WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.520 Welcome to The Debate. Today we're dissecting 00:00:02.520 --> 00:00:05.000 a crisis that's, well, it's everywhere and nowhere 00:00:05.000 --> 00:00:08.400 at the same time. Homelessness. It is visible 00:00:08.400 --> 00:00:10.619 on every major street corner in the developed 00:00:10.619 --> 00:00:13.359 world, yet the solutions seem permanently out 00:00:13.359 --> 00:00:15.919 of reach. We need to look past the tents and 00:00:15.919 --> 00:00:17.980 the cardboard signs to understand the machinery 00:00:17.980 --> 00:00:20.839 behind this, the interplay of definition, economic 00:00:20.839 --> 00:00:25.129 policy, and human physiology. It's one of those 00:00:25.129 --> 00:00:28.309 topics, isn't it? It really forces society to 00:00:28.309 --> 00:00:31.809 take a hard look at itself. We tend to view this 00:00:31.809 --> 00:00:34.950 as a logistics issue, a crisis of rooflessness, 00:00:35.070 --> 00:00:37.469 as you might call it. But looking at the source 00:00:37.469 --> 00:00:39.490 material, I don't think we're just dealing with 00:00:39.490 --> 00:00:41.670 a housing shortage. I think we're dealing with 00:00:41.670 --> 00:00:44.770 a fracture in social identity. We're asking what 00:00:44.770 --> 00:00:47.929 it means to actually belong to a community. And 00:00:47.929 --> 00:00:50.030 that really is the friction point. Is homelessness 00:00:50.030 --> 00:00:52.969 primarily a structural economic failure, you 00:00:52.969 --> 00:00:55.670 know, a lack of inventory best solved by unconditional 00:00:55.670 --> 00:00:59.490 housing, the housing first model? Or is it a 00:00:59.490 --> 00:01:02.090 symptom of deeper individual fractures, trauma, 00:01:02.289 --> 00:01:04.849 mental health, addiction, that requires a more 00:01:04.849 --> 00:01:07.569 conditional treatment -based approach? I'm taking 00:01:07.569 --> 00:01:10.450 the stance that the economic view is, well, it's 00:01:10.450 --> 00:01:13.890 dangerously reductive. Homelessness to me is 00:01:13.890 --> 00:01:17.209 a manifestation of a loss of identity. And if 00:01:17.209 --> 00:01:19.390 we simply provide four walls without addressing 00:01:19.390 --> 00:01:22.269 the trauma or the social disconnection, we're 00:01:22.269 --> 00:01:24.370 not solving the problem. We're just hiding the 00:01:24.370 --> 00:01:26.750 symptom behind a door. And I'm going to argue 00:01:26.750 --> 00:01:30.209 that homelessness is fundamentally a math problem. 00:01:30.390 --> 00:01:33.689 It is an economic failure. I'll show that housing 00:01:33.689 --> 00:01:36.849 first isn't just a slogan. It is the only evidence 00:01:36.849 --> 00:01:39.349 -based solution we have that actually saves taxpayer 00:01:39.349 --> 00:01:42.549 money and keeps people alive. Viewing housing 00:01:42.549 --> 00:01:45.109 as a fundamental human right is really the only 00:01:45.109 --> 00:01:48.849 fiscal path forward. Fiscal efficiency is a cold 00:01:48.849 --> 00:01:51.450 comfort if the human inside the house is still 00:01:51.450 --> 00:01:55.329 broken. But let's look at your math. All right. 00:01:55.590 --> 00:01:58.329 Let's start with the scale. Because to understand 00:01:58.329 --> 00:02:00.430 the urgency, we have to look at the numbers. 00:02:01.530 --> 00:02:04.430 As far back as 2005, global estimates put the 00:02:04.430 --> 00:02:07.629 homeless population at around 100 million. But 00:02:07.629 --> 00:02:09.590 looking specifically at the United States, the 00:02:09.590 --> 00:02:12.729 situation is actively deteriorated. In 2024, 00:02:13.229 --> 00:02:17.289 the count rose to approximately 771 ,400 individuals. 00:02:17.689 --> 00:02:20.849 That is a staggering figure. It's actually surpassed 00:02:20.849 --> 00:02:22.490 the levels we saw during the Great Recession. 00:02:22.669 --> 00:02:25.610 It is a massive number, but I do want to caution 00:02:25.610 --> 00:02:27.849 against treating that population as a monolith. 00:02:28.389 --> 00:02:31.460 Sure. But the drivers, if you look at the drivers, 00:02:31.659 --> 00:02:34.319 they're remarkably consistent. We are seeing 00:02:34.319 --> 00:02:38.539 the brutal mechanics of gentrification. Formerly 00:02:38.539 --> 00:02:40.879 affordable neighborhoods become popular. The 00:02:40.879 --> 00:02:44.039 wealthy move in. Prices skyrocket. And the working 00:02:44.039 --> 00:02:46.400 poor are just pushed out. You combine that with 00:02:46.400 --> 00:02:48.560 the stagnation in living wages and the legal 00:02:48.560 --> 00:02:51.319 ease of eviction, and you get a real distortion 00:02:51.319 --> 00:02:53.780 in the market. It's not a mystery. It's a ledger 00:02:53.780 --> 00:02:56.659 sheet. When rent burdens exceed income, people 00:02:56.659 --> 00:03:00.490 fall out of the bottom of the economy. OK. I 00:03:00.490 --> 00:03:03.669 don't deny the rent burden, of course. But if 00:03:03.669 --> 00:03:07.650 it were purely economic, then why do we see such 00:03:07.650 --> 00:03:11.610 a high prevalence of these very specific pathologies 00:03:11.610 --> 00:03:14.409 among the homeless population? You're describing 00:03:14.409 --> 00:03:16.830 a resource problem. I'm looking at a capability 00:03:16.830 --> 00:03:19.710 problem. Because a solution to the resource problem 00:03:19.710 --> 00:03:23.699 actually helps fix the capability problem. This 00:03:23.699 --> 00:03:25.560 is where the federal government's Interagency 00:03:25.560 --> 00:03:27.800 Council on Homelessness landed with the Housing 00:03:27.800 --> 00:03:31.360 First initiative. The logic is, give people independent 00:03:31.360 --> 00:03:34.199 housing immediately. No hoops to jump through. 00:03:34.300 --> 00:03:37.419 No sobriety tests first. Which sounds, you know, 00:03:37.419 --> 00:03:39.439 pretty counterintuitive to a lot of people. It 00:03:39.439 --> 00:03:42.680 might, until you look at the ROI. A 2013 study 00:03:42.680 --> 00:03:44.580 by the Central Florida Commission on Homelessness 00:03:44.580 --> 00:03:47.379 is really the gold standard here. They broke 00:03:47.379 --> 00:03:49.979 down the cost of not housing people. The cost 00:03:49.979 --> 00:03:53.189 of the status quo. Exactly. It costs that region 00:03:53.189 --> 00:03:57.110 $31 ,000 per year to manage a homeless person 00:03:57.110 --> 00:04:00.969 on the street. That's policing, jail time, emergency 00:04:00.969 --> 00:04:04.500 room visits for exposure or violence. In contrast, 00:04:04.780 --> 00:04:07.520 providing permanent supportive housing, so paying 00:04:07.520 --> 00:04:10.039 their rent and providing a caseworker, costs 00:04:10.039 --> 00:04:13.199 just $10 ,051. So you're saying it's cheaper 00:04:13.199 --> 00:04:15.340 to give them a house than to arrest them. Regions 00:04:15.340 --> 00:04:19.079 chronically homeless would save taxpayers $149 00:04:19.079 --> 00:04:22.399 million over a decade. This proves that the moral 00:04:22.399 --> 00:04:25.699 choice is also the greedy choice. We are spending 00:04:25.699 --> 00:04:28.660 three times as much to criminalize poverty as 00:04:28.660 --> 00:04:31.720 it would cost to end it. Okay, that's a compelling 00:04:31.720 --> 00:04:33.850 spreadsheet. I'll give you that. But you're defining 00:04:33.850 --> 00:04:36.529 the problem very narrowly to make the mouth work. 00:04:36.709 --> 00:04:39.610 You're treating home as a commodity, a physical 00:04:39.610 --> 00:04:42.829 structure to be supplied. But scholars like Tippel 00:04:42.829 --> 00:04:45.910 and Speak, they offer a much more nuanced definition. 