• some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    In the 2021-22 fiscal year, when the homeless population was estimated to be 172,000, California spent $7.2 billion, which equated to nearly $42,000 per homeless individual.

    This is why a housing-first policy is absolutely the only sane solution. At this rate, we can absolutely provide people adequate shelter.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    5 days ago

    If you multiply the HUD estimated census of homeless people by the average cost of housing it comes out to $11B annually, if by the average cost to incarcerate, then it’s $30B/year. What’s reasonable for administrative costs? Even if you figure 25%, that’s $38B per annum max to house pretty much anyone who wanted it.

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development has a budget of $40B. So just like healthcare, we already paying for it, we’re just not getting it.

    • solrize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I don’t know how that math really works though. Lots of homeless also have serious physical and mental health problems, addictions, and other issues. Housing is a first step but after that a lot more costs remain. Are those included in the $42K? And remember, California is more expensive than many other states, especially in the cities with lots of homelessness.