Or they have an income so low that they can't afford rent, and a 10% reduction won't get them into an apartment building.

Homelessness happen in high rent cities, a 10% reduction helps people not get evicted

Approaching a solution to homelessness through the lens of the marketplace is usually going to be ineffective. Countries which have near non-existent homeless populations employ Housing First and get them in homes without asking for rent.

@3v6en8 Yeah like I said it'll help people dealing with gentrification, but it's not going to do anything if you're homeless

Again that’s not accurate

Alleviating the housing market in the aggregate helps homelessness

More homes = lower cost

What does a 10% reduction to rent do for someone on Skid Row?

GG @fuck12moredeadcops, you just advanced to level 2!

Well, if they were kicked out of their house because they couldn’t afford rent, it lets them move back into their house

So they’re no longer homeless

Okay, if your rent goes up, and you can't afford it, and you decide to stay anyway with no plan to relocate yourself and that caused your homelessness, yeah it'll help you

Honestly for skid row, its needs low income jobs and low income housing

...no

So remember that’s 76% of people

But the market moves as a whole

If someone higher up has a rent reduction, it allows them to upgrade

Making room for someone lower on the chain and so on

Like I’m not saying it solves all the problems

Nice way of saying that

By a very strict definition of chronically homeless you've derived that number. If you're in and out of temporary living situations with no clear path to permanent housing, you're not counted as chronically homeless, and if you have no disability you're not counted as chronically homeless.

But obviously if you have a 10% alleviation in rent it lowers housing costs

So?

If you are alleviating for some you are alleviating for all

So this number is absolutely flawed when a large chunk of the population which is habitually on the street is not counted.

Because the people who ARE helped are no longer taxing the system, and can provide help for the others

You have no data to support that claim.

If you disagree with official estimates, then provide alternative data

I don't disagree with the official estimates, I think the categories they've created don't accurately reflect the number of people without places to stay on a regular basis.

I don’t care about your anecdotes, come play with data

And it doesn't

Ok, so obviously if you alleviate housing prices it decreases homelessness

I don't care about your data when it's arbitrarily decided if you have no disability, or if you've found a temporary housing situation, you don't count as chronically homeless

Shocked that I have to say that

Do you have data for how many people that is?

Yes, you’ve made it clear you don’t care about data

Just you work with some people so you feel strongly that economics doesn’t work.

And you misread what it says about disabilities

Homeless in and out of housing are consider cyclically homeless, they are not counted as transitionally homeless

I didn't say anything about economics not working, I just said it's unlikely to alleviate homelessness in a sufficient way, and it does nothing to directly improve the conditions homeless people are living in. Believing Warren's solution of rent reduction is sufficient when it does nothing to improve job opportunities for the unsheltered, it does nothing to ensure housing for the unsheltered, and it generally doesn't sufficiently address how you transition people out of homelessness

That’s a housing plan, not a homelessness plan.