I can tell you that having no free healthcare, no help for people who don’t seem to manage, and blaming mental illness seem to be causes for homelessness.
Think as homelessness of just a symptom of deeper issues. If you try to treat the symptoms you’re not going to get far.
So maybe it’s more of a social problem then the fault of individuals. And maybe it would make more sense to fight the root causes then the symptoms.
1) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227691245_Homelessn...
So lower rate of homelessness plus better living conditions while being homeless seem like both good things.
Building such spikes etc. means going out of one's way to make it uncomfortable for everyone, just so it may be uncomfortable for the homeless, too.
Not building these spikes isn't "going out of one's way", it's the default.
Forcing the poor and homeless out of sight doesn’t fix anything. Criminalizing poverty doesn’t fix anything. If you’re so offended by poverty, perhaps do something useful to address the root causes?
It didn't stop us from skating, obviously; we just found somewhere else to skate. Often on the same property. More malicious peers of mine would do things like grind down the rail until it was smooth.
I think about that a lot when I hear about stories like this. We were just kids doing stuff for fun, not people fighting for survival.
While reintegration may help some of the homeless, most of them likely need a different approach if we want to somehow relieve their plight. Something more geared towards medical and psychiatric help.
It would be easy to dismiss your post as merely repugnant, and it certainly is. Essentially you're proposing a death march from one city location to another.
But the lack of logic you display is common when people discuss the homeless problem.
So I'll illustrate a productive way to discuss this.
Let's assume the following demographics about SF, which has a reported budget of over $300 million for 5,000 homeless (and rapidly growing as rents skyrocket) - that's $60,000/yr per homeless person:
- 50% of homeless are healthy but unemployed - we can fix this fairly easily. Provide a mailing address, missing id documents, cubicles for job interview calls, and databases of room rentals and employers. Have a help line to sort out kafkaeque procedural problems, like e-verify database problems.
This would be incredibly cost-effective for solving the current problem, but equally important for the coming tidal wave of even more homeless as rents continue to rise in 2020.
Some housing assistance would be needed, say 90 days, as well as acute medical assistance, but hey, $300 million - where's it being spent today?
- 50% of homeless are mentally ill - there is no short-term solution for those in psychosis, but we have data now on the effects of closing long-term care facilities and can revisit those policies. The milder cases can be helped to stabilize and integrate with society, but the rest need institutional care.
Decreasing from 5,000 people on the streets to 2,500 in SF is a huge win and would really improve the situation for everybody and allow resources to focus on the more difficulat cases.
Without an actionable plan, the alternative is Mad Max, which Market St. has already become.
thats called catastrophism.
> but for most it is frankly easier to be homeless than to tackle the difficult task of reestablishing a foothold in society.
Don't you think that your kind of attitude might be part of the problem? Every country has homelessness issues but not every country treat them like a pest.
1. "Trash" marks a spot where you intend to return. This can help ensure that you have a regular place to sleep.
2. What appears to be trash might have some value to the hoarder, e.g., trashy but wearable clothing, recyclables, etc.
3. Litter can camouflage minor valuables, so you can accomplish #1 and also have a hiding place for stuff people might steal.
4. Given all of the above, trash naturally gathers in a homeless community and eventually gets dumped however is most practical.