zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. Ogsyed+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-02-17 02:00:48
Then they'll have much further distances to commute on foot to their jobs.
replies(1): >>WillPo+wb
2. WillPo+wb[view] [source] 2025-02-17 03:37:46
>>Ogsyed+(OP)
If they could have a job they wouldn't be homeless.
replies(2): >>amanap+yf >>genewi+ia1
◧◩
3. amanap+yf[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 04:19:06
>>WillPo+wb
My understanding is that there are plenty of homeless folks with jobs.
replies(1): >>bombca+2i1
◧◩
4. genewi+ia1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 13:09:54
>>WillPo+wb
Why would a job automatically mean housing? This is America, a job only means enough money for housing in some markets.
◧◩◪
5. bombca+2i1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-02-17 14:00:39
>>amanap+yf
Identifying and assisting these people first would seem to be the thing to do.

But reducing those homeless to 0% would likely not move the needle at all on the “problematic homeless” - the type everyone complains about.

Nobody cares about Steve Wallis sleeping in a bush.

[go to top]