Reducing the discussion of homelessness to “houselessness” is an intentional focusing illusion designed to direct your concern towards landlords, builders, and employers (people the state can control), rather than on the broken choices and often lawless misbehavior of the homeless themselves (people we struggle to control).
To understand why consider these 4 points:
- Law abiding people are always easier for government to control by their very nature than law breakers.
- It’s simply the path of least resistance.
- By teaching them to accept the responsibility for the actions of those who refuse to conform to community-set standards, you have a never ending, guilt driven, reason to demand resources.
- It’s never ending because it never deals with the choices of the homeless person.
- Law abiding people generate the revenue required to support the existence of the lawless and those who wish to have careers managing them.
- Managing the homeless has become a multi-billion-dollar industry with feel good social status and often including public employee benefit packages.
- Unlike privately funded business endeavors, taxpayers have no recourse to reclaim tax revenue spent on projects that don’t deliver what they promised. Just look at the billions of dollars spent[1] on ending homelessness since the 2001 HUD proposed “10-Year Plan to End Homelessness” for an example[2]. While it has not come close to delivering on what was promised, government funded agencies just keep doubling down on the same talking points and requests for more tax dollars. The money was spent, and it simply hasn’t delivered[3]. If this were the private sector, one could reasonably expect a refund of the money spent and the firing of those who proposed the project.
- This relies on the current cultural idea that it is somehow wrong to be critical of someone’s choices (unless that someone is a landlord, builder, or employer).
- The vast majority of homeless are in that state due to a series of bad choices (please note that I did not say that they are bad people).
- Many homeless choose to remain homeless when given an opportunity to do otherwise[4].
- It also counts on public sympathy for the notion that everyone is entitled to receive equal outcomes regardless of the risk or effort invested. “What’s missing is a house, and everyone deserves a house… right?”
- Houses, tents, and pallet shelters have become the new participation trophy for existing, rather than being the reward for years of hard work, earning and income and saving wisely.
By keeping our focus on homelessness, we are forced to remember the layers of relationships required to earn and keep a home. We’re reminded that it’s in a healthy home that we learn the required social disciplines, including loving and caring for our neighbor, that transforms a house into a home. It’s here that we come to value submitting to others and contributing to each other’s needs. The health of the home is truly the foundational measure of a healthy society.
Let’s not let the media and government-funded social engineers get away with this “sleight of mind” by reframing the discussion to be about “houses” rather than choices. Help those who cause the problem to become the solution. They can and they will thank you for it when they rediscover the value of home.
By: Brian Bouteller, Executive Director
[1] The 2002 Hud budget was $1.123 billion, and the proposed budget for 2023 is $71.9 billion. 2002, archives.hud.gov/budget/fy02/cjs/part_1/homeless.pdf.; https://www.hud.gov/budget Accessed 9 May 2022.
[2] Berg, Steve. nlihc.org/sites/default/files/Sec7.08_Ten-Year-Plan_2015.pdf. Accessed 9 May 2022.
[3] US Department of Housing and Urban Development. www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/2021-AHAR-Part-1.pdf.
[4] McCarron, Steve. Seattle, KOMO News, 2022, www.komonews.com/news/project-seattle/many-homeless-people-decline-shelter-offers-by-city-of-seattle-report-finds. Accessed 9 May 2022.