and addiction is the biggest reason
21 comments
Lol no.
No there is still homelessness here
you cant become homeless, without trying.
usually it is mental / drug / alcohol
https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/s/k1LQhUVIX1
Read this comment
“Only” 3400 homeless people in whole country.
So compared to alot of countries its great.
But in general its extremely hard to become homeless in Finland unless you have severe addictions or problems you refuse to seek help.
No, it’s not true. We have a lot of homeless people
Yes its true that it is largely eradicated, not completely but largely.
Most homeless people messed up their things themselves. Ofc there are few who just had bad luck with stuff, but mostly its about getting money from government to pay the rent, but instead of paying the rent they spend the money on drugs and get evicted.
There has been news in Finland that homelessness has been increasing over the past year and a half.
Many who are homeless in Finland are homeless because of refusing help. So in other words yes, homelessnes exists but there are programs and organizations that help if you seek help.
In a sense yeah.
There’s a strong support system for people going through difficult times and a lot of resources/social services available, so it’s actually very rare for someone to end up homeless unless all help is refused or certain conditions apply. Becoming homeless is really difficult here because the system is designed to catch you before that happens.
Kind of? I mean, yeah, we don’t have people living on the streets in tents and whatnot, but still. If you’re broke, you’re broke. We’re talking bottom of the barrel benefits here, just enough to survive, and a small apartment.
Pretty much the homeless people you see fall into one of two categories, those who refuse to help or to change themselves (aka they trash the place or don’t follow rules and get kicked out), these people are most often addicts of some form.
The second category are people who refuse to seek help, either out of some personal beliefs, not knowing how or fear of repercussions. These people are often foreigners most notably the last bit.
Finland has made great efforts to help people in need (not only homeless), and it has worked to great success that they were able and willing to cross political boundaries and work together.
Here are some statistics. Use DeepL or similar to translate: https://www.varke.fi/fi/tilastot-ja-julkaisut/asunnottomuus/asunnottomat-2024
That said, neither has homelessness completely disappeared (far from it!) nor is it clear if the progress will be sustainable, now that many social programmes face funds reductions…
But most of all – it is probably not a scheme that can be transferred 1:1 to many other countries. It worked because of the specifics of Finland, where people are more ready to give support to fellow countrymen and -women, because many other safeguards are already in place, and also because the economic situation allowed for this effort.
So all in all, it is maybe half-true. But it is at least a lot truer than for other countries. And I think the Finns should be prouder of this achievement than what they seem if you go by the comments here.
Not Finland per say.
Winter did.
You can’t be fully homeless in Finland, Norway or Sweden, it’s too cold for that, and unlike Siberia, there’s no hot pipes to make shelters around, in Canada you have homeless shelters where people living there are qualified homeless; in the end it is the cold that reduces homelessness; because even in Siberia, the hot pipes can only take so many people.
I don’t like posts where a country did this or that, without realizing the major differences; even the attitude usually seen in the Nordics, is the product of weather; take a group of Finns to say, Argentina, and make them live on their own, and soon enough they’d be indistinguishable in attitudes from Argentinians; oh wait, that actually happened, I read about it from an old Spanish book, without any external influence, because they spoke Finnish and Swedish, they became a tigher community and changed their customs, the way they built, the food they eat, until, they all decided to leave the isolated village because they realized they identified more with Argentina than Finland as generations shaped them even without any Argentinians living there but themselves (now considered Argentinians as born there), and nothing but the ancient remains of the village of the Finns remain, a story forgotten and that likely will die with that book, because it’s a story as old as time.
People don’t seem to understand how much something like weather can affect the way society organizes itself, and affects each individual; this is how the Nordics can have great infrastructure, Russia worse because so rich in oil so who cares if heating is inefficient, and a warm country they just put four sticks and roof and call it a day; equally, something like the cold, will simply, on its own, reduce homelessness to a ridiculous degree.
There is less homelesness than in many other countries, that’s true. But is the situation perfect? No.
It’s because there are multiple levels of social safety nets. If you get unemployed, you get unemployment benefits that are almost as high as your salary for some time. After that you get smaller benefits. If your income is low, you can get housing subsidies. If you situation is really bad monetary wise, you can get toimeentulotuki and some other benefits.
So for a normal, mentally healthy person, it’s hard to become homeless, because you can get by with housing subsidies and toimeentulotuki even when you don’t have a job at all. It’s not a wealthy life, you have to life frugally. And you have to move to a small and cheap apartment. But these social benefits are the largest reason why people don’t turn homeless if they lose their job or face other problems.
Then there are people with mental health/alchohol/drug problems, and probably most of the homeless are having these kind of problems. There are publicly owned social housing for them, because it could be difficult to find apartment from housing markets.
Is the system perfect? No. It’s probably better than in many other countries though. That photo said “mental health support”, but that’s quite optimistic. There is not enough mental health support/aid, there are many who are not getting the help they would need.
80% Reintegrate into society succesfully… press (littlebit of) x to doubt.
I wonder how that is calculated.
I mean if it form everyone needing benefits, then quite possibly yeah, but then they were not necessarily really missing those things in first place, potentially just getting unemployed for while, or studying and needing benefits for that reason, so I would not really consider them yet unintegrated from society, and as result would not count them really into “reintegrating into society” statistic.
If we think of those who are actual really about to become homeless without last safety nets, and are actually already unintegrated from society, dealing with addictions and so, I would be kind of surprised if 80% reach sobriety, at least like more strict one, if we talk “nordic sobriety” where one might still drink quite some casual beer, then maybe.
But generally there are homeless people, but not much, and % of people who just choose to be homeless (aka are not necessarily even under financial hardship, but lifestyle of living in tent in forest and so appeas to them at that point of thei rlife) actually is not so massively insignificant it would not be possible to see in some statistics, that generally might be seen as being kind of positive indicator.
[https://www.bigissue.com/news/housing/homelessness-finland-rough-sleeping/](https://www.bigissue.com/news/housing/homelessness-finland-rough-sleeping/)
I would say that it is still remarkable how little we have rough sleeping here. This has been a major success. However the current trend is really alarming and the current government does not care. Especially cuts to building social housing will be a major problem.
This is not good.
Where is this no condition mental support for a working person as myself? They told me you have to cover half the price for therapy in any case. And if you have any substance abuse problems – they won’t help you (not my case but I find it irritating)
Kind of a gray area to claim 100%. I don’t think that’s humanely possible. But even the homeless people often live in homes. I’ve been to a few due to my job. They have food, bunks and activities, social workers there.
So it’s kinda murky. Not 100% homeless free, but only a fragment of “homeless” live outside.
In addition, half-way houses still exist, usually run by the city or the Salvation Army.
Also, there are people who don’t have an official address, just a mail address, where they “visit” on a daily basis.
You see sad stories about homeless in Helsinki, witch is insane, its the most expensive city to rent, theres not enough apartments etc. You would get a place to live immediatly If you would move to a smaller city, choosing to stay on example in Helsinki as a homeless is idiotic, naturally mental and addiction is the biggest reason
Comments are closed.