CDZ Homeless Problem Part II

[badger2]

At timepoint 3:47 in the following video, Foscarinis mentions Reagan's cuts.

Inside the LA Homeless Epidemic


Notice the statement that accompanies this video:

25 Dec 2017 U.S. Homeless Population Grows for First Time in Seven Years

' CGTN is funded in whole or in part by the Chinese government. Wikipedia'

 

[badger2]

In the retrievable LA epidemic video, it is stated: 'The homeless epidemic is incredibly complex and misunderstood by many people. This has led some cities to criminalize the issue instead of focusing on proven solutions.'

What is hidden from view is the potential synchronization of Chinese investments in California real estate with Reagan's cuts mentioned in the video, during the 1980s.

 

[OldLady]

Most of us agree that homelessness is, in large part, due to substance abuse and mental illness. One problem we face in addressing these issues is that these people can't be forced to participate in treatment programs unless they are an immediate danger to themselves or others.

Like it or not, the only way around this problem is to utilize the criminal justice system as a means for requiring participation in these programs, with the threat of incarceration for noncompliance.

If anyone has an alternative solution to this problem (which hasn't already been tried) please share it.

Creation of a middle ground is out of the question?

What does the middle ground look like?

What I would envision is a eye roll inducing bit of government double-speak but what it boils down to is….

QUARRANTINE.

I will point you to my earlier posts in Homeless I in the CDZ for background. Essentially it is this:
You take those who are arrested for B-Misdemeanors (Criminal Trespass, Public Lewdness, Public Intoxication, minor drug charges, Public Disturbances, Obstructing Public Highways (panhandlers) etc.….) who have no verifiable home address and give the CRIJ system the option of placing them in quarantine which is the “middle ground” between full scale incarceration which usually means one county paying for it and a reservation setting that is set up to take these types of prisoners from a number of counties—about 10-30 counties depending on populations.

Just an aside...Currently what happens quite often is that a person is arrested for Criminal Trespass or having a joint on them and 3 hours later is set free with a Personal Recognizance bond; an agreement to show up for their court date. Since the homeless have no calendar (much less concern)…they don’t show up and now have an FTA on their books. So when they have another arrest, the FTA hits and now there are two charges….which will get the PR bond again more than likely. Each “hit” to the system is a cost that we the taxpayers absorb.

So the thought I have is that we find a middle ground that is less expensive so I propose a reservation system.

The State sets it up; assigning counties to these regional reservations. They build it (spartan conditions to say the least) and have overall supervision. Each County provides the services… Some days Counties A, B and C will staff the health centers, mess hall, sanitation, and other facilities. Other days it’s Counties D, E, and F…etc…. Or one county can supply only Sanitation 7 days a week instead of sending nurses or human services folks. Security is provided by the State. There will be rules that are enforced but it will be mainly to keep the peace instead of punishment.

By and large, the homeless will be in their element. They will be free to roam the reservation, sleep under the park benches in the common areas or in their assigned shelters, urinate on trees, or whatever else there is going on in homeless encampments. The bonus for most of us is that they will be located in the remote (probably near State Prisons) where there is an abundance of land to start with in many cases.

Don’t get me wrong; the costs will be massive. Incarceration costs always are which is why the counties issue PR bonds like they are handing out candy on Halloween. One thing you will not have is the constant involvement of the DA’s office so there is some savings to be enjoyed. The costs you do incur are shared with a number of other counties thus relieving the cost burden, freeing up cells for actual criminals (not those who are merely exhibiting criminal behavior) and, getting the homeless away from the general population (no pun intended) where they are panhandling, exposing themselves, shitting on the sidewalk, spreading disease, and…being honest here…contributing to urban blight. The homeless are able to avail themselves of health resources, a safer environment, and perhaps learn to live in a community setting. But most will learn to game the system the way they game the system now.

Do you realize this is basically Margaret Sanger's plan?
I'm not saying that's good or bad, but yesterday I was reading an article about her and I thought of you and this plan. They are almost identical in concept.

 

[candycorn]

Most of us agree that homelessness is, in large part, due to substance abuse and mental illness. One problem we face in addressing these issues is that these people can't be forced to participate in treatment programs unless they are an immediate danger to themselves or others.

Like it or not, the only way around this problem is to utilize the criminal justice system as a means for requiring participation in these programs, with the threat of incarceration for noncompliance.

If anyone has an alternative solution to this problem (which hasn't already been tried) please share it.

Creation of a middle ground is out of the question?

