All studies: cheaper to give homeless shelter, food, health care, job training than doing nothing

8-minute video: Director of US Interagency Council on Homelessness explains how to END homelessness:

In 2009 I reported that all economic cost-benefit studies conclude it costs less to provide homeless Americans with shelter, food, health care, and job training than doing nothing at all.

The greatest savings come from decreased emergency room visits, police calls, and court time. What isn’t counted, and significant, is the increase of business in areas where the homeless are vagrants.  In addition, these studies show most participants find jobs and leave these programs.

Utah has reduced homelessness by 78%, and has targeted ending homelessness entirely in 2015.

A 2014 study in Florida reports taxpayers save over $20,000 per homeless person when they are provided basic services rather than languishing on the streets. An academic paper from two University of Pennsylvania professors document it’s more cost-effective to end homelessness than endure it.

Richard Cho, US Interagency Council on Homelessness Policy Director, documents similar studies from New York CityBoston, Denver, Seattle, Chicago, San FranciscoLos Angeles, with smaller cities in Connecticut, and rural areas in Maine that all research have found it’s more cost-effective, intelligent, and moral to end homelessness.

In an example of what not to do, New Jersey officials spent over $300,000 to evict ~100 homeless off vacant land in Camden while doing nothing to address public costs of the homeless. Given these public costs, it’s also really stupid to criminalize homelessness, as increasing numbers of US cities do.

The US Interagency Council on Homelessness provided me with information, and after two weeks of promises, failed to provide a spokesperson to have a conversation with me, via Skype, phone, or e-mail. I provided these questions, that they are welcome to answer for a follow-up article:

1. Given the economic cost-benefit studies are unanimous (true, yes?) that we both save money and do the moral thing by providing services to the homeless, why hasn’t this problem been completely solved? Related, given the seemingly powerful political benefit to solving this problem while saving money, why has neither political party taken this issue on as a talking point of real-world progress that helps everyone while saving money?

2. Given the related issue of ending poverty (documentation in link below) including Congressional Committee work and dozens of NGOs for decades and two UN Summits for heads of state, the facts that ending global poverty costs less than 1% of the developed nations’ GNI while reducing population growth rates and terrorism (and microcredit ends poverty while making a profit), and that ending poverty would seem to have similar political benefits as ending homelessness, what do you see is missing to solve these real-world problems when they have solutions ready right now?

3. What’s missing in this article’s information that you’d like to provide to help end homelessness?

My working hypothesis is that US “leadership” is as interested in ending homelessness as they’re interested in ending war, poverty, unemployment, or government debt: that is, “leadership” will take token actions only.

Token actions is all Americans will receive because any major problem that is solved would risk awakening public demand for all of them to be solved.

This path risks public recognition of what hundreds of us in alternative media document: the present is dominated in tragic-comic chaos from an oligarchy immersed in “Big Lie” crimes centering in in warmoney, and media (also in ~100 other crucial areas).

The good news is that we have available solutions, only requiring public demand to stop/arrest “leadership” policy preferences for unlawful wars, poverty, debt, unemployment, and the Orwellian-opposite of what the public really want.

The good news is that we’re an Emperor’s New Clothes’ moment away from having these solutions enacted.

Related to the economic benefits of ending homelessness, the following seem to be essential economic policy proposals:

Note: has blocked public access to my articles on their site (and from other whistleblowers). Some links in my articles are therefore now blocked. If you’d like to search for those articles other sites may have republished, use words from the article title within the blocked link. Or, go to, paste the expired link into the box, click “Browse history,” click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive. Then switch the expired URLs with webarchived ones of that same information. I’ll update as “hobby time” allows; including my earliest work from 2009 to 2011 (blocked author pages: here, here).

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • not authorized

    Agree 1000% what way to usher in a new era for humanity.

  • truthtime

    Its basically how it was for other Empires, like France or Rome. Slavery has been replaced by debt serfdom however, and the widening gap between “rich” vs. “poor” is similar.

    There is so much “money” and apparent wealth in the world and yet many in society have been led toward massive poverty.

  • BuelahMan

    Thank you, Carl. Although, sharing something like this can immediately cause the “baby eaters” (the most virulent, ideological right wingers and Libertarians) to start their attacks.

    Of course, these same people will generally SUPPORT $BILLIONS being given to banks and off-shoring the jobs that could have helped the poor pull themselves up and international trade, etc, etc, etc.

    Somehow, the baby eaters have very small, stony hearts with no sympathy (much less empathy, for most are well-to-do in comparison).

    I would much rather my tax money go to helping the poorest of the poor LEGAL CITIZENS of this country. I sure as hell don’t want it bailing out usurious bankers and their ilk.

    • Carl_Herman

      You’re welcome, BuelahMan. Thank you for your self-expression.

      Economists I work with have a great response to “baby eaters” and the general public: economics has great tools to make costs and benefits as clear as possible for different options of what we can do (policy).

      As someone also working in the field of history, I’m fine with the public having to defeat the “baby eaters” in order to have social improvements that also are resource/cost efficient.

      And the bigger picture that we in alternative media emphasize: the solutions we know of are so powerful, all the complaints/problems we have would vanish IF we could honestly engage in their applications without psychopaths in power, and lying media to hide them.

  • Ravinder Singh Patil

    Practice Ukrainian conversation via Skype and learn it as a second language and it is very helpful…..

    Truly real and great experience to have and learn Ukrainian easily from courses by Skype….

    A number of tutors are available and can be chosen to take the learning classes and start Ukrainian practice on Skype…

    Here is the platform available for learning Ukrainian by a Ukrainian online course available on Skype…