Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that DC needs to do a lot better with coordinating and making efficient and effective use of its resources.

DC also needs to get serious about the harder decisions that need to be made, for example if there is a homeless untreated schizophrenic drug addict threatening and harrassing people on the streets and causing problems for business, he needs to be given an ultimatum of either being committed for treatment, voluntarily or involuntarily, or taking himself and his bullshit elsewhere and DC not allowing it to continue.

That said, I don't think Houston suffers from some of the other contributors to homeless that DC does. For one, DC is the recipient of tons of homeless who get shipped here, mostly from red states who cynically want to make it political, where sheriffs will round up any homeless they find and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to DC to make it "DC's problem" because they blame "Joe Brandon" or "liberal politics" or whatever for homelessness, ignoring the fact that DC government has absolutely nothing to do with a homelessness problem 4 states away. It's unfair to DC taxpayers.

Additionally, and along a similar vein, DC is also a magnet for homeless crazies, the schizophrenic and paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists, like maybe they think they have the whole alien reptoid illuminati conspiracy all figured out and they are going to come here to expose it all, or whatever else.

For those reasons, DC has an excess burden of homeless and mentally ill that its neighboring communities don't. That's a burden that should be shared and not be for DC to shoulder alone.

Additionally, costs are much higher in DC than in many other parts of the country - real estate costs for housing the homeless are higher, not to mention DC has limited space to begin with; labor costs are higher, and so on - it makes more sense to try and house and treat the homeless in places where it's more fiscally affordable.

Sensible comments... but crickets...

What’s there to say? When you announce you’re a sanctuary city you have to be a sanctuary city.

You are stuck on stupid. You keep saying "sanctuary city" as if it has any relevance. Again, for the 20th time, "sanctuary city" DOES NOT mean we will house, feed and clothe you. It ONLY means we don't check what your immigration status.

So easy to take this position when you have no skin in the game and somewhere else far away is bearing the burden. Fake compassion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.governing.com/housing/how-houston-cut-its-homeless-population-by-nearly-two-thirds

Houston cut its homeless population by 2/3rds and not by shipping people to other states. Key quote in regards to how DC does things: “The working relationship between the city and the county in addressing homelessness could not be better,” says Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner. “Instead of a hundred NGOs competing with each other, we’ve kind of pulled them all together. They’re now operating under a single umbrella, The Way Home.”

Texas has the 5th highest homeless population in the country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Houston only has to coordinate with Harris County.

DC cannot look to Houston because it has to coordinate with PG, MoCo, Arlington, Alexandria, Fairfax, etc. There are too many jurisdictions and they all have perverse incentives - if one (usually DC) tries to take a more generous or proactive approach, then the others are incentivized to "crack down" by razing encampments or rousting people where they sleep and watching as the homeless people in their area "self-deport" to DC where things are not as draconian. This creates a self-replenishing population of homeless people and a black hole for services, money, and efforts. You cannot cut homelessness by 2/3 in this scenario because the vacuum will fill itself.

And all of that is before you add in red states actively shipping people with no addresses to DC on planes.

How is that relevant? You're confusing two very different topics. Most of the undocumented immigrants sent to NE by Abbott were from the border - not Houston. They were also not part of the homeless encampments. Houston is run by a D and has been for a very long time. Like most TX cities, Houston has a D mayor and city council. Abbott and the rest of the Rs in ATX don't have much to do with the city's homeless issue.

Plus, the above is just flat wrong. DC can deal with the homeless in the district without having to liaise with FFX Co. DC is just too inept to do it.

We now know that homelessness is a housing problem. Houston is cheap. DC is not. That's why many desirable cities have homeless problems. Many homeless people work and still can't afford housing.

Fairfax definitely did some things that helped. Our government won't do it, like bringing ALL homeless services within one agency (actually Houston did do that).

I love DC, but folks keep reelecting Bowser. Why, I have no idea. No, I don't think it's because there is one party rule here.

Anonymous wrote:Houston also has a good starting point of a very low homeless population relative to total population and square mileage (the high spread of the city also means that affordable housing is, in general, less of a problem).

Anonymous wrote:Houston only has to coordinate with Harris County.

DC cannot look to Houston because it has to coordinate with PG, MoCo, Arlington, Alexandria, Fairfax, etc. There are too many jurisdictions and they all have perverse incentives - if one (usually DC) tries to take a more generous or proactive approach, then the others are incentivized to "crack down" by razing encampments or rousting people where they sleep and watching as the homeless people in their area "self-deport" to DC where things are not as draconian. This creates a self-replenishing population of homeless people and a black hole for services, money, and efforts. You cannot cut homelessness by 2/3 in this scenario because the vacuum will fill itself.

And all of that is before you add in red states actively shipping people with no addresses to DC on planes.