What does the middle ground look like?

What I would envision is a eye roll inducing bit of government double-speak but what it boils down to is….

QUARRANTINE.

I will point you to my earlier posts in Homeless I in the CDZ for background. Essentially it is this:
You take those who are arrested for B-Misdemeanors (Criminal Trespass, Public Lewdness, Public Intoxication, minor drug charges, Public Disturbances, Obstructing Public Highways (panhandlers) etc.….) who have no verifiable home address and give the CRIJ system the option of placing them in quarantine which is the “middle ground” between full scale incarceration which usually means one county paying for it and a reservation setting that is set up to take these types of prisoners from a number of counties—about 10-30 counties depending on populations.

Just an aside...Currently what happens quite often is that a person is arrested for Criminal Trespass or having a joint on them and 3 hours later is set free with a Personal Recognizance bond; an agreement to show up for their court date. Since the homeless have no calendar (much less concern)…they don’t show up and now have an FTA on their books. So when they have another arrest, the FTA hits and now there are two charges….which will get the PR bond again more than likely. Each “hit” to the system is a cost that we the taxpayers absorb.

So the thought I have is that we find a middle ground that is less expensive so I propose a reservation system.

The State sets it up; assigning counties to these regional reservations. They build it (spartan conditions to say the least) and have overall supervision. Each County provides the services… Some days Counties A, B and C will staff the health centers, mess hall, sanitation, and other facilities. Other days it’s Counties D, E, and F…etc…. Or one county can supply only Sanitation 7 days a week instead of sending nurses or human services folks. Security is provided by the State. There will be rules that are enforced but it will be mainly to keep the peace instead of punishment.

By and large, the homeless will be in their element. They will be free to roam the reservation, sleep under the park benches in the common areas or in their assigned shelters, urinate on trees, or whatever else there is going on in homeless encampments. The bonus for most of us is that they will be located in the remote (probably near State Prisons) where there is an abundance of land to start with in many cases.

Don’t get me wrong; the costs will be massive. Incarceration costs always are which is why the counties issue PR bonds like they are handing out candy on Halloween. One thing you will not have is the constant involvement of the DA’s office so there is some savings to be enjoyed. The costs you do incur are shared with a number of other counties thus relieving the cost burden, freeing up cells for actual criminals (not those who are merely exhibiting criminal behavior) and, getting the homeless away from the general population (no pun intended) where they are panhandling, exposing themselves, shitting on the sidewalk, spreading disease, and…being honest here…contributing to urban blight. The homeless are able to avail themselves of health resources, a safer environment, and perhaps learn to live in a community setting. But most will learn to game the system the way they game the system now.

Do you realize this is basically Margaret Sanger's plan?
I'm not saying that's good or bad, but yesterday I was reading an article about her and I thought of you and this plan. They are almost identical in concept.

If you mean it’s a bad idea….I agree.

But the problem is that there are no good ideas. If you were to build a house for every homeless person, you’d have people sleeping outside. The way I know this is that our homeless shelters often have vacancies nd we still have hundreds sleeping on the streets. Is it because all of them have evil people, evil spirits, or some bully in there hurting them? No. It’s conditioning.

I agree with you that the idea is terrible to incarcerate persons for sleeping in a storefront during a rainstorm (example of criminal trespassing) but sometimes a bad idea is better than no idea at all.

There is no “good”…it’s just all that there is.

 

[Wyatt earp]

How about a few posts on WHY we have so many homeless,
Why are some fighting for 15 dollars & hour when if we had added a dollar every 2 or 3 years would have increased the min wage & helped the working class,
check out those leaders of ours who voted against any raise.
consider that wages have been stagnant for many years, while the cost of everything has gone up.
housing costs in populated areas have made buying out of reach for many working people, and rent has become 50 to 80 % of a monthly paycheck. lots of questions, not enough answers.

because it doesn't do anything, it is trickle up poor and a tax on the rest of us, remember a gallon of gas was once 25 cents a gallon

 

[OldLady]

Most of us agree that homelessness is, in large part, due to substance abuse and mental illness. One problem we face in addressing these issues is that these people can't be forced to participate in treatment programs unless they are an immediate danger to themselves or others.

Like it or not, the only way around this problem is to utilize the criminal justice system as a means for requiring participation in these programs, with the threat of incarceration for noncompliance.

If anyone has an alternative solution to this problem (which hasn't already been tried) please share it.

Creation of a middle ground is out of the question?

What does the middle ground look like?

