Do either place have physical tent cites that the bay area or LA have? Do you see these massive tent cities in snow in either of your examples?
Point was apparently the explanation was needed given what I quoted.What's your actual point here?
It's not exactly a revelation that there are more homeless people where it's warm and the explanation for this is so obvious it doesn't even rate mentioning.
Having said that, YES there are LARGE NUMBERS of homeless in places like NYC.... which also has literally hundreds of miles of tunnels where large numbers of that population stays in bad weather AND very little open land for "tent cities".
Point was apparently the explanation was needed given what I quoted.
Anyone who thinks simply providing housing will fix the homeless problem because as the name implies, THEY DON'T HAVE HOMES, is frankly, stupid.
Yes, giving people who are homeless a more permanent place to live will fix the homelessness problem. This isn't some complicated issue.Point was apparently the explanation was needed given what I quoted.
Anyone who thinks simply providing housing will fix the homeless problem because as the name implies, THEY DON'T HAVE HOMES, is frankly, stupid.
The only person saying that "providing housing completely solves the problem" would be you lol.
Providing stable housing is a critical FIRST STEP that without, none of the follow-up treatment/counseling will have a chance.
Hrmmm.Yes, giving people who are homeless a more permanent place to live will fix the homelessness problem. This isn't some complicated issue.
And once they have a place to live, you can more easily start providing other services to either get them back on their feet, or keep them on their feet.
Hrmmm.
I can read, but I don't call people in hospitals or prisons "housed". If you are going to use the notion of "affordable housing" you can't flip it and say oh just get them in a HOUSE and then give all this other stuff.Seriously?
Did you actually read what you posted in a feeble attempt to make yourself right?
Here I'll help you out:
"once they have a place to live, you can more easily start providing other services"
"Providing stable housing is a critical FIRST STEP that without, none of the follow-up treatment/counseling will have a chance."
I can read, but I don't call people in hospitals or prisons "housed". If you are going to use the notion of "affordable housing" you can't flip it and say oh just get them in a HOUSE and then give all this other stuff.
What they need is to be admitted or committed to a mental/addiction type hospital or ward and fix that first, then once that is settled we can worry about getting them a house or home.
Brilliant!
A simple yes/no suffices.
You are advanced stupid.
The idea you are discussing goes by the name "Housing First". There is not a lot of research on it because few people are willing to fund such programs. But, there has been some research.You should try giving some random person off the street a room at your place, see how it goes. They now have a home, so I'm sure they won't still try to get drugs, or steal your shit to acquire said drugs, definately won't try to stab you either. Nope I'm sure they'll instantly reform, have a job the following week and paying taxes. Bravo, problem solved!
So, if based on nothing else at all, we should give housing first a serious try to save massive amounts of taxpayer money.Clients using supportive services are more likely to participate in job training programs, attend school, discontinue substance use, have fewer instances of domestic violence, and spend fewer days hospitalized than those not participating.
Finally, permanent supportive housing has been found to be cost efficient. Providing access to housing generally results in cost savings for communities because housed people are less likely to use emergency services, including hospitals, jails, and emergency shelter, than those who are homeless. One study found an average cost savings on emergency services of $31,545 per person housed in a Housing First program over the course of two years. Another study showed that a Housing First program could cost up to $23,000 less per consumer per year than a shelter program.
You are literally just falling into the "I'm a homeless expert" trap. They are called homeless, so if we only had homes the problem would be solved! No, they need help, how in the world can anyone in their condition handle taking care of a home when they can't take care of themselves?@RPD is a Wile E. Coyote style "super genius" unlike the rest of us clods don't be silly! /s
After all ZERO actual first-hand knowledge of the topic at hand CLEARLY makes his opinion 100% factual!
Do you put your shoes on first, then your underpants in that order as well?
You go do that, you just go lower the cost of housing and watch skid road magically disappear. But hey, I mean it's right in the title right? They are homeLESS so just give them homes and ta-da, they are not longer homeLESS. Problem solved!Sorry but you no longer rate serious replies on this topic.
(and you're well OTW to not being taken seriously on any topic at all!)
It would literally be more productive going back and forth with the OP....
at least @Gizmo j is relatively harmless and entertaining!
EDIT: And to be clear, you don't have to agree with me to earn my respect BUT you do have to make an argument that makes at least SOME sense rather than just repeating the same bogus statements and cherry-picking posts to ignore the answers you've been given.
Thats fine, maybe they know how to solve problems in a logical order. Check back and let me know.
And they're making a better argument then you are!
Thats fine, maybe they know how to solve problems in a logical order. Check back and let me know.
Wow Gizmo must be one of the more successful trolls I've seen in a while
At least others have provided evidence of their claims or support for ideas. You've had nothing but the same feels repeated in almost every post you've made, as if repeating it makes it true. It doesn't.You are literally just falling into the "I'm a homeless expert" trap.
So...you know the primary reasons for homelessness (the opposite of what's been linked with evidence numerous times now), and the best order of operations and methods to care for homeless people and get them off the streets?No, they need help, how in the world can anyone in their condition handle taking care of a home when they can't take care of themselves?
They need to be committed or institutionalized first, get sober or medication for their mental condition before you can even talk about having their own home. Do you not hear the words you are typing?
Remember that? That's the smell of irony.You are literally just falling into the "I'm a homeless expert" trap.