Again, what is that all based on? It disagrees with most of what I read from researchers and people on the ground, especially that quitting is the first step before housing.
I've seen where many people with those problems live, and the places aren't horrid, just lacking in money and social services.
It just seems like demonization of yet another group - this time, people who have drug addictions. Why is it important to demonize them?
> This is based on the fact that we have finite resources. Any resources that go to housing drug addicts could have been used for something else. There is a real opportunity cost there.
And anything spent on other things could have been spent helping people addicted to drugs. Why is one more important or deserving than the other, other than the demonization?
I've seen where many people with those problems live, and the places aren't horrid, just lacking in money and social services.
It just seems like demonization of yet another group - this time, people who have drug addictions. Why is it important to demonize them?
> This is based on the fact that we have finite resources. Any resources that go to housing drug addicts could have been used for something else. There is a real opportunity cost there.
And anything spent on other things could have been spent helping people addicted to drugs. Why is one more important or deserving than the other, other than the demonization?