The announcement follows Newsom’s 2024 executive order, which directed encampment cleanups after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling granted state and local governments more authority to remove them.
The announcement follows Newsom’s 2024 executive order, which directed encampment cleanups after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling granted state and local governments more authority to remove them.
Removed by mod
I think you are conflating chronic homeless (less than 25% of all homeless) with people who are homeless for the first time, or have gone in and out of homelessness one or two times. The transiently homeless are absolutely driven there by lack of housing. Chronically homeless tend to have multiple issues that make serving them a challenge, but targeted support programs have been shown to make significant inroads even there.
This page has a lot of detailed breakdowns: https://endhomelessness.org/state-of-homelessness/
“Chronically homeless tend to have multiple issues that make serving them a challenge, but targeted support programs have been shown to make significant inroads even there.”
That was the point I was making. It’s not just lack of housing.
sounds like propaganda, even housing chronically homeless people, or people who druggies, have a very beneficial effect in an area. even if it doesnt immediately solve thier problems.
You have had conversations with many unhoused people and they’ve indicated they would much rather prefer sleeping in places with little security, a high risk of their few possessions being stolen, and little protection from the elements, to a safe, stable place of residence?
I’m quite skeptical.
I’ve been homeless. This person is either full of shit or the population they were around was drastically different than mine.
There are circumstances I recall where people turned down shelter space, opting to sleep on the streets, but that’s because the shelters imposed conditions that were unacceptable to them. Primarily, it was drug addicts refusing to get clean or shelters that imposed religious requirements. The rest was mostly untreated mental illness.
probably nimby person. the last thing Nimby neighborhoods want is low-income housing being built near them. thats what NEWSOM caters to.
“but that’s because the shelters imposed conditions that were unacceptable to them.”
There are people for whom conditions are not acceptable. I’m not saying they shouldn’t have access to a safe place to live.
Not what I said
I’m curious then, you seem to know the thoughts and experience of unhoused people, yet you’re saying you haven’t conversed with them. How did you form such an opinion?
My comments have been removed for some reason but I started the first one with “I can’t speak for all unhoused people but there are some.”
Not sure how you could read that as me speaking for all homeless people. I’ve lived in all kinds of situations with all kinds of people. I’ve known some who flat out reject being involved in programs designed to help them, preferring to go it alone. Yes, giving up access to safe shelters and other resources. I’m not saying they deserve to go without help or that they should be rounded up and placed in camps. I’m saying understanding their choices can be complex and requires more than just access to shelters or housing.
Your initial comment read like, “we shouldn’t provide access to housing for anyone because some don’t actually want it.”
I believe a better solution would be, “we should provide access to housing and if some don’t want it, they won’t be forced to use it.”
It’s definitely a complex issue, but the first step should be compassion and not eliminating practical options because they might not suit a small subset of the population.
You might have read my comment that way but you also read it as me speaking for all homeless people for some reason.
There is a risk of using already limited funds for housing projects that pay out to contractors/land developers (profiting off social programs) without having enough to go towards other issues facing unhoused people. The solution is more complex than simply “build more homes” which is what the original message I responded to was intimating.
All people deserve safe, stable living environments, some just choose to forgo those for reasons people seem unwilling to acknowledge.
I think you’re buying republican narrative about the homeless. That is judgement, but so is your comment.
i dont think that word means what you think it means
Lol, I get the impression you don’t know what it means.
no shit? you think we have different ideas of what judgement means? what gave you that impression- was it the 1/9 ratio or me telling you so first?
shove your thoughtless reply right straight back up whatever hole you were gonna shit it out of. i’ve already blocked you.
Removed by mod