Why don’t advocates for the homeless build spacious housing for them 1-2 hours away from DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those who are mentally ill, maybe we do need to go back to the institution model. Federally funded, build them in low COL areas that need jobs. Near smallish cities would work well so that residents wouldn’t necessarily have to be cooped up inside but high functioning folks who are safe to be in public would have access to activities and parks during the day.

For those who are capable of functioning in society but just need a leg up after a hard time: loosen restrictions in urban areas to allow more building but especially smaller simpler units for single people. We wouldn’t have so many homeless if rents weren’t so dang high. Rents are high because supply is constrained. Look to Japan for a model of the type of high density single person apartments that could be built. My rent was about $400 a month (not Tokyo obviously) for a place that was tiny by US standards, but had its own bathroom, kitchen, laundry, balcony, and access to the outdoors. We need much much more of this kind of thing but local governments and probably state and fed to a degree are preventing this. It would be much easier to provide rental assistance if there were more affordable units in the first place.

We're already doing that with prisons. How's that working out?

I agree that SRO hotels, residential hotels, and rooming houses need to be de-outlawed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well the District will have to find a place in the District. I’ve heard that the shelters are so dangerous that the homeless don’t want to go there. They’d rather sleep in the streets.

More like...you have to be sober to be in a shelter and a lot of people don't want to or can't get sober.

[Anonymous]

More subsidized, or even free, housing could certainly benefit a specific population of homeless people. This would help a person working a low wage job who lives in their car because they can’t afford market rent or a single mom who couch surfs between the homes of family and friends. These people, though, are the “invisible” homeless, not the ones generally talked about when people are talking about how to “fix”the homelessness issue.

If the goal is to eliminate tent communities and people defecating in the street I don’t see what could effectively address this beyond institutionalization

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who are mentally ill, maybe we do need to go back to the institution model. Federally funded, build them in low COL areas that need jobs. Near smallish cities would work well so that residents wouldn’t necessarily have to be cooped up inside but high functioning folks who are safe to be in public would have access to activities and parks during the day.

For those who are capable of functioning in society but just need a leg up after a hard time: loosen restrictions in urban areas to allow more building but especially smaller simpler units for single people. We wouldn’t have so many homeless if rents weren’t so dang high. Rents are high because supply is constrained. Look to Japan for a model of the type of high density single person apartments that could be built. My rent was about $400 a month (not Tokyo obviously) for a place that was tiny by US standards, but had its own bathroom, kitchen, laundry, balcony, and access to the outdoors. We need much much more of this kind of thing but local governments and probably state and fed to a degree are preventing this. It would be much easier to provide rental assistance if there were more affordable units in the first place.

We're already doing that with prisons. How's that working out?

I agree that SRO hotels, residential hotels, and rooming houses need to be de-outlawed.

How's it working out? I have family in a low-COL area and a bunch of their neighbors all work for the prison - and it's one of the best paying gigs around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the District will have to find a place in the District. I’ve heard that the shelters are so dangerous that the homeless don’t want to go there. They’d rather sleep in the streets.

More like...you have to be sober to be in a shelter and a lot of people don't want to or can't get sober.

Yep. For a lot of them it's substance abuse. A shelter can't be any more dangerous than living on the street where any rando might assault you and trash your belongings (and that does happen on the street).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to raise taxes to help these people, get them better services. Golly, this is such a sad thread.

It’s not my problem that people are attempting to live somewhere they can’t afford, doing drugs and coming here from all over the U.S.

+1 you forgot the illegal population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to raise taxes to help these people, get them better services. Golly, this is such a sad thread.

It’s not my problem that people are attempting to live somewhere they can’t afford, doing drugs and coming here from all over the U.S.

+1 you forgot the illegal population.

They aren't the ones living in tents. They work hard, feed their families and rent apartments with the money they've earned.

[Anonymous]

They need transportation links.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. It would be much more efficient to provide services to the homeless if they’re housed in one place.

Like a camp?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From someone who volunteers with DC's downtown homeless-- probably over 65% of the people we serve are struggling with some form of mental illness. Homelessness at its core is the result of Reagan's deinstitutionalization policies of the early 1980s. Cities have been paying the price ever since.

So a policy from 40+ years ago is to blame for the current homeless situation? What about for a 30 year old homeless person who wasn't even born then?

You’re not very bright. A 30 y/o homeless person today can’t be institutionalized as a result of Reagan.

People were abused horribly in those facilities

So improve the facilities, but don’t throw out the idea altogether. People are abused horribly in churches, shall we abolish them?

[tiny voice]Yes?[/tiny voice]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is plenty of cheap land to be had near the MD/PA border, in southern MD and near Prince William County. Build clean, safe, spacious housing for the homeless there & have them live there only. Bus them to & from DC.

This sounds very similar to the Florida and Texas plan for the undocumented.

DC can charter buses as easily as Florida and Texas. Trade them homeless for refugees wanting to work

More than half of the homeless work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well the District will have to find a place in the District. I’ve heard that the shelters are so dangerous that the homeless don’t want to go there. They’d rather sleep in the streets.

More like...you have to be sober to be in a shelter and a lot of people don't want to or can't get sober.

Yep. For a lot of them it's substance abuse. A shelter can't be any more dangerous than living on the street where any rando might assault you and trash your belongings (and that does happen on the street).

That happens in the shelters, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to raise taxes to help these people, get them better services. Golly, this is such a sad thread.

It’s not my problem that people are attempting to live somewhere they can’t afford, doing drugs and coming here from all over the U.S.

If you weren’t so selfish and self-centered, you would see that it is your problem — a problem shared by all those within our communities and society.

[Anonymous]

Super cringe OP

[Anonymous]

Institutionalization is really the only answer. Not sure why we keep dancing around it. The problem keeps getting worse, and no other solution has worked. I'll vote for any candidate who advocates for institutionalization.