[bryanlarsen]

90% of the homeless people in California lived in Californa for over a year before becoming homeless.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_California

[throwawayq3423]

That can mean any number of things. A lot of people move to LA to "make it" with no plan B, they didn't have a plan B where they came from either.

California has 30% of the US homeless population, but 11% of it's total population. It is dramatically disproportional, period.

https://shou.senate.ca.gov/sites/shou.senate.ca.gov/files/Ho...

[bryanlarsen]

California has the most expensive housing in America. That is the primary reason for its larger homeless population.

[throwawayq3423]

That doesn't explain how 11% of the population could supply 30% of the homeless. That's impossible if it was a self-contained statistic.

I think housing prices does make the homeless problem worse, but it didn't create it. Good climate and numerous public services did.

[bryanlarsen]

(0.9 x 30%) / 11% means that California has a homeless rate 2.5X the rest of America. That's not impossible, in fact it seems surprisingly low. California is the land of $3000/month rent. A very significant proportion of the population can't pay that.

[throwawayq3423]

I'm sorry where does your math come from? 1 state having 1/3 of the nation's homeless doesn't represent 2.5x the normal rate. That's 10-15x territory.

[bryanlarsen]

> impossible

Finland got to 0 by giving everybody a place to live, not by kicking the homeless out of their country.

[throwawayq3423]

Finland isn't responsible for all the homeless from Sweden and Denmark. It had a number that makes sense based on it's population and resources, therefore it was able to solve it.