That's a rather disingenuous take.
Isn't it plausible that taking anecdotal evidence at face value doesn't actually add insight to not only the root causes but also the prevalence of some of it's different categories?
I mean, spending a week living in a tent isn't exactly a way to gather proper statistics on the issue, not to mention the likelihood that the observer might be biased to begin with.
Sure, you can say "that doesn't represent all homeless", but I don't think the mayor was saying that. Here is a direct quote:
"We can clearly do more to help people and move them on to stable housing," Coffman said. "What isn’t working is spending more money on it without changing behaviors. People are never going to [move] forward with their lives. You don’t want to be in a situation with public policy where you’re enabling really bad, destructive behavior."
What is so terrible about those conclusions?
And the gatekeeping by homeless advocates is really stark in that article. Their attitude is literally "You want to know about homelessness, you talk to me, don't go out there talking to these people on your own".
How in the hell is that anything close to a reasonable take?
That's because if you actually solved (or even reduced) homelessness, those people might be out of a job.
Sorry, it actually is.
You have a guy who decided to live in a tent for a week as a publicity stunt, and that is supposed to make him an insightful expert on the nature and causes of the problem, in total contrast with the observations and experience of every single person that ever did any serious work on homelessness?
The "goes and talks to a group of homeless" take sounds an awful lot like an attempt to go on the confirmation bias path, intended to fabricate a justification to continue to not address the root causes, than an honest and objective approach to understand issues.
Around 1/4 are short term homeless, just folks at the margins of society who fell off the page, and now cannot make ends meet. Alot of these folks do find their way off the streets of their own, but this is the group that we need to most urgently help.
Around 1/2 are long term chronic homeless, often they were just short term homeless folks, but now have fallen into the trap of the homelessness. They want out, but cant figure out how to navigate their way there.
Around 1/4 are willingly homeless, as in they do not want help.
And of those who are homeless, they seem to have the same common problems:
Around 1/3rd do have some measure of substance abuse issues (more prevalent in long term chronic homeless).
Around 1/3rd have moderate issues with excessive alcohol consumption (more prevalent in long term chronic homeless).
Another 1/2 have untreated mental health issues of some sort (seen in all groups).
The most common reasons the interventions for homelessness seem to fail:
1. Requires giving up too much personal freedom/dignity - can't come and go as you please/its treated as a pseudo-probation, have to go listen to a preacher, cant bring your pet (usually a dog).
2. too many prerequisites/hurdles to get help (must be sober/clean, must have kids/not have kids.
3. shelters feel less safe than being on the street (your stuff gets stolen, you'll get gay bashed).
4. requires you to give up too much of your SSI or other benefits to get it.
5. long waiting periods for help or not enough bed slots.
It's why I believe in a housing-first approach, housing without hurdles or prerequisites, its much easier to provide services to a sedentary population than it is a mobile one with no fixed address.
I think the case that every homeless person is a drug addict is wildly overstated, but I think the solution that SF and Seattle is doing wildly ineffective in actually solving homelessness, if anything, it makes the problem worse, while also reducing quality of life for folks who do have homes and live there.
it's clear you think really deeply about things I think you have a lot of interesting stuff to contribute. And you've had an interesting intersection of experiences and combine that with your good analysis and insights often seemingly to me not obvious, and your easy to read writing style, I think you'd make a really good sort of writer that people would love to read about all kinds of tricky issues so I hope you take up blog posting and share here!
