4 ms·

i don't know why this is being downvoted. the core idea is a good one. Start moving people away from expensive areas and have them populate areas like the rust

i don't know why this is being downvoted. the core idea is a good one. Start moving people away from expensive areas and have them populate areas like the rust belt where housing is much cheaper. Detroit is pretty cost effective as others have mentioned.

mrnobody_67 8y ago
Yep. Dollar for dollar (taxpayer dollars, mind you), you get a lot more bang for the buck. Solving homeless crisis doesn't necessarily have to mean that everybody has a right to live in one of the most expensive cities in the world at taxpayers expense...
brixon 8y ago
Rust belt and Detroit get cold in the winter. Homeless people gravitate to places that will not kill them in their sleep. The climate (temperate/weather, government, and population) are what draw homeless to specific areas.
- ggggtez 8y ago
  The parent is implying you'd buy them the property, not just move them and still have them sleep outside.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
samstave 8y ago
What exactly would these people do in a place like detroits dilapitated housing wasteland for prosperity, work and money? You'd need to create a subsidized economy for some decade or such to build it up. Here is an idea - if a company like Amazon wants to move into NYC, as an example, rather than paying them ~3B to do so, why not require large companies to pay to subsidize a revival city in detroit. Where those resources will be made to build out the core infrastructure needed to support a city there. Rather than spending $700 billion dollars a year on defense spending, spend $70 billion to rebuild/build-out a new detroit? Want a city based solely on self-driving cars, wifi only, with small-sized apartment/tiny-home housing and many micro-lot farms? A bold attempt at building out something would be nice to try again in this country. We need it.

4 ms·

i don't know why this is being downvoted. the core idea is a good one. Start moving people away from expensive areas and have them populate areas like the rust

by megaman8 8y ago

mrnobody_67 8y ago
Yep. Dollar for dollar (taxpayer dollars, mind you), you get a lot more bang for the buck. Solving homeless crisis doesn't necessarily have to mean that everybody has a right to live in one of the most expensive cities in the world at taxpayers expense...
brixon 8y ago
Rust belt and Detroit get cold in the winter. Homeless people gravitate to places that will not kill them in their sleep. The climate (temperate/weather, government, and population) are what draw homeless to specific areas.
- ggggtez 8y ago
  The parent is implying you'd buy them the property, not just move them and still have them sleep outside.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
samstave 8y ago
What exactly would these people do in a place like detroits dilapitated housing wasteland for prosperity, work and money? You'd need to create a subsidized economy for some decade or such to build it up. Here is an idea - if a company like Amazon wants to move into NYC, as an example, rather than paying them ~3B to do so, why not require large companies to pay to subsidize a revival city in detroit. Where those resources will be made to build out the core infrastructure needed to support a city there. Rather than spending $700 billion dollars a year on defense spending, spend $70 billion to rebuild/build-out a new detroit? Want a city based solely on self-driving cars, wifi only, with small-sized apartment/tiny-home housing and many micro-lot farms? A bold attempt at building out something would be nice to try again in this country. We need it.