3 ms·

I don't agree with this author at all. Housing First has proven to be very successful when implemented on the local and state level.[0] This author seems to be

by Ajay-p 3y ago

I don't agree with this author at all. Housing First has proven to be very successful when implemented on the local and state level.[0] This author seems to be taking a strange economic view that just because it has worked doesn't it mean it will continue to work, or work on a national level. I hate to say it but he sounds very bitter and thinks this is just throwing good money after bad. IMO if it gets people off the streets and into a safety net, then we should try, and if it works keep doing it. https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chroni...

jppope 3y ago
Can you provide any data on California? It may just be the skeptic in me but using Utah, with its large Mormon population and climate, feels like an exception not a rule. I'm aware that New York City has done some good work, but that predates Housing First if I'm not mistaken.
- davidw 3y ago
  California has a huge homelessness generating machine: the housing market. There's no way that some charities and a few government programs can get people out of homelessness faster than the rising prices can generate people without a place to live.
  - shuntress 3y ago
    You know most people move somewhere cheaper when they can't afford to live somewhere, right? This is not about people being priced out of certain markets. This is about the people who are too deep in crisis to handle finding a cheaper place to live.
    - davidw 3y ago
      You're correct that many people do move - that's why California lost a congressional seat. But there are plenty that get 'caught out' - they don't have the cash to move somewhere far away with no friends or family or a job lined up. The statistics are pretty clear that, at a high level, it is about housing prices. That's why California has more homelessness than Detroit despite the latter being mired in poverty. That's why there's more homelessness in Oregon than West Virginia, even if the latter has a raging opioid problem. https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/everything-you-think-you-know-about https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/everything-you-think-you-know-...
      - pandaman 3y ago
        If statistics had been as clear as you claim them to be then we'd see enormous concentration of homeless in Aspen, Hamptons, Marta's Vineyard, Beverly Hills etc.
- jeffbee 3y ago
  After California builds some housing, then we can measure it.
- freedomben 3y ago
  Salt Lake City does have a high Mormon population, but Mormon's are actually a minority there (by population, not by power aka government office holding). Outside the city there are a lot more of course, but the city itself is a lot more diverse than most people think. I think it's a useful comparison and resource for approaching California's situation.
- mitchbob 3y ago
  I'm currently reading Jennifer Egan's excellent article in last week's New Yorker magazine about a supportive-housing facility in New York City [1], and its depiction of their Housing First approach is one of the most encouraging things I've ever read about addressing homelessness. Meet people where they are, address their most basic needs, and their lives become much, much better. If it can work in NYC with all its challenges, I think it can work anywhere. [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/09/18/a-journey-from-homelessness-to-a-room-of-ones-own https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/09/18/a-journey-from... (archived: https://archive.ph/2023.09.12-175108/https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/09/18/a-journey-from-homelessness-to-a-room-of-ones-own https://archive.ph/2023.09.12-175108/https://www.newyorker.c... )
pdonis 3y ago
> Housing First has proven to be very successful when implemented on the local and state level Your reference talks about one state (Utah). Even if Housing First was successful there, that doesn't mean it was successful anywhere else. Also, the definition of "success" in the article you reference is that a person gets into housing provided by Housing First. But the article under discussion in this thread is not saying that doesn't happen. It's saying that getting into housing provided by Housing First doesn't necessarily improve the lives of the people--the author describes "Massive drug use, fights, assaults, despair and death" in a Housing First building. So your definition of "success" seems to be different (and less stringent) than the author's.
- davidw 3y ago
  Houston has also had good results with something that looks like Housing First: https://calmatters.org/housing/2023/06/california-houston-homeless-solutions/ https://calmatters.org/housing/2023/06/california-houston-ho...
chmod600 3y ago
Not sure if it's true or not but the author is suggesting that the housing is not a safe environment and that they don't have good access (or at least utilization) of services. I read it more as an argument that it's an expensive way to keep the homelessness out of sight. (Not agreeing or disagreeing, just my interpretation of the author's general point.)
shuntress 3y ago
"Housing First" is a little bit like Universal Basic Income. Small scale programs have good results with indications that it will work just as well or better at large scale.

