Fax

Not every homeless person is mentally ill. Even those that are weren’t necessarily that way before; being homeless is not great for your mental health. So giving them a place to live would be an unequivocal good for all of them where as what you’re suggesting only really helps a fraction of them.

Reopen asylums if you want, but they aren’t going to stop being homeless once they finish their treatment. Unless what you really want is just a pseudo prison to lock them all up in so you don’t have to look at them.

80% of the chronically homeless have life long mental health issues, and 60% of the chronically homeless have drug addictions.
- What percentage of people with lifelong mental health issues are homeless? What percentage of the housed population has lifelong mental health issues? Should we lock up the ones with houses in asylums too?
  
  Neither of those statistics are relevant to the discussion.
  
  Neither are the ones you posted.
  
  No, the ones I posted show the demographics of the chronically homeless. People who aren't homeless have nothing to do with the discussion.
  
  No the ones you posted are as disingenuous as posting crime stats to imply that black people are inherently violent. Correlation is not causation and you can’t just look at them in a vacuum.
  Without knowing what the baseline for mental health is how do you even know that 80% is statistically significant deviation from the standard population? I can tell you for certain that around 60% of people I’ve met have lifelong drug problems, homeless or not.
  
  It doesn't matter what the general population is. We're discussing the homeless population.
  Your questions are a strawman.
  
  You should probably get a better grasp of statistics before you try to lie with them. Black people are homeless at a rate four times higher than whites, are you going to suggest melanin causes homelessness? Hawaiians experience it at a rate three times higher than black people, what could possibly explain that other than their hawaiianness? Here’s my source, which I note you neglected to provide for your own stats.
  
  are you going to suggest melanin causes homelessness?
  Are you going to suggest that race plays no factor and it's entirely a coincidence? What exactly are you suggesting here? "All the data must be pure coincidence"? "What even IS data anyways?"
  
  Have you been to a section 8 neighborhood? What you’re suggesting would be even worse
  Each person needs the help they need…. Some homeless folks just need a break, for sure! I’ve been there myself. Some of them are legit crazy and homeless for a good reason, I’ve lived alongside them and you can’t just give them a home and all is well, they legit need professional help. Putting those folks up in housing alongside the folks that do legit just need a little help will taint the public perception against all of them and screw up a good attempt at solving the issue. We really need a system in place to evaluate these folks and get them the level of help they really need, but that would be socialism and that’s bad so I guess let’s all just keep suffering hahaha
  
  how do you even know that 80% is statistically significant deviation from the standard population?
  What a ridiculous question
  
  Then you should have no trouble providing me with the stats that prove how ridiculous it is.
  
  Sure thing: https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.x7HX2fwG3CyMLgKCNCeQYwHaE9&pid=Api
- And a near-0% of them will ever make progress on that without a home. All of that is downstream from having safe and secure housing.

It all leads back to Reagan. Fucking monster.

Finland already solved this. A regular ol house upfront and then aid in accessing social services and job placement helps way more than anything else. Here's an article if you're interested

In Finland if you don't find housing you die
- In anywhere, you don't find housing your lifespan decreases dramatically.
  
  But you don't die that winter.
  
  Every region except the most moderate of them has a season that'll kill you. Don't be so reductive.
  
  Finland is in that season far more than places with more homeless. You're being reductive by saying "we should just copy Finland". I'm introducing you to the idea that it's more complicated than that.
  
  And I didn't say we should copy Finland. Youre being reductive by saying "the only reason you have to do that there is because it'll kill em otherwise." My whole point is that every region has harsh climates that will kill you, the simple fact that anyone doesn't have a home will drastically decrease their lifespan.
  More reasons we can't just copy Finland, we're huge. We're not homogeneous. We have a particularly prickly culture towards the homeless. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't look at their successes and actually think critically before spouting shit about their region being the sole reason. Guess they never had any homeless before 2007 or 2008, when they started housing first, because they all just died every winter.
  
  Yes, I was giving one example among a myriad of reasons why we can't just copy Finland. Reading comprehension, please.
  
  And my point is it's a shit reason because EVERYWHERE either kills you or makes it far harder to survive without a home. Reading comprehension, please.

There was a time that people with mental health problems and substance use issues could still afford a place to live. All that cheap housing seems to have gone away.

Absolutely, some people need in patient medical care or rehab. But not everyone. And those often aren't permanent things. Usually in patient care is only temporarily needed and a group home is a better and more scalable long term solution.

But the key is some people. Not everyone needs medical help. For one thing, there's a huge number of homeless people who aren't the stereotypical on the streets type, but rather living in shelters, friends' sofas, or their cars. Some homeless people do just need a little help and way to support themselves or a safety net.

Some people are probably also using drugs to cope with being homeless. It certainly won't be the case for every person, but I'm sure some number can absolutely turn things around after they're no longer homeless (but not before). I mean, things are pretty bleak if you don't have a safe place to live and sustain yourself. Can you really fault people for not wanting to give up drugs that make that shitty situation slightly less shitty?

Having the a stability of a home does improve mental health and addiction. Also, paying for access to these services along with housing will still be cheaper than for profit prison.

100% agree. This would also filter out the people who are homeless by choice, who IMO don't deserve free housing.

People that are dedicated to not living in a home aren't going to seek out programs and aid for housing. This is a thinly veiled excuse to continue dehumanizing homeless people. Housing is a human right and everyone should have access to one. If they don't want it they don't have to take it but that's no reason to exclude everybody else

If you house them they have a foundation upon which to build such things as working on their mental illnesses. Or getting over drugs. Or getting a job. Housing is the first step, not the last. People need a private, safe space they call their own FIRST, and the rest at least has a chance to follow.