LA considers giving homeless population homes

[San Jamar]

Article link

I'm curious what NSG things of such a proposal by the LA city government. The CBS article details several other initiatives that the municipal and county governments are considering for implementation.

Aside from people who choose homelessness as a lifestyle, and yes they are out there - I have a friend who moved to Raleigh in order to live in a van as part of a lifestyle choice, I believe that this is one step toward solving a very serious social ill. Taxes and spending on the local level are always complicated and tricky and many casual voters fail to realize that it's at this level of government they are most impacted - not the national or federal level.

But this proposal reminds me of the Labour proposal by Corbyn in the UK to help tackle their homeless problem too.
Guardian article

I think that there needs to be partnerships with charities or non profit ventures as well so that the taxpayer is not unduly burdened. But while on that subject, I would imagine that even at the local levels the tax structures aren't ideal - many wealthy people using loopholes with accountants and lawyers to subvert the system and avoid paying what they owe. Then there is an argument to be made about property right and perhaps using foreclosed or abandoned formerly commercial properties, like hotels, to house the homeless.

The article also discussed housing people in mobile homes but the cost seemed quite high - a symptom of the cost of living in SoCal? Lastly, it's sad that people would protest the temporary relocation of the homeless. This indicates that the social stigma around "rough sleeping" (the UK term) is still highly negative. But I believe it is a broader indication of the state of our mixed economy here in the US.

NSG, are the proposals being bandied around Southern California, according to the CBS article, worthwhile? Or are they a waste of time and resources? How should we be addressing the crisis of homelessness?

EDIT: Are these measures attempts by LA Mayor Eric Gracetti to bolster his liberal bona fides as he travels to Iowa ahead of a possible Democratic primary run?

[Arlenton]

Didn't they do this in Utah? And didn't it work pretty well? It seems to be an ok idea.

[Petrolheadia]

How the policy was conceived:

- Mayor of Los Angeles (walking around the office): Hmm, how should I fix the homelessness problem?

- The janitor (sarcastically): Give them homes.

- Mayor of Los Angeles: Yeah! That's amazing!

[-Ocelot-]

A better measure would be to find out and eliminate the causes of homelessness.

[Petrolheadia]

A better measure would be to find out and eliminate the causes of homelessness.

Not having a home is the leading cause of homelessness.

(I also nearly wrote "homielessness")

[Galloism]

A better measure would be to find out and eliminate the causes of homelessness.

Not having a home is the leading cause of homelessness.

(I also nearly wrote "homielessness")

Homielessness is also a societal ill.

[Luziyca]

Yes, they are worthwhile.

[Cannot think of a name]

Not having a home is the leading cause of homelessness.

(I also nearly wrote "homielessness")

Homielessness is also a societal ill.

On the plus side, you get to drink all of your 40oz.

[Liriena]

Housing for the homeless? Hell yes, LA, do it.

[Chan Island]

I hear it was a massive success when they tried it in Salt Lake City of all places, so I see no reason why it wouldn't work in LA. You can't fix your life unless you have some form of a base of operations to do it from, which is exactly what such initiatives do. Go for it!

[Die PreuBen Kaiserreich]

I hear it was a massive success when they tried it in Salt Lake City of all places, so I see no reason why it wouldn't work in LA. You can't fix your life unless you have some form of a base of operations to do it from, which is exactly what such initiatives do. Go for it!

^

[USS Monitor]

I don't really have the time and inclination to dig into the details of the proposals, but the broader concept of providing housing to homeless people is solid. In some cases, the cost of the housing is less than the cost of hospital stays, police intervention, etc. that occur because people are left out on the street. Being out on the street makes people more vulnerable to getting robbed, getting in fights, developing medical problems, etc. which then require intervention. If they were housed somewhere, they would not bother other people as much or get sick as often.

Also: Holy crap, LA. 57,000 homeless???? The whole state of Massachusetts doesn't even have that many, and I still see friggin' panhandlers all the time. That is way too many.

[Petrasylvania]

Great idea, but will they be decent housing or bare bones roach motels with burgeoning bed bug civilizations?

