||The controversy of homelessness by choice centers upon the question of the political. Debates on this issue are divided as individual problem view and socio-economic problem view, both problematize the excluded status of the homeless. Be it “homeless rights view” in Taiwan or “government responsibility view” in the US, the remedies that dominant homeless studies come up with incline to include the homeless into the collective. Nevertheless, homelessness by choice in Taiwan is a reversal of social inclusion, a reversal initiated by an interrogation of the sociological bond. In contrast with the sociological bond, which at once harbors complicated relations and prioritizes the immanent collective, the ethical bond valuates simple relations and differences. The ethical bond and its spatial counterpart, the floating land bond, on the other hand, bring tension to the space of the State as the latter is composed of the sociological bond and the fixed land bond. The ethical bond and the floating land bond of homeless by choice, in terms of Henri Lefebvre and Jean-Luc Nancy, is an effort to produce inoperative community that will lead to the end of the State. The ethical bond of homeless by choice in Taiwan challenges the dominant idea that the political is the power relation between the collectives.