(11-06-2022, 07:10 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote:

(11-06-2022, 04:14 PM)mikesez Wrote: If you just don't believe in statistics, that's fine. But if we're not going to use statistics to see which one of us is right about homeless people, what are we going to use?

Have you ever been homeless? Have you had family members that were homeless and/or addicts, and/or had mental illness? Have you worked with them? Volunteered with organizations that serve them? I can say yes to all of these and I can tell you that in the areas I have this experience in, I don't need statistics because I've been in it or been around it. 

It's not up to me to figure this stuff out. When I can help those who are less fortunate, I do, and I can do it without having to know anything other than they need help. They don't care about stats and polls and any of that. If they're able to function, the ones who are not addicts or with serious mental illness, they care about their safety and their next meal. They care about the weather and do they have a place to sleep that night. They worry that they nice jacket someone gave them might be taken by the aggressive jerk down the street.  

The addicts and the mentally ill are a whole different subject with different needs.

I have never been homeless.  I have an uncle I don't know well who has been through a lot of stuff like that.  
I have volunteered to work with the homeless many times.  Always under a larger dedicated organization.  I just go where they say and do what they say to do.  
As far as talking to them, yes I have, at length, and they told me the same things they told you.  It's heartbreaking how things get stolen from people who already have so little.

I want to have a conversation where we "figure this stuff out."  You don't.  That's fine.  The conversation you want to have is important too.

There are overlapping categories of homeless people.
Homeless by choice "I don't want to be tied down."
Homeless due to mental illness.  Some of these are open to treatment if offered, some aren't.
Homeless due to addiction. Some of these are sobering up, some aren't.
Homeless due to lack of funds or high rent.  Some of these people have jobs, some don't.  

You're probably better than me at relating to the homeless and helping them one on one.  I've listened to them like I said, but I doubt I ever really helped by listening.  I have no advice to offer them. You might be great at that, given your experiences.

Anyhow, we should be able to agree, a significant number of homeless people in Seattle aren't addicted.  It doesn't matter if it's a majority or not.  It's significant.  You said yourself that in your experience not all of them are addicted.  Why would Seattle and Vancouver be any different? A significant number of them wouldn't be homeless at all if there was simply an apartment available at a rent price they could afford.  

With housing costs on the west coast so out of line compared to anywhere else, am I wrong to focus on that?

Maybe I am wrong.  There is another major difference between Seattle and Providence that none of you have mentioned.  In Providence, actually in most of the US east of the Rockies, it is considered "constitutional" for the police to tell someone "you can't sleep here" and arrest them if they don't move along.  In the 9th federal judicial circuit, that is not the case.  That one difference makes it much easier for police to get a person into treatment vs. releasing them to the streets.  And its not anything that any city on the west coast decided.  The 9th judicial circuit decided it for them.  The Supreme Court should consider these cases, but they wont.

---