I'm no pro on the subject but it's always worth remembering that statements of this form are almost always wrong: "300m annual budget to help less than 5000 pe

I'm no pro on the subject but it's always worth remembering that statements of this form are almost always wrong: "300m annual budget to help less than 5000 people. That's $60k/homeless person" Maybe you have a killer source and I'm out of line, but the usual issues is that these numbers almost never come from one comprehensive study or source. You can't just grab two numbers without context and divide them to say anything meaningful. What exactly is that 300m/yr spent on? How many people did it successfully get off the streets or prevent from ending up there? How many new homeless people arrived over that same time span? I don't have a meaningful answer to these questions and I'm sure you're right that there are better ways that the money can be spent. It's just that those numbers can be absolutely accurate and still fail to be a meaningful way to understand the problem.