[IncreasePosts]

No, that is not what I'm saying. Notice, I never said we shouldn't do anything.

I'm saying reaching the state of "no homelessness" is dependent upon finding something to do with the worst of the homeless.

For a tech analogy, imagine you've architected a system that has 99.5% uptime. You might be able to imagine a way to get to 99.9% up time.

With enough resources, you might even be able to get to 99.99% uptime. With laser focus and a giant dedicated team and an immense budget, maybe you can get it to 99.995%.

But what would you do if some exec came in and said we need 100% uptime, and we are a failure as a company unless we reach that?

[Qwertious]

Is anyone here saying we need to reach literally 0% homelessness? Reducing current numbers by 99% would be amazing.

[IncreasePosts]

Well, people have used the phrase "end homelessness", which I take to mean no homeless.

[amanaplanacanal]

People have used the phrase "end poverty" for decades, and we still spend money on it even if we didn't get to 0%.