James Street Homeless (Seattle: for rent, credit, loans)

[margaretBartle]

Originally Posted by CrazyDonkey

Providing treatment, therapy, meds, etc., to every one who needs them is much less expensive than relying on police, courts, and jails as the only solution.

Do you have any evidence of this? A few years ago, when the City of Seattle was proposing housing for active drunks on Eastlake, they hired some social-service types to prove that it was cheaper to house than to jail. What the authors of the study did was take the 91 worst cases, total up the cost of jail, ambulance and emergency care, and come up with some large dollar amount that was more than the cost of housing them. But that was the 91 most expensive people. If you multiplied the cost of housing them, which I believe was around $30,000 a year. That cost included case management, which is kind of like that $400 Boeing hammer from 20 years ago. That's fine for 91 people. How about 12.000 people? 12,000 * 30,000 =$360,000,000 a year. And can you imagine how many there will be once the word gets out? Can you say "7 billion people on this planet, and all they need to do is get on an airplane!" ?

You are correct about looking at the cost, but free treatment for life for anyone who wants it is not the answer. The drugs that are given out are making people worse, not better. It temporarily stops the acting out, but causes all kinds of crazy neuroses. We need real treatment, which takes expensive, human interaction and years of treatment. Really? For anyone who wants it?

[AADAD]

I will be driving there in an hour or so. These tents were blowing in the wind the other day. Hardly a shelter. People have been living outdoors since our species evolved so perhaps there is a basic connection that connects them. That's the only reason I can fathom would encourage someone to live next to a freeway on cold concrete. It's going to be getting into the 30's and those are going to be some cranky people when they wake up.

[CrazyDonkey]

Originally Posted by margaretBartle

Do you have any evidence of this? A few years ago, when the City of Seattle was proposing housing for active drunks on Eastlake, they hired some social-service types to prove that it was cheaper to house than to jail. What the authors of the study did was take the 91 worst cases, total up the cost of jail, ambulance and emergency care, and come up with some large dollar amount that was more than the cost of housing them. But that was the 91 most expensive people. If you multiplied the cost of housing them, which I believe was around $30,000 a year. That cost included case management, which is kind of like that $400 Boeing hammer from 20 years ago. That's fine for 91 people. How about 12.000 people? 12,000 * 30,000 =$360,000,000 a year. And can you imagine how many there will be once the word gets out? Can you say "7 billion people on this planet, and all they need to do is get on an airplane!" ?

You are correct about looking at the cost, but free treatment for life for anyone who wants it is not the answer. The drugs that are given out are making people worse, not better. It temporarily stops the acting out, but causes all kinds of crazy neuroses. We need real treatment, which takes expensive, human interaction and years of treatment. Really? For anyone who wants it?

I made no claim about the cost-effectiveness of providing housing to chronic alcoholics - while they are heavy users of emergency medical services, I understand that what a hospital might charge for a service and what it might actually cost are entirely different numbers.

I also said nothing about "free treatment for life for anyone who wants it". What I said was: "Providing treatment, therapy, meds, etc., to every one who needs them is much less expensive than relying on police, courts, and jails as the only solution." Nor did I say that the criminal justice system shouldn't be part of the solution: "If they refuse treatment or therapy and continue to commit crimes, then by all means arrest, prosecute, and jail them."

This is from 2004, so you'll have to adjust the numbers for inflation, but the ratio should still be good:

The Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison (DTAP) program in Brooklyn, New York, enables alcohol or drug addicted defendants to plead guilty to an offense, and then enter a residential, therapeutic community treatment system that can last up to 2 years as an alternative to a prison sentence. A recent evaluation of DTAP by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University found that the program achieved significant results in reducing recidivism and drug use, increased the likelihood of finding employment, and saved money over the cost incarceration.8 Along with these results, the evaluation found that the average cost of placing a participant in DTAP, including the costs of residential treatment, vocational training and support services was $32,974 — half the average cost of $64,338 if the participant had been sent to serve the average term of imprisonment for participants, 25 months.

http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads...tion_ac-dp.pdf

You'll need to substantiate your claim: "The drugs that are given out are making people worse, not better." By "drugs", I'm assuming that you mean medications used to treat psychosis, bipolar disorder, etc. If they can help many, even if not most, that's still helping. I'm saying that anyone who finds them to be helpful should be able to have them.

In my experience, with friends who've been effected, is that to remember to take their meds, they need to be on them. Thus the need for a support system. Regardless, someone who is screaming bloody murder on a street corner needs to be medicated or in the booby hatch.

Note that I never claimed that treatment or therapy will help everyone. I did cite a quality source (NY Times - if you think that is "fake news", I really can't help you) that stated that Portugal, by decriminalizing drug addiction and treating it as a health care and not a criminal issue, reduced their active heroin addict population by 75% (and that is with the U.S. having over 50 times more overdose deaths per capita, so it wasn't a matter of them offing themselves by overdosing).

[MarciaMarshaMarcia]

Originally Posted by AADAD

I will be driving there in an hour or so. These tents were blowing in the wind the other day. Hardly a shelter. People have been living outdoors since our species evolved so perhaps there is a basic connection that connects them. That's the only reason I can fathom would encourage someone to live next to a freeway on cold concrete. It's going to be getting into the 30's and those are going to be some cranky people when they wake up.

You will have to get used to seeing it. The homeless on the streets in tents is just as grave in Seattle as it is in San Diego...it’s bad in Portland, too. Weather does not matter. Last winter, when I took my fwy. exit in Wallingford area near UW, there were tents & tarps in the plants, right on the freeway slopes, up the off-ramps in the rain. I don’t know how anyone can survive like that.

[bloom]

Originally Posted by MarciaMarshaMarcia

You will have to get used to seeing it. The homeless on the streets in tents is just as grave in Seattle as it is in San Diego...it’s bad in Portland, too. Weather does not matter. Last winter, when I took my fwy. exit in Wallingford area near UW, there were tents & tarps in the plants, right on the freeway slopes, up the off-ramps in the rain. I don’t know how anyone can survive like that.

Seattle/Portland are progressive liberal cities. San Diego is not.

[MarciaMarshaMarcia]

Originally Posted by bloom

Seattle/Portland are progressive liberal cities. San Diego is not.

And the connection is...?

[bloom]

Originally Posted by MarciaMarshaMarcia

And the connection is...?

The two cities seem to have comparable homeless problems, not related to political bent of city government. What do you think, triple-M, others ?

[Hemlock140]

Originally Posted by bloom

The two cities seem to have comparable homeless problems, not related to political bent of city government. What do you think, triple-M, others ?

It's not a problem unique to San Diego and Seattle, it's the entire west coast.

Homelessness soars on West Coast as cities struggle to cope - SFGate

[MarciaMarshaMarcia]

Originally Posted by bloom

The two cities seem to have comparable homeless problems, not related to political bent of city government. What do you think, triple-M, others ?

I don’t want to politicize this situation, & I agree with Hemlock140’s post above...it’s all up & down the west coast. This is supposed to be a First World country, but it’s looking pretty Third World-like to me. Also, I know that someone will likely make a comment like, “you should see Calcutta, or the slums of Rio”, but that’s pointless. We’re in the USA, & in my lifetime, I’ve never seen anything like this, & it’s accelerating at an alarming rate of speed.

[CrazyDonkey]

What about bringing back boarding houses? Change the rules so that food stamps could be put toward paying for board.