|
|
|
|
|
by paisawalla
1117 days ago
|
|
Data which is 1) based on self-reported status 2) fails to distinguish between temporary hardship homelessness and that resulting of addiction/illness Should not be relied upon. For the first, there is an obvious incentive towards exaggerating one's stay in state, and no counter-incentive whatsoever. For the latter, these are two separate problems which need drastically different solutions. |
|
If you have data that addresses the two points you made, please post them.
> For the first, there is an obvious incentive towards exaggerating one's stay in state, and no counter-incentive whatsoever.
Nothing obvious or even true about it. Using the word obvious just hides the fact it isn’t.