2 ms·
The state doesn't have 'quite a bit of money' to 'buy homes for people who need them, within the high-cost metros where they are homeless'. San Francisco is sp
by olivermarks 4y ago
The state doesn't have 'quite a bit of money' to 'buy homes for people who need them, within the high-cost metros where they are homeless'.
San Francisco is spending $60k per year on each transient living in a tent on top of the various food stamps, general assistance and food deliveries etc. Many of these people are not from California. As I wrote previously this is a national problem not a local one - Hawaii is struggling with transients who have flown in and thanks to previous social networking know where to immediately register as 'unhoused'.
This is a huge intractable problem that needs cost efficient nationwide triaged solutions not complimentary housing in the most expense parts of the country for anyone who wants it.
- closeparen 4y agoThere are just not that many dispositions the government can have towards someone’s housing situation. You get left alone (status quo), complimentary unlocked housing (moderate cost), or complimentary locked housing (very high cost). Locked housing is off the table anyway because of the whole due process thing. Laws against public camping are unenforceable if you’re not offering complimentary housing. But if they were enforceable, you’d still be offering complimentary housing, just a more expensive form of it.