What I would envision is a eye roll inducing bit of government double-speak but what it boils down to is….

QUARRANTINE.

I will point you to my earlier posts in Homeless I in the CDZ for background. Essentially it is this:
You take those who are arrested for B-Misdemeanors (Criminal Trespass, Public Lewdness, Public Intoxication, minor drug charges, Public Disturbances, Obstructing Public Highways (panhandlers) etc.….) who have no verifiable home address and give the CRIJ system the option of placing them in quarantine which is the “middle ground” between full scale incarceration which usually means one county paying for it and a reservation setting that is set up to take these types of prisoners from a number of counties—about 10-30 counties depending on populations.

Just an aside...Currently what happens quite often is that a person is arrested for Criminal Trespass or having a joint on them and 3 hours later is set free with a Personal Recognizance bond; an agreement to show up for their court date. Since the homeless have no calendar (much less concern)…they don’t show up and now have an FTA on their books. So when they have another arrest, the FTA hits and now there are two charges….which will get the PR bond again more than likely. Each “hit” to the system is a cost that we the taxpayers absorb.

So the thought I have is that we find a middle ground that is less expensive so I propose a reservation system.

The State sets it up; assigning counties to these regional reservations. They build it (spartan conditions to say the least) and have overall supervision. Each County provides the services… Some days Counties A, B and C will staff the health centers, mess hall, sanitation, and other facilities. Other days it’s Counties D, E, and F…etc…. Or one county can supply only Sanitation 7 days a week instead of sending nurses or human services folks. Security is provided by the State. There will be rules that are enforced but it will be mainly to keep the peace instead of punishment.

By and large, the homeless will be in their element. They will be free to roam the reservation, sleep under the park benches in the common areas or in their assigned shelters, urinate on trees, or whatever else there is going on in homeless encampments. The bonus for most of us is that they will be located in the remote (probably near State Prisons) where there is an abundance of land to start with in many cases.

Don’t get me wrong; the costs will be massive. Incarceration costs always are which is why the counties issue PR bonds like they are handing out candy on Halloween. One thing you will not have is the constant involvement of the DA’s office so there is some savings to be enjoyed. The costs you do incur are shared with a number of other counties thus relieving the cost burden, freeing up cells for actual criminals (not those who are merely exhibiting criminal behavior) and, getting the homeless away from the general population (no pun intended) where they are panhandling, exposing themselves, shitting on the sidewalk, spreading disease, and…being honest here…contributing to urban blight. The homeless are able to avail themselves of health resources, a safer environment, and perhaps learn to live in a community setting. But most will learn to game the system the way they game the system now.

Do you realize this is basically Margaret Sanger's plan?
I'm not saying that's good or bad, but yesterday I was reading an article about her and I thought of you and this plan. They are almost identical in concept.

If you mean it’s a bad idea….I agree.

But the problem is that there are no good ideas. If you were to build a house for every homeless person, you’d have people sleeping outside. The way I know this is that our homeless shelters often have vacancies nd we still have hundreds sleeping on the streets. Is it because all of them have evil people, evil spirits, or some bully in there hurting them? No. It’s conditioning.

I agree with you that the idea is terrible to incarcerate persons for sleeping in a storefront during a rainstorm (example of criminal trespassing) but sometimes a bad idea is better than no idea at all.

There is no “good”…it’s just all that there is.

No, I didn't mean it's a bad idea, or a good idea. Not yours or Margaret's, because I know that both have good intentions at heart. You're right that we need a multi-generational and multi-presidential approach. The problem is not one that will get fixed overnight or with a simple "fix" of any one thing.

 

[candycorn]

Creation of a middle ground is out of the question?

What does the middle ground look like?

What I would envision is a eye roll inducing bit of government double-speak but what it boils down to is….

QUARRANTINE.

I will point you to my earlier posts in Homeless I in the CDZ for background. Essentially it is this:
You take those who are arrested for B-Misdemeanors (Criminal Trespass, Public Lewdness, Public Intoxication, minor drug charges, Public Disturbances, Obstructing Public Highways (panhandlers) etc.….) who have no verifiable home address and give the CRIJ system the option of placing them in quarantine which is the “middle ground” between full scale incarceration which usually means one county paying for it and a reservation setting that is set up to take these types of prisoners from a number of counties—about 10-30 counties depending on populations.

