Also, Silicon Valley is all about making money. How do you make money solving homelessness?
This is very closely related to the idea of reform vs. revolution. Sometimes you just need to burn the whole thing down to get the outcome you want.
But the money might have to come from the government. Private prisons don't seem to mind.
> Between 2011 and 2012, SF spent $157 million on homeless services. By the 2015-2016 fiscal year, it was up to $242 million. In the most recent 2019-2020 budget proposals, the figure hit more than $364 million. But the consensus remains that more is needed.
(Source: https://sf.curbed.com/2019/12/19/21027974/san-francisco-home... )
That money's not going to the homeless people. It's going to the people who run the services to support them. You think they'd want to see homelessness end?
And, indirectly, the Police make money from homelessness because they can use it to get their budgets increased.
Yes, I think those people want to see homelessness end. Why else would you want a career in that field?
Climate scientists also want action to be taken to fight climate change, even if it might put them out of a job. Folks who work for the UN to tackle world hunger want world hunger to end, even if it puts them out of a job.
I don't think rank-and-file workers are psychopaths.
The people who want a career in that field who actually interact with the homeless are pretty detached from the big decisions.
At 40k a year per homeless person..how are they homeless. Answer: they aren't getting 40k of benefits.
SF's budget is basically $40-50k per homeless person yet each person receives a fraction of that, maybe 10%, its incredibly inefficient. Its even been called "The Homeless Industrial Complex" by a variety of outspoken locals.
There's a really interesting character from SF who posts on twitter (@MyTwolffamily) about his personal experience of being a homeless drug addict, it might be enlightening to read some of his posts.
Yes, any proper non corrupted police would love to see that.
Seeing the most downtrodden people in society continually crushed is an awful experience for people on both sides of the table.
I'd encourage you to talk to a single person actually working on the problem. Literally anyone.
But no, they can’t do that. It would piss too many people off. The problem with homelessness is that it’s always someone else’s problem. Everyone agrees that it should be dealt with, just that no one wants to deal with it themselves.
You also don’t have to divide it equally among homeless people. You could start with a few and add more to the program over time, as the endowment grows. Those getting the money would be assessed based on potential to get off the streets permanently and find jobs, housing, etc.
Because then it pays for itself. Look at the Nobel prizes. Look at Harvard University. Look at the Norwegian pension fund. These are backed by HUGE endowments which pay for themselves with profits earned on the market. They are also extremely stable.
On the other hand, look at Social Security in the US. Any sort of benefits program paid for by taxes is exposed to political interference. That makes them inherently unstable.
One of the problems with homelessness is that it's a systemic issue.
Another problem with homelessness is that it's dozens of problems, because different people have different reasons for being homeless.
A mother living with her two kids in a tent could see most of her problems solved with a monthly cash injection; she could get an apartment, make sure her kids have sufficient care while she works, or just take care of them herself using the stipend.
The guy who sits on a bench howling at the moon because he's convinced it's implanted digital worms in his teeth? If you cut him a check, he's not going to be equipped to spend it in a way that's beneficial for himself.
https://www.fcc.gov/general/lifeline-program-low-income-cons...
When Trump said he wanted to eliminate it, tons of politicians and whatnot defended it as essential to getting cell phones into the hands of poor people.
Trump did reform it rather than eliminate it, putting stricter requirements and adding things (less payment to the companies, must be a smart phone, must provide some data, etc.). But up until this, I knew of one company that had about 30 employees and earned over $200mil per year directly from the government operating as an MVNO. The industry was rife with fraud (and likely still is for all I know, it was absolutely shocking before which is why they reformed it, but hopefully it's better now) - recipients had to fill out a stack of paperwork, but they would pay independent contractors to go to methadone clinics, homeless shelters, etc. with pre-filled paperwork and get people to just sign their name and hand them a phone. It was also a scam for the recipients who were in on it somewhat, as they would switch providers every month or sign up for multiple, and get gift cards (or booze, cigarettes etc.) from the independent contractors for doing so. Companies I worked with would have churn up to 80% per month so they constantly had to refill with "new" people who the independent contractors found.
I have seen so much fraud in various government programs that have a veneer of "doing good" but the end result is legions of private companies that execute the mandate and collect the check. If you are an enterprising person and want easy money, government programs are a great place to look, which is sadly why it attracts so much fraud.
Give free or extremely cheap housing to every homeless person and the lucrative real estate companies and investment funds will disappear.