00:04:46.009 --> 00:04:49.370 They define homelessness as the antithesis of 00:04:49.370 --> 00:04:52.069 home. That sounds a bit academic when we're talking 00:04:52.069 --> 00:04:54.329 about people literally freezing on concrete. 00:04:54.649 --> 00:04:57.990 It's diagnostic, though. Home isn't just shelter. 00:04:58.189 --> 00:05:00.870 It's a base for nurturing human relationships. 00:05:01.500 --> 00:05:03.660 For the development of identity, homelessness 00:05:03.660 --> 00:05:07.720 is a loss of belonging. So if you treat it only 00:05:07.720 --> 00:05:10.740 as a logistics issue, you know, shipping container 00:05:10.740 --> 00:05:13.480 apartments for everyone, you completely miss 00:05:13.480 --> 00:05:16.079 the pathology. And this is where Housing First, 00:05:16.180 --> 00:05:18.560 I think, fails the human test. How does giving 00:05:18.560 --> 00:05:20.779 someone a secure lock on their door fail the 00:05:20.779 --> 00:05:23.699 human test? Because Housing First offers that 00:05:23.699 --> 00:05:26.720 door without asking for any accountability regarding 00:05:26.720 --> 00:05:30.209 substance abuse. It prioritizes the roof over 00:05:30.209 --> 00:05:33.110 the rehabilitation. So while housing retention 00:05:33.110 --> 00:05:35.990 numbers might look good on paper, critics argue, 00:05:36.110 --> 00:05:38.910 and I tend to agree, that it essentially encourages 00:05:38.910 --> 00:05:41.949 rent -seeking behavior without addressing the 00:05:41.949 --> 00:05:44.689 trauma that put the person on the street in the 00:05:44.689 --> 00:05:46.910 first place. But how can you possibly address 00:05:46.910 --> 00:05:49.829 trauma when you were sleep -deprived and terrified 00:05:49.829 --> 00:05:52.269 every night? By acknowledging that the trauma 00:05:52.269 --> 00:05:55.310 often predates the homelessness. Look at the 00:05:55.310 --> 00:05:57.740 prevalence of brain injuries. There's a Canadian 00:05:57.740 --> 00:05:59.879 survey that found that traumatic brain injury, 00:06:00.019 --> 00:06:02.839 TBI, is incredibly widespread among homeless 00:06:02.839 --> 00:06:05.839 populations. And crucially, for 70 % of those 00:06:05.839 --> 00:06:08.180 respondents, the brain injury happened before 00:06:08.180 --> 00:06:11.420 they became homeless. That is a significant correlation, 00:06:11.779 --> 00:06:14.540 yes. Well, it changes the causality, doesn't 00:06:14.540 --> 00:06:16.860 it? If you have a population where the majority 00:06:16.860 --> 00:06:19.699 are dealing with severe TBI, or as a study in 00:06:19.699 --> 00:06:22.319 Hong Kong found, where 56 % have some degree 00:06:22.319 --> 00:06:24.579 of mental illness, just handing them a set of 00:06:24.579 --> 00:06:27.459 keys is not a solution. It's abandonment. You're 00:06:27.459 --> 00:06:29.579 putting a person with diminished executive function 00:06:29.579 --> 00:06:32.660 in a room alone and just saying, good luck. I 00:06:32.660 --> 00:06:36.000 think abandonment is a very strong word for providing 00:06:36.000 --> 00:06:39.000 shelter. I call it the platform for stability. 00:06:39.639 --> 00:06:42.620 You seem to be advocating for treatment first. 00:06:42.860 --> 00:06:45.079 You know, prove you're sober, prove you're taking 00:06:45.079 --> 00:06:47.879 your meds, then you get a bed. That approach 00:06:47.879 --> 00:06:51.160 uses an all or nothing standard. It demands that 00:06:51.160 --> 00:06:53.160 people solve their most complex psychological 00:06:53.160 --> 00:06:56.750 problems while living in a tent. I'm not suggesting 00:06:56.750 --> 00:06:59.410 they stay in the tent. I'm suggesting the housing 00:06:59.410 --> 00:07:02.089 must be conditional on treatment. Otherwise, 00:07:02.250 --> 00:07:04.689 it just