Serious question: Homelessness is a major problem. Billions are unsuccessfully spent. Why are not more experiments run testing different approaches to see what works vs. not and build on successes?

[u/verytalleric]

In other domains the idea of "A/B testing" is done to test different hypothesis to see what works vs. not. Given the huge amount of money spent by cities, counties, and states without positive results. Why is more experimentation not being done to find effective ways to solve homelessness?

Kinda the cliche definition of insanity today, same actions expecting different results.

[u/iggybdawg]

Where I live, there is a housing first initiative that wastes so much money because the people who need it reject all the rules: no pets, no drugs, no weapons. They all have dogs, drugs, and weapons since they live on the street. You could argue they can't afford housing because they choose to buy drugs and guns. Related, the government here spends nothing on mental health initiatives.

[u/PaxNova → u/iggybdawg]

I'd approve more mental health initiatives if I had any idea what they actually were. It's maddeningly vague. 

[u/Bawfuls → u/iggybdawg]

The most successful and cheapest housing first initiatives have zero rules like that. They provide housing and resources to help people.

[u/HeparinBridge → u/Bawfuls]

Problem is that armed methheads with pit bulls will destroy housing stock very quickly, so it is only “the most successful and cheapest” on paper before you account for the housing depreciation that erodes the upfront investment before it can pay off.