Well, I'll venture into non-pc territory here, but for some reason immigrants do not seem to have the same homelessness problem, and undocumented workers can work for much less than Americans.

It may seem that way, but at least here in the UK homelessness is a huge problem in the immigrant community. It is virtually invisible though. You can get kicked out of the UK as a migrant (even from the EU) for being homeless, so keeping a low profile is essential.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/05/st-mungos-ho...

https://www.homeless.org.uk/connect/blogs/2018/jan/10/migran...

That's because undocumented workers live in undocumented housing which is to say illegally subdivided dwellings that people who aren't part of that community will not have access to even if they wanted to live in a fire trap.

Yes, it seems that our legislation on wages and housing make it harder for citizens to have a home than it is for undocumented immigrants.

I think this has more to do with a "social safety net" than minimum wage. Immigrants often come to the U.S. knowing other immigrants who are already here. This network of friends and family help them get on their feet. They have a community of people to help them when funds are tight. A couch to sleep to on if you can't make rent, an extra plate at dinner if you don't have enough for groceries this week. Many Americans, particularly those who wind up homeless, don't have any sort of safety net beyond what the government provides. Which is to say, almost nothing.

There are already a lot of homeless people working minimum wage jobs. Check any construction site. What's the point of a job if it can't even put a roof over your head?

The problem is a lack of social safety nets and a minimum wage not indexed for inflation, not government regulation against squalor.

It could be both/and instead of either/or. The other angle is we as a society have given up on personal responsibility for each other (i.e. lack of social safety net), and instead look for help from big government, which is notoriously inefficient, corruption prone and scammable.

Government is the framework through which we help each other. My tax money goes in, social services should come out. I will not comment on the unfounded generalization ("notoriously inefficient, corruption prone and scammable"). Government is not perfect, but it is not what you describe.

I would like to ask the parent comment if he thinks there is a more efficient way of managing society and all it's people.

Actually, lets start with defining what "efficient" actually means in this context? That the goverment spends little money? That it is able to do it's duties effectively?

When you write immigrants do you mean undocumented immigrants? It's confusing because your next clause is about undocumented workers so we the reader are left unclear.

My personal experience just from San Jose is there are a lot of immigrant homeless from southeast Asia, Mexico, and central America, it just depends on what neighborhood one visits.

Also, people who actually interviewed homeless, found something different from your speculation (I am assuming you didn't actually talk to a lot of homeless people), this story is just Los Angeles but there were a lot of other news stories and it's obviously an issue because the federal government made undocumented immigrants not eligible for federal aid in 1996.

https://www.scpr.org/news/2016/07/14/62582/immigrants-a-larg...

But they usually don't. They work harder, longer, and more efficiently than most americans and there's just as many people paying them fair wages as not. Also, when you have 6 working people in a house, it's a lot easier to justify the costs. How many roommates do you have working full time jobs and contributing to everything in the house?

They're not more efficient. It's a combination of willingness to work for less, longer hours to make up for it, and pooling resources with extended families that enables them to get by

If you've ever worked in the trades, you'd know this is untrue. In America, $$$ is everything and jobs go to the lowest bidders.

>What do you mean by "high minimum wage"? Federal minimum wage in the United States is still $7.25 which is not enough for someone to live on, especially in a high cost of living area. I don't understand.

He/she means "higher than the federal minimum".

Homelessness problems seem to loosely correlate with cities and states that have higher minimum wage (edit: so do many other things and homelessness problems might actually be correlating with one or several of those).

this has more to do with the fact that cities are far more favourable for homeless people to live.

I recently toured for 5 months in the US on my bicycle. My average cost was $30 per day. That included sightseeing, an airline ticket every month and a bus ticket every month. I used Warm Showers and wild camping, so I rarely paid for housing. $7.25 per hour is enough to live on. You just need to work enough hours, do long commutes and be very, very disciplined in all your purchases.

Even if you live in a state with no income tax, work full-time at your minimum wage job, and live as you describe (which is homeless) your take home pay would only barely cover your $30/day budget. What happens when you get sick and have to miss a shift? Or need to see a doctor? What happens if your job is in New England where it's well below freezing at night for a significant portion of the year?

It's disingenuous to perpetuate the notion that "discipline" is all that's needed to survive on minimum wage and it's patently ridiculous to suggest that people on minimum wage ought to "wild camp" in order to make ends meet.

I live on less than 30/day (including rent) working a poorly paid manual labor part time job in a state with income tax. No, I don't own a car. Yes, I split housing costs with other people.

> What happens when you get sick and have to miss a shift?

As mandated by state law, I get paid for my normal hours.

> It's disingenuous to perpetuate the notion that "discipline" is all that's needed to survive on minimum wage

It's also amusing to be lectured about how your situation is impossible by people who are going into debt making 80k+ a year.

>As mandated by sate law, I get paid for my normal hours.

Paid sick time is not mandated by law in most states. http://www.paidsickdays.org/research-resources/current-sick-...

Nobody wants to hear that there are some people who are just not equipped for an environment A) with abundant access to addictive substances and B) where economic success is dependent on being reasonably intelligent and able to delay gratification.

Epigenetic damage can undoubtedly predispose one to addiction, etc. But bad health in general can get you unhoused, and there's an epidemic of chronic illness. Delaying gratification and a good IQ aren't sufficient to pave your way in the world.

If I had to survive on minimum wage, I would do things differently: No airline tickets, no long distance bus tickets and no sightseeing. Cooking ramen noodles instead of eating the dollar burgers at that I bought at McDonalds.

I would also work much more than 40 hours a week.

I would share a flat in a poor neighbourhood with someone.

I'm not saying everyone has the discipline to pull it off. I'm just saying I can see how some immigrants can live off minimum wage and still send money home every year.

Why would it be better to be unemployed at 15U$S an hour that employed at 5U$S an hour?

Just to get this clear: you’re suggesting a viable alternative to homelessness is… being homeless? Or is wild camping considered a domicile, these days?

Question for you: at most national/state parks, there are available campsites that cost in the range of $5-$20 per night. These are advertised on their usual websites. These are sites for car camping. However, the couple times I've called, I've asked about primitive camping (aka hike into the woods and camp at the primitive sites), and it turns out that this is free. But the primitive campsites aren't ever discussed on the park websites.

Does this match with your experience? Where did you usually camp?

Many state parks in California has a special area for cyclists and hikers at a special rate ($5 - $10) and no reservation is needed. 1 night only in each park.

AFAIK, primitive camping for a night or two in a National Forest is free. Just be far enough away from roads and water sources. And many national parks have national forests near them.

Also check out freecampsites.net

I did camp on private property a few times without permission and only got discovered once: It was at a church and the pastor gave me free breakfast.

Let them bike tour (and eat cake)? Besides the camping, you also relied on the kindness of strangers for showers and other hospitality. I find your response pretty heartbreaking because it illustrates just how big of an empathy gap we're dealing with in the US between the rich and poor.

   You just need to work enough hours, do long commutes and be very, very disciplined in all your purchases.

This is an old idea, but it's never been a good or accurate one. I think it appeals to some people because it allows them to dissociate from any feeling of collective responsibility, by placing that on the individuals alone.

This assumes you're healthy and have no other responsibilities. A minor health problem would lead to ruin with this lifestyle, and it's just not possible if you have to care for family members.

So you were homeless this whole time? It sounds like you are saying you can live on minimum wage if you are willing to be homeless? Do I have that right?

"high minimum wage" probably refers to the minimum wage set by high costs cities, that is "higher" then the federal. Seattle , for example, it is $15 for certain types of employment.