California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
1–10 of 1001 posts
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#2Everyone already knows that the more money California spends on homeless, the more of them will come to California.
It's a service. The state/city that provides the best service for homeless people - that's where I will try to go if I don't have a home.
Politicians don't seem to understand this. Or maybe they do, but they do the wrong thing in order to drum up politically correct votes.
Take San Francisco. It spends $400m on homeless each year. With $400m, you can probably just buy a small apartment in Idaho for every single one of them. Problem solved. Are you homeless? Make your way to San Francisco. The tax payers in the city will buy you a home in Idaho - no questions asked.
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#3Homelessness is a failure of the Federal government that nobody there is even willing to talk about.
This can't be solved at a local or state level in a country with unrestricted freedom of movement.
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#4> has about half of the nation’s unsheltered homeless
How many are from California and how many were given a bus pass to California by a government content to move the homeless around or on their own accord made their way to California as it has some of the best services?
How many are the same homeless people and how many are new homeless people who have replaced the old homeless people, making it appear that no progress has been made, but in reality there may just be greater need?
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#5Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#6Everyone already knows that the more money California spends on homeless, the more of them will come to California. It's a service. The state/city that provides the best service for homeless people - that's where I will try to go if I don't have a home. Politicians don't seem to understand this. Or maybe they do, but they do the wrong thing in order to drum up politically correct votes. Take San Francisco. It spends…
> With $400m, you can probably just buy a small apartment in Idaho for every single one of them. Problem solved.
The problem is that people become homeless due to a number of reasons that include addiction, mental illness, trauma, loss of work, etc. It’s not going to be solved by JUST providing them an apartment. At least not for everyone.
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#7It is mentioned in the article about a woman working full time, yet still unable to afford rent.
I think a big steps towards resolving homelessness should go in addressing the housing market; which in California is really really bad. This isn't just "build more homes" (which is already an extremely difficult task in the state given the zoning laws) but comprehensive housing policies. Take a look at the way Austria has controlled rent prices (though californians might not like the fact that around 70% of housing in austria is limited or non profit).
Also, this is a US-wide problem. California just has the best weather and open doors. But I doubt it's going to get better, wealth inequality does nothing but increase in the US. We'll see, but this looks to me more of a symptom than a sickness in itself.
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#8That’s because Cali’s approach is insane.
They give you hundreds a month in cash grants (some make $1k a month in SF) and require you to make NO alterations to your lifestyle.
I was amazed when living in SF how many of the homeless are not locals. Not even Californians! I myself lived on the streets for a number of years and have dealt with addiction issues. It is absolutely insane how we’ve stopped treating homeless people as humans with potential and aspirations and assume that all they can be is a vacuum for drugs and cash. There’s no other conclusion to reach about how policy makers truly think about this class of people with the way the incentives of these “support” programs are structured.
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#9Everyone already knows that the more money California spends on homeless, the more of them will come to California. It's a service. The state/city that provides the best service for homeless people - that's where I will try to go if I don't have a home. Politicians don't seem to understand this. Or maybe they do, but they do the wrong thing in order to drum up politically correct votes. Take San Francisco. It spends…
Very frustrating to see the right blame the left for the homeless problem when the left are the only ones attempting to do anything about it.
Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working
#10Homelessness is a failure of the Federal government that nobody there is even willing to talk about. This can't be solved at a local or state level in a country with unrestricted freedom of movement.
I don’t think the feds are to blame.
SF and similar CA cities have set up a program that encourages people to move there because it makes being “homeless” an actual possible lifestyle choice. Even an enjoyable one.