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

[Anonymous]

How about I hire a few of them to come to your house and clean? Inside your house with your kids.

LOL people think everybody can work. Jeez.

[Anonymous]

People are not arguing with OP in faith.

Right, it's not actually 221 people. It's more like 1200-1500 people. However, I think OP's underlying point, which is that this is not some monolithic group, stands. We're talking about a finite group. Surely we can come up with solutions that don't result in tent cities under bridges and in parks. Surely we can figure out how to provide basic services, including shelter, medical care, and mental health services, to fewer than 2k people?

I think just giving them money or jobs doesn't make sense (though I actually do support some form of UBI, but I wouldn't limit it to unhoused peopel for a variety of reasons). Most of the chronically unhoused in DC have special and high needs. This is just the truth of the matter. But why can't we provide them? It feels like we've given up, and it also feels like some of the advocates for the unhoused in DC have lost the plot a bit, arguing for them to be allowed to stay in unsanitary and dangerous tent villages throughout the city instead of coming up with a solution that makes more sense.

I have enormous empathy for the unhoused and want understand the issues with temporary housing and other services. But I do think we could solve this problem. We simply do not have the will. Like many issues in DC, we're stuck in this political quagmire where everyone locks themselves behind ideological bars and refuses to speak reason with one another. It's exhausting.

[Anonymous]

Not all unhoused people want to be housed. Not all unhoused people want to be housed if there are conditions and requirements to access that housing.

Not all unhoused people want to be employed. Not all unhoused people want to be employed if there are conditions and requirements to obtain and maintain that employment.

I know social workers assigned to unhoused people who have refused any help including counseling, housing, employment assistance.

[Anonymous]

There needs to be more robust mental health services

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not just 221 people, and how in the world do you manage such a program? Who gets the 50k? Do you have to be a resident if DC to qualify for this 59k, and if so, what are the residency requirements? Many of the homeless are not from DC, but migrated to DC from other areas because of the city’s social welfare programs in comparison to their own. Also, why give the homeless 50k, why stop there. What are the other eligibility requirements? Are new high school or college graduates eligible for the 50k if their parents are no longer obligated to house them and tell them go get your 50k handout from true city and get your own living quarters?

I think this is great. Initially take only the 221 which DC homeless services has identified according to the mayor. Why are you worrying about high school graduates or residency. DC does not require residency for anything else. You can vote here now without being a DC resident. Enroll the 221 in program OP described and how could things possibly get any worse.

Andy by the way, being a college graduate or high school graduate does not make you homeless. With thinking like that, no wonder our city has such intractable problems with no solutions in sight.

If you graduate from high school and your parents say you’re on your own, you’re homeless Sherlock. Now can that homeless kid go collect that 50k from the government and get free housing, yes. Same for a recent grad who is sharing an apartment with two others because of low-entry waged income. Why share space when I can get a 59k housing supplement from the government.

[Anonymous]

They tried this in Utah.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2020/05/11/utah-was-once-lauded/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

You can’t force someone into treatment. The ones left are on the streets because they want to keep using and are therefore ineligible for most programs.

This is a pretty easy fix. The alternative for public drug use and/or creating a danger to yourself by sleeping on the streets is commitment to a psychiatric institution. So, they should be able to choose: inpatient SA treatment, inpatient psychiatric treatment or jail. Start building the treatment facilities and training the workers.

We already fund shelters which do nothing to solve the problem, so it would be better to fund the above. Keep one small shelter in place for those fleeing domestic violence or who truly just need a few weeks to access social services for financial problems.

[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.

Simple and obvious answer: That 221 number...is pure misinformation.

[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.

Simple and obvious answer: That 221 number...is pure misinformation.

What?

The mayor said it. It’s a fact.

Have you always been a conspiracy theory-believing nut job?

[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.

Simple and obvious answer: That 221 number...is pure misinformation.

What?

The mayor said it. It’s a fact.

Have you always been a conspiracy theory-believing nut job?

Guess who's nuts? YOU.


As another PP pointed above, there's at least several thousand people who are "temporarily displaced" -- unless you're fudging the numbers using some funny criteria.

[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.

Simple and obvious answer: That 221 number...is pure misinformation.

What?

The mayor said it. It’s a fact.

Have you always been a conspiracy theory-believing nut job?

Guess who's nuts? YOU.


As another PP pointed above, there's at least several thousand people who are "temporarily displaced" -- unless you're fudging the numbers using some funny criteria.

Question: What would happen if you offer free housing and jobs to a few "temporarily displaced" people?

Answer: Like Jesus did, those thousands would become tens of thousands, and no one could understand why. Miracle!

[Anonymous]

No idea if Bowser lied, but it's obvious that the Rep was being dishonest.

She said there were 221 people *on the street*, which doesn't count people in shelters or housing.
The grandstanding rep wouldn't even let her finish her sentences, so we have no idea what she trying to say.

[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.

Simple and obvious answer: That 221 number...is pure misinformation.

What?

The mayor said it. It’s a fact.

Have you always been a conspiracy theory-believing nut job?

Guess who's nuts? YOU.


As another PP pointed above, there's at least several thousand people who are "temporarily displaced" -- unless you're fudging the numbers using some funny criteria.

Question: What would happen if you offer free housing and jobs to a few "temporarily displaced" people?

Answer: Like Jesus did, those thousands would become tens of thousands, and no one could understand why. Miracle!

Oh no, people would work for a living and a home. What a tragedy.

[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.

OP's quite directly contradict OP's title and claim. Ignore the troll.

[Anonymous]

Shouldn't there be some sort of survey that led her to that very specific number in the first place? Why can’t we see the source?