21–30 of 72 posts
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
Especially as meat is subsidized so heavily.
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
Especially as meat is subsidized so heavily.
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
This guy and I'm sure a lot of others could be pretty well off if there was some type of rural co-op they could live and work on. It could save a lot of money and probably help these people a lot by getting them out of the city.
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
This guy and I'm sure a lot of others could be pretty well off if there was some type of rural co-op they could live and work on. It could save a lot of money and probably help these people a lot by getting them out of the city.
"Power-law solutions have little appeal to the right, because they involve special treatment for people who do not deserve special treatment; and they have little appeal to the left, because their emphasis on efficiency over fairness suggests the cold number-crunching of Chicago-school cost-benefit analysis." This is exactly why programs like these won't take off. It's hard to present this kind of complex analysis of…
What amazing garbage. Well over half the homeless are such because they belong in a mental institution, the closing of which was a major successful crusade of the left through the '70s or so (many libertarians and some members of the right like Jerry Pournelle joined them in this and the more honest of them like Jerry admit the mistake). "The right" was entirely happy with "special treatment" for these people since that is the only humane way to accommodate them. (You have, I assume, spent a little time around a schizophrenic person? Their ability to think is PROFOUNDLY broken.)
Antipsychotics were and are amazing wonder drugs: my Mom did her nursing residency in the '50s and part of that was working in a psych ward. Later she took a job at that same hospital and was amazed to see one of the previously hopeless cases productively working there as a janitor or the like.
The problem is that antipsychotics are also seriously nasty drugs (even more so when the above crusade happened, before safe atypical antipsychotics were on the market (the first was so dangerous that you couldn't get the next month's prescription filled for your patient without sending in a blood sample)) and "compliance", getting people to take their meds, is for all too many an impossible challenge outside of an institutional setting. Note also that the "drugs and alcoholism" problems are all too often attempts to self-medicate.
Anyway, we ("the right") believe these people deserve "special treatment" (the causes are mostly genetic after all) but the left has outlawed the only one that works. Not much we can do now but to pick up their bodies off the street when it's all over as harscoat relates.
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
This guy and I'm sure a lot of others could be pretty well off if there was some type of rural co-op they could live and work on. It could save a lot of money and probably help these people a lot by getting them out of the city.
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
This guy and I'm sure a lot of others could be pretty well off if there was some type of rural co-op they could live and work on. It could save a lot of money and probably help these people a lot by getting them out of the city.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This guy and I'm sure a lot of others could be pretty well off if there was some type of rural co-op they could live and work on. It could save a lot of money and probably help these people a lot by getting them out of the city.
A lot of homeless people cannot, or will not, live in such a situation. There are so many well-meaning people trying to help the homeless that those who stay homeless generally have a compelling reason why they are. Either they're episodically violent which makes them unsafe to house with other homeless people, or they've simply adapted to the vagrant lifestyle and don't know any other. Makes the problem much tougher…
The crux of the matter: The cost of services comes to about ten thousand dollars per homeless client per year. An efficiency apartment in Denver averages $376 a month, or just over forty-five hundred a year, which means that you can house and care for a chronically homeless person for at most fifteen thousand dollars, or about a third of what he or she would cost on the street. I believe similar observations have bee…
It's not as simple as just throwing money at the problem and managing things differently. I've been homeless before and it's not pretty, a lot of the people who I met on the street during that time would not have been able to just take an apartment and that would be their problem solved. They are on the street for a reason and if the reason was purely financial then perhaps the apartment would help, but a lot of the…