I really like how many people were helped with this pilot project, and how it’s really energized the conversation about how we help people and things like UBI.
I hate that it keeps being used as proof that people are wrong about homeless people though… The people in this study fit the technical definition of homeless sure, but not the colloquial one. In fact, those who fit the what many people think of when they think of homeless people where specifically disqualified from the study (likely because it wouldn’t give such a nice result) which actually reinforces the public perception instead of challenging it. There’s a huge difference between the “unhoused” and “homeless” (for lack of better differentiating the groups) and what these two groups need, and pretending like there’s no difference isn’t helping anyone.
Still, if it helps a portion of the people on the street get a roof over their heads, that ought to free up some of the existing resources to focus on the more challenging cases, shouldn’t it?
It’s probably entirely different resources to be honest, with little overlap. Regardless, this program is great and should be expanded ASAP. I just don’t like the spin being put on it is all.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
I really like how many people were helped with this pilot project, and how it’s really energized the conversation about how we help people and things like UBI.
I hate that it keeps being used as proof that people are wrong about homeless people though… The people in this study fit the technical definition of homeless sure, but not the colloquial one. In fact, those who fit the what many people think of when they think of homeless people where specifically disqualified from the study (likely because it wouldn’t give such a nice result) which actually reinforces the public perception instead of challenging it. There’s a huge difference between the “unhoused” and “homeless” (for lack of better differentiating the groups) and what these two groups need, and pretending like there’s no difference isn’t helping anyone.
Still, if it helps a portion of the people on the street get a roof over their heads, that ought to free up some of the existing resources to focus on the more challenging cases, shouldn’t it?
It’s probably entirely different resources to be honest, with little overlap. Regardless, this program is great and should be expanded ASAP. I just don’t like the spin being put on it is all.