1973. Some things never change
let’s change them
From my experience with the homeless, though a fair few do realy need the homes, and it do them good to help them, for others, it’s just a waist of time and money. Some just want to be homeless, otheres are mentally ill and need caretakers, then there are the ones who just are unwilling to take care of themselves and what they own. Lets not forget the drug addicts.
Just giving these people homes has been tried, and after a year the houses were wrecked, and the people were bearly livibg any better then befor. I’m not ragging on the homeless, frankly I could eisily becom homless, but we got to face it, homelessness will exist, and to end it would require forceing people into homes by gunpoint.
No one makes a profit on an empty house.
Compare this to California, which just blew through a one-billion-dollar bond project meant to provide 10,000 homeless with housing… all the money is now gone, and they have a single 100-unit facility to show for it.
Are they examining what went wrong? No.
They are simply demanding a new bond and more money to “finish the job” that they barely started to begin with. Purchasing existing housing and just giving it to homeless people, free of charge, would have been cheaper and more effective.
So where’s the profit on that one?
It’s in your politicians’ pockets and polling numbers.
Now if we were talking about redusing rent costs, then I'm all for that, rent her cost more then my paycheck.