enables the addiction. But the data shows 00:07:04.689 --> 00:07:06.990 the conditional approach fails. People can't 00:07:06.990 --> 00:07:10.689 comply. Look at Boston, Massachusetts. In 2010, 00:07:11.110 --> 00:07:13.069 they reported that the Housing First initiative 00:07:13.069 --> 00:07:16.290 significantly reduced the chronic homeless single 00:07:16.290 --> 00:07:19.310 -person population. It was so effective they 00:07:19.310 --> 00:07:21.350 were actually able to close emergency shelter 00:07:21.350 --> 00:07:24.149 facilities like the Boston Night Center. That 00:07:24.149 --> 00:07:26.639 isn't theoretical. That is a functional reduction 00:07:26.639 --> 00:07:29.420 in the need for emergency services because people 00:07:29.420 --> 00:07:32.180 stayed housed. I'm just wary of equating the 00:07:32.180 --> 00:07:34.779 closing of a shelter with the solving of a problem. 00:07:34.959 --> 00:07:37.839 You might have reduced the visible count, but 00:07:37.839 --> 00:07:41.160 have you reintegrated those people? Without addressing 00:07:41.160 --> 00:07:44.199 what some scholars call the loss of usual relationships 00:07:44.199 --> 00:07:47.100 with the mainstream, just placing someone in 00:07:47.100 --> 00:07:49.259 an apartment doesn't solve social exclusion. 00:07:49.639 --> 00:07:53.079 It's what Moore described back in 2007 as the 00:07:53.079 --> 00:07:56.449 loss of identity. You are, in effect, warehousing 00:07:56.449 --> 00:07:58.870 people. They are out of sight, so the public 00:07:58.870 --> 00:08:01.470 assumes the problem is fixed. Warehousing implies 00:08:01.470 --> 00:08:04.310 we're just storing them. I'd argue we're keeping 00:08:04.310 --> 00:08:06.730 them alive so they can reintegrate because the 00:08:06.730 --> 00:08:09.209 alternative is what we're seeing right now, the 00:08:09.209 --> 00:08:11.910 active criminalization of existence. I mean, 00:08:11.910 --> 00:08:14.209 if we don't provide housing and we don't allow 00:08:14.209 --> 00:08:16.610 them on the street, where do they go? The legal 00:08:16.610 --> 00:08:19.149 landscape is certainly shifting toward enforcement. 00:08:19.569 --> 00:08:22.550 Shifting is a polite word for it. It's a crackdown. 00:08:23.100 --> 00:08:26.660 In June 2024, the U .S. Supreme Court ruled 6 00:08:26.660 --> 00:08:30.060 -3 to permit cities to criminalize homeless camps. 00:08:30.439 --> 00:08:33.360 This ruling allows bans on public camping to 00:08:33.360 --> 00:08:35.820 be enforced even when there's no government -provided 00:08:35.820 --> 00:08:38.639 shelter available. Then Florida followed this 00:08:38.639 --> 00:08:43.299 up in October 2024 with HB 1365, prohibiting 00:08:43.299 --> 00:08:46.480 sleeping on public property. We're legally mandating 00:08:46.480 --> 00:08:48.600 that people just disappear into thin air. It 00:08:48.600 --> 00:08:51.779 is harsh. I agree. But we have to look at why 00:08:51.779 --> 00:08:55.440 that sentiment is so popular. It's not just cruelty 00:08:55.440 --> 00:08:58.820 for cruelty's sake. It's a reaction to the clash 00:08:58.820 --> 00:09:01.720 over public space. Municipalities are trying 00:09:01.720 --> 00:09:04.580 to manage public safety. You see this in so -called 00:09:04.580 --> 00:09:07.980 hostile architecture, the spikes in London doorways 00:09:07.980 --> 00:09:12.019 or the low overpasses Robert Moses designed in 00:09:12.019 --> 00:09:14.659 New York to prevent buses and therefore the poor 00:09:14.659 --> 00:09:17.620 from accessing certain beach areas. But those 00:09:17.620 --> 00:09:19.960 are aggressive tactics designed to make human 00:09:19.960 --> 00:09:22.600 beings feel unwelcome in their own cities. They're 00:09:22.600 --> 00:09:25.659 defensive tactics. The housed population often 00:09:25.659 --> 00:09:28.419 views the homeless as safety threats or even, 00:09:28.440 --> 00:09:31.080 as some sociological literature suggests, as 00:09:31.080 --> 00:09:34.740 pathogens. It's a very primal psychological reaction 00:09:34.740 --> 00:09:38.120 to disorder. Cities are trying to reclaim public 00:09:38.120 --> 00:09:41.480 space for the taxpaying majority. But that stigma 00:09:41.480 --> 00:09:44.500 is lethal. It drives depression and victimization. 