"It costs less to house people than to police the unhoused."
September 21, 2021 10:01 PM Subscribe
Tiffany Ferg talks about [SLYT] influencer vanlife, the history of and discrimination against Roma, homelessness, public housing, legal and physical dangers against people who live in vehicles, and asks if van life an actual rejection of capitalism, materialism, and modern living.
Vanlife previously, previously, previously, previously, and previously.
(It's an unfortunate coincidence that a video on this topic was released now in light of the recent disappearance of Gabby Petito, a 22-year-old woman who went missing while on a vanlife trip across the US. Ferg was working on the video for weeks and was on a posting schedule agreed with her sponsor.)
Vanlife previously, previously, previously, previously, and previously.
(It's an unfortunate coincidence that a video on this topic was released now in light of the recent disappearance of Gabby Petito, a 22-year-old woman who went missing while on a vanlife trip across the US. Ferg was working on the video for weeks and was on a posting schedule agreed with her sponsor.)
Punishing non-standard living and homelessness has always been eye-poppingly more expensive than housing people who want to be housed and creating safe and harassment-free situations for people who like nomadic living. People who say they care about cost just want to sound reasonable — punishing marginalized people because of their housing situations is all about feeling justified in causing misery in the “wrong sorts” of people. I learned about a number of studies that have shown the financial disconnect here on Metafilter over a decade ago. It’s not a surprise that this gets proven again and again in all sorts of situations, but it’s definitely worth getting really mad about. Thanks for posting more exhaustive evidence on the topic.
posted by fontgoddess at 10:31 PM on September 21, 2021 [11 favorites]
posted by fontgoddess at 10:31 PM on September 21, 2021 [11 favorites]
How Much Would It Cost To End Homelessness In America?
Ending homelessness is not only an achievable goal (and a moral obligation for many), but it’s also one that would likely save money in the long run. The government spends an average of $35,578 per year for every person who must endure chronic homelessness. Much of this money goes toward publicly funded crisis services, including jails, hospitalizations, and emergency departments.
Popular alternative solutions to end homelessness, such as permanent supportive housing, focus on helping people access permanent housing and coordinated services like mental health treatment and financial assistance. Permanent supportive housing costs $12,800 per person per year on average.
My previous comment on housing people in the US.
You need a certain amount of money or savings to be a #vanlifer and that further widens the gap between people seeking hashtags and people seeking survival.
posted by bendy at 11:56 PM on September 21, 2021 [12 favorites]
Ending homelessness is not only an achievable goal (and a moral obligation for many), but it’s also one that would likely save money in the long run. The government spends an average of $35,578 per year for every person who must endure chronic homelessness. Much of this money goes toward publicly funded crisis services, including jails, hospitalizations, and emergency departments.
Popular alternative solutions to end homelessness, such as permanent supportive housing, focus on helping people access permanent housing and coordinated services like mental health treatment and financial assistance. Permanent supportive housing costs $12,800 per person per year on average.
My previous comment on housing people in the US.
You need a certain amount of money or savings to be a #vanlifer and that further widens the gap between people seeking hashtags and people seeking survival.
posted by bendy at 11:56 PM on September 21, 2021 [12 favorites]
Here in Toronto, we just spent 2 million dollars or $33000 per per person to evict a few homeless people from parks this summer. Of course, they’re still homeless, so we’ll have to do it again wherever they end up. Never mind that $33000 could house someone for a long time, even in this city.
posted by rodlymight at 6:05 AM on September 22, 2021 [7 favorites]
posted by rodlymight at 6:05 AM on September 22, 2021 [7 favorites]
Annoying how the Toronto article mixed costs for police with costs for cleanup (re-landscaping was separate). Those are different costs. One is needed (cleanup) regardless of the approach to clearing the space (removal vs housing) and one is debatable depending on which choice we make as a society. I'm curious if the policing costs equal a home just by themselves.
posted by keep_evolving at 6:26 AM on September 22, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by keep_evolving at 6:26 AM on September 22, 2021 [1 favorite]
asks if van life an actual rejection of capitalism
Seems like any rejection of capitalism/consumerism that involves buying a bunch of kit and influencing others to buy the same is not really rejecting capitalism.
posted by duoshao at 6:39 AM on September 22, 2021 [4 favorites]
Seems like any rejection of capitalism/consumerism that involves buying a bunch of kit and influencing others to buy the same is not really rejecting capitalism.
posted by duoshao at 6:39 AM on September 22, 2021 [4 favorites]
Rejection of capitalism brought to you by Google (YouTube), Grammarly, Skillshare, HelloFresh, and NordVPN.
