Say-So

The KDT (Kupieckie Domy Towarowe) or in loose translation - Merchants’ Shopping Center in the heart of Warsaw is history. Its closure registered in international headlines due to a formidable resistance of the tenant merchants against the incoming bailiffs and private guard. Polish media described the events as a “battle of a magnitude unseen since 1989″. Indeed, the images of the struggle were reminiscent of the heydays of Solidarity back when it was still a trade union free of political aspirations. The retailers of KDT barricaded themselves inside the halls and fought to preserve 2000 jobs the loss of which is estimated to impact 8000 people.

Mainstream news sources delivered a brief and sensationalistic account of the recent chain of events. Tear gas, stone throwing, water blasts and beatings caused injuries to roughly 100 people. The leaders of KDT partnership had been negotiating with the city regarding their status as occupants of prime real estate for years. As a result of last round of failed talks, current mayor of Warsaw (the post is also commonly known as the presidency of the city) - Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz - refused to renew the lease in January 2009. The occupants of KDT ran their business illegally since, and were informed of the time and date of eviction. Warsaw’s municipal government claims that the tenants unlawfully refused to vacate the building. The organizers of the opposition will be criminally charged and held accountable for property damage.

Sympathizers on the side of the city portray the merchants as obstructionist, self centered and greedy, their lengthy, assertive negotiations as seeking special consideration. The KDT hall, which was a makeshift shopping center and not a “bazaar” as it is too often called, was constructed in 2001 to replace an open air market of free standing metal stands popularly nicknamed “jaws”. Made of sheets of corrugated metal it was always intended to be a temporary solution until the permanent shopping center was built in its stead. Ten years ago that temporary shelter, (while its aesthetic was questioned) was considered to be a face lift, certainly an improvement over the free standing stalls. It is now thought of as an eyesore by the increasing numbers of the ever more sophisticated Varsovians.

What took place on the streets of Warsaw, and what many fail to recognize and appropriately name - is sadly a story seen many times before all around the globe - the dispossession of poorly organized segments of population by a neoliberal government looking out for the interests of big business. The impressive resistance mounted by the merchants is a testimony to their weakness, not strength. Their unique situation comprised of a combination of cultural diversity entirely new in Polish society along with their ambiguous class definition made it difficult to align themselves politically and seek protective backing. That same set of circumstances made them vulnerable to exploitation by self serving politicians. It is that lack of political representation that drove the KDT partnership towards desperate and violent measures according to Agata Czarnacka author of an opinion published at the left wing political commentary website krytykapolityczna.pl. Hers is a knowledgeable and compassionate account of everything not mentioned anywhere else about the KDT Warsaw crisis. The essay titled “Bloody Riots Among the Middle Class” deserves a full translation, here I hope to do her justice by summing up some of her more poignant points. (original in Polish).

Ms. Czarnacka recounts that back in 1999 when the KDT partnership was founded under the Civic Platform mandated Warsaw presidency - an average KDT merchant was a model CP voter, a hard working, entrepreneurial, self-made individualist. Under the rival Law and Justice mayorship in 2005, promises of a 30 year lease and a newly built proper locale were made no doubt in order to woo the relevant voters in the face of looming elections. The merchants’ egos were stroked, and expectations set high. When Ms. Gronkiewicz-Waltz became the mayor in 2006, she was faced with significant degree of posturing and tactical vying for most advantageous outcome by the KDT representatives - a result of prior negotiations under a different government. As recently as a few months ago, in summer 2009, the merchants were being courted by both the Democratic Left Alliance and by the Democratic Party.

Most interestingly, the author brings to light the curiously nationalist image that the KDT has forged, branding itself as a “Polish place to shop” in direct opposition to the supposedly Jewish Golden Terraces across the street. This postulated image is all the more jarring if one has indeed had the opportunity to visit or shop at KDT. It was by far more ethnically diverse than the average cross section of the Polish population, with many merchants having come from the middle east or the far east. The Asian, and the most numerous among them - the Vietnamese diaspora, are generally marginalized in the Polish society to the point of invisibility.

Add to the mix the unclear and ill defined class standing and unsurprisingly the situation becomes noxious. The article mentions that the neoliberal practices in Poland forced significant chunks of population into self employment and created a new sector of society which could typically be defined as middle class entrepreneurs but without the backbone capital usually associated with it. The ambivalent character of the new Polish proletariat disallows the application of Western social conventions, since according to Ms. Czarnacka the “working class” (which serves as a counterpart to the “middle class”), has been eliminated from existence. To which, I will add alas - in theory perhaps, but not in practice.

When Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz assumed the city presidency, the plans for the prime spot occupied by the KDT changed and along with it, turned the fortune of the lessee retailers. A shopping area is still part of the proposal for the development of the greater stretch of Parade Square, but its crown jewel will be a Museum of Modern Arts. On the first glance it is a lofty idea and a fitting design for exploitation of the most desirable real estate in the country. It is also a skillful public relations measure convincing the public that the presence of provincial merchants trading with cheap Asian goods is a tarnishing anathema to the image of Warsaw as a thriving European capital.

It is mid 2009 and the KDT has been liquidated. The construction of the museum and the adjacent shopping center will not start till 2011, if at all. It is worthwhile mentioning that the merchants have collected and payed 16 million PLN for the 700 stands and now vacant KDT hall. Adding insult to injury, the city of Warsaw made the new proposed retail area “available” to the KDT merchants - at a rental market price (140 EU/m2 per month). To put things in perspective, presently, the EUR-PLN exchange is 1-4, while minimum wage is less than 1300 PLN monthly. Since, very predictably (and I dare to say premeditatedly) it was well beyond reach of the KDT partnership, the city earmarked alternative locations to which the retailers could move. All of them turned out to be on the peripheries of the city. Under pressure from the KDT negotiators, the city representatives offered up a few central areas one of which, near Okopowa street was finally agreed upon, for the price of 41 mln PLN. Embittered merchants claim that the agreement never came to fruition because the city negotiators at the last minute raised the price to 65 mln PLN. Moreover, the city boasted offering 200 merchant stands without auction on first come first served basis for those who voluntarily renounced their KDT spots. On closer scrutiny - 200 spots when 700 are needed - is not a gesture of rapprochement but a divisive tactic aiming to split and weaken the KDT opposition.

Despite the facts seriously calling into question the attitude and the goodwill of the city in respect to KDT, the Polish public opinion is divided. To some, the disobeying of law, rioting and disorder are in themselves transgressions worthy of condemnation. The expurgation by the city of “bazaar” vendors is fully supported. The KDT merchants were considered to have had plenty of notice. They ought to have taken care of themselves and secured alternative sources of income. They are fully to blame for their own demise.

Others, criticize the nationalist tendencies and the demagogic tactics (such as presence of children in the barricaded hall) used by the organizers of the KDT, their unwillingness to compromise, the misdirection of efforts away from securing employment and instead focusing on achieving political victory (original article in Polish). Ironically, alongside the supporters of the municipal government, this view holds the KDT leaders unilaterally responsible for the riots, violence and personal injuries.

The majority holds a compromising view - splitting the blame and accusing both parties of absence of goodwill and inability to reach an agreement. It is seemingly a sensible stance going amiss on one crucial point - that of inequitable negotiations and all too evident class oppression.

Only a minority sided with the victims of Tuesday’s eviction. They chanted and marched, protested, waved flags and taunted the police which was called in on behalf of the city to help overpower the unexpectedly strong opposition. The singing of the national anthem, the chanting of the name of “Solidarity” and banners with nationalist slogans were evocative of the great struggle for freedom of the 1980s. The methods used in protests clearly have not changed in the last 20 years, but Poland has. According to a 2002 census roughly 1.23% declared “other” as nationality (ie. other than Polish, Silesian, German, Belorussian, Ukrainian, Roma etc.) and 2.03% did not declare any. Who are the 1.25 mln people living in Poland who choose to call themselves “other” or not to identify themselves at all? Where were the racial minorities who also had a stake in the fight over KDT during riots? How do they feel about slogans such as “KDT - good because it is Polish”?

The populist Law and Justice party a close rival of the Civic Platform in the past, is already feeding off Ms. Gronkiewicz-Waltz’s failure to handle the crisis. Naturally, their criticism is politically motivated and reactionary. It is conceivable however that they will be able to recapture the imagination of the Polish electorate in the face of increasingly more visible fallout of liberal economics. The lack of sensitivity that Poles exhibit towards minorities may turn, under heavy nationalistic rule into something much, much, worse.

During my 5 week absence from the United States between April 19th and May 30th, I led a largely self absorbed life in Buenos Aires, taking in the local reality, learning about Argentina’s political and economic challenges of the moment, bonding and assimilating. During that time, when my attention was turned away, the American media buzzed (and I seem to have caught the tail end off it upon my return) with articles and interviews with Fareed Zakaria. Within matter of weeks he appeared on Charlie Rose, The Daily Show and was a speaker at the New Yorker Conference.

