Homelessness on the West Coast

[RiverDog]

With only 1/4 to 1/3 of the homeless suffering from mental illness, it can't be the root cause. IMO there's multiple causes, with no one cause in itself representing the majority of those that are homeless. Some are mentally ill, some are drug addicts/alcoholics, and some became homeless for some other reason and as a result, turned to drugs/alcohol.

But then we get back to the OP: Why is it so more evident on the west coast than it is in other areas of the country? Are there more mentally ill people in Seattle and Portland than there are in other areas of the country? Why don't I see any tent cities where I live? In an area with a population of around 1/4 million, I should see a significant number of them if the rate is similar to that of Portland and Seatle, right?

[NorthHawk]

With only 1/4 to 1/3 of the homeless suffering from mental illness, it can't be the root cause. IMO there's multiple causes, with no one cause in itself representing the majority of those that are homeless. Some are mentally ill, some are drug addicts/alcoholics, and some became homeless for some other reason and as a result, turned to drugs/alcohol.

But then we get back to the OP: Why is it so more evident on the west coast than it is in other areas of the country? Are there more mentally ill people in Seattle and Portland than there are in other areas of the country? Why don't I see any tent cities where I live? In an area with a population of around 1/4 million, I should see a significant number of them if the rate is similar to that of Portland and Seatle, right?

When you take away say 20% of the mental illness cases (there will always be some that fall through the cracks), that's a much more manageable number to work with and help. The other thing that happened at
the time of de-institutionalizing people with mental disorders and not following up with proper outpatient care was the move to the economic right which gave companies more power to limit wages. This meant
that as housing prices increased, more people lost their jobs or the jobs they kept didn't pay enough to keep them afloat. It's all coming together at once currently so that's why there are more than what traditionally
would be.
Why the west coast? I can only think it's the weather that pushes them from the much colder or in summer hotter climes of the rest of the continent. Maybe it's also the availability of drugs which often come from
Asia. I have no idea what Florida or the south east coast of the US is like for homelessness, but I'm sure there are some level of problems,

[RiverDog]

When you take away say 20% of the mental illness cases (there will always be some that fall through the cracks), that's a much more manageable number to work with and help. The other thing that happened at
the time of de-institutionalizing people with mental disorders and not following up with proper outpatient care was the move to the economic right which gave companies more power to limit wages. This meant
that as housing prices increased, more people lost their jobs or the jobs they kept didn't pay enough to keep them afloat. It's all coming together at once currently so that's why there are more than what traditionally
would be.

I simply don't buy any economic argument. We've had an abundance of jobs for the better part of the past 30 years and even more so in the past 10 once the baby boomer generation started retiring, and with plenty of opportunities to migrate from lower wage jobs to higher paying ones for any reasonably well functioning adult. It's certainly not like when I graduated from college in the late 70's, with the unemployment rate two to three times what it is today. There does seem to be a relationship between affordable housing and homelessness, but that can only account for temporary homelessness, ie 6 months or less. It doesn't take years to find a decent home/job. There are lots of jobs near relatively affordable housing, just that they may not be in the city of their choice.

Why the west coast? I can only think it's the weather that pushes them from the much colder or in summer hotter climes of the rest of the continent. Maybe it's also the availability of drugs which often come from Asia. I have no idea what Florida or the south east coast of the US is like for homelessness, but I'm sure there are some level of problems,

I've been to a few major cities in warm climates, including Phoenix, Houston, and Las Vegas, and even though there are homeless and a fair number of panhandlers, you don't see the tent cities in freeway interchanges and 30 year old motor homes sitting alongside streets and parkways like you see in Seattle and Portland. My brother-in-law drives for Uber in the Seattle area and frequently picks up fares from all across the country and they are astounded by what they see and ask him why there's so many homeless in Seattle. No doubt the moderate weather has something to do with it...get in a fight with a family member and it's a lot easier to leave the house in Seattle or Portland than it is in Chicago....but there has to be some other factor involved, and IMO that factor is politics.

[NorthHawk]

I don't know what's happening in your area, but the housing prices are ridiculously high here.
It's in a large part because of the corporate aspect of buying housing for profit. That didn't used to be a big thing but when you have billion dollar companies
bidding on housing, the individuals will be priced out. Our housing prices have been increasing somewhere around 15-20% per year in the hottest markets so
the investment is extremely attractive. That in turn pushes up rents which prices people out of their rental homes and others can't afford to buy in the market
where they have careers or businesses. The economic portion plays a huge role up here and combined with the other issues previously discussed we have a
big problem. The problem with the jobs aspect is the wages haven't been keeping up with the price of housing. Housing has gone up 300% or more the last
15 -20 years but wages have not increased at anywhere near that rate. We bought our current home 16 years ago. It has tripled in value. I was working then
and together we had an income of about $130,000. Today's wages for those jobs would be about $150,000 and we wouldn't have been able to afford the home
we have - and we don't have any kids. With the average house price over $1M and 2 bedroom Condos at $675000 (from the last report I saw) it would be very
tough for a family to afford a place to stay. Renting a 1 bdrm appt is now in the area of $1600 - $2000/ month. Ten years ago it was around half that.
So for us, economics is a big factor.

