• stabby_cicada@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I appreciate the link!

      The article, I think, is very clear on how those dollar amounts were measured, and I don’t think they’re bullshit at all, but everybody here can read the article and decide for themselves.

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 months ago

      Also, they quote $10k for “supportive housing” and show a picture of San Francisco. I guarantee that’s not accurate. The state needs to pay to house these people, but we need to be realistic about the cost.

      • Soup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        3 months ago

        Housing in places like SF is expensive because of private landlords jacking up proces to the moon. If the government owns the property and gets to control the cost then it’s really not any more expensive than housing them anywhere else. Better still it puts those people within the range of public services like transit so they can actually work on getting themselves into a better situation.

          • Soup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Cities have more property than you’d think. They homd a lot of it so they don’t get locked out of being able to do things like this.