Zakaria was a guest on The Daily Show for the first time shortly after the nefarious events of 9/11, in October 2001. As the editor of Newsweek magazine he talked about Islamic fundamentalism and why the regimes of the middle east provide such fertile ground for dangerous anti-American sentiments. He explained in brief and simplified manner what his Newsweek article - Why They Hate US thoroughly and knowledgeably laid out in a masterstroke of irrefutable logic. In that article he dismissed the simpleton’s notion promoted by president H.W. Bush, his administration and the supporting media, that America was hated for its “way of life” in which wealth and freedom are staple. He went on to analyze and explain how historical events of the last 30 years, economical predicaments and cultural particularities of the region, have conglomerated to shape the anti-American attitude of an increasing number of young middle eastern men, the attitude which gained mass and exploded into the forefront of American consciousness with two planes demolishing the World Trade Towers, and a third crashing short of its Pentagon target, killing thousands.

Fareed Zakaria’s latest book The Post American World is groundbreaking and equally as insightful. Mr Zakaria’s body of work encompasses many informative and enlightening essays, books and articles. “The Post American World” however is pivotal in potentially being capable of reflecting back to Americans how their country, their government and its policies are perceived in the global, international context. Just as an individual can benefit from a critical glance in a mirror, so can a nation. Zakaria’s book does America a favor by providing content which can be used as a reflective surface for our consideration. It helps to examine the quasi-mythological stature United State has risen to in the eyes of its patriot citizens as a result of the country’s role in the outcome of WWII and its unrivaled economic standing in decades following. The country found itself in an unprecedented position of being the world’s single dominant power after the collapse of the counterbalancing arch-nemesis - the Soviet Union in 1991. The imperial laurel crown seemed to have settled deeper onto the forehead of American body politic.

With the decline of communism, the currents of Globalization (at work for centuries, academically defined in the 60s and institutionalized in the 90s) were reinvigorated. They silently have been terra-forming the economic balance of power in the world. The United States today finds itself slightly caught unaware by unintended consequences of its own international economic policies. Since, flaunting of the “free market” is as typically American as holding high the standard of “democracy”. American companies have aggressively pursued new business opportunities opening up in China as the Soviet sphere of influence crumbled. Next came India. The access to massive cheap labor in both countries combined amounting to a third of our planet’s population proved irresistible. With help of foreign investment, China established itself as the producer of very affordable goods for export to the rest of the world and India as a hub of inexpensive information technology know-how. Both, as if to spite the critics of Globalization, have found their own respective international stronghold market niches which afford them economic influence and by extension political power from which they were excluded in the 20th century. Chinese and Indian rapid development are only two among a few others. Russia is rebounding. Brasil is the most recent new appendage to the list of large and fast growing countries.”The Rise of the Rest” is appropriately the subtitle of Fareed Zakaria’s book which aims to map out the position of the United States among nations in the light of the changes of the last decade. The book’s descriptions reads as follows:

This is not a book about the decline of America, but rather about the rise of everyone else.” So begins Fareed Zakaria’s important new work on the era we are now entering. Following on the success of his best-selling The Future of Freedom, Zakaria describes with equal prescience a world in which the United States will no longer dominate the global economy, orchestrate geopolitics, or overwhelm cultures. He sees the “rise of the rest”—the growth of countries like China, India, Brazil, Russia, and many others—as the great story of our time, and one that will reshape the world. The tallest buildings, biggest dams, largest-selling movies, and most advanced cell phones are all being built outside the United States. This economic growth is producing political confidence, national pride, and potentially international problems. How should the United States understand and thrive in this rapidly changing international climate? What does it mean to live in a truly global era? Zakaria answers these questions with his customary lucidity, insight, and imagination.

The un-American view - is a tough point to sell in USA and a difficult mindset to convey. Zakaria summarizes his ideas in The Future of American Power and offers a faint consoling statement to those who find it difficult to part with sitting at the helm of world affairs in The Rise of the Rest :

It’s true China is booming, Russia is growing more assertive, terrorism is a threat. But if America is losing the ability to dictate to this new world, it has not lost the ability to lead.

