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

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=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.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics