If DC only has 221 temporarily displaced people, why can't the city just house and hire them?

[Anonymous]

The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

If twenty of them have valid drivers licenses we could more than double the DC City owned tow truck force and pay for the program through towed vehicles. it would be worth sending twenty of these displaced persons back to drivers training even if they did not have a license and then hire them through Ddot to tow vehicles or run the booting program.

[Anonymous]

I'm living with a friend in DC with a relative giving me an allowance to help. Can I also get $50,000?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

I don’t think it’s only lack of money that keeps them unhoused. For many it’s the underlying mental health and addiction issues that are a bigger barrier to finding and staying in safe housing. I don’t think it’s just about sending them for CDL training and calling it a day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

I don’t think it’s only lack of money that keeps them unhoused. For many it’s the underlying mental health and addiction issues that are a bigger barrier to finding and staying in safe housing. I don’t think it’s just about sending them for CDL training and calling it a day.

But you would know who they are as you are paying them and providing them with a W-2 form. So you could make treatment or education a part of the program. Paying you to get treatment in essence. Make that a requirement for the $50K. Once you get through a percentage of treatment, you get job skills. Like learning how to boot a car.

We cannot be such a dumb city that we cannot solve a homeless crisis consisting of 221 people.

[Anonymous]

Is that 221 number in addition to the 1000 or so shelter beds available in DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

I don’t think it’s only lack of money that keeps them unhoused. For many it’s the underlying mental health and addiction issues that are a bigger barrier to finding and staying in safe housing. I don’t think it’s just about sending them for CDL training and calling it a day.

But you would know who they are as you are paying them and providing them with a W-2 form. So you could make treatment or education a part of the program. Paying you to get treatment in essence. Make that a requirement for the $50K. Once you get through a percentage of treatment, you get job skills. Like learning how to boot a car.

We cannot be such a dumb city that we cannot solve a homeless crisis consisting of 221 people.

I’m interested in where you live. Most of the homeless people in my neighborhood are clearly drug users and have significant mental health challenges. It’s not as east as just signing them up for a treatment plan and giving them a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is that 221 number in addition to the 1000 or so shelter beds available in DC?

I answered my own question… no there are far more than 221 homeless people in DC. The mayor is talking about people who are literally on the streets and not going to a shelter at night. Shame on her for giving a misleading answer like that.

D.C. operates 10 low-barrier shelters, which provide beds on a first-come, first-served basis throughout the year to anyone experiencing homelessness. Collectively, the shelters offer about 840 beds for men, 340 beds for women, and 40 beds for LGBTQ+ individuals in the only city-funded shelter where occupancy isn’t based on a gender binary. During hypothermia season, which generally lasts from Nov. 1 to April 1, the D.C. Department of Human Services (DHS) opens overflow shelter sites to account for the identified gap between demand and shelter beds — this year, about 250 beds.

https://dcist.com/story/23/02/13/dc-homeless-shelter-capacity-2023/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

I don’t think it’s only lack of money that keeps them unhoused. For many it’s the underlying mental health and addiction issues that are a bigger barrier to finding and staying in safe housing. I don’t think it’s just about sending them for CDL training and calling it a day.

Not all of the homeless people are drug users. Those that are. Enroll them into in patient treatment full time. Until they are capable of moving into other programs. But those who are not drug users, the bulk of the 221 persons, employ them and let's turn them back into citizens proud to call DC home. Do you mean to tell me that we cannot give a lift to 221 people?
But you would know who they are as you are paying them and providing them with a W-2 form. So you could make treatment or education a part of the program. Paying you to get treatment in essence. Make that a requirement for the $50K. Once you get through a percentage of treatment, you get job skills. Like learning how to boot a car.

We cannot be such a dumb city that we cannot solve a homeless crisis consisting of 221 people.

I’m interested in where you live. Most of the homeless people in my neighborhood are clearly drug users and have significant mental health challenges. It’s not as east as just signing them up for a treatment plan and giving them a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

I don’t think it’s only lack of money that keeps them unhoused. For many it’s the underlying mental health and addiction issues that are a bigger barrier to finding and staying in safe housing. I don’t think it’s just about sending them for CDL training and calling it a day.

But you would know who they are as you are paying them and providing them with a W-2 form. So you could make treatment or education a part of the program. Paying you to get treatment in essence. Make that a requirement for the $50K. Once you get through a percentage of treatment, you get job skills. Like learning how to boot a car.

We cannot be such a dumb city that we cannot solve a homeless crisis consisting of 221 people.