Just an aside...Currently what happens quite often is that a person is arrested for Criminal Trespass or having a joint on them and 3 hours later is set free with a Personal Recognizance bond; an agreement to show up for their court date. Since the homeless have no calendar (much less concern)…they don’t show up and now have an FTA on their books. So when they have another arrest, the FTA hits and now there are two charges….which will get the PR bond again more than likely. Each “hit” to the system is a cost that we the taxpayers absorb.

So the thought I have is that we find a middle ground that is less expensive so I propose a reservation system.

The State sets it up; assigning counties to these regional reservations. They build it (spartan conditions to say the least) and have overall supervision. Each County provides the services… Some days Counties A, B and C will staff the health centers, mess hall, sanitation, and other facilities. Other days it’s Counties D, E, and F…etc…. Or one county can supply only Sanitation 7 days a week instead of sending nurses or human services folks. Security is provided by the State. There will be rules that are enforced but it will be mainly to keep the peace instead of punishment.

By and large, the homeless will be in their element. They will be free to roam the reservation, sleep under the park benches in the common areas or in their assigned shelters, urinate on trees, or whatever else there is going on in homeless encampments. The bonus for most of us is that they will be located in the remote (probably near State Prisons) where there is an abundance of land to start with in many cases.

Don’t get me wrong; the costs will be massive. Incarceration costs always are which is why the counties issue PR bonds like they are handing out candy on Halloween. One thing you will not have is the constant involvement of the DA’s office so there is some savings to be enjoyed. The costs you do incur are shared with a number of other counties thus relieving the cost burden, freeing up cells for actual criminals (not those who are merely exhibiting criminal behavior) and, getting the homeless away from the general population (no pun intended) where they are panhandling, exposing themselves, shitting on the sidewalk, spreading disease, and…being honest here…contributing to urban blight. The homeless are able to avail themselves of health resources, a safer environment, and perhaps learn to live in a community setting. But most will learn to game the system the way they game the system now.

Do you realize this is basically Margaret Sanger's plan?
I'm not saying that's good or bad, but yesterday I was reading an article about her and I thought of you and this plan. They are almost identical in concept.

If you mean it’s a bad idea….I agree.

But the problem is that there are no good ideas. If you were to build a house for every homeless person, you’d have people sleeping outside. The way I know this is that our homeless shelters often have vacancies nd we still have hundreds sleeping on the streets. Is it because all of them have evil people, evil spirits, or some bully in there hurting them? No. It’s conditioning.

I agree with you that the idea is terrible to incarcerate persons for sleeping in a storefront during a rainstorm (example of criminal trespassing) but sometimes a bad idea is better than no idea at all.

There is no “good”…it’s just all that there is.

No, I didn't mean it's a bad idea, or a good idea. Not yours or Margaret's, because I know that both have good intentions at heart. You're right that we need a multi-generational and multi-presidential approach. The problem is not one that will get fixed overnight or with a simple "fix" of any one thing.

I’ll take the opposite approach. There is no fix. There is only mitigation and it will ebb and flow.

 

[badger2]

Hillary Clinton: "I admire Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger."

Mary Ware Dennett, founder of the National Birth Control Leagued, later the Voluntary Parenthood League, Dennett was striving for complete abolition of the laws against the dispensing of birth control devices and information. She considered Sanger's strategy a capitulation to the moral crusaders; birth control should be freely dispensed, not controlled exclusively by the medical establishment.

 

[OldLady]

What does the middle ground look like?

What I would envision is a eye roll inducing bit of government double-speak but what it boils down to is….

QUARRANTINE.

I will point you to my earlier posts in Homeless I in the CDZ for background. Essentially it is this:
You take those who are arrested for B-Misdemeanors (Criminal Trespass, Public Lewdness, Public Intoxication, minor drug charges, Public Disturbances, Obstructing Public Highways (panhandlers) etc.….) who have no verifiable home address and give the CRIJ system the option of placing them in quarantine which is the “middle ground” between full scale incarceration which usually means one county paying for it and a reservation setting that is set up to take these types of prisoners from a number of counties—about 10-30 counties depending on populations.

Just an aside...Currently what happens quite often is that a person is arrested for Criminal Trespass or having a joint on them and 3 hours later is set free with a Personal Recognizance bond; an agreement to show up for their court date. Since the homeless have no calendar (much less concern)…they don’t show up and now have an FTA on their books. So when they have another arrest, the FTA hits and now there are two charges….which will get the PR bond again more than likely. Each “hit” to the system is a cost that we the taxpayers absorb.

So the thought I have is that we find a middle ground that is less expensive so I propose a reservation system.

