Ending homelessness and poverty would be a negligible expense for states in the imperial core. It might even be a long-term financial benefit for them to prevent people from hitting the bottom. People who are driven mad by deprivation can be pretty destructive.
It is kept as a feature of society in order to discipline the working class and scare them into submission.
There’s plenty of data showing that it saves governments money to straight up provide housing and healthcare to the homeless than to let them live on the streets. But that doesn’t discipline the poors.
IIRC it was weirdly Utah where they tested housing first models to combatting homelessness (it proved very effective, as you say). The fact that it solves the problem more effectively then other solutions and is cheaper for the government than other solutions, but isn't standard practice shows how little will there is to actually end homelessness.
:this:
Ending homelessness and poverty would be a negligible expense for states in the imperial core. It might even be a long-term financial benefit for them to prevent people from hitting the bottom. People who are driven mad by deprivation can be pretty destructive.
It is kept as a feature of society in order to discipline the working class and scare them into submission.
There’s plenty of data showing that it saves governments money to straight up provide housing and healthcare to the homeless than to let them live on the streets. But that doesn’t discipline the poors.
IIRC it was weirdly Utah where they tested housing first models to combatting homelessness (it proved very effective, as you say). The fact that it solves the problem more effectively then other solutions and is cheaper for the government than other solutions, but isn't standard practice shows how little will there is to actually end homelessness.
Didn’t Utah then go on to end those programs even though they were undeniably successful?
Way less surprising than them doing it in the first place, honestly.