[Valrifell]

A better measure would be to find out and eliminate the causes of homelessness.

In society as it stands, there will always be poor. The extreme among those will never have assets, including a home. Therefore, to solve the root causes of homelessness is to solve the root problems of society. Which, you know, good luck with that.

Providing homes for the homeless is a good idea, it beats criminalizing homelessness by a mile.

[Chan Island]

I don't really have the time and inclination to dig into the details of the proposals, but the broader concept of providing housing to homeless people is solid. In some cases, the cost of the housing is less than the cost of hospital stays, police intervention, etc. that occur because people are left out on the street. Being out on the street makes people more vulnerable to getting robbed, getting in fights, developing medical problems, etc. which then require intervention. If they were housed somewhere, they would not bother other people as much or get sick as often.

Also: Holy crap, LA. 57,000 homeless???? The whole state of Massachusetts doesn't even have that many, and I still see friggin' panhandlers all the time. That is way too many.

The entire state of California has a very high homelessness rate. Partly that's the large general population, and I've heard (can't confirm) that it's mostly to do with how they are more decent with homelessness there than in their neighbours, so homeless people from AZ, OR or NV travel there.

[Dixie]

Great idea, but will they be decent housing or bare bones roach motels with burgeoning bed bug civilizations?

Not defending the latter but it would probably still be a step up from homelessness. What might constitute decent housing? Should Universal Basic Housing be instituted so that everyone has access to it? In a nation where there's 5-6 empty homes for every homeless person, wouldn't be advantageous to give these people homes and so take care of them and give them an opportunity to get work?

I'm not poopooing these ideas, kinda just wondering aloud.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/empty-homes-outnumber-the-homeless-6-to-1-so-why-not-give-them-homes/207194/

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-why-we-cant-just-put-homeless-families-in-foreclosed-homes-2012-6

[The Huskar Social Union]

I hear it was a massive success when they tried it in Salt Lake City of all places, so I see no reason why it wouldn't work in LA. You can't fix your life unless you have some form of a base of operations to do it from, which is exactly what such initiatives do. Go for it!

This.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Better idea, draft them all into the army and use them to conquer Canada and just give them homes we take from our new subjects. Nothing could go wrong.

[Dixie]

Better idea, draft them all into the army and use them to conquer Canada and just give them homes we take from our new subjects. Nothing could go wrong.

What about the homeless subjects?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Better idea, draft them all into the army and use them to conquer Canada and just give them homes we take from our new subjects. Nothing could go wrong.

What about the homeless subjects?

I'm sure Mexico has plenty of homes to take. We'll conquer the entire world in no time.

[Petrolheadia]

Better idea, draft them all into the army and use them to conquer Canada and just give them homes we take from our new subjects. Nothing could go wrong.

What about the homeless subjects?

"Good news, Mr. President! We have taken 200k homes from 800k people and housed 800k homeless!"

"We made that 800k homeless."

"Collateral."

[Dixie]

What about the homeless subjects?

I'm sure Mexico has plenty of homes to take. We'll conquer the entire world in no time.

What about the homeless in the last nation?

Is... is this what takes humanity to the stars? In search of more homes?

[MERIZoC]

What a strange and novel idea

[The Black Forrest]

Homielessness is also a societal ill.

On the plus side, you get to drink all of your 40oz.

[Fartsniffage]

I don't really have the time and inclination to dig into the details of the proposals, but the broader concept of providing housing to homeless people is solid. In some cases, the cost of the housing is less than the cost of hospital stays, police intervention, etc. that occur because people are left out on the street. Being out on the street makes people more vulnerable to getting robbed, getting in fights, developing medical problems, etc. which then require intervention. If they were housed somewhere, they would not bother other people as much or get sick as often.

Also: Holy crap, LA. 57,000 homeless???? The whole state of Massachusetts doesn't even have that many, and I still see friggin' panhandlers all the time. That is way too many.

Homeless isn't always people living on the streets. There are people living out of their cars, couch surfing, cheap motels, etc.