Having spent a lot of time running around the country, I'd argue Boston has done a much better job of handling the homeless population than most, with much less of a "street" homeless / unhoused problem than many many other cities. Yes, Boston has the 2nd highest rate of homelessness amongst large US cities, but we have the 8th lowest rate of "unsheltered" homeless. The national average is 40%; LA's is 73%, while the rate in Greater Boston is 6% - Boston proper is just 3%. The last citywide census was just over 130 individuals; that's smaller than many individual encampments elsewhere. The other metric is chronic homelessness - that lasting more than a year or repeatedly due to mental illness or substance abuse. Boston's is 9% compared to a national average of 22%. Long Island would absolutely be a incredibly valuable resource, but Boston & our local orgs are doing as good of a job as you'll find in the US.
Societally, we need to stop assuming that everyone who is homeless is mentally ill / a criminal / a drug addict - those are factors at the individual level which don't translate to population level. Greater Boston notably has substantially lower rates of such factors than most cities, even amongst the homeless - but what does have a huge body of research is that housing affordability is absolutely the key factor.
Societally, we need to stop assuming that everyone who is homeless is mentally ill / a criminal / a drug addict - those are factors at the individual level which don't translate to population level. Greater Boston notably has substantially lower rates of such factors than most cities, even amongst the homeless - but what does have a huge body of research is that housing affordability is absolutely the key factor.
How Housing Costs Drive Levels of Homelessness
A new analysis of rent prices and homelessness in American cities demonstrates the strong connection between the two: homelessness is high in urban areas where rents are high, and homelessness rises when rents rise.
www.pewtrusts.org