How would YOU resolve LA's homeless problem? (San Francisco, Beverly Hills: gated community, square footage)

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by LuvSouthOC

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ6_EkkydMg

At 4:12 it is discussed why the homeless come to Southern California.

At 6:28 the question is posed whether the homeless come to Southern California for the weather or for the services. The answer is both.

Roflmfao, OC. You're still at it trying to refute every study on homelessness by agencies and academia. I have linked and quoted and demonstrated how many times that what this guy being interviewed says is total bull**** about homeless migration for weather and services (or any other reason). Too freaking funny.

So, I am curious, you have never explained why it is so important to you that the homeless be migratory - that you would contradict all social science and research.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

Homelessness is just a symptom of capitalism. When it comes to a zero sum positional good like housing, there will be winners and losers. So the only true solution to a problem like homelessness is socialism. In capitalism, it will always exist

Actually, socialism is part of the problem. A capitalistic system would build more housing. But socialist NIMBYs block any and all attempts to build enough housing to keep up with demand while simulatneously saying we need more housing (just not anywhere near where the NIMBYs live. Problem is, there are NIMBYs everywhere).

Of course, the homeless problem is only partly a housing problem. Normal people who can't afford to live in an expensive city will move somewhere cheaper. People with serious issues allow living on the street to become their way of life.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Kaphawoman

Homeless advocacy groups are the ones impeding progress. They file suit over any sort of law that would restrict the homeless, and the judge ends up deciding in their favor.

An excellent point.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by seain dublin

Now, now lets not bring in the rights you have as a US citizen.

What some people don't realize is once you go down a slippery slope, whose to say you won't end up sliding down as well?

When blue collar jobs started going out of the country, many with white collar jobs didn't care.

Well than the white collar jobs started being outsourced.

Whose to say what is mentally ill? Who determines that?

In CA now you can call the police and say a family member is unstable and they have a licensed gun and the police can come and take it away. So anyone with something against a family member can lie and the licensed gun will be removed....sounds likes Germany to me.

So the ones who think just rounding up homeless people and just send them somewhere, guess they don't think(thinking is so rare these days) that next it could be them.

"Gee you seem to be upset, you're acting unstable, you will be going away".

Yeah, I really can see the slippery slope here. It is a real conundrum. But it's also not good for the homeless people or non homeless citizens to just allow them to live on the street.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by David Aguilar

So you think the government mishandling even more of our money is a solution?

LOL!

You'll never convince the true believers that government ever wastes money on anything (except the military). Any social program is unquestionably good for them.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Leisesturm

Nope. It would work. That much money could not possibly be mishandled badly enough not to be able to do lots of good on its way to wherever money goes after the economy... excretes it.

Heh, that's what you think.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

True: no point in just throwing money around without an understanding of how to be effective. But I am curious at your use of the word "cause" in the singular. A number of your posts I have read in various topics places you in my mind as someone who thinks pretty well through many issues. Surely you know there is no singular cause for homelessness?

That said, the best, most successful program for dealing with homelessness so far anywhere is "Housing First" programs. Which, oddly, save 25% - 50% over budgets typically spent otherwise in failure.

Go figure. Haters hate the idea of just paying to house the homeless where their problems don't have to be tripped over daily. Because they don't earn it! Why should they just get a roof over head?! (Uh, to get them out of everyone's way? ... when nothing else works?)

I think you make a valid point. But there's also a valid point to be made that it's a tough pill for people to swallow in expensive areas to pay for free housing while they're paying $3000 a month for a small apartment. And even the best rehabilitation is going to leave a lot of these folks without the necessary skill sets to do well in expensive metro areas like L.A. and San Francisco. I read in an article recently about a social worker in San Francisco who was indeed an advocate for housing first solutions. But even he admitted some people needed to be urged to move. As he said (and I paraphrase) "Nobody would show up on the street in Beverly Hills and expect a free place to live". Well nowadays pretty much all of San Francisco is essentially like Beverly Hills in terms of cost.

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

No, I don't agree. As I have said I've worked with the homeless and you would be surprised at how many of them, even though they are impaired with mental illness or substance abuse disorders, want to stay where they are. Certainly they would prefer housing over a cardboard box, but a good number of them have connections locally. It's not uncommon for family members to bring food or cash to their homeless relative but refuse to let them stay in their home because of their disruptive behavior. And to be honest, if I were homeless I would stay where I was rather than accept a bus ride to Hemet

Yep. The mild climate here definitely enables their behavior. You have fewer homeless by choice people in places with crappy weather.

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

Actually, socialism is part of the problem. A capitalistic system would build more housing. But socialist NIMBYs block any and all attempts to build enough housing to keep up with demand while simulatneously saying we need more housing (just not anywhere near where the NIMBYs live. Problem is, there are NIMBYs everywhere).

Of course, the homeless problem is only partly a housing problem. Normal people who can't afford to live in an expensive city will move somewhere cheaper. People with serious issues allow living on the street to become their way of life.

Yes I agree , I keep hearing this argument .
" if only housing was more affordable , it would help the homeless situation "

The mayor has recently stated that we shouldn't stop until housing is affordable for all people in Los Angeles .
A pretty ridiculous statement and probably one he doesn't believe to be possible but he always has to appear to be politically correct rather than telling the hard truth.

I see L.A and other parts of CA going more socialist in the future .
I think it's a big mistake . You just have to look at the many failures of places around the world with the " affordable for all " motto .

Lots of affordable housing in the country , but none of it is in the city of L.A at least at market rates .

[Teckeeee]

Solvent Green........Just Kidding.......Kinda.

Bus ticket and when they return starve them out fine anyone that gives them money run the meth heads off to slab city I don't care about them anyway brain-dead losers.