Anonymous wrote:Imho, acceptance of seeing it as an issue bad for both homeless and homeowners as well as businesses, tourists, city services, safety
I think this is spot onetc is the first step.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that DC needs to do a lot better with coordinating and making efficient and effective use of its resources.

DC also needs to get serious about the harder decisions that need to be made, for example if there is a homeless untreated schizophrenic drug addict threatening and harrassing people on the streets and causing problems for business, he needs to be given an ultimatum of either being committed for treatment, voluntarily or involuntarily, or taking himself and his bullshit elsewhere and DC not allowing it to continue.

That said, I don't think Houston suffers from some of the other contributors to homeless that DC does. For one, DC is the recipient of tons of homeless who get shipped here, mostly from red states who cynically want to make it political, where sheriffs will round up any homeless they find and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to DC to make it "DC's problem" because they blame "Joe Brandon" or "liberal politics" or whatever for homelessness, ignoring the fact that DC government has absolutely nothing to do with a homelessness problem 4 states away. It's unfair to DC taxpayers.

Additionally, and along a similar vein, DC is also a magnet for homeless crazies, the schizophrenic and paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists, like maybe they think they have the whole alien reptoid illuminati conspiracy all figured out and they are going to come here to expose it all, or whatever else.

For those reasons, DC has an excess burden of homeless and mentally ill that its neighboring communities don't. That's a burden that should be shared and not be for DC to shoulder alone.

Additionally, costs are much higher in DC than in many other parts of the country - real estate costs for housing the homeless are higher, not to mention DC has limited space to begin with; labor costs are higher, and so on - it makes more sense to try and house and treat the homeless in places where it's more fiscally affordable.

Sensible comments... but crickets...

What’s there to say? When you announce you’re a sanctuary city you have to be a sanctuary city.

You are stuck on stupid. You keep saying "sanctuary city" as if it has any relevance. Again, for the 20th time, "sanctuary city" DOES NOT mean we will house, feed and clothe you. It ONLY means we don't check what your immigration status.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that DC needs to do a lot better with coordinating and making efficient and effective use of its resources.

DC also needs to get serious about the harder decisions that need to be made, for example if there is a homeless untreated schizophrenic drug addict threatening and harrassing people on the streets and causing problems for business, he needs to be given an ultimatum of either being committed for treatment, voluntarily or involuntarily, or taking himself and his bullshit elsewhere and DC not allowing it to continue.

That said, I don't think Houston suffers from some of the other contributors to homeless that DC does. For one, DC is the recipient of tons of homeless who get shipped here, mostly from red states who cynically want to make it political, where sheriffs will round up any homeless they find and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to DC to make it "DC's problem" because they blame "Joe Brandon" or "liberal politics" or whatever for homelessness, ignoring the fact that DC government has absolutely nothing to do with a homelessness problem 4 states away. It's unfair to DC taxpayers.

Additionally, and along a similar vein, DC is also a magnet for homeless crazies, the schizophrenic and paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists, like maybe they think they have the whole alien reptoid illuminati conspiracy all figured out and they are going to come here to expose it all, or whatever else.

For those reasons, DC has an excess burden of homeless and mentally ill that its neighboring communities don't. That's a burden that should be shared and not be for DC to shoulder alone.

Additionally, costs are much higher in DC than in many other parts of the country - real estate costs for housing the homeless are higher, not to mention DC has limited space to begin with; labor costs are higher, and so on - it makes more sense to try and house and treat the homeless in places where it's more fiscally affordable.

Sensible comments... but crickets...

What’s there to say? When you announce you’re a sanctuary city you have to be a sanctuary city.

You are stuck on stupid. You keep saying "sanctuary city" as if it has any relevance. Again, for the 20th time, "sanctuary city" DOES NOT mean we will house, feed and clothe you. It ONLY means we don't check what your immigration status.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that DC needs to do a lot better with coordinating and making efficient and effective use of its resources.

DC also needs to get serious about the harder decisions that need to be made, for example if there is a homeless untreated schizophrenic drug addict threatening and harrassing people on the streets and causing problems for business, he needs to be given an ultimatum of either being committed for treatment, voluntarily or involuntarily, or taking himself and his bullshit elsewhere and DC not allowing it to continue.

That said, I don't think Houston suffers from some of the other contributors to homeless that DC does. For one, DC is the recipient of tons of homeless who get shipped here, mostly from red states who cynically want to make it political, where sheriffs will round up any homeless they find and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to DC to make it "DC's problem" because they blame "Joe Brandon" or "liberal politics" or whatever for homelessness, ignoring the fact that DC government has absolutely nothing to do with a homelessness problem 4 states away. It's unfair to DC taxpayers.

Additionally, and along a similar vein, DC is also a magnet for homeless crazies, the schizophrenic and paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists, like maybe they think they have the whole alien reptoid illuminati conspiracy all figured out and they are going to come here to expose it all, or whatever else.

