Homelessness in DC- has it gotten worse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. NIMBYs oppose housing.
2. Housing becomes more expensive as more people want to live in DC
3. Low-income folks are evicted onto the street.

Simple as that.

.

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

This isn't even remotely true. Like you, I was skeptical of the claim that homelessness was tied to affordability, but after reading up on the literature, it's true. High housing prices and homelessness are undeniably tied together.

Here are some papers if you're interested in learning more:
https://wp-tid.zillowstatic.com/3/Homelessness_InflectionPoints-27eb88.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.09380
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9906.00168?journalCode=ujua20
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00643.x

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. NIMBYs oppose housing.
2. Housing becomes more expensive as more people want to live in DC
3. Low-income folks are evicted onto the street.

Simple as that.

.

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

This isn't even remotely true. Like you, I was skeptical of the claim that homelessness was tied to affordability, but after reading up on the literature, it's true. High housing prices and homelessness are undeniably tied together.

Here are some papers if you're interested in learning more:
https://wp-tid.zillowstatic.com/3/Homelessness_InflectionPoints-27eb88.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.09380
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9906.00168?journalCode=ujua20
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00643.x

Debate Club Guy is back at it. The Google expert on every topic. LOL.

Step 1: Make sweeping, yet untrue, generalization on any topic
Step 2: People point out that it is incorrect
Step 3: Search Google for "studies" and post links without reading them
Step 4: Claim those links "prove" your point

It's a dumb game. If you cannot synthesize the evidence without posting links, then you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. NIMBYs oppose housing.
2. Housing becomes more expensive as more people want to live in DC
3. Low-income folks are evicted onto the street.

Simple as that.

.

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

This isn't even remotely true. Like you, I was skeptical of the claim that homelessness was tied to affordability, but after reading up on the literature, it's true. High housing prices and homelessness are undeniably tied together.

Here are some papers if you're interested in learning more:
https://wp-tid.zillowstatic.com/3/Homelessness_InflectionPoints-27eb88.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.09380
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9906.00168?journalCode=ujua20
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00643.x

Debate Club Guy is back at it. The Google expert on every topic. LOL.

Step 1: Make sweeping, yet untrue, generalization on any topic
Step 2: People point out that it is incorrect
Step 3: Search Google for "studies" and post links without reading them
Step 4: Claim those links "prove" your point

It's a dumb game. If you cannot synthesize the evidence without posting links, then you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

The only dumb game here is the one that you're playing by pretending to ignore all of the evidence that runs contrary to your priors. You have the evidence in front of you if you actually want to learn something instead of trying to win an Internet argument by insulting people who disagree with you. Read it, or not. I suspect I already know which one you'll choose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. NIMBYs oppose housing.
2. Housing becomes more expensive as more people want to live in DC
3. Low-income folks are evicted onto the street.

Simple as that.

.

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

This isn't even remotely true. Like you, I was skeptical of the claim that homelessness was tied to affordability, but after reading up on the literature, it's true. High housing prices and homelessness are undeniably tied together.

Here are some papers if you're interested in learning more:
https://wp-tid.zillowstatic.com/3/Homelessness_InflectionPoints-27eb88.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.09380
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9906.00168?journalCode=ujua20
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00643.x

Debate Club Guy is back at it. The Google expert on every topic. LOL.

Step 1: Make sweeping, yet untrue, generalization on any topic
Step 2: People point out that it is incorrect
Step 3: Search Google for "studies" and post links without reading them
Step 4: Claim those links "prove" your point

It's a dumb game. If you cannot synthesize the evidence without posting links, then you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

The only dumb game here is the one that you're playing by pretending to ignore all of the evidence that runs contrary to your priors. You have the evidence in front of you if you actually want to learn something instead of trying to win an Internet argument by insulting people who disagree with you. Read it, or not. I suspect I already know which one you'll choose.

Does all of your knowledge of "evidence" come from those links that you just posted that your just Googled? Have you bothered to even read what you posted? Can you synthesize that information and re-present it accurately?

The technical term for what is happening here is what the experts call, "pulling stuff out of your butt." Just making it up as you go along, furiously Googling for post-hoc justifications to support whatever it is that you say.

You're like a conspiracy theorist screaming about everyone "ignoring the evidence" or not understanding the "truth", when you cannot even explain it yourself. My gosh. You're transparently ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

Thank you for being the voice of reason. Unfortunately I can’t imagine this happening, so we’ll just have to keep hoping that the “unhoused” do as little harm to themselves and others as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. NIMBYs oppose housing.
2. Housing becomes more expensive as more people want to live in DC
3. Low-income folks are evicted onto the street.

Simple as that.

.

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

This isn't even remotely true. Like you, I was skeptical of the claim that homelessness was tied to affordability, but after reading up on the literature, it's true. High housing prices and homelessness are undeniably tied together.

Here are some papers if you're interested in learning more:
https://wp-tid.zillowstatic.com/3/Homelessness_InflectionPoints-27eb88.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.09380
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9906.00168?journalCode=ujua20
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00643.x

Debate Club Guy is back at it. The Google expert on every topic. LOL.

Step 1: Make sweeping, yet untrue, generalization on any topic
Step 2: People point out that it is incorrect
Step 3: Search Google for "studies" and post links without reading them
Step 4: Claim those links "prove" your point

It's a dumb game. If you cannot synthesize the evidence without posting links, then you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

The only dumb game here is the one that you're playing by pretending to ignore all of the evidence that runs contrary to your priors. You have the evidence in front of you if you actually want to learn something instead of trying to win an Internet argument by insulting people who disagree with you. Read it, or not. I suspect I already know which one you'll choose.

Does all of your knowledge of "evidence" come from those links that you just posted that your just Googled? Have you bothered to even read what you posted? Can you synthesize that information and re-present it accurately?

The technical term for what is happening here is what the experts call, "pulling stuff out of your butt." Just making it up as you go along, furiously Googling for post-hoc justifications to support whatever it is that you say.

You're like a conspiracy theorist screaming about everyone "ignoring the evidence" or not understanding the "truth", when you cannot even explain it yourself. My gosh. You're transparently ridiculous.

DP. And you’re so credible and evidence-based, why? Lol.

[Anonymous]

Getting back to the topic … I think tents are a trend enabled by the availability of tents, the reasonable wish not to live in a shelter or motel during covid, combined with the opioid epidemic and unaffordable housing. This combined with DC’s tolerance of encampments, and access to amenities downtown like food kitchens, donations, public bathrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Getting back to the topic … I think tents are a trend enabled by the availability of tents, the reasonable wish not to live in a shelter or motel during covid, combined with the opioid epidemic and unaffordable housing. This combined with DC’s tolerance of encampments, and access to amenities downtown like food kitchens, donations, public bathrooms.

Tents are the reason why people think there is more homelessness now than ever, when the reality for anyone who has lived in this area a long time know that is not true. It’s been really, really bad.

People have tents because some group went out and provided them tents. It’s up to the city to decide whether or not they will continue to tolerate the encampments. The problem is that Bowser has boxed herself in by closing and demolishing DC General before having any alternative lined up. It was irresponsible and morally outrageous. So that’s why we have the tents.

[Anonymous]

I’ve worked at the same downtown office for 20 years. The visible homeless in the parks downtown have definitely increased. I personally think the invisible homeless are more tied to the dearth of affordable housing. The visible homeless (the ones you see in tents on a busy sidewalk or sleeping on a bench) have different problems. The opioid epidemic is definitely part of it. I think the closure of some large DD institutions such as diversion of most of st Elizabeth to other uses, closure of DC general shelter, etc. how many people remember the enormous housing projects that surrounded the whole area that is now nationals park? Those were all closed in the 2003–05 time frame. They were pretty awful looking and I think basically an open air drug market but obviously provided housing for a LOT of people at least some of which probably did not have the capacity to maneuver the housing market even if they got the housing subsidies they were promised.

Today there was a guy strolling down the middle of 15th street entirely naked except for a diaper. Affordable housing is not his biggest problem, I think.

