Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

http://www.nationswell.com/one-state-track-become-first-end-homelessness-2015/

 

Utah Is on Track to End Homelessness by 2015 With This One Simple Idea Give them an apartment first, ask questions later.

Utah has reduced its rate of chronic homelessness by 78 percent over the past eight years, moving 2000 people off the street and putting the state on track to eradicate homelessness altogether by 2015. How'd they do it?

The state is giving away apartments, no strings attached. In 2005, Utah calculated the annual cost of E.R. visits and jail stays for an average homeless person was $16,670, while the cost of providing an apartment and social worker would be $11,000. Each participant works with a caseworker to become self-sufficient, but if they fail, they still get to keep their apartment.

 

Other states are eager to emulate Utah's results. Wyoming has seen its homeless population more than double in the past three years, and it only provides shelter for 26 percent of them, the lowest rate in the country. City officials in Casper, Wyoming, now plan to launch a pilot program using the methods of Utah's Housing First program. There's no telling how far the idea might go.

Posted

If only "Utah" had apartments to give that didn't come from stealing them first.

 

How much maintenance will have to be stolen to manage the effects of people not taking care of that which they do not own/did not earn?

 

How many people will be near the threshold of whatever guidelines is required that will choose to stop earning in order to get a "free" home?

 

The working to help become self-sufficient is a good approach, but again, those caseworkers are being provided from stolen monies.

 

This is one of those things that's passed off as a really great idea while ignoring the unseen costs or the immorality of holding guns to people's heads to fund it.

Posted

This is just another public housing program which is guaranteed to produce predictable results.

 

Well, the way it was presented to me was like this - the cost of locking up homeless people for drug abuse, etc, and the cost of paying for their health care is greater than the cost of building a home.  So it makes sense from an economic stand point to build houses for the homeless.  That's the basis for this program.

 

I disagree, of course - these are all problems created by the state, so that is where the real solution lies.

Posted

Well, the way it was presented to me was like this - the cost of locking up homeless people for drug abuse, etc, and the cost of paying for their health care is greater than the cost of building a home.  So it makes sense from an economic stand point to build houses for the homeless.  That's the basis for this program.

 

I disagree, of course - these are all problems created by the state, so that is where the real solution lies.

So they are finding a more efficient way to spend stolen money. However are they now giving the saved money back to the people they stole it from or reducing the amount of money they steal in the future? Yeah didn't think so

Posted

Since the money is already stolen I guess it's good that it's being spent on socialism instead of cracking heads and throwing people in jail... Now if they could legalize drugs they could "save" all sorts of money.

 

I mean if they're stealing money I'd rather it go to socialist programs than cops and prisons or to a military carpet bombing foreigners. At least there's some progress towards less violence.

Posted

The "savings" would only materialize if "Utah" actually stopped spending the $16k on police and jails. They won't. The $11k for an apartment and social worker (which will actually be quadruple that amount) will simply be added to the cop/prison expenses, which will never go away.

 

Plus, like the auto-refilling horn of plenty that Thor tried unsuccessfully to empty in a single gulp, homelessness can't be ended by giving houses to homeless people because the policy will help create new homeless people. First, the people on the margin will want other people to pay for their apartment, then out-of-state people will move there to get one.

Posted

If somebody asked me if I'd rather be stolen from to pay for prisons or stolen from to pay for shelter, I'd answer that I'd rather not be stolen from at all.

Posted

You can see that the headline/idea  is being presented like it's this unthought-of, unprecedented program born out of a staggering amount of common sense.  No houses?  Give em' a house!

 

But don't we have decades of data on this?  There's housing projects, alphabet cities, section 8 like in every state which are the same idea.

Posted

The thing that's making this unique is that this housing is supposedly intended as short term housing and one of the requirements to qualify is that you have to find a job.  However the guidelines also stipulate that you don't have to prove that you actually have a job to keep living there.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.