Since the end of the financial crisis, Lubarsky says, Seattle has added roughly 100,000 jobs, but barely 32,000 new homes and apartment units. “We’ve underbuilt every year since 2010,”
Interesting how that lines up so nicely with this headline/factoid:
For every 100 families living in poverty on the West Coast, there are no more than 30 affordable homes
(The Seattle area, the nation’s 22nd largest by population, has the third most homeless people, behind only Los Angeles and New York City.)
I sarcastically say purely coincidentally because of how often I get told that (a large portion of) homeless people are drug addicts, mentally ill etc, so lack of affordable housing is not why people are out on the street.
Are the people telling you that many homeless are drug addicts or mentally ill professionals on the subject? It's well regarded that both types of people are over-represented in the homeless population.
I don't believe they are. I've had a college class on Homelessness and Public Policy. I spent 5.7 years homeless and got myself off the street a few months ago. I am author of the San Diego Homeless Survival Guide. Because of that site, I've been interviewed by reporters a few times. So I'm something of a SME on the topic of homelessness.
In a nutshell, there are housed people who drink heavily or have mental health issues. Simply having a substance abuse problem or a mental health issue does not per se cause homelessness.
Homelessness occurs when an individual has too many problems and too few resources or options. The difference between a homeless person and a housed person can be one more problem or one less resource.
There is a longstanding and dire shortage of affordable housing in the US. Dismissing that as a contributing root cause of the homeless problem in this country sounds like crazy talk to me. It sounds to me like someone really reaching to wash their hands of the problem and chalk it up to personal failure rather than acknowledging the systemic issues that are causing enormous stress for a great many Americans of all kinds of income levels and demographics.
Saying that mental illness and substance abuse are the cause of homelessness, so much so that we can totally ignore the issue of housing affordability whole cloth and dismiss it entirely as not pertinent to the subject of homelessness looks ludicrous on the face of it to me. But I keep hearing it over and over and over. The best guess I have is that it is a narrative that serves a desire to wash one's hands of the problem and pretend that well known systemic issues are not relevant as homeless people are "just a few losers with unsolvable personal problems and they would be homeless even if our country didn't have a dire shortage of affordable housing."
It doesn't help to downplay substance abuse and mental illness' roles in homelessness (especially chronic homelessness)... He linked two different sources, but there are countless others, that point to both substance abuse and mental illness being noticeably more common in the homeless population...
That isn't to say that this is an excuse for America's lacking response to the homelessness crisis. But, to say the scale of Seattle's homeless population isn't an indictment of America's substance abuse policy and the state of its (mental) healthcare system, just as it's an indictment of dysfunctional urban bureaucracy and housing policies strikes me as a disingenuous assignment of blame.
If Seattle's high rate of homelessness is due much more to substance abuse and mental health issues and is largely unrelated to the high cost of housing locally, I would be interested in knowing what about Seattle is either causing people to be crazy or addicted or drawing inordinate numbers of such people there. If the high levels of local homelessness are an indictment of America's mental health and substance abuse issues, why isn't it equally bad elsewhere?
I'm aware there are many factors that contribute to homelessness and nowhere have I said that personal problems aren't a factor. But I fail to comprehend why there is such strong push back against the idea that lack of affordable housing is a factor at all, why every time this cones up, multiple people feel some need to say "Nuh uh, homeless people are just crazies and addicts and the cost of housing has no bearing" in essence, granted in slightly more PC language.
For what it's worth, my parents work in providing either free or below market rate housing. People provided eith such housing can have trouble keeping it due to their various personal problems.
I agree with you that there is a housing cost gradient which will cause people with moderate addiction or mental health issues to become homeless.
It's hard to keep any housing if you can't keep a job and your entitlements don't cover everything.
The article you linked says nothing of the sort, nor is it ever even really hinted at that the average age is 9... Which is quite difficult to believe without a lot of proof to contradict every bit of anecdotal evidence to the contrary. I'm not an expert and I'd love to have proof of the average age one way or another but you have made an outrageous claim with 0 backup.
Researching just now, there's some questiion on that statistic, though the point remains that there are a tremendous number of minor children affected by homelessness, unlikely to fall under the scope of either addiction or mental illness as fiter was addressing, above.
Not that either gives cause to kick anyone to the curb.
It's not that anyone is bring kicked to the curb for being mentally ill or addicted. However, for most housing, you have to pay and respect some rules. If you can't pay or can't respect the rules, then you'll either have to find another place or you'll become homeless. The individual interaction is not heartless, but it is pragmetic. The larger issue does still need to be addressed.
The next question is whether their parents have any troubles...
If there's a failure to provide for those who cannot follow the rules, then the systemic effect is kicking to the curb.
What of those whose "respect" failures aresuch that they cannot gain or hold a job? Discrimination, disability, drugs testing, convictions or arrest screens, etc.?
The sytem you describe kicks them to the curb as well.
All of this also studiously ignores the fact that housing has been underbuilt for decades ineconomically vital areas.
My point was that the decisions are not being made based on disability or drugs testing. The individual decisions are being made based on the behavior of the person. That's not discrimination, that's just responding to another person's behavior. Is that not a fair system?
Interesting how that lines up so nicely with this headline/factoid:
For every 100 families living in poverty on the West Coast, there are no more than 30 affordable homes
https://www.geekwire.com/2018/every-100-families-living-pove...
Also, no doubt purely coincidentally:
(The Seattle area, the nation’s 22nd largest by population, has the third most homeless people, behind only Los Angeles and New York City.)
I sarcastically say purely coincidentally because of how often I get told that (a large portion of) homeless people are drug addicts, mentally ill etc, so lack of affordable housing is not why people are out on the street.