We need a complement of different kinds of solutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. NIMBYs oppose housing.
2. Housing becomes more expensive as more people want to live in DC
3. Low-income folks are evicted onto the street.

Simple as that.

.

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

This isn't even remotely true. Like you, I was skeptical of the claim that homelessness was tied to affordability, but after reading up on the literature, it's true. High housing prices and homelessness are undeniably tied together.

Here are some papers if you're interested in learning more:
https://wp-tid.zillowstatic.com/3/Homelessness_InflectionPoints-27eb88.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.09380
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9906.00168?journalCode=ujua20
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00643.x

Correlation is not causation. Higher housing prices means more income for local government and programs. The poor follow the rich. Tiebout.

[Anonymous]

They need to make it illegal and enforcement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. NIMBYs oppose housing.
2. Housing becomes more expensive as more people want to live in DC
3. Low-income folks are evicted onto the street.

Simple as that.

.

Hey GGW summer intern! 👋 Your talking points are irrelevant to the underlying causes of street living in DC.

We need to have the courage as a society to admit we were wrong when we upended policy in the Reagan 80s and shut down the involuntary psych residential facilities. We need to have the balls to reinstate the regulatory structure that facilitated long-term — even permanent— institutionalization of some segments of society. Then spend everything it takes to staff these hospitals and mandate evidence-based care for these men and women. I know - ha.

The people under the bridge living with incurable schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and lifelong poly substance use disorder that has permanently remodeled their brains (aka, self medicating for the schizophrenia) can. never. live. independent. lives.

This is the population in the tents and stumbling in the middle of Connecticut Ave. Overwhelmingly so. The striving single mom who just needs a housing voucher for the GGW-endorsed new apartments is an intentional red herring to trigger your guilt. She has zero to do with tent cities and the public health emergency

This isn't even remotely true. Like you, I was skeptical of the claim that homelessness was tied to affordability, but after reading up on the literature, it's true. High housing prices and homelessness are undeniably tied together.

Here are some papers if you're interested in learning more:
https://wp-tid.zillowstatic.com/3/Homelessness_InflectionPoints-27eb88.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.09380
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-9906.00168?journalCode=ujua20
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9906.2012.00643.x

Debate Club Guy is back at it. The Google expert on every topic. LOL.

Step 1: Make sweeping, yet untrue, generalization on any topic
Step 2: People point out that it is incorrect
Step 3: Search Google for "studies" and post links without reading them
Step 4: Claim those links "prove" your point

It's a dumb game. If you cannot synthesize the evidence without posting links, then you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

The only dumb game here is the one that you're playing by pretending to ignore all of the evidence that runs contrary to your priors. You have the evidence in front of you if you actually want to learn something instead of trying to win an Internet argument by insulting people who disagree with you. Read it, or not. I suspect I already know which one you'll choose.

Does all of your knowledge of "evidence" come from those links that you just posted that your just Googled? Have you bothered to even read what you posted? Can you synthesize that information and re-present it accurately?

The technical term for what is happening here is what the experts call, "pulling stuff out of your butt." Just making it up as you go along, furiously Googling for post-hoc justifications to support whatever it is that you say.

You're like a conspiracy theorist screaming about everyone "ignoring the evidence" or not understanding the "truth", when you cannot even explain it yourself. My gosh. You're transparently ridiculous.

Hey man, listen. I get it. If my heels were so dug in to an obviously wrong position, in the face of overwhelming evidence supporting the contrary position, I'd attack the messenger and do everything I could to avoid confronting the evidence too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They need to make it illegal and enforcement

They need to make what illegal? Being homeless?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to make it illegal and enforcement

They need to make what illegal? Being homeless?

setting up a tent in public land - you shouldn't be allowed to take over public space permanently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to make it illegal and enforcement

They need to make what illegal? Being homeless?

setting up a tent in public land - you shouldn't be allowed to take over public space permanently.

The government may not criminalize sleeping on public property unless the government provides adequate alternatives.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-homelessness/u-s-supreme-court-leaves-in-place-ruling-barring-prosecution-of-homeless-idUSKBN1YK1EA