For those reasons, DC has an excess burden of homeless and mentally ill that its neighboring communities don't. That's a burden that should be shared and not be for DC to shoulder alone.

Additionally, costs are much higher in DC than in many other parts of the country - real estate costs for housing the homeless are higher, not to mention DC has limited space to begin with; labor costs are higher, and so on - it makes more sense to try and house and treat the homeless in places where it's more fiscally affordable.

Sensible comments... but crickets...

What’s there to say? When you announce you’re a sanctuary city you have to be a sanctuary city.

Anonymous wrote:Obviously people have reasons for where they want to be but all of us end up living where we can afford, not in areas we want to live. There has to be some life coaching for homeless folks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that DC needs to do a lot better with coordinating and making efficient and effective use of its resources.

DC also needs to get serious about the harder decisions that need to be made, for example if there is a homeless untreated schizophrenic drug addict threatening and harrassing people on the streets and causing problems for business, he needs to be given an ultimatum of either being committed for treatment, voluntarily or involuntarily, or taking himself and his bullshit elsewhere and DC not allowing it to continue.

That said, I don't think Houston suffers from some of the other contributors to homeless that DC does. For one, DC is the recipient of tons of homeless who get shipped here, mostly from red states who cynically want to make it political, where sheriffs will round up any homeless they find and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to DC to make it "DC's problem" because they blame "Joe Brandon" or "liberal politics" or whatever for homelessness, ignoring the fact that DC government has absolutely nothing to do with a homelessness problem 4 states away. It's unfair to DC taxpayers.

Additionally, and along a similar vein, DC is also a magnet for homeless crazies, the schizophrenic and paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists, like maybe they think they have the whole alien reptoid illuminati conspiracy all figured out and they are going to come here to expose it all, or whatever else.

For those reasons, DC has an excess burden of homeless and mentally ill that its neighboring communities don't. That's a burden that should be shared and not be for DC to shoulder alone.

Additionally, costs are much higher in DC than in many other parts of the country - real estate costs for housing the homeless are higher, not to mention DC has limited space to begin with; labor costs are higher, and so on - it makes more sense to try and house and treat the homeless in places where it's more fiscally affordable.

Sensible comments... but crickets...

Anonymous wrote:I agree that DC needs to do a lot better with coordinating and making efficient and effective use of its resources.

DC also needs to get serious about the harder decisions that need to be made, for example if there is a homeless untreated schizophrenic drug addict threatening and harrassing people on the streets and causing problems for business, he needs to be given an ultimatum of either being committed for treatment, voluntarily or involuntarily, or taking himself and his bullshit elsewhere and DC not allowing it to continue.

That said, I don't think Houston suffers from some of the other contributors to homeless that DC does. For one, DC is the recipient of tons of homeless who get shipped here, mostly from red states who cynically want to make it political, where sheriffs will round up any homeless they find and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to DC to make it "DC's problem" because they blame "Joe Brandon" or "liberal politics" or whatever for homelessness, ignoring the fact that DC government has absolutely nothing to do with a homelessness problem 4 states away. It's unfair to DC taxpayers.

Additionally, and along a similar vein, DC is also a magnet for homeless crazies, the schizophrenic and paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists, like maybe they think they have the whole alien reptoid illuminati conspiracy all figured out and they are going to come here to expose it all, or whatever else.

For those reasons, DC has an excess burden of homeless and mentally ill that its neighboring communities don't. That's a burden that should be shared and not be for DC to shoulder alone.

Additionally, costs are much higher in DC than in many other parts of the country - real estate costs for housing the homeless are higher, not to mention DC has limited space to begin with; labor costs are higher, and so on - it makes more sense to try and house and treat the homeless in places where it's more fiscally affordable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Houston only has to coordinate with Harris County.

DC cannot look to Houston because it has to coordinate with PG, MoCo, Arlington, Alexandria, Fairfax, etc. There are too many jurisdictions and they all have perverse incentives - if one (usually DC) tries to take a more generous or proactive approach, then the others are incentivized to "crack down" by razing encampments or rousting people where they sleep and watching as the homeless people in their area "self-deport" to DC where things are not as draconian. This creates a self-replenishing population of homeless people and a black hole for services, money, and efforts. You cannot cut homelessness by 2/3 in this scenario because the vacuum will fill itself.

And all of that is before you add in red states actively shipping people with no addresses to DC on planes.

How is that relevant? You're confusing two very different topics. Most of the undocumented immigrants sent to NE by Abbott were from the border - not Houston. They were also not part of the homeless encampments. Houston is run by a D and has been for a very long time. Like most TX cities, Houston has a D mayor and city council. Abbott and the rest of the Rs in ATX don't have much to do with the city's homeless issue.

Plus, the above is just flat wrong. DC can deal with the homeless in the district without having to liaise with FFX Co. DC is just too inept to do it.