I'm sure politics plays some part in it, but I'm not convinced it's a big part - at least I haven't heard much of anything that it is. It might be one of those things
that you can't prove but just know it's true.

[RiverDog]

I don't know what's happening in your area, but the housing prices are ridiculously high here.
It's in a large part because of the corporate aspect of buying housing for profit. That didn't used to be a big thing but when you have billion dollar companies
bidding on housing, the individuals will be priced out. Our housing prices have been increasing somewhere around 15-20% per year in the hottest markets so
the investment is extremely attractive. That in turn pushes up rents which prices people out of their rental homes and others can't afford to buy in the market
where they have careers or businesses. The economic portion plays a huge role up here and combined with the other issues previously discussed we have a
big problem. The problem with the jobs aspect is the wages haven't been keeping up with the price of housing. Housing has gone up 300% or more the last
15 -20 years but wages have not increased at anywhere near that rate. We bought our current home 16 years ago. It has tripled in value. I was working then
and together we had an income of about $130,000. Today's wages for those jobs would be about $150,000 and we wouldn't have been able to afford the home
we have - and we don't have any kids. With the average house price over $1M and 2 bedroom Condos at $675000 (from the last report I saw) it would be very
tough for a family to afford a place to stay. Renting a 1 bdrm appt is now in the area of $1600 - $2000/ month. Ten years ago it was around half that.
So for us, economics is a big factor.

I'm sure politics plays some part in it, but I'm not convinced it's a big part - at least I haven't heard much of anything that it is. It might be one of those things
that you can't prove but just know it's true.

They're sky high here, too, up 37% over last year, although real estate is still a lot cheaper here than it is in the Seattle area. Our vacancy rate for rentals is 2% even though they're building apartments like crazy. Amazon is building not one, but two warehouses, each with over 1 million square feet and plan to start hiring 1500 workers this summer. There's several other employers, including my former employer, that are expanding their operations. Costco is building a 2nd warehouse. The local economy here is on steroids.

But the problem with real estate nation wide has more to do with demographics than anything else. The baby boomer generation is retiring and they're not downsizing or selling their homes:

Thanks to their sheer numbers, the baby boomers have shaped society, driving social change and the economic expansion since the 1970s. But now they're influencing society in a new way -- by holding on to their homes.

The oldest baby boomers are now in their early 70s, an age that in previous generations signaled a desire to downsize into condos and apartments. But economists are finding that boomers aren't yet downsizing, at least not in the numbers that some of them had predicted. That's pinching the real estate market because Americans over 65 have the highest homeownership rate of any generation. Almost 80 percent of seniors own their homes, compared with 35 percent of Americans under age 35.

With boomers remaining in their homes, that removes about 33 million properties from the market, Realtor.com estimated. That's significant considering 5.5 million existing homes were sold last year, according to the National Association of Realtors.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/housings-b ... ownsizing/

Baby boomers have lived healthier lifestyles than previous generations. We didn't grow up smoking two packs of cigarettes like my parents generation used to, and we're living longer and not going into the nursing homes and graveyards like our parents did. Of course, that will change eventually, likely within another 10 years, and a whole bunch of houses will start hitting the market and create a glut of housing.

There's no doubt that the real estate market is one of the factors in homelessness, but it's not the root cause. Otherwise, why would my area, with a 2% rental vacancy rate, not be showing at least some tent cities? If people can't find a place to rent that they can afford, they usually have options, like living with a relative or friend, until something affordable opens up.

I agree that politics isn't a major factor in homelessness, but it does contribute to it. It also has the tendency to attract it from other areas from around the region, which is likely one of the reasons why I don't see tent cities in my area.

[mykc14]

If you want to fix a majority (80% I'd estimate) of the homeless problem start by addressing the drug problem. The Seattle metro area spends over 1 BILLION a year on homelessness, about 100k per homeless person, but still have one of the worst homeless problems in the country. About 50% of homeless people in Seattle, Portland, and San Fran are from out of the area, when surveyed many homeless state a liberal or more accepting view towards homeless as a major reason for coming to these areas. City ran hotels, whose sole purpose is to give the homeless a place to stay sit empty when police start to crack down on drug possession. It's not a Democrat vs Republican issue but it is an extreme liberal policy issue. There are plenty of more moderate Democrat cities who don't allow the drug issues to persist in their cities, but allowing open drug use, stealing, battery, etc with no consequences are a common themes in all of these liberal cities. Liberals want to have compassion for the homeless, but enabling them to live in their addiction, inflicting their disease on these beautiful cities is not compassion. Compassion is giving them the help they need, whether they realize they need it or not.

