lets do it!!!
I seriously question whether
It’s not going to be worth it to eliminate “chronic” homelessness. There are always going to be some homeless people whose utility from housing would outweigh the cost to society of providing that housing. What we should reasonably expect is some basic safety net, which many cities already provide.
Anyway, it’s not really clear what the article is advocating. It seems that they just assume a $1 billion cost of building the shelters. I doubt that this includes other costs, like medical aid for the homeless people in those shelters, or the drop in property values wherever they decide to put that facility. You’re not going to splurge on some condo in SoHo if it’s next to that shelter, is what I’m saying.
only allow healthy bums. problem solved
Positive economic incentives for homelessness (free money), create more homelessness.
Here in South Korea there is essentially zero homelessness (US homeless ratio is 8X greater than SK!). To my knowledge there’s no big government safety net. It’s just highly competitive, everyone knows if they fail they die on the streets, and so people don’t fail. No babying, no free money, hardcore “unkind” meritocracy and capitalism—and the result is more kind.
Also, the family unit has not been destroyed in SK, as it has been in the US, when people have hard times their friends and family support them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homeless_population