There's a surprisingly difficult question to answer. Imagine you had practically unlimited funds. In other words some large number, but not millions of dollars

There's a surprisingly difficult question to answer. Imagine you had practically unlimited funds. In other words some large number, but not millions of dollars per homeless individual. How would you solve homelessness? Let's imagine with the most straight forward solution. You simply make them not homeless by giving them a home. Now you've suddenly set this city to face a massive increase of migration of homeless individuals who'd also like a free home. You're also going to face antagonism from the general population who end up spending huge chunks of their income just to get a small space to call their own. Free public housing, if remotely tolerable, is something many regular people would also be attracted to. And if you kick the homeless out of this free housing once they start earning money, you've created quite the broken incentive system! And then you have to consider the reason for homelessness. There are absolutely some individuals that end up homeless because of unfortunate circumstance outside of their control. Though for these individuals homelessness is often a brief affair before they get back on their feet anyhow. Among the other reasons for homelessness are mental health issues, substance abuse problems, and even choice where some individuals would rather be 'free' than participate in society. I think when we look at solutions we often consider all homeless as the group of unfortunate circumstance. And they're indeed relatively easy to solve. Even just giving them a low interest loan would often be sufficient to get them back on their feet. But I'm not sure how large a chunk of all homeless these individuals are. And for the other individuals, homelessness may not even be their most significant obstacle to overcome. In a way I see this like education. We constantly argue that lack of money is the reason America's educational results are slipping. And we ignore the fact that places like Vietnam outperform us on math and science with educational spending that's a tiny fraction of ours per student, even when parity adjusted. The point there is that money may just be a red herring. You can always claim the problem is not enough of it, when the real problem may be something much more fundamental with no easy solution.