00:09:44.799 --> 00:09:47.799 A 2007 study showed that violent crimes against 00:09:47.799 --> 00:09:50.139 homeless people are on the rise. When you use 00:09:50.139 --> 00:09:52.700 hostile architecture or pass laws like those 00:09:52.700 --> 00:09:55.120 in Hungary or Russia, where there were reports 00:09:55.120 --> 00:09:57.440 in 2022 of homeless people being targeted for 00:09:57.440 --> 00:09:59.919 conscription into the war in Ukraine, you are 00:09:59.919 --> 00:10:02.259 stripping them of humanity. You're saying their 00:10:02.259 --> 00:10:04.899 lives are currency to be spent or trash to be 00:10:04.899 --> 00:10:08.139 swept away. I agree that the stigma is incredibly 00:10:08.139 --> 00:10:10.980 damaging. But I think your defense of the homeless 00:10:10.980 --> 00:10:13.580 is too Western -centric. You're picturing a specific 00:10:13.580 --> 00:10:16.440 type of person, likely the American model of 00:10:16.440 --> 00:10:19.240 the single male on a park bench. If we want to 00:10:19.240 --> 00:10:21.120 solve this, we have to look at the global diversity 00:10:21.120 --> 00:10:23.600 of the issue. The very definition of home and 00:10:23.600 --> 00:10:25.820 homeless shifts radically when you cross borders. 00:10:26.440 --> 00:10:28.759 Poverty is poverty, isn't it? Not necessarily. 00:10:29.159 --> 00:10:32.320 Look at Japan. Homelessness there is primarily 00:10:32.320 --> 00:10:35.500 a phenomenon among middle -aged and elderly men. 00:10:36.120 --> 00:10:39.179 This demographic shift peaked in the 90s due 00:10:39.179 --> 00:10:41.879 to the collapse of the asset price bubble. It's 00:10:41.879 --> 00:10:44.419 a specific generation left behind by an economic 00:10:44.419 --> 00:10:47.720 crash. Now compare that to China, where homelessness 00:10:47.720 --> 00:10:50.759 is tied to the hukou system. The household registration 00:10:50.759 --> 00:10:54.539 system. Right. Migrant workers move to Beijing 00:10:54.539 --> 00:10:57.139 or Shanghai for labor, but because their registration 00:10:57.139 --> 00:10:59.960 is rural, they have no rights to social services 00:10:59.960 --> 00:11:02.580 in the city. The massive evictions in Beijing 00:11:02.580 --> 00:11:05.059 in 2017 weren't just about housing shortages. 00:11:05.299 --> 00:11:08.000 They were about managing population flow. Those 00:11:08.000 --> 00:11:09.700 people aren't necessarily addicts or mentally 00:11:09.700 --> 00:11:11.480 ill in the way you might characterize the US 00:11:11.480 --> 00:11:14.919 population. They are legally excluded laborers. 00:11:14.919 --> 00:11:17.710 But the result is the same. No roof. But the 00:11:17.710 --> 00:11:21.149 result is different forms of exclusion. In India, 00:11:21.269 --> 00:11:24.169 you don't just see isolated individuals. You 00:11:24.169 --> 00:11:27.690 see entire families, five generations deep, living 00:11:27.690 --> 00:11:30.289 on the streets. This isn't the social isolation 00:11:30.289 --> 00:11:32.789 we talk about in the West. It's a different form 00:11:32.789 --> 00:11:36.409 of community survival. Or consider the net cafe 00:11:36.409 --> 00:11:39.350 refugees in Japan. Right. I've read about them 00:11:39.350 --> 00:11:43.289 living in 24 -hour internet cafes. Exactly. So 00:11:43.289 --> 00:11:45.649 they have a roof, technically. They have internet. 