California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working • Hacker News Board

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#501

Post by nomel » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:34 PM UTC

GeoAtreides wrote: post #465

guardiangod wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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. Vancouver has the same approach- warmest place in Canada. When I suggested active intervention (eg. force detox), the activists would accuse me of treating homeless people as sub-humans, that I am being cruel and inhumane and a monster, and that w…

> force detox Forcing people to detox is a grave violation of their right to body autonomy. In general people tend to react very badly when their body autonomy is violated: the results are trauma, CPTSD, suicide. I suggest we try other solutions first, starting from a place of compassion, empathy and scientifically tested medical advice.

> and scientifically tested medical advice.

Like detox centers, which exist to minimize trauma, suicide, and CPTSD.

> Forcing people to detox is a grave violation of their right to body autonomy.

Giving an addict a steady supply of money often just kills them (like my sister). I consider that some sort of violation. As is, letting addicts do drugs might sort itself out [1]. I imagine 2022-2023 numbers will be very very depressing.

[1] https://www.nist.gov/image/drug-overdose-deaths-chart-0

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#502

Post by adeon » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:35 PM UTC

hnarn wrote: post #416

freddybobs wrote: post #302

There is an episode of the "you're wrong about" podcast, that discusses homelessness. In that episode there are several discussion about several projects in California around homelessness. Those projects provided housing. The studies based on those projects showed that overall the cost was less that not having some housing and services. The podcast goes into more details, but as I remember this was because * It remov…

The strategy is called “housing first” and has been proven to work in Finland: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle... The idea that homeless people need homes to be able to advance further seems to trigger some people — after all, most of us pay for our housing, so why should they get it for free? What people don’t consider is that when “we”, the people with houses, don’t spend our dollars ho…

Around year 2009-2010, I worked in public sector in Helsinki in the real estate department. I worked the phone handling tenants calling and needing repairs. A large portion of the tenants were people from the homeless program. At the time I did not know this program was unusual.

My understanding of how it worked was that if you were functional enough and willing, you could walk into a certain building and they'd get you an apartment very quickly, although not sure if on the spot (I didn't work that part, just repairs part). I sometimes moved big bundles of keys for newly vacated or repaired apartments from the real estate building to the social workers in the homeless building they can then give out to new tenants.

I've now lived San Francisco for 5+ years and Helsinki basically does not have homeless people compared to what I've seen here.

I wondered a lot why California seems to be failing at the homeless problem. I see at least one comment here in threads that is saying that homeless are drug addicts and should be forced to go into rehab as a condition to give a home. While I was working for Helsinki I rarely heard anyone suggest the people being given homes needed to pay that back somehow, it was seen as obvious that the main problem is not having a home and the other problems can be dealt with later, and it's inhumane to make demands.

I don't know if "housing first" would actually work in California. Housing is super expensive, and I think California also has a lot more homeless than Finland ever did.

The ex-homeless tenants tended to need more repairs and care. I remember some funny/weird stories like we had a woman who could not use the toilet in her apartment because it was bright green and that caused her panic attacks. And some other tenant who painted literally everything (ceilings, windows, cabinets, furnite, floors, etc.) black.

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#503

Post by amanaplanacanal » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:35 PM UTC

atdrummond wrote: post #79

heavyset_go wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of homeless people are homeless for economic reasons, like loss of income, cost of living increases, or lack of affordable housing, or changes in co-living situations caused by break-ups/divorce/abuse/loss of partner's income/etc. Families are the fastest growing homeless demographic.

And that group is hurt the most by having to share the streets with people whose uncivil and dangerous behaviour puts their life and well being in danger. Treating unhoused persons as a homogenous population is probably the original sin of modern American homeless policy.

It's unfortunate. Most of the conversation here is about addicts and the mentally ill and how hard they are to help. Probably because they are the most visible.

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#504

Post by thomastjeffery » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:35 PM UTC

gamblor956 wrote: post #219

aorloff wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are doing exactly what you propose. Many communities have "housing first" homeless strategies. Some people do in fact get off the street. But we also have some "service resistant" homeless populations that do not want to live in your rule-based housing, they want to live without those rules even if it means living on the street.

On this note, LA has hundreds of shelter beds the remain empty every night because they're located in "sober" facilities (meaning that the facilities do not allow alcohol or drug use) and the putative residents would rather be able to drink and use drugs than to have shelter.

Cramming everyone who isn't sober into one facility is a bad idea? No shit, Sherlock!

Maybe we should try treating people better than sardines.

