Re:San Francisco’s “Housing First” Nightmare
by convolvatron on Friday April 29, 2022 @07:32PM
(#31211809)
these people are addicted. quitting takes a lot of time and a lot of support and many of them won't make it to sobriety even in the best of conditions. saying they need to quit before the can be housed is the same as saying they should stay on the street.
Re:San Francisco’s “Housing First” Nightmare
by bifrost on Friday April 29, 2022 @07:34PM
(#31211823)
The alternative is actually putting them in jail for the crimes they comitted on the street so they detox there.
It got a mediocre success rate but its 100x better than whats happening now.
Re:San Francisco’s “Housing First” Nightmare
by pixl97 on Saturday April 30, 2022 @09:29PM
(#31221236)
Well, unless you can get drugs in jail, which is common. Black markets exist everywhere.
Re:San Francisco’s “Housing First” Nightmare
by jljljl on Friday April 29, 2022 @06:51PM
(#31211508)
I'm curious about this -- is there data comparing the outcomes of Housing First vs. Shelter First solutions? My understanding is that Shelters are also major sites of violence, abuse, and overdose/drug use.
Re:San Francisco’s “Housing First” Nightmare
by bifrost on Friday April 29, 2022 @09:12PM
(#31212450)
San Francisco is the perfect example of what happens when you house addicts - they don't improve, continue the bad behavior, they destroy the housing and are often kicked out of it. We've got several examples a week of people making meth in their housing and creating a severely hazardous situation.
If you check out @bettersoma on twitter he's got a looooot of info about this.
Re:San Francisco’s “Housing First” Nightmare
by alex504 on Friday April 29, 2022 @07:57PM
(#31211966)
I am definitely not an expert, don't know about the data around shelters. My understanding of shelters is that they make it a lot harder to do drugs and that is why a lot of the homeless prefer camps. My understanding is that abuse, violence and drug use are reduced at shelters and that is the main advantage of them.
I just finished reading Sanfransicko by Michael Shellenberger, who is a critic of housing first.
He doesn't seem like the most trustworthy author, especially after reading parts of his other book, Apocalypse Never, this scathing review of it (https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2020/07/review-bad-scienc...), and Shellenberger's really poor defense (https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2020/8/3/bad-scie...)
However I think what Shellenberger is saying makes a lot of sense: you shouldn't give free housing to people without asking for something in return like getting off of drugs or taking antipsychotic meds. Shelters, yes, apartments, no. Addicts go into these places, overdose, and die, because there is no one around to help them when they overdose. It is also just a huge waste resource-wise and might even make the problem worse, because you are enabling people to live these lifestyles that they need to get out of.