The new leadership role requires an inclusive world policy and a recognition of legitimate interests of other countries, a perspective clearly incomprehensible to the majority of American present day politicians. My intuition goes against Zakaria’s assertion that challenges the United Sates faces are mainly political and only to a small degree economic. The future he describes for America is in my opinion largely a theorem of best possible outcome. I see the decline of the country’s economic influence as a factor of its political girth. I find beauty in the following coincidental symmetry: the totalitarian regimes associated with communism were toppled from inside first by a native systemic creation - a workers’ union - the Solidarity, while the American imperial bubble was quietly punctured as the country was busy contemplating its own greatness by capitalism’s main driving process hungry for incessant growth and profit - the spread of free markets and Globalization, and its embodiment - the multinational corporation.

“Persevering”, my coworker once described me. “Dogged” and “obsessive” I might add.

The post is again about Poland and what quickly becomes patent, my unresolved issues with the country of my birth. In the past year I have incited a few electronic discussions with my extended family on the topic of politics and the strong nationalistic, religious and conservative character of Poland in its current incarnation. On my recent visit we kept at it in person. Pointing out the negatives of laisse-faire market liberalism and the dangers inherent in strong nationalist and religious sentiments, I caught myself basing all my arguments on my daily living experience and current events in the United States. Both Poland and the USA are governed by right wing conservative parties, both are overwhelmingly Christian. It was only too inviting and too easy to make simpleminded comparisons.

I scoured Warsaw bookstores looking for an authentic overview of the most recent polish political history. I was searching for a local voice and a local perspective. For the most part however, I would find very little of interest, only the usual all too common display of John Paul II anthology and a litany of polish WWII victimhood. Ultimately, in a downtown Warsaw bookstore (hosting a gun shop! [my "liberal/latte sipping/San Francisco intellectual" bias bobs up in acknowledgment that Walmart and guns is lamentable but expected, yet a combination of bookstore and guns seems shockingly denatured]) I reached out for a book by David Ost.

—

It is now a few months since I paused that last thought, Poland kicked the ultra right wing coalition and elected a pro market government which differs from its predecessor by a hair, mainly in the international pro-European stance - a welcome change. I have since finished reading The Defeat of Solidarity . The irony of reading a book in Polish translation about the socio-economical and political processes in Poland written in English by an American professor of political science, is noteworthy. I suspect that the reason for my inability to find a Polish authored analysis of the transition from a planned market to a free market economy and its effects on the Polish society is due to the lack of distance and grand perspective, which David Ost possessed by virtue of simply being an outsider.

The book is very informative. Its most captivating point in my opinion is the attempt to explain how the hardships of economic reforms and the inability of political leadership to keep its electorate, ultimately resulted in increased support for extreme right-wing ideas. It may seem like an unfortunate turn of events where the working classes shunned and dismissed by their elected leaders found others, who happened to espouse nationalist and catholic ideologies and who were willing to listen to their grievances and take on their causes all of course, in the self serving pursuit of rising to power. The truth of the matter is however that Poland always has been a tradition bound conservative society; nationalist, since its borders were constantly threatened by invading neighbors ever since its birth as a country in the 10th century, and fervently catholic, ever more so, since religion was denounced by the communist regime. The path that David Ost is tracing however fascinating, is rather a short one. It takes a religious society with strong national identity to one that is inclined to emphasize those aspects as unique attributes.

My hesitance for drawing too literal of a parallel between Poland and America, stems from uncertainty as to whether the same basic list of ingredients will produce the same exact cake. In other words, whether liberal market, social conservatism and prominent religion will result in a society of marked contrasts between rich and poor, little or no social safety nets or benefits, discrimination towards minorities on the basis of alternative sexual orientation, reactionary and defensive stance in respect to the rest of the world, dated and dangerous attitudes towards women and reproductive rights, inclination to limit or outwardly suppress free speech in attempts to appease religious sensibilities, just to name a few.
Common sense dictates that I am both right and wrong in tracing the similarities between the two countries as predictors of Poland’s ultimate post transitional outcome. Of course, there is the process. Skilled cooks can work marvels with just potatoes, peas and carrots. At the same time, their creation has zero chances of turning out to be a lemon merengue pie.

A couple of weeks ago, at the forefront of NYT magazine a very interesting article by Jim Holt titled The New, Soft Paternalism was printed. It posits that as “highly competent, well informed people” we are nevertheless capable of making choices detrimental to our own well being. It also suggests that the government maybe the right body to step in, and help us help ourselves by outlawing, for instance, helmet free motorcycle riding. The operative example of the article is gambling:

In some states with casino gambling, like Missouri and Michigan, compulsive gamblers have the option of putting their names on a blacklist, or “self-exclusion” list, that bars them from casinos. Once on the list, they are banned for life. If they violate the ban, they risk being arrested and having their winnings confiscated. In Missouri, more than 10,000 people have availed themselves of this program. In Michigan, the first person to sign up for it was, as it happens, also the first to be arrested for violating its terms when he couldn’t resist sneaking back to the blackjack tables; he was sentenced to a year’s probation, and the state kept his winnings of $1,223.

