Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on More homeless in Seattle despite more money?

1

The thing about the unemployment statistics is that once you're no longer qualifying for benefits, your name is removed from the unemployment records, regardless of whether or not you've found employment. I'd be willing to bet that unemployment is not actually lower than it was in 2004.

Posted by Jenny | December 12, 2006 4:12 PM
2

Let's bear in mind that the ROOTS shelter serves a unique segment of the total homeless population in Seattle - the youth & young adult segment - that is quite distinct from the other segments (such as homeless families, homeless single women, homeless single men, or chronic inebriates, to name a few). The Friday Feast which you attended is a mix of those young shelter clients, plus others from the broader homeless population. Looking to citywide metrics like the annual Count which reflect trends in the entire homeless population for clues about what's going on with youth and young adult homelessness is probably not going to be very instructive. Similarly, unemployment figures aren't going to tell you very much, as the root cause of most youth & young adult homelessness is not economic.

Posted by Jeff | December 12, 2006 4:14 PM
3

Hmmmm, unemployment's down, we're spending more money on homelessness, yet we seem to be experiencing a bigger and bigger problem.

Don't be so naive. The word is out - Seattle has a PLAN to end homelessness. If you can just get your ass here, you're going to be taken care of eventually. If you don't think word like this gets around in the homeless community nationwide, you need to spend a few days on the street.

Ask any homeless person that you see on the street how long they've been in Seattle. At least 50% will tell you less than 2 years.

With our do-good, feel-good programs, we've hung a huge "welcome" sign for the world's outcasts. Better get used to it because it's only going to get worse.

Posted by bill | December 12, 2006 4:30 PM
4

Good post Sarah.

Posted by golob | December 12, 2006 4:46 PM
5

With more and more condos and luxury apartments being built in Seattle at the expense of more affordable housing, wouldn't that factor into an increasing homeless problem?

Posted by neo-realist | December 12, 2006 4:58 PM
6

bill you ignorant slut. it's not just about how much money you throw at a problem, or employment stats. homelessness has something to do with the affordability of housing.

Posted by trevor | December 12, 2006 5:08 PM
7

I hate to be a jerk about this, but it's simple: supply and demand! You give away more stuff, you're going to have more customers.

People come to Seattle to be homeless (according to Dan Savage -- that's how he got his kid, from a roaming self-described "gutter punk")

Posted by Chris | December 12, 2006 5:25 PM
8

Bill@3

Other communities and cities have 10 Year Plans, not just here in King County. Homeless people are not necessarily traveling to our region because of better benefits.
The One Night Count is not a scientific survey, I've been out on that count and the counting is NOT accurate.
We all need to be aware and engaged in the discussions and choices (taxes for more transitional housing).

Posted by uhm... | December 12, 2006 6:06 PM
9


Part of this problem is that there's huge pressure in the homeless advocate community to spend our homelessness dollars on things like emergency shelters and food banks which is not the same as spending money to end homelessness. These things keep people alive, which is great and important, but they basically maintain homelessness, not end it.

There's actually seems to be very little political will to END homelessness. Can you imagine if a politician said "We should stop spending money on food banks and start spending it on rental assistance"? They would be seen as heartless bastards.

Posted by home | December 12, 2006 6:27 PM
10

there's no reason why we can't have food banks AND rental assistance.

Posted by trevor | December 12, 2006 7:13 PM
11

If you build it, they will come. Seattle is the only place they're building it.

Posted by cynical bastard | December 12, 2006 7:48 PM
12

Well - all the ego about Seattle and benefits is pure bullshit.

From those who roam the West, Seattle is OK, but there many better scenes in other cities.

Of course, the pretend were the best - works well for middle class do little or nothing guilt.

Posted by Sam | December 12, 2006 8:23 PM
13

Uh, 10 Year Plan or no, services or no, there will be homeless here forever, and in every other city too. Upwards of 80% of homeless people are mentally ill. When you have delusions that the the dogs are telling you to put Saran wrap up your nostrils and anus, you probably aren't thinking, "Hmmm...I think I'll move to Seattle because of their excellent social service programs. I read all about it in the New York Times, because like all mentally ill homeless people, I have a subscription delivered to my steam grate, and am a careful analyst of national trends in homeless policy. What, doggy? Now I should smear my feces on myself?"

As for the other 20%, if they decide to come, let 'em. If my tax dollars transform them into productive citizens again, I'd feel incredibly proud of my city and community.

Posted by Gitai | December 12, 2006 10:39 PM
14

Gitai, before the First Mental Case (Ronald Reagan) shut down all the mental health programs, there WASN'T the homeless problem there is now. We also didn't feel the need to build gated communities to protect us from mostly made-up threats.

That drooling worthless mass of shit Reagan. I sure hope he's burning in hell. I only wish he'd suffered more while here on Earth.

Posted by Reagan was a selfish idiot | December 13, 2006 7:15 AM
15

It's the most simple economics: if you offer more money and services to the homeless, you'll have more homeless. At the margin, there are people who are at the cusp of homelessness, and more services just makes being homeless that much easier.