The State sets it up; assigning counties to these regional reservations. They build it (spartan conditions to say the least) and have overall supervision. Each County provides the services… Some days Counties A, B and C will staff the health centers, mess hall, sanitation, and other facilities. Other days it’s Counties D, E, and F…etc…. Or one county can supply only Sanitation 7 days a week instead of sending nurses or human services folks. Security is provided by the State. There will be rules that are enforced but it will be mainly to keep the peace instead of punishment.

By and large, the homeless will be in their element. They will be free to roam the reservation, sleep under the park benches in the common areas or in their assigned shelters, urinate on trees, or whatever else there is going on in homeless encampments. The bonus for most of us is that they will be located in the remote (probably near State Prisons) where there is an abundance of land to start with in many cases.

Don’t get me wrong; the costs will be massive. Incarceration costs always are which is why the counties issue PR bonds like they are handing out candy on Halloween. One thing you will not have is the constant involvement of the DA’s office so there is some savings to be enjoyed. The costs you do incur are shared with a number of other counties thus relieving the cost burden, freeing up cells for actual criminals (not those who are merely exhibiting criminal behavior) and, getting the homeless away from the general population (no pun intended) where they are panhandling, exposing themselves, shitting on the sidewalk, spreading disease, and…being honest here…contributing to urban blight. The homeless are able to avail themselves of health resources, a safer environment, and perhaps learn to live in a community setting. But most will learn to game the system the way they game the system now.

Do you realize this is basically Margaret Sanger's plan?
I'm not saying that's good or bad, but yesterday I was reading an article about her and I thought of you and this plan. They are almost identical in concept.

If you mean it’s a bad idea….I agree.

But the problem is that there are no good ideas. If you were to build a house for every homeless person, you’d have people sleeping outside. The way I know this is that our homeless shelters often have vacancies nd we still have hundreds sleeping on the streets. Is it because all of them have evil people, evil spirits, or some bully in there hurting them? No. It’s conditioning.

I agree with you that the idea is terrible to incarcerate persons for sleeping in a storefront during a rainstorm (example of criminal trespassing) but sometimes a bad idea is better than no idea at all.

There is no “good”…it’s just all that there is.

No, I didn't mean it's a bad idea, or a good idea. Not yours or Margaret's, because I know that both have good intentions at heart. You're right that we need a multi-generational and multi-presidential approach. The problem is not one that will get fixed overnight or with a simple "fix" of any one thing.

I’ll take the opposite approach. There is no fix. There is only mitigation and it will ebb and flow.

True. Nothing is perfect and humans are basically uncontrollable.

 

[badger2]

A closer look at Foscarinis and the Reagan cuts (post # 41)

The Reagan Administration's Budget Cuts: Their Impact on the Poor
www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/focus/pdfs/foc52b.pdf
'....For example, before the fiscal year 1982 changes, the typical working woman in Wisconsin earned $432 per month, reported average work expenses of $108, and received $217 from ADFC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children). Her monthly disposable income was $140 higher than that of a nonworking ADFC mother with one child, who received $401 per month. Now after four months of welfare recipiency, her earnings decreased her welfare benefits even further, and she receives only $44 from ADFC. Her income after work expenses is now actually $33 per month lower than it was in the fiscal year 1981. Such an arrangement is hardly likely to encourage work effort.'

 

[jwoodie]

Her monthly disposable income was $140 higher than that of a nonworking ADFC mother with one child, who received $401 per month.

Did you forget the subsidized housing, food and medical care the nonworking mother was also receiving?

 

[badger2]

JW knows something's up with Reaganomics. The City Club of Portland's video has also pointed to Reagan's cuts as the model blow to the poor. That comes as timepoint 25:58, though the other speakers are worth the time to take to listen to them:

The speaker lists five major problems.

1. Alcohol and drug abuse
2. Lack of jobs, lack of job skills
3. Mental illness
4. Domestic and serial violence
5. Financial crisis and lack of affordable housing

Ending Homelessness: Why Jobs and Housing Are Not Enough


And yet another video specifically mentions Reagan's cuts from the heart of LA and Venice Beach. A decent rant.
Youtube: Why I No Longer Support Prioritization of Chronic Homeless People

Youtube: Micro Communities: Solution to Homelessness? (Excellent short video that requires updating-- Portland)

Youtube: A National Response to Homelessness -- It's Actually Happening
' Since 2005, Utah has reduced homelessness by 78%, and is on track to end it by 2015. Annual cost of ER and jail stays for each homeless person: $ 16,670. Annual cost of providing apartment and social worker for each homeless person: $11,000....property values did not go down.' (There's more to the story at timepoint 4:35, 'It's because they're Mormons.' Requires updating to see if homelessness actually did end in 2015)

 

[jwoodie]

JW knows something's up with Reaganomics.

