I suppose in certain circles "homeless" leads to connotations of drug use, dirtyness and crazyness, where as "unhoused" (to me at least) conjures and image of a regular person in a temporary situation.
It's stupid.
There's a correlation between "sanctuary ciies" and NGOs that ultimately hire based on political ideology rather than pragmatic policies.
If you do not remove the drugs from the equation the overall situation will not improve. There's a big contrast between homeless population in Japan vs West Coast America and the obvious reason is access to drugs.
There's fundamentally no reason for cramming 10k people in some of the most unaffordable NIMBY real estate land of one of the most expensive CoL countries in the world. Even if these folks were able to overcome years of raging addiction, what will they do in SF? Learn machine learning? Become a wealth manager? A teacher? A cop? How are they going to make enough to live in the city when even most regular middle class professions can barely make it there?
"They're unhoused. They have a home: Seattle is their home"
later excerpts
"...the word’s root emphasizes that the problem is a structural one linked to a lack of affordable housing, not a personal weakness."
"...those who have adopted it say it’s [...] to lessen stigma and to highlight that those lacking permanent roofs over their heads may still have communities or physical spaces they consider home."
"Unhoused" being those literally without any shelter. "Homeless" can refer to anyone without a fixed address, but say couchsurfing.
Most "homeless" don't actually sleep outside.