If I want to do that, I can.

1 Like

OK. But that way doesn’t seem to be working. Want to try something else?

Provide housing first. Then provide mental health and substance abuse treatment second.

A house/home provides a person with a sense of safety and stability. Providing treatment to a person living on the street is destined to fail.

^^^^^FACT^^^^^

“And what about the addict who succumbed to addiction through prescribed oxy?”

Big Pharma thanks them and their doctor for their service.

If you drug test, it won’t solve the problem.

I mean it’s one thing to give a homeless guy a house worth a hundred or two hundred grand, quite another to give him a sub 10k printed tiny home.

1 Like

There’s more than a few (c)Conservatives that don’t want a solution to the homeless problem. It doesn’t affect them and provides political fodder so they obstruct any solution or suggestion

I agree on all counts. That is absolutely the way such a program.should be implemented. The drug testing suggestion was more of a point that I think compromise needs to happen in order to get anything through.

And a reasonable compromise if it’s the difference in getting such a program or not.

That defeats the entire purpose.

You can’t successfully treat people living on the street, they need a home/safe haven if you expect them to get clean. Home first, treatment second has been proven to work.

So then the new subsidized housing program helps the homeless that are not on drugs. Its a start and I’d rather help some off the streets than nobody. It’s better than whats happening now. Step 2 could be a better drug and mental health system than we have now and not just for the homeless

Step 2 can come first.

Please stop quoting me.

Astroid worth $10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000?
Federal Reserve: “Hold my beer”

2 Likes

Step 2, treatment works better if some lives in a house or apartment, than in a box.

Drugs or no, all homeless need to get off the street first.

How weird is it that we have people actually arguing giving the homeless homes won’t solve the homelessness problem. Print them a tiny concrete house, can be done for under 10k, homelessness conquered.

They also have to be able to keep it of course, and many are not really capable of that. They need to be taught how to run even the simplest of households, get job training or what have you, the drugs of course, psychological who knows what and more, while many have likely owned homes in the past and just need a leg up. You can’t just give them a house and walk away, that would spell disaster in very short order.

You don’t need much maintenance on a new concrete house. And even if you think they need services afterwards to remain in the home, they still need a home first.

I know they need services afterwards. I wasn’t talking so much about maintenance so much as budgeting and paying bills and such. Those systems have to be in place BEFORE giving them homes.

Set up a solar panel farm to give them free electricity. Give them city garbage collection. What else do they need? I am not worried about incentive to leave, that is covered by how small the home would be, plenty of incentive there.