Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

ktla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 368 posts

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#51

Post by Edmond »

GrantYE wrote: post #24
Edmond wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're being down voted, this is the most honest statement about so called "homelessness" in the united states. It is affordable housing advocates essentially leveraging the mentally ill while completely ignoring their plight.

But if you ask anyone who works to house the unhoused, the affordability of homes is the problem. If you don't have shelter to rely on, how can you possibly treat your mental illness in a safe environment. I actually think it is truly both. IT's the lack of available mental health treatment and the lack of affordable housing. Neither can be fixed with the perverse incentives of the current system we have.

With the exception of treatment facilities/hospitals and housing as a basic necessity for all, housing really shouldn't be a central part of the discussion when it comes to people living on the streets, housing (or lack thereof) is not their problem.

Almost all people you see on the streets end up there after burning all bridges in their personal lives because of their illness. You may not be aware of this but there are in fact a lot of options in existence for housing such people, it doesn't work because they are ill and without treatment (forceful), it is hopeless trying to help them.

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#53

Post by pooper »

tempnow987 wrote: post #29

$837,000 is just the cost of the unit. If you are housing actual homeless, you MUST offer supportive services on-site or have some other types of supervision or these units are going to be trashed. You MUST budget for a lot of ongoing costs. I'd say $800K+ per unit + maybe $100K+/year for supportive services / maintenance etc? One question is, would that 800K + $100K/year go further somewhere else?

> One question is, would that 800K + $100K/year go further somewhere else?

Where is that money going now? Who gets this money now and why would they give it up?

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#54

Post by Day1 »

sevenf0ur wrote: post #31
nimbius wrote: post #17

the fact that any housing is getting built is frankly a refreshing turn of events. for people unfamiliar with los angeles, is very much a city of landed gentry. republican legislation designed to curtail rising taxes for elderly residents 40 years ago wound up creating a cloistered elite of land-owners that pay nearly nothing in tax and resist any attempt to create additional housing. They coast on a bubble of six-fi…

Liberal policies is why Los Angles has been dealing with a homeless crisis for so long. Spending $837,000 to build a single studio to house a single homeless person seems insane to most of the country.

It seems insane because it is insane. Unfortunately, we already started down this path long ago and it will only get worse until catastrophe. I.e China takes over.

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#55

Post by sjg007 »

mikeg8 wrote: post #39

I'm finishing construction next month an 1,100 sq/ft single family home in the north bay area; a very high cost-of-living region. We started construction in Sept 2021, after an intentional delay of a couple months to let lumber prices drop after peaking in May-June. My home will be built for about $350k (less land acquisition). I'm acting as contractor and have connections in the industry so very few can build at my…

So you are saving ~30% right? Plus the land at probably <250k means $600k max net cost. I imagine the area you live in has $800k-$1m houses.

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#57

Post by vkou »

Kalium wrote: post #30
GrantYE wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its because they don't actually want to house the unhoused. They want to make it seem like this impossible challenge to provide affordable housing that doesn't cost the average person in LA $1M+

San Francisco had a similar problem in recent years, where trying to build housing for the unhoused was running a cost of about a million a pop. It's perhaps possible that this isn't a deliberate display of incompetence, but a set of systemic problems that make housing in California very expensive to build.

Also, it's worth noting that building a house isn't a hole that you throw money into, it's an asset that appreciates.

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#58

Post by AniseAbyss »

tempnow987 wrote: post #29

$837,000 is just the cost of the unit. If you are housing actual homeless, you MUST offer supportive services on-site or have some other types of supervision or these units are going to be trashed. You MUST budget for a lot of ongoing costs. I'd say $800K+ per unit + maybe $100K+/year for supportive services / maintenance etc? One question is, would that 800K + $100K/year go further somewhere else?

Yep you can't just put a psychotic person in an apartment and walk away. Homeless people have issues that made them end up on the street.

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#59

Post by dealforager »

mikeg8 wrote: post #39

I'm finishing construction next month an 1,100 sq/ft single family home in the north bay area; a very high cost-of-living region. We started construction in Sept 2021, after an intentional delay of a couple months to let lumber prices drop after peaking in May-June. My home will be built for about $350k (less land acquisition). I'm acting as contractor and have connections in the industry so very few can build at my…

The solution is real free markets. Constant government intervention in the housing market, the stock market, education, healthcare, and everything else under the sun has led us to where we are today. It always feels nice for a bit when the government bails you out, but the long term consequences are always much more severe. Prices are information and when all the information is polluted, it becomes very difficult to have a functioning economy. It's the same thing that happens in social media, trolls and bots pollute the information so it's impossible for most people to tell the truth apart from fiction. Unfortunately the regulatory capture is so deep and the problems have gotten so bad that I don't know how this can be solved without an extreme event.

Re: Los Angeles is spending up to $837k to house a single homeless person

#60

Post by Dylan16807 »

Kalium wrote: post #30
GrantYE wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its because they don't actually want to house the unhoused. They want to make it seem like this impossible challenge to provide affordable housing that doesn't cost the average person in LA $1M+

San Francisco had a similar problem in recent years, where trying to build housing for the unhoused was running a cost of about a million a pop. It's perhaps possible that this isn't a deliberate display of incompetence, but a set of systemic problems that make housing in California very expensive to build.

They can choose anywhere to build, the government controls zoning, and they're making apartments. Doesn't that get past all the big systemic cost problems?

Though the article doesn't actually say anything about average costs or cost per type of unit, and since this is a professional news outlet they don't link their sources...

Post reply on HN