00:11:46.000 --> 00:11:48.519 They have a reclining chair, but they lack a 00:11:48.519 --> 00:11:51.639 home. They represent a continuum of homelessness. 00:11:52.019 --> 00:11:55.240 A policy like housing first, just giving them 00:11:55.240 --> 00:11:57.600 a permanent apartment key, doesn't necessarily 00:11:57.600 --> 00:12:00.500 fix the complex legal exclusion of a migrant 00:12:00.500 --> 00:12:03.360 worker in Beijing or the social nuance of a net 00:12:03.360 --> 00:12:05.860 cafe refugee. That's a fair point on cultural 00:12:05.860 --> 00:12:08.639 nuance, but I would argue that biology overrides 00:12:08.639 --> 00:12:11.669 culture. Regardless of whether it's China, India 00:12:11.669 --> 00:12:14.830 or the U .S., the physiological toll of not having 00:12:14.830 --> 00:12:18.190 a private secure space is universal. You can 00:12:18.190 --> 00:12:20.429 debate the definition of home, but the definition 00:12:20.429 --> 00:12:23.909 of hypothermia doesn't change. Biology is universal, 00:12:24.169 --> 00:12:26.769 sure. The United Nations defines the problem 00:12:26.769 --> 00:12:29.929 as a lack of adequate housing. And we have to 00:12:29.929 --> 00:12:32.269 look at the health impacts. We are talking about 00:12:32.269 --> 00:12:34.850 conditions like street feet, immersion foot syndrome 00:12:34.850 --> 00:12:38.110 from wet socks, scabies, the increased vulnerability 00:12:38.110 --> 00:12:41.120 to the heat island effect in urban areas. The 00:12:41.120 --> 00:12:44.379 physical toll is undeniable. It's catastrophic. 00:12:44.860 --> 00:12:48.419 A report from the charity Crisis in 2011 found 00:12:48.419 --> 00:12:51.000 that homeless people in the UK have a life expectancy 00:12:51.000 --> 00:12:54.620 of just 47 years. That's 30 years lower than 00:12:54.620 --> 00:12:57.980 the average population. 30 years! So whether 00:12:57.980 --> 00:13:00.419 you're a migrant laborer in Beijing or a rough 00:13:00.419 --> 00:13:03.039 sleeper in London, the lack of physical shelter 00:13:03.039 --> 00:13:05.899 is killing you. And that necessitates a physical 00:13:05.899 --> 00:13:08.759 solution, housing, over a theoretical one about 00:13:08.759 --> 00:13:11.100 belonging. We can't build a sense of identity 00:13:11.100 --> 00:13:13.620 for a corpse. See, I'm just not convinced by 00:13:13.620 --> 00:13:15.639 that line of reasoning because it creates a false 00:13:15.639 --> 00:13:18.679 dichotomy. You're prioritizing survival, keeping 00:13:18.679 --> 00:13:21.059 the heart beating, which is valid, of course, 00:13:21.120 --> 00:13:23.860 but you're ignoring what makes that life sustainable 00:13:23.860 --> 00:13:26.980 long -term. If we house people but ignore the 00:13:26.980 --> 00:13:29.279 lack of belonging, we are merely keeping them 00:13:29.279 --> 00:13:31.879 alive in isolation. Reintegration starts with 00:13:31.879 --> 00:13:34.700 survival. You cannot reintegrate a dead person. 00:13:34.960 --> 00:13:37.809 But let's look at the predictors. If we want 00:13:37.809 --> 00:13:40.750 to actually stop homelessness, not just manage 00:13:40.750 --> 00:13:44.070 it, we have to look way upstream. We have to 00:13:44.070 --> 00:13:46.830 look at childhood. The literature shows such 00:13:46.830 --> 00:13:50.470 a strong link to foster care transitions. Youth 00:13:50.470 --> 00:13:53.309 leaving the system often have no support, no 00:13:53.309 --> 00:13:57.149 income. We see physical and sexual abuse in childhood 00:13:57.149 --> 00:14:00.429 as major predictors. These experiences stunt 00:14:00.429 --> 00:14:02.809 the development of relationship -building skills. 00:14:03.210 --> 00:14:06.519 I don't deny those causes. But we have to deal 00:14:06.519 --> 00:14:08.659 with the adults standing in front of us today. 