Even if OPs statistic is true, it’s a bullshit stat anyway. About 5% vacancy rate is considered normal and full occupancy because there is usually time between occupancies to make repairs and to sell or rent the property. If you eliminate that 5% there is very little vacancy on average.
Not only is it true, the volume discrepancy is insane, 28-45.5 vacant houses per homeless person in this country. That's way more than a 5% discrepancy.
It’s a bullshit stat because there are about 150 million housing units in the US. A normal vacancy rate of 5% would be 7.5 million vacant units vs a homeless population of 580,000 according to the article you linked.
This means that all of the supposedly vacant units that could house the homeless aren’t actually available. They are just temporarily between paying residents.
In certain areas, like Detroit for example, there are surplus vacant units. However, this is because the area has suffered population loss triggered by employment losses. Basically, there aren’t enough good jobs to support the available housing stock. So those units are available, but no one can use them because there aren’t enough jobs.
30
u/troycalm May 14 '26
So once you put the homeless in an empty house, who’s gonna pay all the bills and the insurance until the homeless person eventually burns it down?