[RiverDog]

If you want to fix a majority (80% I'd estimate) of the homeless problem start by addressing the drug problem. The Seattle metro area spends over 1 BILLION a year on homelessness, about 100k per homeless person, but still have one of the worst homeless problems in the country. About 50% of homeless people in Seattle, Portland, and San Fran are from out of the area, when surveyed many homeless state a liberal or more accepting view towards homeless as a major reason for coming to these areas. City ran hotels, whose sole purpose is to give the homeless a place to stay sit empty when police start to crack down on drug possession. It's not a Democrat vs Republican issue but it is an extreme liberal policy issue. There are plenty of more moderate Democrat cities who don't allow the drug issues to persist in their cities, but allowing open drug use, stealing, battery, etc with no consequences are a common themes in all of these liberal cities. Liberals want to have compassion for the homeless, but enabling them to live in their addiction, inflicting their disease on these beautiful cities is not compassion. Compassion is giving them the help they need, whether they realize they need it or not.

Your 80% estimate sounds a little high from what I've been reading. Surveys that I've read have shown that about 25-30% report that they've used drugs and around 35-40% admit to an alcohol abuse problem, but if those surveys I'm reading are dependent on the respondent giving an honest answer, they may not be a good reflection of the true percentages. I've also seen reports of about a third of all homeless suffer from some form of mental illness, but whether those mentally ill are also drug addicts isn't noted.

In any event, I'd like to see the survey(s) you're referring to about homeless coming from out of the area due to the more sympathetic environment as it would support a suspicion of mine. Not that I don't trust you, but I'd like to see their methodology.

I agree 100% with your last statement, which is why I won't give to a panhandler as they'd probably use the money to buy drugs or alcohol, but instead will donate to organizations like 2nd Harvest and the Union Gospel Mission that actually provide food and shelter. Cities around here have started to erect signs asking people not to give to a panhandler and have a phone number/website noted where they can donate.

[mykc14]

River- overall it is incredible hard to get reliable homeless data because, like you mentioned most raw homeless data means that the homeless themselves would have to report their drug use. Reporting where homeless have migrated from is also flawed because most statistics used by the state look only at a homeless persons last addresses to note if they are local or not. Most of the data I use has been gathered over time as I have been studying/teaching about the issue. Most of the "good" data has to come from real work observation. What happens when type of data. An example of that happened in a town about 30 minutes from where I live. There was an explosion of homeless at a beautiful park seemingly overnight. It turns out the local police force has begun to crack down on the drug use at the main shelter in town and 90^ of the homeless left. Anyway, I'll post data when I come across it, but I probably won't be researching it again until next fall, but here is an article that looks at the problem, although I would say it is from a pro-capitalist, anti-socialist perspective.

https://www.city-journal.org/seattle-homelessness

[RiverDog]

River- overall it is incredible hard to get reliable homeless data because, like you mentioned most raw homeless data means that the homeless themselves would have to report their drug use. Reporting where homeless have migrated from is also flawed because most statistics used by the state look only at a homeless persons last addresses to note if they are local or not. Most of the data I use has been gathered over time as I have been studying/teaching about the issue. Most of the "good" data has to come from real work observation. What happens when type of data. An example of that happened in a town about 30 minutes from where I live. There was an explosion of homeless at a beautiful park seemingly overnight. It turns out the local police force has begun to crack down on the drug use at the main shelter in town and 90^ of the homeless left. Anyway, I'll post data when I come across it, but I probably won't be researching it again until next fall, but here is an article that looks at the problem, although I would say it is from a pro-capitalist, anti-socialist perspective.

https://www.city-journal.org/seattle-homelessness

Oh, I fully understand how difficult it is to get reliable data on specific characteristics of the homeless population. That's why I wanted to see where you were getting your information, so I could see their methodology.

I've read roughly a quarter of the article you linked. It's very good and gives a believable summation of the problems Seattle faces. The one thing I wish they would have done would have been to footnote their references. If they're going to say that they're using the city's own data, then give it a footnote with a link so I can check it out.

I do believe the 80% estimate of drug and/or alcohol addiction. I don't have a good feel for what percentage is mentally ill or how they arrive at their 30% estimate, but mental illness seems to me to be a secondary problem when compared to substance abuse. Without a lot of evidence to back it up, my gut feel is that we've created, or allowed for the creation, of an alternative lifestyle, that the combination of a moderate climate and a sympathetic city council has led to an explosion of the problem. As the article points out, the left likes to blame big business for making real estate so expensive, but I have my doubts that if a person couldn't find affordable housing that they'd choose to live on the streets. They'd find some other type of housing, either move in with a friend or relative or relocate to a city that was less expensive and still had good job opportunities. Even these small towns in eastern Washington, Connell or Quincy, for example, where you can find furnished studio apartments for $600-$1000/month, has jobs available that start out at $15/hour with benefits and a $1000 sign on bonus or relocation assistance. But they have to pass a drug test, which is a deal breaker for a lot of applicants.

Anyhow, thanks for the link. I'll comment further once I'm done reading it as it's pretty lengthy.