Reaganomics? Really?

 

[Damaged Eagle]

People can only be assisted when they're ready.

*****SMILE*****

 

[badger2]

LA Times 15 May 2019 Homeless Shelter Opponents Are Using This Environmental Law in Bid to Block Housing
Homeless shelter opponents are using this environmental law in bid to block new housing
'....Signed by then Gov. Ronald Reagan in 1970....'

 

[badger2]

Two hours ago.

San Diego: Man Accused of Brutal Attacks on Homeless to be Back in Court
Man Accused in Brutal Attacks on Homeless to Be Back in Court

 

[badger2]

20 May 2019 In the aftermath of a drug bust, Seattle homeless camp is cleaned up again
In the aftermath of a drug bust, Seattle homeless camp is cleaned up again
'....5.5 grams of heroin....and talk with community leaders in the Chinatown International District about how to best use the space for everyone....'

 

[badger2]

A Shared Kitchen and Bath is Not an Apartment

'In Milwaukee, renters with housing vouchers were charged an average of $55 more each month, compared to unassisted renters who lived in similar apartments in similar neighborhoods. Overcharging voucher holders cost taxpayers an additional $3.6 million each year in Milwaukee alone -- the equivalent of supplying 588 more needy families with housing assistance.

The idea of a "rent certificate program" was first proposed in the 1930s, not by some Washington bureaucrat or tenant's union representative but by the National Association of Real Estate Boards. That group would later change its name to the National Association of Realtors and become the largest trade association for real estate agents, with more than a million members. A rent certificate program would be superior to public housing, they argued. Landlords and Realtors saw government-built and managed buildings offered at cut-rate rents as a direct threat to their legitimacy and bottom line. At first, federal policymakers disagreed and at midcentury decided to fund the construction of massive public housing complexes. But real estate interests kept lobbying for vouchers and were joined by numerous other groups of various political persuasions, including civil rights activists who thought vouchers would advance racial integration.

Eventually, after America's public housing experiment was defunded and declared a failure ( in that order), they would have their day. As housing projects were demolished, the voucher program grew into the nation's largest housing subsidy program for low-income families. In policy circles, vouchers were known as a "public-private partnership." In real estate circles, they were known as "a win."
(Desmond M, Eviction: Poverty and Profit in the American City, 2016)

 

[badger2]

'In other words, for every eviction executed through the judicial system, there are two others executed beyond the purview of the court, without any form of due process. This means that estimates that do not account for informal evictions downplay the crisis in our cities. If public attention and resources are a product of how widespread policymakers think a problem is, then studies that produce artificially low eviction rates are not just wrong; they're harmful

Some of the most important findings to come out of the Milwaukee Area Renters Study (MARS) have to do with eviction's fallout. The data linked eviction to heightened residential instability, substandard housing, declines in neighborhood quality, and even job loss. These findings led me to analyze consequences of eviction in a national-representative data set (the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study), which showed that evicted mothers suffer from increased material hardship as well as poor physical and mental health.....According to these official records, each year almost half of all formal, court-ordered evictions in MIlwaukee take place in predominantly black neighborhoods. Within those neighborhoods women are more than twice as likely to be evicted than men.
....
The median monthly household income of tenants in eviction court was $935, and the median amount of back rent owed was about that much. The eviction court survey also showed that much more than rental debt separates the evicted from the almost evicted. When I analyzed the data, I found that even after accounting for how much the tenant owed the landlord -- and other factors like household income and race -- the presence of children in the household almost tripled a tenant's odds of receiving an eviction judgment. The effect of living with children on receiving an eviction judgment was equivalent to falling four months behind in rent.
....
Together, these combined data sources provide a new portrait of the powerful ways the private housing sector is shaping the lives of poor American families and their communities. They have shown that problems endemic to poverty -- residential instability, severe deprivation, concentrated neighborhood disadvantage, health disparities, even joblessness -- stem from the lack of affordable housing in our cities.'
(Desmond, Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City)

 

[badger2]

CBS News 23 May 2019 Homeless Transgender Americans Would Lose Protections Under New HUD Rule Proposal
Homeless transgender Americans would lose protections under new HUD rule proposal