3 ms·
The implication was that if they just had a house their lives would turn around. This isn’t the case for a lot of people as it’s an addiction or mental illness
by edgyquant 5y ago
The implication was that if they just had a house their lives would turn around. This isn’t the case for a lot of people as it’s an addiction or mental illness problem.
- sammalloy 5y agoMultiple case studies and real world examples show the opposite. It's cheaper to provide housing for the homeless, there's more success with drug/alcohol/mental illness programs when they have housing, and many of them do get a chance to re-enter the job market.
- edgyquant 5y agoCan you link me to some of these studies?
- mattficke 5y agoThey wouldn’t be homeless anymore, though. I think that’s a pretty solid improvement, regardless of any other challenges they have in their lives.
- edgyquant 5y agoThe point is though that a lot of them might be. Besides houses aren’t cheap or free you still have all kinds of bills to pay so your basically giving an addict a burdensome issue. Homeless shelters are a much better place for someone just trying to get clean and off the streets. There’s also an abundance of beds in homeless shelters because a lot of the people don’t want to get clean or off the streets.