It’s very likely using similar dubious metrics as statistics that claim China has a 20-30% homelessness rate because it counts all the migrant workers that don’t officially own a home in the cities they migrate to (they count rental properties under this FYI) as “homeless” even though they all technically have homes in their home towns already.

Also yeah, it’s pretty hilarious that Thailand has a ‘pale white’ slum category while all their neighbours are much higher in percentage when Thailand one of the most unequal countries in the world when it comes to wealth and living standards. I mean just go to downtown Bangkok and you will literally find slum-like habitations next to high rise condominiums lol.

[–] RandallThymes@hexbear.net 12 points 1 month ago

Western nations deliberately misunderstand seasonal migrant labour specifically for cases like this where they can claim it as evidence of a “homelessness”, “slums” or “forced labour” problem.

Flashback to western media reporting all local labor in Xinjiang as “forced” and that all the labourers were being sent to other regions of China somehow simultaneously

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

~~I think it's fair to say that itinerant homelessness is real homelessness, it should just be counted as its own category.~~ see below

[–] Krem@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

these people are neither, they have a house in one province and rent an apartment in another (or worst case have a staff dorm as a job benefit)

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

Oh, I misread, my bad