Here's What Happened When One City Gave Homeless People Shelter Instead of Throwing Them in Jail

I found this interesting article on Alternet in support of preventing forseeable problems being less expensive to society then attempting to correct the problem after it has developed.

The only possible support for the second position, one that is far too common in the US and increasingly elsewhere, is that prevention doesn't put as much money into elite business interests (in this case the prison/jail industrial complex).

Prevention is not only less expensive to the public purse but the money goes to smaller and more local organizations and businesses which is good for the economy while paying big business helps no one but the very wealthy in the long term.

And do note that the city named is a very conservative city. But they are conservative in the traditional sense - helping people while conserving the public purse and so getting excellent value for their tax dollars.

www.alternet.org...

Salt Lake City crunched the numbers. And the prescription was clear. The city was spending $20,000 per homeless resident per year – funding for policing, arrests, jail time, shelter, and emergency services. Homelessness was not going down. Instead, for $7,800 a year through a new program called Housing First, the city could provide a person with an apartment and case management services.

In 2005, the city was spending $40 million to address chronic homelessness. Several years after starting the Housing First program, in 2013, spending was down to $9.6 million.

And more importantly, chronic homelessness has dropped 72 percent.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Another example of how curmudgeonry and miserliness is strictly for giggles and is not truly part of a smart fiscal conservative game.

People that tout that logic (the screw you, I got mine, bootstraps, rabble rabble, git off mah lawn types) often don't understand they are shooting themselves in their collective foot when they shoot down any discussion of creative solutions like this.

If you keep stomping on the poor and letting them starve, they'll continue to be a drain. You give them housing and a foothold, they'll be your future customers, lining your pockets. All the while, saving you money. Upward mobility from the bottom of a well is a myth. Trickle-down is a myth. You need to have a base or everything will trickle down into a flat mud puddle, including the rich folks.

Bravo, Salt Lake. Can't stand being in that city but they just went up a few notches on my respect board.

Good idea, has been tried in other countries. Makes sense and costs less.

Keeping people off the streets is good for the economy!

Now if only they they would of stopped outsourcing jobs a while ago...

Star and flag for you and for SLC..

I am quite impressed as to this forward thinking.. Besides the obvious (and important) fiscal impact, there is some underlying positivity that I think other cities/counties/states might want to do a case study on..

I am a big fan of proactive/preventative measures of this sort, and this concept can extend far beyond housing the homeless into other areas..

Congrats Utah!

originally posted by: Cuervo
a reply to: FyreByrd

Another example of how curmudgeonry and miserliness is strictly for giggles and is not truly part of a smart fiscal conservative game.

People that tout that logic (the screw you, I got mine, bootstraps, rabble rabble, git off mah lawn types) often don't understand they are shooting themselves in their collective foot when they shoot down any discussion of creative solutions like this.

If you keep stomping on the poor and letting them starve, they'll continue to be a drain. You give them housing and a foothold, they'll be your future customers, lining your pockets. All the while, saving you money. Upward mobility from the bottom of a well is a myth. Trickle-down is a myth. You need to have a base or everything will trickle down into a flat mud puddle, including the rich folks.

Bravo, Salt Lake. Can't stand being in that city but they just went up a few notches on my respect board.

Not a fan of Salt Lake either but do admire this pragmatism and forethought.

I'd like to add to your observations that by continuing to, as you so discriptively stated, 'stomp down the poor' they continue to become more and more desparate which can lead to unrest and more.

Now this is a great attitude! It was better for everybody, I'm glad they came up with this idea!

Two words : Zeitgeist Movement.

But yeah way to go SLC. Keep it up Mormons. Show us what you're made of.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Wow, this is amazing. Thank you for sharing this, I really had no idea. If I made a guess, I wouldn't have guessed that homeless people cost more money being homeless than when given a home. I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one to make that mistake either.

Thanks for educating us all, this will change people's stance on the homeless. It has changed mine.

I am no fan of Salt Lake City. Their arrogance towards their religion and their blatant racism irritates the hell out of me.
However, they have figured out something right (even though being a predominately white state with white homelessness moreso than their western neighbors of California, you wonder if this is why they decided to try it in the first place).

Considering that the only industry they have there is Mormon and the Utah Jazz, this is a great thing. That is, until homeless everywhere hear about it and flock there and they alter the program. Until then, kudos.

now this is a good news story....S&F for you good sir.......there is hope for the peoples of earth yet

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

God I hate acronyms. I've put off asking since I like figuring things out on my own but I can't get abbreviations well ever. What's S+F?

a reply to: FyreByrd

This is an exceptional move forward.

Kudos to Salt Lake City....let's hope other cities and towns take notice and implement such initiatives!

originally posted by: tavi45
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

God I hate acronyms. I've put off asking since I like figuring things out on my own but I can't get abbreviations well ever. What's S+F?

S&F = Star and Flag

Plant 'em a big field of gardinels. Provides them housing, fixes the problem, it's even ecological!

I think the best part of the story is how homeless has dropped 72%. Most people do not want to be homeless and simply need a break so they can get back on their feet again.

I have been close to it at times and know people who have hit that point. Once there it is even harder to re-establish yourself. This gives people a fighting chance and as a bonus has been shown to be less costly to the people.

It is great news but you know "that guy" will have something against it.

a reply to: Cuervo

QFT
/

It's a little sad that this isn't the standard all over, when you think of a village of 10-50 people and suddenly one of them had problems to the point they couldn't manage, you'd presume the rest of the villagers might help just enough to see that person get by. At least with modest living situation for the bare minimum.

Constructive, positive and pro-active/pro-social behaviours net a better outcome than prejudicial hate and persecution. Who would have thought?

Proof positive right there that a little compassion and help results in a huge change for the better. Now, just imagine how many times over something like the Catholic church could do this, with the same idea & their money if a local government could do it. (lol, silly me, they'd never part with their money) At least it's a truly beneficial use of taxpayer money in SLC that has been proven to work & cost substantially less.

This is a prime example why often called "socialism", whether it's supporting the unemployed, welfare, free education, free healthcare etc. ULTIMATELY safes people money rather than COST them,

Only at a first, naive glance you will think that this is a bad thing since very real money might come out of your pay check, from taxes etc. But ultimately you will have more money left over since any one LESS homeless, unemployed, on welfare, anyone with good education who actually can get a job will be LESS of a burden on the society and so also on your wallet.

I am always baffled how so many don't see this.