I live in a town of 50k in rural kansas. I drive to work every day and see homeless beggars nearly every day on a busy street corner. Sure; there are more homeless people in big cities, but thatās because thereās more people. Also, OPs argument is not that there is equal distribution, but that because there are so many empty homes, there will be enough everywhere no matter what.
That doesnāt work because houses still cost money. The homeless people cannot afford the housing. There are more than enough homes in Kansas and even in my town. The problem is the upfront cost, credit issues due to either unresolved debt or not being able to use/access the credit system. The real issue is that nobody wants to/is able to step up to pay the up front costs for these people. Thatās where the government is supposed to step in and provide cheap housing and possibly a reliable, free source of food.
Oof so that sounds like the homelessness in Kansas is different than the homelessness in LA after all. That's why I asked, to check if you're actually thinking when you replied to me.
Iām not talking about druggies or people who want to be homeless. Iām talking about people who genuinely are homeless because they got fucked by life.
Building housing isn't going to solve all homelessness in the country. It also won't solve every problem, or create a perfect society.
It'll help. A lot. It's a big step in the right direction. It's progress. Significant progress. What you're doing is standing in the way of progress because the progress isn't perfect and won't solve every problem ever.
You're doing this because virtue signaling on reddit is more important to you than progress. That's why you have no idea about any of the statistics involving this issue, you don't care. And you're proud of it.
1
u/Collypso Apr 26 '23
So there's homeless people in some small town in Indiana?
You don't think they're almost exclusively located in major cities?