Here in California we're saving the most money, by not jailing the homeless AND not housing the homeless.

They're making money on people being in jail of course.

It's insane to think that the U.S. has private prisons. You have people interested in the incarceration of people.

It's a 10 billion dollar industry iirc.

Honestly, as a non-homeless person the prison situation is getting more appealing in certain ways.

Food, shelter, less expectations... Life is a fucking grind these days and it didn't really used to be this way.

You are way more likely to acquire an infection in prison (bacterial or viral) and have your health conditions ignored or downplayed than you are to get any real access to medical care.

Absolutely, the US needs universal healthcare. But not everyone on the internet is American. Tons of us live in places that already offer health care, but still have a long ways to go for helping the homeless.

But just letting people have housing if they want would already massively help so many people.

The argument that because not all of them want a house so we shouldn't do it, is literally just the perfect being the enemy of good.

Many of them "don't want to be housed" because of all the strings attached to having housing. When you simply give people their own warm bed with a roof they'll almost always use it.

Houses are only a small piece of the puzzle.

People are homeless for many different reasons. Mental health and drug addiction are two big ones. Then there are the handicapped, those that can't hold down a job. Those that lost everything they had. And even those that just want to be homeless.

People look at the homeless population though their own biases. Their framing is that people want a house.

We could try and give a house to every one of these people and they wouldn't all take it. Some would destroy it and return to being homeless, either maliciously or as.a byproduct of their mental illness.

We should house the ones we can, feed the ones we can, and treat the health of the ones we can. Those that want rehab should get it, but I don't think every drug addict out there wants to be cured. We should provide showers and clean clothes.

We need to remove the stigma from the homeless.

We need to make it easier for businesses to hire the homeless.

And we could do all that, and more. And we'd still have homeless. We will always have homeless. There is no holistic solution that will magically house everyone.

I wouldn't want to be housed either, if it came with a laundry list of stipulations, requirements, and more or less complete destruction of autonomy. I doubt anyone would turn down a free, no-questions-asked place to call a home. Somewhere safe to rest and begin working on the issues naturally.

Housing first tends to more or less solve, or drastically reduce, homelessness and all the associated negative things - crime, substance abuse, medical issues, etc. Turns out it's easier to get all the other things sorted and get back to society when you have the bare minimum left.

Sure there will probably be a very small percentage of people who just... don't want to. They're actually happy doing their thing, and that's not really a problem. But I'd strongly doubt it's less than a tenth of a percent of the current homeless population.

Because... getting housing often means losing the community support they get from other homeless. If you get a house, but lose your friends and support system and the people who (eg) go shopping for you, then how is that a win?

These people would happily be housed if it didn't mean yanking them away from their community.

So the solution is to house entire homeless communities together and at the same time.

lol never. Not enough profit in it and it lowers neighborhood average prices, ruining investment returns and reducing the potential profitability of mortgage-backed securities.

Too much money is now in housing for the prices to fall - they can’t afford it.