As smart and lancinating as this approach may be, what caught my attention was the author’s very elegant sidestep into philosophy and David Hume’s idea of multiplicity of the self . Mr Holts observes of the critics of the program

But some libertarians have deeper misgivings. What bothers them is the way soft paternalism relies for its justification on the notion that each of us contains multiple selves — and that one of those selves is worth more than the others.

In essence, the program encourages long term rational thinking, and punishes the instant gratification seeking limbic part of an individual, to some degree limiting overall personal freedom. Holt further explains:

A distinctive quality of humans, as the third earl of Shaftesbury observed three centuries ago, is that we do not simply have desires; we also have feelings about our desires. Take the unhappy heroin addict: he gives himself an injection because he desires the drug, but he also has a desire to be rid of this desire. The philosopher Harry Frankfurt has given such “second order” desires a central role in his analysis of free will: we act freely, he submits, when we act on a desire that we actually desire to have, one that we endorse as our own. Beings that do not reflect on the desirability of their desires — like animals and infants and, perhaps, our short-run selves — are what Frankfurt calls “wantons.”

Segue - The Prestige , a film by Christopher Nolan the master of temporal play and non linear story telling. Multiplicity of selves in real and physical terms is predominant, but the film carries an undercurrent of multiplicity of emotions all through its end.The reviews and synopses well describe the body of the story, but none of the ones I came across mentions the force which galvanizes the century old rivalry between Alfred Borden and Rupert Angier. That of course is love. And while Rupert Algier’s love story is pure and simple, preserved at its peek of perfection through memories by its premature end, Alfred Borden’s affairs of the heart require the understanding that a protagonist can be in love one day with his wife then out of love with her, at one point in love with another woman, and both at the same time. The setup is suggestive of a deep emotional imbalance yet in the light of David Hume, Harry Frankfurt and earl of Shaftesbury… it is not unthinkable that one man be subject to coexisting yet contradictory desires. Possessing an intuitive understanding of complexities of human psyche, I was content with the face value of presented situation. However, ended up being fooled. Without giving away the plot of this satisfying cinematic experience, the interesting dichotomy was somewhat “rationally” revealed to originate beyond the expected id-super ego daily mud wrestling and neatly and clearly resolved (along with all other pending mysteries) through a confession of a dying man.

For further exploration of nuances and complexities of love I dawdled in Plato’s Symposim . Besides nudity, pederasty, drinking, flute girls who were also courtesans and games, the men at the symposia engaged in rhetoric. At one hosted by Plato, among other accomplished attendees was Socrates. When his turn came to speak the philosopher took the stage to recount his meetings with Diotima and her attempt at imparting her conviction and knowledge of love. Though I hoped to discover a truth on the subject from a wise woman from whom even Socrates took instruction, the teachings of Diotima were enlightening but difficult to relate to. For one, the debate whether love is a God, and ultimately categorizing Eros as a “great spirit” which acts as an intermediate between Gods and mortals conveying “prayers and sacrifices” or “rewards and commands”. The absolute terms debated are “wisdom, beauty and goodness” yet they are never defined. And finally the predicable and disappointing injection of pregnancy and birth that is inherent to the female experience (yet is insufficient as a basis for an entire cosmology, in my opinion): “Love is giving birth in beauty either in body or in soul.(…) All people are pregnant… “. Despite the personal objections, a single theme becomes apparent, it is the diversity and multiple subtleties of possible loves. Love as a need, love as desire, love of knowledge, wisdom or beauty, love of poetry and the nuances between being a lover or a beloved. Other speakers elaborate on love, the earthly or divine, love between two men or man and woman, love as reconciliation of opposites. My favorite, and an allegory of sorts is given by Aristophanes:

The sexes were originally three, men, women, and the union of the two; and they were made round–having four hands, four feet, two faces on a round neck, and the rest to correspond. Terrible was their strength and swiftness; and they were essaying to scale heaven and attack the gods. Doubt reigned in the celestial councils; the gods were divided between the desire of quelling the pride of man and the fear of losing the sacrifices. At last Zeus hit upon an expedient. Let us cut them in two, he said; then they will only have half their strength, and we shall have twice as many sacrifices. He spake, and split them as you might split an egg with an hair; and when this was done, he told Apollo to give their faces a twist and re-arrange their persons, taking out the wrinkles and tying the skin in a knot about the navel. The two halves went about looking for one another, and were ready to die of hunger in one another’s arms. Then Zeus invented an adjustment of the sexes, which enabled them to marry and go their way to the business of life. Now the characters of men differ accordingly as they are derived from the original man or the original woman, or the original man-woman. Those who come from the man-woman are lascivious and adulterous; those who come from the woman form female attachments; those who are a section of the male follow the male and embrace him, and in him all their desires centre. The pair are inseparable and live together in pure and manly affection; yet they cannot tell what they want of one another. But if Hephaestus were to come to them with his instruments and propose that they should be melted into one and remain one here and hereafter, they would acknowledge that this was the very expression of their want. For love is the desire of the whole, and the pursuit of the whole is called love.

Malcolm Gladwell’s article Million Dollar Murray reverberates across the web in multitudes of blogs. Homelessness has been quantified, a new distribution curve has been found, a scientific approach may help solve a deep social problem with which modern cities have been struggling with for decades. Based on a research by Dennis Culhane Ph. D. , the power law as applied to homelessness suggests that roughly 10% of the dispossessed are chronically so, and they are the ones straining the resources of health care and social services. Those very few can cost the system hundred thousands of dollars a person per year. In medical terms here is a typical scenario as described by James Dunford, the city of San Diego’s emergency medical director:

“If it’s a medical admission, it’s likely to be the guys with the really complex pneumonia. They are drunk and they aspirate and get vomit in their lungs and develop a lung abscess, and they get hypothermia on top of that, because they’re out in the rain. They end up in the intensive-care unit with these very complicated medical infections. These are the guys who typically get hit by cars and buses and trucks. They often have a neurosurgical catastrophe as well. So they are very prone to just falling down and cracking their head and getting a subdural hematoma, which, if not drained, could kill them… . Meanwhile, they are going through alcoholic withdrawal and have devastating liver disease that only adds to their inability to fight infections.”

In a radical program to end homelessness advocated by the executive director of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness Philip Mangano folks like these and the titular persona of the article - Murray Barr, are handed keys to their very own rented apartments. In exchange they are required to comply to the monitoring of case workers who are in touch with them every couple of days. They expectation is that as soon as the participants stabilize and find work they can start covering their rent in portions incremental to their overall progress.
As shocking as the description of those hard case homeless beneficiaries whose mental state allows for such profound disregard to their very own wellbeing is, the solution appears abysmally inappropriate. It isn’t a problem of the undeserving being treated to comfort, or the fact that this solution is meant to save the system 2/3 of presently incurred costs and sweep the homeless out of the view of the average american, it simply is a question of feasibility and common sense. Before the Murray Barrs are assigned their homes and are expected to rehabilitate they need to be placed under psychiatric care and possibly on lifelong medication which in turn would inflate the cost of their care, not decrease it. Malcolm Gladwell, muddies the homeless issue and the proposed solution with other power law conforming examples in his trademark sexy panoptic style. He invokes cases like the Rodney King beating and the subsequent Christopher Commission report and a mobile smog emission testing proposed by Donald Stedman, a chemist and automobile-emissions specialist at the University of Denver which is meant to replace the current comprehensive smog test. The only thing the three examples thrown into the article’s mix have in common is the pattern of their distribution, it should not be implied that a simple solution to decrease overhead on smog testing by targeting and policing the most serious offenders is also an applicable working model to end homelessness. In his book “The Tipping Point”, Mr. Gladwell produces an example of the Broken Windows theory which states that dilapidated environment invites crime, the solution to which among others is “quick replacement of broken windows “. It comes in a chapter about “the power of context” in which he also relates a Princeton University Good Samaritan study. The study concludes that even seminarians thinking of the biblical story of a good samaritan, under certain circumstances such as pressure of time, will act against their predisposition. This example is meant to prove that human behavior is malleable by the surrounding context. Drawing on this train of thought the author seems to suggest in the Million-Dollar Murray article, that simply giving homes to chronically homeless and placing them in an environment free of “broken windows” and signs of decay, will be enough to rehabilitate them. It is erroneous, ignoring the fact that it is the hard case homeless people themselves who are “broken”, in need of psychiatric care. Simply placing them in a new context will do very little to cure the self destructive streak which lands them in emergency rooms and intensive care time and time again.