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#505

Post by cute_boi » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:35 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #421

fullspectrumdev wrote: post #413

Having lived/spent time in a few places with varying homeless problems and approaches to homelessness, I find it fucking depressing every time I read about how badly - and inefficiently - the US handles it. Probably because I see alarming parallels with my own country. Billions going where, exactly? If the problems growing, and you are just sinking billions into it without making any measurable impact, where the fuck…

> If the problems growing, and you are just sinking billions into it without making any measurable impact, where the fuck is the money going? A lot of these programs are hard to stop paying into once you start. Say you are a political leader and you try to solve homelessness by pouring $X per year into some new program. 5 years later it's clear the program is not effective. However, if you axe the program, good luck…

This is the fundamental reason why democracies often face challenges. For instance, let's consider a country like India, where a significant portion of the population isn't financially well-off. As a result, there is an expectation for government assistance and benefits during each election cycle. Consequently, politicians who promise freebies or welfare programs tend to have a higher likelihood of being elected. This pattern is not unique to India; it can be observed in various other places as well. Even in the United States, which prides itself on its democratic system, the influence of this phenomenon is evident

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#506

Post by AgentOrange1234 » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:35 PM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #463

jonny_eh wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s no easy fix for homelessness True, but that's only because there's no easy way to add housing in modern society. Homelessness is caused primarily by a lack of homes.

> Homelessness is caused primarily by a lack of homes. That is absolutely not true. Not even close. Mental illness, drug and alcohol abuse are major factors. Dozens of studies show this. I've seen numbers as high as 76% having substance abuse and severe mental illness. One study from 2017 says 80% mental illness, 88% drug abuse and 59% alcohol addiction. There are studies with lower numbers. In most, if not all, of t…

“Saying the issue is lack of homes implies these people could actually pay for a place to stay.”

Or we could just… choose to house people, regardless of their ability to pay?

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#507

Post by hnuser847 » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:35 PM UTC

no-dr-onboard wrote: post #475

hnuser847 wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, it’s caused by mental illness and drug addiction. Short of rounding them up and forcing them to get help, there’s actually nothing we can do to get these people off the street.

Nah it's caused by poor family cultures that lead to mental illness and drug addiction. Short of rounding up families and forcing them to be responsible for their children, teens, and young adults, there's actually nothing we can do to get these people off the street. You know it's funny. A lot of people look at the US and turn up their noses at our "poor infrastructure". Just a couple of months ago I watched a very…

I'm glad you brought up Singapore, since they can actually force people with mental health or addiction issues into shelters. Imprisoning people for being mentally ill or addicts is a viable to solution to homeless and it clearly works for Singapore, however this will never happen in the West. For better or worse, individual liberty is sacred in our cultural tradition, and it will never be politically palatable to force people into shelters.

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#508

Post by HDThoreaun » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:36 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #489

jonny_eh wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s no easy fix for homelessness True, but that's only because there's no easy way to add housing in modern society. Homelessness is caused primarily by a lack of homes.

It's not even a lack of homes--its a lack of access to existing homes. There are already ~16 million vacant homes in the USA, a tiny fraction of which could house the homeless if there were political will. We all can say homelessness is a problem, but if you ask these people hoarding vacant homes if they'd be willing to house a homeless person on their property, or if you ask a politician whether they are willing to…

The vast majority of those homes are either being actively fixed/waiting for a tenant to move in or are in bumfuck where no one wants to live. If you can convince the homeless on the west coast to move to the vacant places in kansas congratulations, you just won California's governor election. The reality is that there are not nearly enough homes where people want to be. Until you can force the homeless to go to less desirable areas the homes there arent helpful.

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#509

Post by TexanFeller » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:36 PM UTC

fullspectrumdev wrote: post #413

Having lived/spent time in a few places with varying homeless problems and approaches to homelessness, I find it fucking depressing every time I read about how badly - and inefficiently - the US handles it. Probably because I see alarming parallels with my own country. Billions going where, exactly? If the problems growing, and you are just sinking billions into it without making any measurable impact, where the fuck…

> The only real solution is large scale construction of mixed use housing - some social, some affordable, some private.

It's a LOT more than making affordable housing available. Most homeless where I am have severe mental health problems, drug addictions, or both. Some are also homeless in large part because of criminal records. Many many difficult social problems to fix before it's just a matter of affordability.

Re: California spent $17B on homelessness – it’s not working

#510

Post by ajmurmann » Fri, Jun 02, 2023, 9:36 PM UTC

meowtimemania wrote: post #466

hnarn wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The strategy is called “housing first” and has been proven to work in Finland: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/jun/03/its-a-miracle... The idea that homeless people need homes to be able to advance further seems to trigger some people — after all, most of us pay for our housing, so why should they get it for free? What people don’t consider is that when “we”, the people with houses, don’t spend our dollars ho…

I like the idea, but I don't think a homeless person should be entitled to free housing in one of the most expensive real estate areas of the world. Why work full time at mcdonalds to pay rent when you could just be a drug addict with a free house? Maybe we could create free housing communities where real estate is a bit cheaper.

This gets to one of the core issues. The homelessness issue, as well as mental health issues, are all left to counties in the US. This leads to bussing the homeless and it's not even clear if the cause for the homelessness is in the area the homelessness is felt. I might become homeless in New York and get on a bus to San Francisco because the weather is nicer and I hear they are nicer to homeless there. This would be much more effectively tackled at a state or better federal level. At least handling this on a state level is a hard requirement to do what you propose and create the housing where it's cheap, not where it's costly because it's nice or there are lots of jobs there for high-earners.

All that said, the federal government in the US of course would also face all kind of pushback and obstacles in part due to the way it's set up.