00:14:09.000 --> 00:14:11.639 But if you simply provide a house at age 40, 00:14:11.799 --> 00:14:14.440 you're not fixing the developmental trauma from 00:14:14.440 --> 00:14:17.740 age 4. We need to address the definition of home 00:14:17.740 --> 00:14:20.460 as a base for nurturing human relationships. 00:14:20.919 --> 00:14:23.240 If the person cannot form those relationships 00:14:23.240 --> 00:14:27.179 due to untreated schizophrenia or TBI, the housing 00:14:27.179 --> 00:14:29.519 will eventually fail. They'll be evicted again 00:14:29.519 --> 00:14:32.379 or they'll abandon the unit. The housing -first 00:14:32.379 --> 00:14:34.690 model might save money in the short term. But 00:14:34.690 --> 00:14:37.870 does it feel the person? It saves money and lives. 00:14:38.070 --> 00:14:40.269 And frankly, in a world where we are facing a 00:14:40.269 --> 00:14:42.809 cost of living crisis, where U .S. numbers have 00:14:42.809 --> 00:14:46.710 surpassed 2007 levels in 2023, we need efficiency. 00:14:46.889 --> 00:14:49.649 We need solutions that scale. We don't have enough 00:14:49.649 --> 00:14:52.269 psychiatrists to treat every trauma before we 00:14:52.269 --> 00:14:54.830 hand out a key. And I argue that efficient solutions 00:14:54.830 --> 00:14:57.610 that ignore human complexity aren't solutions 00:14:57.610 --> 00:15:01.389 at all. They're stopgaps. So as we wrap up, I 00:15:01.389 --> 00:15:04.179 want to reaffirm my position. Homelessness is 00:15:04.179 --> 00:15:06.259 a violation of the right to an adequate standard 00:15:06.259 --> 00:15:08.539 of living, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration 00:15:08.539 --> 00:15:11.259 of Human Rights. Whether the cause is the lingering 00:15:11.259 --> 00:15:13.980 effects of the Great Recession, the 2023 cost 00:15:13.980 --> 00:15:16.639 of living crisis, or expiring COVID -era protections, 00:15:16.980 --> 00:15:20.100 the data is clear. Housing first and rapid rehousing 00:15:20.100 --> 00:15:22.159 are not just the most humane paths, they are 00:15:22.159 --> 00:15:24.100 the most fiscally responsible. We could save 00:15:24.100 --> 00:15:27.179 $149 million in a decade in one region alone. 00:15:27.440 --> 00:15:29.500 The numbers just don't lie. And I'll conclude 00:15:29.500 --> 00:15:32.629 by saying that while housing is necessary, It 00:15:32.629 --> 00:15:35.889 is woefully insufficient. If we focus only on 00:15:35.889 --> 00:15:38.950 the economics, we miss the human being. We must 00:15:38.950 --> 00:15:41.029 look at the childhood predictors, the abuse, 00:15:41.149 --> 00:15:43.870 the foster care system. We must look at the neurological 00:15:43.870 --> 00:15:46.669 reality of traumatic brain injuries. We have 00:15:46.669 --> 00:15:49.350 to view home not as a structure, but as a place 00:15:49.350 --> 00:15:52.309 of identity and relationship. If we don't address 00:15:52.309 --> 00:15:54.610 the lack of belonging, we're just treating the 00:15:54.610 --> 00:15:57.190 symptom. and ignoring the disease. It's a tension, 00:15:57.250 --> 00:15:59.289 isn't it, between the immediate need for survival 00:15:59.289 --> 00:16:02.230 and the long -term need for community. Exactly. 00:16:02.570 --> 00:16:05.389 And despite all our global wealth, the fact that 00:16:05.389 --> 00:16:07.350 these numbers are rising, that we're seeing U 00:16:07.350 --> 00:16:10.710 .S. numbers climb back past 2007 levels, it suggests 00:16:10.710 --> 00:16:13.549 that our current understanding, or perhaps our 00:16:13.549 --> 00:16:15.809 current compassion, is falling short. There are 00:16:15.809 --> 00:16:18.049 certainly more to explore in the material. Thank 00:16:18.049 --> 00:16:19.309 you for joining The Debate.