Tiny home villages pop up for LA's homeless: 'They saved my life'

[PoplarSoul]

Here's another opinion.....

In a Compassionate Community, the needs of all the inhabitants of that community are recognized and met, the well-being of the entire community is a priority, and all people and living things are treated with respect. More simply, in a Compassionate Community, people are motivated by compassion to take responsibility for and care for each other. A community where compassion is fully alive is a thriving, resilient community whose members are moved by empathy to take compassionate action, are able to confront crises with innovative solutions, are confident in navigating changes in the economy and the environment, and are resilient enough to bounce back readily from natural and man-made disasters.

https://charterforcompassion.org/sharea ... -community

Compassion comes first.
Not everyone has it or understand it.
Using words like predators and disrespectful to our community doesn't help to solve the homeless problem in our communities.

[fluffy]

"The good of all" is a socialist plot, don't ya know.

[nucksRnum1]

I think it is amazing how people use "untenable" in regards to millions helping the homeless - when hundreds of millions or even billions pads the stock options of people like musk and bezos dodging taxes and that seems to be tenable.

[rustled]

These Tiny Villages may work well for many of the people who need to be housed, and are most likely to succeed if there are other supports provided AND an expectation that they will show basic respect for their community.

The chances of success with "other supports" are much, much greater if the housing issue has already been dealt with.

People who pretend all the homeless want to be housed are, IMO, only fooling themselves. Persisting in placing the predatory homeless among those who are already struggling to overcome problems with addiction and mental health isn't a recipe for success. Warehousing the homeless without regard for reality isn't compassionate - it's blind adherence to preferred ideology masquerading as compassion.

Warehousing the predatory homeless and those incapable of respecting their fellow community members in these Tiny Villages will make it harder for the supports to succeed, and more difficult for the entire program to succeed.

[fluffy]

It's not a simple issue to be sure. But housing is the key first step to rise out of the problem. Do you have a different solution ?

[rustled]

It's not a simple issue to be sure. But housing is the key first step to rise out of the problem. Do you have a different solution ?

There are plenty of other solutions, as I'm sure you well know. How and where to house, who to house with whom, is a key part of the issue.

Here, we are talking about the Tiny Home Villages meeting the needs of some of the homeless - and these projects are most likely to succeed if there are other supports provided AND an expectation that the people they're housing will show basic respect for their community.

[the truth]

It's not a simple issue to be sure. But housing is the key first step to rise out of the problem. Do you have a different solution ?

wrong, safe too say 99% of all homeless had a home to live in but still became homeless . what your saying is 100% wrong

[fluffy]

wrong, safe too say 99% of all homeless had a home to live in but still became homeless . what your saying is 100% wrong

What's your solution ?

[PoplarSoul]

Anyone thinking that the homeless housed in the Tiny Home Villages will not show "basic respect for their community" is what I don't understand. Down right rude.
Obviously not all homeless are allowed in that program.
Watch the video.

[spooker]

Even my wife was shooting back with "the housing will only work in concert with other services" ... too often I hear people using that argument to complicate the process ... if we build a perfect solution so big that it requires so much money and effort then we are guaranteed that nothing will ever happen ...

Getting housed is a simple step that can move things forward ... yes, that has to be followed up, unlike now where we do one thing and then put off the rest of it so everything reverts ... it's like that saying "if you never even try you will make sure you only fail"

As for money waste, look at how we're still paying for the "war on drugs" ... that could have been spent so much better

This is a quick read that looks at what Canada has done with "Housing First" ... from an American point-of-view to boot ...

https://medium.com/@darkblacksocks/expl ... 21d84e71fe

[fluffy]

https://medium.com/@darkblacksocks/expl ... 21d84e71fe

[rustled]

No one's saying "don't provide housing".

Most of us agree that we need both housing AND supports.

And as others have pointed out in this thread, the Tiny Villages don't take in everyone who's homeless. There ARE reasonable expectations for the people they're housing - not all homeless people would be suited to the Tiny Villages.

These programs are most likely to succeed when there's a more realistic approach that recognizes this.

[spooker]

No one's saying "don't provide housing".

Most of us agree that we need both housing AND supports.

And as others have pointed out in this thread, the Tiny Villages don't take in everyone who's homeless. There ARE reasonable expectations for the people they're housing - not all homeless people would be suited to the Tiny Villages.

These programs are most likely to succeed when there's a more realistic approach that recognizes this.

Does that mean that if the services aren't ready you don't think the housing should go forward?

[rustled]

No one's saying "don't provide housing".

Most of us agree that we need both housing AND supports.

And as others have pointed out in this thread, the Tiny Villages don't take in everyone who's homeless. There ARE reasonable expectations for the people they're housing - not all homeless people would be suited to the Tiny Villages.

These programs are most likely to succeed when there's a more realistic approach that recognizes this.

Does that mean that if the services aren't ready you don't think the housing should go forward?

No, it doesn't mean that. If that's what I'd meant, that's what I would have written. I wrote what I meant:

And as others have pointed out in this thread, the Tiny Villages don't take in everyone who's homeless. There ARE reasonable expectations for the people they're housing - not all homeless people would be suited to the Tiny Villages.

These programs are most likely to succeed when there's a more realistic approach that recognizes this.

[nucksRnum1]

It's interesting. I think that every one of us has made a valid point of one kind or another. You cant have pros and simply reject the cons. It's up to those who are willing to create a program to do so. And if it was easy every city would do it. As you see in the videos - there are individuals who bring together a group who put the vision into practice. There will always have to be a moment where people buy into the big idea. And as was mentioned in the video - there will be trial and error. Which is actually a good thing. Because as more groups build effective programs - there is less groundwork for others to have to do. And the programs can be tailored together for specific needs and people. I admire the good people who have a heart for others that at least try to help. Nothing good ever comes to light if the work put in - is simply poking holes in the idea. It makes these facilitators who canvas for money and services and put the plan into action even more amazing. They didn't have to do so - and they ran into a ton of rejection. But in these positive cases, they proved that programs can work. And that will to succeed rubs off on the right people in the programs that see the effort into something - who are then willing to work on themselves to be a better person as well. A lot of times in these programs. People helping people can be contagious. And it's the right thing for societies to do.