I’m interested in where you live. Most of the homeless people in my neighborhood are clearly drug users and have significant mental health challenges. It’s not as east as just signing them up for a treatment plan and giving them a job.

Not all of the homeless people are drug users. Those that are. Enroll them into in patient treatment full time. Until they are capable of moving into other programs. But those who are not drug users, the bulk of the 221 persons, employ them and let's turn them back into citizens proud to call DC home. Do you mean to tell me that we cannot give a lift to 221 people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Mayor says that 221 temporarily displaced people live within DC. Why can't DC just round all of them up over the course of a week, hire them into various DC govt jobs, house them in 221 subsidized units or hotels and the ones who refuse enroll into this new social contract would immediately be enrolled into in house treatment for whatever ails them. ALL AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE. It would still be less expensive than running the homeless programs we are currently.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dc-mayor-bowser-grilled-claim-city-221-homeless-people-what-you-talking-about

"Do you agree that we have a major, major problem in Washington, D.C., as it relates to homelessness?" Timmons asked.

"We have 221 people, as of today's count, who are living on the street," Bowser responded.

You could simply pay them an allowance of $50K annually and you would only spend 10 million which is currently less than our homeless budget.

I don’t think it’s only lack of money that keeps them unhoused. For many it’s the underlying mental health and addiction issues that are a bigger barrier to finding and staying in safe housing. I don’t think it’s just about sending them for CDL training and calling it a day.

But you would know who they are as you are paying them and providing them with a W-2 form. So you could make treatment or education a part of the program. Paying you to get treatment in essence. Make that a requirement for the $50K. Once you get through a percentage of treatment, you get job skills. Like learning how to boot a car.

We cannot be such a dumb city that we cannot solve a homeless crisis consisting of 221 people.

I’m interested in where you live. Most of the homeless people in my neighborhood are clearly drug users and have significant mental health challenges. It’s not as east as just signing them up for a treatment plan and giving them a job.

Not all of the homeless people are drug users. Those that are. Enroll them into in patient treatment full time. Until they are capable of moving into other programs. But those who are not drug users, the bulk of the 221 persons, employ them and let's turn them back into citizens proud to call DC home. Do you mean to tell me that we cannot give a lift to 221 people?

The mayor lied. There are way more than 221 people in dc in need of “a lift”. And no, it’s really not as easy as you’re making it out to be.

[Anonymous]

Some homeless people don't want to live in a home. Nor do they want a job.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like you are talking universal basic income, but only for houseless people.

Some people will take the paychecks and use them to build a life. It may or may work. Some people will be unable to care for their housing or do their job. Are you okay with those people still receiving the paychecks? Some people will use the money for drugs. What kind of rules does your hypothetical program have about that?

A lot of truly unhoused folks live where they live because they are not able to engage with the system anymore - whether that is the W2ed rent-paying system or the homeless shelter system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you are talking universal basic income, but only for houseless people.

Some people will take the paychecks and use them to build a life. It may or may work. Some people will be unable to care for their housing or do their job. Are you okay with those people still receiving the paychecks? Some people will use the money for drugs. What kind of rules does your hypothetical program have about that?

A lot of truly unhoused folks live where they live because they are not able to engage with the system anymore - whether that is the W2ed rent-paying system or the homeless shelter system.

We have to be smart enough to be able to house, train, educate, and treat 221 people. I am not sure this is universal basic income, because it is only 221 people in a program run by the city and being paid a salary for their treatment and education.

We can't come up with ten smart people to run a program like this. Cut through all the red tape and just pull people off the streets and enroll them in a DClife program that is funded for five or ten years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like you are talking universal basic income, but only for houseless people.

Some people will take the paychecks and use them to build a life. It may or may work. Some people will be unable to care for their housing or do their job. Are you okay with those people still receiving the paychecks? Some people will use the money for drugs. What kind of rules does your hypothetical program have about that?

A lot of truly unhoused folks live where they live because they are not able to engage with the system anymore - whether that is the W2ed rent-paying system or the homeless shelter system.

We have to be smart enough to be able to house, train, educate, and treat 221 people. I am not sure this is universal basic income, because it is only 221 people in a program run by the city and being paid a salary for their treatment and education.

We can't come up with ten smart people to run a program like this. Cut through all the red tape and just pull people off the streets and enroll them in a DClife program that is funded for five or ten years.

It’s more than 221 people. Or are you only talking about those who chose not to seek shelter beds last night?