It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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.
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.