@Marmel
I've heard from SF city hall sources that the lady running the tiny houses program is a bit nutty. But, they are moving the needle.
What CA needs is a grand strategy. Then the billionaires can fund that.
SF is swamped, so the tiny houses are a stop gap until Newsom supports/defines a strategy with a larger scope.
@Marmel
Agreed. These people do reduce the pain. Yet funding behind a strategy is more influential than merely reducing the near-term pain.
Housing is both a symptom and a cure. I think we need to go heavy on housing regardless of the addiction-status.
BTW, I think we should stop using the word "homeless". Too general a term for a large group of issues that cause people to be without a stable home.
@jurban Im completely down with a different word. But the word "Home" carries emotional weight.
@Marmel
Home is an emotional term. But labels cause grouping that limit the application of effective solutions.
Maybe:
- Home-Transient (down on their luck but trying to get into a home asap)
- Home-Challenged (Can't afford a home in the area)
- Home-Adverse (Don't want to be in a house due to drug or mental health issues)
I guess the point is that if we are challenged to NOT use the word Homeless we will dig deeper to understand how we're unconsciously defining these people.
@jurban
Unhoused?
@Marmel
I think the label should reflect how they got there. Brings us closer to assigning a solution.
@jurban You're not wrong. But I look at people like Chef Andres who is doing the work or Mackenzie Scott who has donated more than 12 billion dollars and wish for more people like that.