http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-thursday-edition-1.3074402/medicine-hat-becomes-the-first-city-in-canada-to-eliminate-homelessness-1.3074742


Main points-


Arguments against providing housing that were solved -

SOME PEOPLE DON'T WANT A HOUSE THEY WANT TO BE ON THE STREETS!

"Clugston believes that no one on the streets is unreachable.

He says city staff found housing for one man, but he insisted on leaving to sleep under cars. Day after day, they'd search him out and take him back to his new home.

"They did it 75 times, but they had the patience and they didn't give up on him and, eventually, he ended up staying in the house," he says. "Ultimately, people do want a roof over their heads."



IT COSTS TOO MUCH MONEY

"Clugston says that it costs about $20,000 a year to house someone. If they're on the street, it can cost up to $100,000 a year."




GIVING SOMEONE SOMETHING DOESN'T FIX THEIR PROBLEMS OR ADDICTIONS

"Housing First puts everything on its head. It used to be, 'You want a home, get off the drugs or deal with your mental health issues,'" Clugston says. "If you're addicted to drugs, it's going to be pretty hard to get off them, if you're sleeping under a park bench."


And the strategy has worked. In Medicine Hat, emergency room visits and interactions with police have dropped. But there was one change that initially surprised Clugston — court appearances went up.

"They end up dealing with their past, atoning for their sins," he says."

Cool.

Hopefully they can keep it up.

I think theres a better middle ground of better mass housing, single tiny fucking rooms for bare minimum safe roofs. Then work on improvements. Too many areas cant house their homeless with even something as comfortable as a broom closet. 20k-100k a year could build some very adequate minimum housing for those who may be in the actual pits.

100k a year is what it costs when they are on the streets, 20k is the housing cost....


Also what is the obsession with creating ghettos....if you want people to have a healthy life, let's have healthy housing....yes in the short run you can make stupid arguments about it being unfair that they get a free ride....but realistically if this "free" ride costs you 5 times less than what it does to have them on the streets....and it makes their life better....whats the argument against it?

...those " free homes " will be run down shitholes in 10 years time . I guess that's not a problem for the occupants since they can just get another free home .

you want press for a system that works VERY well for a minimum number of people. My system would work poorly in some places, so would yours. Whats the program gonna do for new york? Where families may not have a roof. In canada sure, in the slums nope.



when you build a minimum housing situation you expect that type of shelf life, thats why their built like crap. But their better than a box. Paper plates and fine china both exist.

This post was edited by thesnipa on May 15 2015 07:49pm

They could have several free homes and it would STILL cost less than what it costs to have them on the streets, try another argument Rich.

...does your cost analysis include the maintenance on these free homes and the increase in crime and drug use that comes with government housing ?

I want the breakdown on the cost figures. Exactly what was included and what is, what the assumptions are.

You don't know, so I'll give you time to look it up.

The weather is not same in Canada vs America, it's common to have -30C during winter over here

This post was edited by 2sexy4u on May 15 2015 08:28pm