And a bunch of dudes who really, really want to turn you into a landlord.
posted by snuffleupagus at 6:58 AM on September 22, 2021 [1 favorite]
And a bunch of dudes who really, really want to turn you into a landlord.
posted by snuffleupagus at 6:58 AM on September 22, 2021 [1 favorite]
I highly doubt that providing housing would save money. It would be difficult to provide housing only to those people who would otherwise cost the government lots of money. It could be money-saving in some individual cases and therefore reduce the costs, but a policy that houses people would generally cost money. Similar logic applies to preventive health care: It raises total costs.
But that's OK! Our goal should not be to minimize costs. If we did that, we'd just do nothing. The goal is to spend money when it's worthwhile. Housing people is worthwhile, even if it costs money, just as keeping people health is worthwhile.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 7:43 AM on September 22, 2021 [3 favorites]
But that's OK! Our goal should not be to minimize costs. If we did that, we'd just do nothing. The goal is to spend money when it's worthwhile. Housing people is worthwhile, even if it costs money, just as keeping people health is worthwhile.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 7:43 AM on September 22, 2021 [3 favorites]
It would be difficult to provide housing only to those people who would otherwise cost the government lots of money.
Speaking only to a US | Midwest | Chicago perspective, it's actually remarkably difficult to provide housing to people who would not (yet) otherwise cost the government lots of money. The chances of getting your name pulled in the lottery for permanent supportive housing is heavily weighted by need-related factors like length and severity of chronic homelessness, age, various mental and physical health conditions, risk for DV/IPV, children, etc. This results in many people getting housed who DEFINITELY need to get housed, but since the supply of PSH units is very small, you have to hit a high level of need - and stay there - before your number comes up. Programs aimed at preventing homelessness before it becomes chronic or providing medium-term housing support (i.e. not shelters, not PSH) are thin on the ground. Artificial scarcity of housing is creating a backlog of human suffering and mental health problems that the US health system just does not have the capacity for. I'm definitely team "taking care of our fellow humans costs what it costs, what the hell else is money for? let's do it." This is not a winning argument with grantmakers, unfortunately.
posted by All hands bury the dead at 9:14 AM on September 22, 2021 [5 favorites]
Speaking only to a US | Midwest | Chicago perspective, it's actually remarkably difficult to provide housing to people who would not (yet) otherwise cost the government lots of money. The chances of getting your name pulled in the lottery for permanent supportive housing is heavily weighted by need-related factors like length and severity of chronic homelessness, age, various mental and physical health conditions, risk for DV/IPV, children, etc. This results in many people getting housed who DEFINITELY need to get housed, but since the supply of PSH units is very small, you have to hit a high level of need - and stay there - before your number comes up. Programs aimed at preventing homelessness before it becomes chronic or providing medium-term housing support (i.e. not shelters, not PSH) are thin on the ground. Artificial scarcity of housing is creating a backlog of human suffering and mental health problems that the US health system just does not have the capacity for. I'm definitely team "taking care of our fellow humans costs what it costs, what the hell else is money for? let's do it." This is not a winning argument with grantmakers, unfortunately.
posted by All hands bury the dead at 9:14 AM on September 22, 2021 [5 favorites]
Those are different costs. One is needed (cleanup) regardless of the approach to clearing the space (removal vs housing) and one is debatable depending on which choice we make as a society.
Nah, as long as we're not building solutions for unhorsed people (I.e housing, stable places to camp with extensive, reliable sanitation service), then homeless removal is just homeless relocation with a side of cruelty. Toronto (or, cough, Seattle) will be paying out the same police, cleanup and landscaping costs again in 4-6 months when they break up the camps where these people moved. And on it goes.
posted by wotsac at 8:57 AM on September 23, 2021 [1 favorite]
Nah, as long as we're not building solutions for unhorsed people (I.e housing, stable places to camp with extensive, reliable sanitation service), then homeless removal is just homeless relocation with a side of cruelty. Toronto (or, cough, Seattle) will be paying out the same police, cleanup and landscaping costs again in 4-6 months when they break up the camps where these people moved. And on it goes.
posted by wotsac at 8:57 AM on September 23, 2021 [1 favorite]
The government spends an average of $35,578 per year for every person who must endure chronic homelessness.