It's obvious if you use this reducio ad absurdum argument. Suppose you'd give $1mn to each homeless person. Wouldn't you guess there'd a fuck ton of new homeless people if that were to happen? How about $100K, $10K, even $1K? At each of these you'd find more homeless now than before. I know we're not talking about $10K worth of services, but the general argument holds true; at the marginal, more money spent on homeless services makes being homeless mroe confortable and a more attractive choice. Thus, more homeless.

Posted by Andrew | December 13, 2006 8:22 AM
16

The question here is why do we think that those who are not homeless have the ability to choose the fates of homeless people just because they have money. As a homeless person myself, I find this incredibly demeaning. The truth is that I am responsible for my own fate: I have a choice.

Posted by Invisible Man | December 13, 2006 10:29 AM
17

seems to me we need to find out where the homeless are coming from (my guess is not Seattle) and drop them off at their city halls so they can deal with them.

Posted by Will in Seattle | December 13, 2006 10:30 AM
18

Bill @3 comes over as a little cold son of a bitch, but he has a point... if services to the needy are utilized as intended, then yes, people will come to seek out the services. That is not a problem, but part of the solution.

I can speak for myself and a lot of other donor/supporters to this issue, we in Seattle would rather the homeless try to survive in Seattle and make an opportunity out of our network of social service. As opposed to say to sparse to non-existent services in Pel El or Darrington or the countless other small towns where the homeless are transparent to both the working poor and what monied elites reside there. Or even trying to survive mean streets of other medium to large cities such as NO, NY, or LA... speaking of, have you heard some LA hospitals dump homeless patients straight onto the curb... the horror.

Posted by Phenics | December 13, 2006 10:40 AM
19

R. Reagan was the greatest Pres. in US history! Jimmy Carter on the other hand probably killed thousands in the mid-east because they bust their guts laughing at him.

Posted by ajday | December 13, 2006 12:59 PM
20

Yeah, that Reagan kicked ass all over Washington, Lincoln, FDR, etc.

Tell that to the nuns raped and tortured to death in El Salvador, fuckhead.

Posted by Dancing on Reagan's grave | December 13, 2006 1:08 PM
21

Reagan let out the Mental Cases? NOPE. The Liberal Warren Court ordered them set free, so now they just continue to prey on normal law abiding citizens.

=====================
U-District? There have to be thousands of lefty free ride people trying to live on others, why the surprise?

Posted by Bruce | December 13, 2006 2:23 PM
22

Build it and they will come, from every income level:

I know of a supervisor in a government agency who goes to food banks to get food and brags about it. He also takes his kids to Disneyland and drives new(er) cars. Is this the kind of homeless we are feeding and helping? I suspect that this "gentleman" isn't the only one supplementing his income by scamming the system. If “don’t ask, don’t tell” is good enough for the military it sure ought to work for welfare distribution.

Anybody with an ounce of street sense knows that homeless people are a mobile group that go to where the deal is the best or wherever they happen to fancy (although a couple of squares a day is paramount). Seattle’s well known (on the street scene) drunk checks are appreciated as well as it’s mild climate. Any announced homeless program (spending millions) will bring the hordes from all over the U.S., no problem. That’s just how it works, no matter what the naive want to believe. Because of that, Seattle will never cure the homeless problem. They will only grow it.


Posted by G Jiggy | December 13, 2006 3:03 PM
23

Another reason for the increased ROOTS turn aways could be fewer desirable shelter beds available elsewhere.

The ROOTS capacity is 25, which is way below the # eligible on any given night. So, if ROOTS reputation as a safe place for emergency overnight shelter increased by any amount with this population, then the # elgible that check us out would increase.
Since the ROOTS capacity has not increased during the last 2 years, the turn away # will increase.

I agree the solution lies in the direction of advocacy for affordable housing, job training, mental health services, etc. That is why I am excited to see that the ROOTS Vision (and budget) has shifted from a primary focus on emergency shelter to additional staffing for advocacy.

Homeless young adults are not stupid or lazy. With the proper investments and support services, they can become incredible assets to our city.

Posted by Woody | December 13, 2006 3:59 PM
24

@22

Yeah, I put about as much stock in that supervisor who you "know of" going to food banks as I do in Reagan's Cadillac-driving welfare recipients - an anecdote that was later proven to be totally false (what Reagan lie? I'm just shocked).

I hope you lose your job and wind up on the streets too, you pathetic prick.

Posted by Dancing on Reagan's Grave | December 13, 2006 6:31 PM
25

Anybody wondering why the numbers at ROOTS is growing need only to reflect on the performance of two failed agencies: The Seattle School District and Child Protective Services. Nanny knows best.

Posted by The Indian | December 13, 2006 8:28 PM
26

20 years ago we moved to Seattle from Chicago. During our first visit to Pike's Market we overheard a conversation between two "bums". Call them what they are!

One asks the other- how long have you been here? Just a week he responded. Oh- you are going to love Seattle, they have so much to offer us here. He went on to describe the location of the handouts.

20 years to the month and I remember that conversation as if it were yesterday.

Posted by Cardio Guy | December 13, 2006 9:31 PM
27

Fuck Seattle. BOrn there in 1980, raised 18 years. Joined the military and it's been worse every time I come back. Some illegal stole my SS# thanks to my liberal parents "feeling their need" and letting them into the house.

What a garbage place Seattle has turned into. I'm going to live with the Arabs.

Posted by The guy | December 14, 2006 5:24 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).