If you want to understand the origins and solutions of the American homelessness problem, a really important starting point is to understand that the problem mostly exists in places where *there are lots of jobs and the labor market is really strong,* not in economically depressed areas.
I discovered signs for two new apartment complexes while running today. Ran past 2 others under construction. We need much more housing so this is good.
It's not a problem of a weak economy - the economy being strong in these areas makes it *worse* by increasing local jobs without adding homes - the problem is housing supply, particularly supply in a handful of extremely expensive metro areas like Los Angeles that build virtually no new housing.
....sort of? Lots of the southeast and midwest having the same rate is a pretty good contrary indicator to that claim tbh. Nobody would claim MO or WY are areas with lots of jobs and a strong labor market compared to TX or NC
an excellent book (if you haven't read it already) is Homelessness is a Housing Problem by Gregg Colburn & Clayton Page Aldern (@compatibilism.bsky.social)
It is remarkable the extent to which people will blame literally anything but "you can't build quads or duplexes in los angeles without six years of community input (bad)"
Read of a study a while back that the strongest predictive indicator of a city or region having a homelessness problem is a high cost of housing/high rents.
I did some outreach in OC, CA a few years ago when there was the big Santa Ana River encampment, and what shocked me was how many of the people living in the riverbed had jobs. Many had full-time, 40 hour jobs.
This is easy. Most of the low homeless population states are depressed states with little/no social services. And all of them are police states. These two factors drive at risk people to
Relocate to a different state with hope of something better. Driving low income housing shortage.
The new American economy is built around sucking every cent a worker makes out of their pockets by raising the cost of life's necessities.
There can be nothing left for pleasure or security, it must all be snatched away as soon as it touches our hands.
I started the sentence expecting you to end it with "when Reagan emptied out all the mental hospitals and they gave their patients a bus ticket to the nearest big city and told them to give panhandling a try" but what you said here also works.
VT's unhoused population is currently more than double the number shown in that chart, and it's all about housing stock -- we're about 30-40k units short of need, and everyone is throwing up their hands (with nimbys fighting tooth and nail the few meager attempts). BUT idk about the job market...
I remember in 00s when 90% of my friends left town because there were no careers to be had.
Now younger millennials get to stay and raise families while bitching that not enough homeless people are being arrested.
I'm kind of disappointed in Wyoming because that homeless population is so small you're solving that with like two mid-sized apartment complexes in Laramie and Cheyenne.
The one counterexample to that is illustrative as well: North Dakota. During the oil boom, the companies brought in a *lot* of temporary housing in the western part of the state. Somewhat confounded by climate (ND winters are not very survivable without *somewhere* warm to stay)
I recently read that there is a very strong correlation between homelessness and rents increasing above 30% of the median wage. Which is what you see in cities that are attracting lots of new people for jobs, but not building lots of new housing. It's landlord profiteering driving homelessness.