Reply #4: The cost of housing the homeless

[izquierdista]

I have maintained, and a recent article I came across about some city in the Northwest backs it up, that by building low-cost housing for the homeless, governments can actually SAVE money. Consider the case of a vacant 10,000 square foot building (like a medium size grocery store put out of business by Wal-Mart). For around 20 to 30 dollars per square foot, the building could be completely renovated, bathrooms enlarged, outfitted with basic furnishings, etc., and turned into a type of dormitory housing. Figuring about 250 to 300 square feet per resident (which is generous), such a dormitory could end homelessness for 30 to 40 people at the cost of $300,000. Governments pay FAR more than that now in vouchers, assistance programs, emergency services, jail space, etc., even when you figure in something like 8-10% of the cost of the renovation as annual maintenance and upkeep.

However greedy they are, "compassionate conservatives" who oppose social services for the homeless can't see how this can actually save money. Plus, once the homeless have a stable address, they are more likely to be able to return to being contributing members of society and earning a decent wage in order to be able to move out.

The reason it isn't done is because there is no money to be made in it, therefore the capitalist economy provides no supply though the demand is great. The private sector will never come in and do what is essential cost avoidance in the public sector.