I think the core physical concerns could be addressed (in a different dialog).
Disclaimer: I've been homeless (never on the streets) and my mother died on the streets of SF.
The bigger concern is where do you park these people? The first qualifier that comes into play is: is the homeless person temporarily distressed or are they "broken" for life. In the disclaimer I gave I was of the former category and my mother was among the latter.
So this solution is meant for the latter group -- the ones who are never going to "contribute to society" again. This qualifier isn't meant to punish or demean, but to recognize that it's not necessarily cruel to move these people to remote locations (where land is cheap). But to do so humanely requires that the housing be better than tarp on a cyclone fence and affordable.
I still think cardboard could be repurposed in a safe and economical manner to aid in providing this shelter. Just like nobody would build a house how of wood without providing environmental protection this would do so as well.
Creating such homesteads would be far more cost efficient than the current efforts to sweep homelessness under the carpet.
The more intriguing question is: if one could create "free" communities such as these how would abuse of same be minimized? That is, ensuring that only the truly needy be admitted. And more interestingly, how could one establish communities like this that "bad people" don't "take over" the complex.
I'm stupidly hopeful enough to believe that these are problems that have satisfactory answers but I don't have them at the moment.
Disclaimer: I've been homeless (never on the streets) and my mother died on the streets of SF.
The bigger concern is where do you park these people? The first qualifier that comes into play is: is the homeless person temporarily distressed or are they "broken" for life. In the disclaimer I gave I was of the former category and my mother was among the latter.
So this solution is meant for the latter group -- the ones who are never going to "contribute to society" again. This qualifier isn't meant to punish or demean, but to recognize that it's not necessarily cruel to move these people to remote locations (where land is cheap). But to do so humanely requires that the housing be better than tarp on a cyclone fence and affordable.
I still think cardboard could be repurposed in a safe and economical manner to aid in providing this shelter. Just like nobody would build a house how of wood without providing environmental protection this would do so as well.
Creating such homesteads would be far more cost efficient than the current efforts to sweep homelessness under the carpet.
The more intriguing question is: if one could create "free" communities such as these how would abuse of same be minimized? That is, ensuring that only the truly needy be admitted. And more interestingly, how could one establish communities like this that "bad people" don't "take over" the complex.
I'm stupidly hopeful enough to believe that these are problems that have satisfactory answers but I don't have them at the moment.