Some find it brutal. But if done the right way, for the right people, it can work.
Whoever wrote this byline should be shot.
It’s trying to change policy really around three different issues. First, it’s trying to expand the use of civil commitments; that’s involuntary mental health treatment. It’s usually reserved for people who are a danger to themselves, danger to others, or unable to meet their basic needs. And he’s looking to expand that. It’s not totally clear how he’s gonna do that, because that’s determined by state law, but in any case, that’s one of his objectives.
In the UK, there are literally more vacant houses than homeless people.
Landlords can jump off a cliff.
that’s broadly true in the US too but much of the housing stock is in rural and suburban areas that just compound poverty (requiring cars/there’s no work) so the lack of housing is still acute in cities
I don’t see why we have to stop at housing why not provide food and healthcare too
of course, there’s just a misunderstanding that we could seize all the vacancies in a city or wherever and actually house the local houseless, which is not necessarily true despite the national statistics
Naturally, the real solution is to build more luxury apartments and parking lots for the prospective tenants.
5% of the units will be “low income” for 4 years after construction. If you criticize this development plan in any way you’re pro-homelessness, btw
Fuck, have you been spying on me? How did you perfectly quote my city council??