That's such an oddly specific number, does anyone know where it comes from? I found this flyer, but it doesn't explain it. Anyone here happen to know, or just have better googles than I do?
posted by bashing rocks together at 9:57 PM on September 23, 2021
That's such an oddly specific number, does anyone know where it comes from? I found this flyer, but it doesn't explain it. Anyone here happen to know, or just have better googles than I do?
posted by bashing rocks together at 9:57 PM on September 23, 2021
STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS IN OKLAHOMA CITY
In general, a person experiencing chronic homelessness costs taxpayers about $35,578 per year in over- utilized services.
Various studies conducted by communities across the United States document the costs of homelessness. In general, a person experiencing chronic homelessness costs taxpayers about $35,578 per year. These costs are reduced by almost 50% when that person lives in supportive housing. Supportive housing costs about $12,800 per unit, making the net savings roughly $4,800 per year.
Other specific studies have found:
❖ Asheville, North Carolina: 37 homeless men and women cost the City and County over $800,000 each year over a three-year period. The total costs included $120,000 for 280 episodes of EMS services, and $425,000 in hospitalization costs.
❖ West Virginia: A study conducted by West Virginia University (WVU) and the West Virginia Coalition to End Homelessness found that 267 persons experiencing homelessness who received care at WVU Ruby Memorial Hospital over a one-year period incurred $5,979,463 in service costs, including 785 emergency department visits totaling $1,128,036 and 257 inpatient stays totaling $3,743,699.
❖ Missoula, Montana: In 2009, the emergency department of St. Patrick Hospital’s emergency room served 514 people experiencing homeless who incurred $3,028,359 in charity care for their 1,219 separate visits to the ER.
❖ Minnesota: The Minnesota Supportive Housing and Managed Care Pilot program found that homeless single adults with highly complex needs such as mental illness, substance use disorders or trauma used about $13,954 per year in services before entering a PSH program.
That OKC study cites to what I presume is the same flyer from EndHomelessness.org. The flyer refers to this source: "2007 to 2014 Point-in-Time Count and Housing Inventory Chart reported to HUD by communities annually." That dataset appears to be here.
posted by snuffleupagus at 5:54 AM on September 24, 2021 [1 favorite]
In general, a person experiencing chronic homelessness costs taxpayers about $35,578 per year in over- utilized services.
Various studies conducted by communities across the United States document the costs of homelessness. In general, a person experiencing chronic homelessness costs taxpayers about $35,578 per year. These costs are reduced by almost 50% when that person lives in supportive housing. Supportive housing costs about $12,800 per unit, making the net savings roughly $4,800 per year.
Other specific studies have found:
❖ Asheville, North Carolina: 37 homeless men and women cost the City and County over $800,000 each year over a three-year period. The total costs included $120,000 for 280 episodes of EMS services, and $425,000 in hospitalization costs.
❖ West Virginia: A study conducted by West Virginia University (WVU) and the West Virginia Coalition to End Homelessness found that 267 persons experiencing homelessness who received care at WVU Ruby Memorial Hospital over a one-year period incurred $5,979,463 in service costs, including 785 emergency department visits totaling $1,128,036 and 257 inpatient stays totaling $3,743,699.
❖ Missoula, Montana: In 2009, the emergency department of St. Patrick Hospital’s emergency room served 514 people experiencing homeless who incurred $3,028,359 in charity care for their 1,219 separate visits to the ER.
❖ Minnesota: The Minnesota Supportive Housing and Managed Care Pilot program found that homeless single adults with highly complex needs such as mental illness, substance use disorders or trauma used about $13,954 per year in services before entering a PSH program.
That OKC study cites to what I presume is the same flyer from EndHomelessness.org. The flyer refers to this source: "2007 to 2014 Point-in-Time Count and Housing Inventory Chart reported to HUD by communities annually." That dataset appears to be here.
posted by snuffleupagus at 5:54 AM on September 24, 2021 [1 favorite]
Hm, thanks. The point-in-time count doesn't include any spending data. Of the other sources listed, the first one is a report about the point-in-time count data, and the second, on Premature Mortality, also doesn't include any spending numbers. The fourth is a link to a collection of studies, but I clicked through the whole map and didn't see any of them highlight this number. So weird.
posted by bashing rocks together at 3:17 PM on September 24, 2021 [1 favorite]
posted by bashing rocks together at 3:17 PM on September 24, 2021 [1 favorite]
If you're interested enough, the org might be responsive.
posted by snuffleupagus at 3:26 PM on September 24, 2021
posted by snuffleupagus at 3:26 PM on September 24, 2021
« Older Pricking, Thumbs, etc | You don't want this award. Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 10:07 PM on September 21, 2021 [11 favorites]