I have been homeless in my life, and while my ordeal wasn’t as bad as some, it’s definitely not a good feeling to have no idea where your next meal is coming fr

I have been homeless in my life, and while my ordeal wasn’t as bad as some, it’s definitely not a good feeling to have no idea where your next meal is coming from. It’s not about the amount of money, it’s about summoning the political will to implement programs that sound counter-intuitive but attack the root of the problem while spending far less money. A few examples: - Safe injection sites reduce crime, restrict the spread of blood-borne diseases, and are cheaper than most forms of outreach. When combined with access to detox and treatment programs, they’re more effective and almost certainly cheaper than police and paramedics responding to hundreds of overdoses a day. - Homeless shelters as designed are dangerous and ineffective at helping people transition from living on the street. A more effective solution is to provide longer-term, smaller scale housing. Lack of housing stability severely impairs an otherwise capable person’s ability to find a job. While the cost-per-person for such a program would be higher than shelters, I suspect it would actually save money by reducing the amount of time a person needs benefits. - Mental health. Mental health. Mental health. We ignore the problem and marginalize mentally ill people from society; which leads to homelessness. There are not enough case workers to deal with the problem, and they are so underpaid that most aren’t far removed from homelessness themselves. We also have to recognize that some people will never be capable of independent living — giving them benefits is not “enabling” their bad habits, it’s taking care of a person who cannot take care of themselves. - Too many outreach programs use a “carrot and stick” approach to providing benefits. For people dealing with profound mental health issues, they may not be capable of meeting whatever requirements are placed upon them, despite their best efforts. The efforts of ensuring compliance with “carrot and stick” programs add costs and reduce the impact of every dollar spent. - A political recognition and acceptance that some people will try to game the system. Some will be successful. That doesn’t mean these programs are ineffective — provide the benefits, investigate the fraud and prosecute the offenders. We have laws against this kind of fraud already. We don’t need new, complex compliance mechanisms. The net here is that homeless people’s lives are often in an out-of-control spiral of helplessness and marginalization that generates an existential level of stress. Unless we can break that spiral by providing a stable, safe environment, the homeless problem will only get worse. It takes the political will to actually help people rather than paper over the problem.