Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Housing first as a philosophy for homelessness usually has been shown to be a cost effective means of dealing with the issue.
It does create some perverse incentives so needs to be national policy to prevent migration.
|
People barely holding onto existing housing needs to be part of the conversation, which is why UBI is on the board at all. Simply rotating homelessness would be detrimental.
There should be a way to identify the line between the cost of programs/crime/social constructs that deal with low income and the benefit of simply giving that to citizens with any threat of having to access those avenues of support.
The suggestion seems to be that line is $8000/year where government money spent/saved is a wash. (yes I understand that this is for people already on the street and accessing public housing and food resources, but the previous arrival at $20 000/year as being too expensive and effectively shutting down the conversation shouldn't be happening)