Glasgow sounds like they are doing great by those numbers compared to at least my city.
In my city subReddit I advocated for something that sounds similar; yes housing even for addicts who will shoot up in their new place. Got downvoted. Also people bitter that rent is unaffordable for them too and said no one is entitled to free or reduced rent, since they don't get that themselves. though kind of my point housing should be a human right produced by society to everyone without judgement.
I think there is a misguided paternalistic moral-crusading factor in the states that holds back things like housing first, harm reduction strategies & treatment.
Both from reading/researching and talking with people who work directly with the homeless locally, this seems to be the crux.
The really sad thing is just building the housing would be cheaper than what we're doing currently. But as soon as the city proposes it the NIMBYs come out like a hurricane refusing to allow it.
Salt Lake City is an instructive example. They've made a huge impact on homelessness there with a housing centric strategy.
In Denver we have a hidden agenda ballot measure coming up that would allow residents to sue the city if they didn't clear out homeless camps in 72 hours, while also putting into law a maximum cap of only four outdoor homeless spaces (parking lots) - while allowing amenities like porta-potties!
Importantly the measure doesn't allocate money OR require these spaces. Just limits the max number the city can have ;(
funded by Republican PAC.
Oh and when a church tried to put one of the mini-camps in their parking lot in a nice neighborhood, the neighbors sued.
It would be so much cheaper just to continue buying old motels and building apartments. Give them the keys, try to help after that. Free & easy suboxone and immediate access to addiction/mental/health treatment if they want it. Naloxone on stand by with nurses in concentrated areas (e.g. an apartment block) would save a ton of money too, not to mention save lives...
How would you feel as a working class citizen, when homeless drug addicts are given a place to live rent-free while you have to work hard every day just to stay afloat? How would you feel if you had children who lived in the same neighborhood as a drug motel? These problems are complex, and require solutions that are more thoughtful than "just give them a place to live and leave them alone."
In my city subReddit I advocated for something that sounds similar; yes housing even for addicts who will shoot up in their new place. Got downvoted. Also people bitter that rent is unaffordable for them too and said no one is entitled to free or reduced rent, since they don't get that themselves. though kind of my point housing should be a human right produced by society to everyone without judgement.
I think there is a misguided paternalistic moral-crusading factor in the states that holds back things like housing first, harm reduction strategies & treatment.