by Ajay-p 3y ago

jppope 3y ago

Can you provide any data on California? It may just be the skeptic in me but using Utah, with its large Mormon population and climate, feels like an exception not a rule. I'm aware that New York City has done some good work, but that predates Housing First if I'm not mistaken.

davidw 3y ago
California has a huge homelessness generating machine: the housing market. There's no way that some charities and a few government programs can get people out of homelessness faster than the rising prices can generate people without a place to live.
- shuntress 3y ago
  You know most people move somewhere cheaper when they can't afford to live somewhere, right? This is not about people being priced out of certain markets. This is about the people who are too deep in crisis to handle finding a cheaper place to live.
  - davidw 3y ago
    You're correct that many people do move - that's why California lost a congressional seat. But there are plenty that get 'caught out' - they don't have the cash to move somewhere far away with no friends or family or a job lined up. The statistics are pretty clear that, at a high level, it is about housing prices. That's why California has more homelessness than Detroit despite the latter being mired in poverty. That's why there's more homelessness in Oregon than West Virginia, even if the latter has a raging opioid problem. https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/everything-you-think-you-know-about https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/everything-you-think-you-know-...
    - pandaman 3y ago
      If statistics had been as clear as you claim them to be then we'd see enormous concentration of homeless in Aspen, Hamptons, Marta's Vineyard, Beverly Hills etc.
jeffbee 3y ago
After California builds some housing, then we can measure it.
freedomben 3y ago
Salt Lake City does have a high Mormon population, but Mormon's are actually a minority there (by population, not by power aka government office holding). Outside the city there are a lot more of course, but the city itself is a lot more diverse than most people think. I think it's a useful comparison and resource for approaching California's situation.
mitchbob 3y ago
I'm currently reading Jennifer Egan's excellent article in last week's New Yorker magazine about a supportive-housing facility in New York City [1], and its depiction of their Housing First approach is one of the most encouraging things I've ever read about addressing homelessness. Meet people where they are, address their most basic needs, and their lives become much, much better. If it can work in NYC with all its challenges, I think it can work anywhere. [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/09/18/a-journey-from-homelessness-to-a-room-of-ones-own https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/09/18/a-journey-from... (archived: https://archive.ph/2023.09.12-175108/https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/09/18/a-journey-from-homelessness-to-a-room-of-ones-own https://archive.ph/2023.09.12-175108/https://www.newyorker.c... )

pdonis 3y ago

> Housing First has proven to be very successful when implemented on the local and state level Your reference talks about one state (Utah). Even if Housing First was successful there, that doesn't mean it was successful anywhere else. Also, the definition of "success" in the article you reference is that a person gets into housing provided by Housing First. But the article under discussion in this thread is not saying that doesn't happen. It's saying that getting into housing provided by Housing First doesn't necessarily improve the lives of the people--the author describes "Massive drug use, fights, assaults, despair and death" in a Housing First building. So your definition of "success" seems to be different (and less stringent) than the author's.

davidw 3y ago
Houston has also had good results with something that looks like Housing First: https://calmatters.org/housing/2023/06/california-houston-homeless-solutions/ https://calmatters.org/housing/2023/06/california-houston-ho...

chmod600 3y ago

Not sure if it's true or not but the author is suggesting that the housing is not a safe environment and that they don't have good access (or at least utilization) of services. I read it more as an argument that it's an expensive way to keep the homelessness out of sight. (Not agreeing or disagreeing, just my interpretation of the author's general point.)

shuntress 3y ago

"Housing First" is a little bit like Universal Basic Income. Small scale programs have good results with indications that it will work just as well or better at large scale.