[mind-blight]

Yeah, it's definitely not a perfect solution. Portland, OR has tried a housing first policy. However, there weren't enough available houses, so that requires to build them. That's lead to years of people still being homeless and underserved while resources went into building homes.

I think it can help a lot under the right circumstances, but if the system is already overwhelmed then funding less permanent solutions for a while may actually be more effective and kind

[bluGill]

Building homes does not take very long if the regulations allow it. Most of the US needs to take a hard look at regulations. Often the problem is regulations won't allow a small house and so the homeless are forced on the street because they can't afford anything.

[mind-blight]

Onerous regulations and process are a huge part of the problem. I looked into building a small apartment complex with a local developer in the city. It was zoned well, but the entire surrounding neighborhood had dirt roads. After talking with the city planner we found out that:

1. We'd need to pay 5k get a price estimate for all of the permits we would need, and

2. That we would need to either pave a road along the property (which would immediately fall apart from erosion since it would be the only paved road for multiple blocks), or pay $400k for the right to not pave the road

At that point, we stopped even trying. There's no way to build affordable housing in a timeline manner in that city.

[cvwright]

Often the regulations are the start of the problem.

I remember reading an article in Portland that the city was expecting N new people to move there in the next 10 years. So they approved construction of housing for N-200k people.

They intentionally set things up to push the poorest and most vulnerable 200k people into homelessness.

[bluGill]

Approving construction at all is a problem. Better a useless carwash ever block than not being able to build what you want.