We’ve looked at places like Dignity Village where tiny houses are starting to pop up as places for low-income and homeless people to live in, but now people are starting to build them for their own minimalist purposes as a new pop culture trend. Is this something that could be detrimental to the purpose of tiny houses? We don’t normally see something that is implemented to benefit the lower members of society become an aspect of pop culture, and I’m starting to think this could either help or hurt the homeless and low-income citizens. I think the introduction of tiny houses into pop culture could be beneficial by showing how higher members of society can live in them; the low cost and high impact\u00a0of giving someone a place to live could sway public opinion to be in favor of using this method to help those in need of a house. On the other hand having higher members of society demonstrate the effectiveness of tiny houses could give people the opinion that tiny houses are a luxury, and possibly a luxury that homeless and low-income citizens don’t deserve. I guess what it comes down to is how this concept will be brought up to the public; obviously it is rooted in the homelessness crisis, but if others around the country are introduced to this idea as an aspect of pop culture as opposed to a way to a way of dealing with\u00a0the homelessness crisis how is that going to affect the social stigma around tiny houses, homeless people, and homeless people in tiny houses?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
We’ve looked at places like Dignity Village where tiny houses are starting to pop up as places for low-income and homeless people to live in, but now people are starting to build them for their own minimalist purposes as a new pop culture trend. Is this something that could be detrimental to the purpose of … Continue reading Tiny Houses, Big Problem?<\/span>