• theprogman@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    19 hours ago

    A homes first initiative with needs based assistance can work. in 2013 a study in Toronto was shown that the city spends on average 75K a year PER homeless individual. this included shelter costs, medical, and other resources. that’s 75K per person in YOUR tax dollars that went towards not solving anything. Providing housing + assistance would be massively cheaper in the long run.

    We had a similar study done in Quebec : https://www.lapresse.ca/affaires/chroniques/2026-07-16/etude-du-cirano/chaque-personne-itinerante-coute-77-600-par-annee.php

    But often, that doesn’t work with the mentality that these people don’t “deserve” the help. So much for the “pragmatism” the same crowd argue for against the empathy and compassion that everyone deserves.

    • Canaconda@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      I concur. Not a study but I’ve spent years working security in welfare offices, shelters, winter encampments, and loss prevention. I’ve seen every type of person and situation and very few are predators or criminals. Most of them are disabled, elderly, and women/teenagers. Men who worked hard until their bodies broke.

      Also I would argue most of the crime would disappear if the government didn’t give drug dealers a monopoly on drugs. Like bike theft would still be a thing, but the vast majority of petty theft is bartered for drugs.

      We could solve a lot of problems by having medical facilities that provide drugs for free to addicts. There people can directly access recovery resources or maybe with a doctor’s help they can lower the dosage gradually. EoD people doing these drugs until they die anyways, so what’s the difference? Oh right, police would lose their “war on drugs” funding. Can’t have that.