3 ms·

Is this a real question? How will you define a local? What happens if someone lives in a town for 10 years then loses their home. What if theyre not a local bu

• roenxi 3y ago
  Quite serious. It isn't like free movement stops people from implementing a local plan against homelessness. > How will you define a local? What happens if someone lives in a town for 10 years then loses their home. What if theyre not a local but they are a minor? Or if they are an immigrant? I'm not sure what point you're wanting to make here, but yes. If a group of locals wants to solve homelessness in their area they will need to decide on answers to those questions. Frankly they aren't hard questions. Born in a geographic area or owned a home for 5+ years, yes, no, yes if they owned a home locally. How do define who gets to be a citizen for a federal response to homelessness? It faces exactly the same problems. America can't afford to provide welfare for all of Asia.
  • cool_dude85 3y ago
    Two issues. First, homeless people tend to be much less likely to have the wherewithal to prove residency, either due to substance problems, difficulty navigating bureaucracy, or just not having the money to chase down paperwork or a safe place to store it. So hurdles like "being local", essentially whatever it means, could prove to be a huge barrier to uptake of your programs. Second, "solving homelessness" for just one subset of homeless people may not actually provide the benefit you hope for. You might still have tent cities, RV encampments, people using drugs outdoors, etc. Now the people doing that are from just past city limits and entitled to no support.