Should the government increase funding for homeless shelters and services?

No

The state and local governments should be the ones to fund these operations, not the federal government. But if this is to be funded with taxpayer dollars, then there must be regulations and a plan to get homeless people out of the shelters and into a stable life so they can find full-time employment, start families, and contributes to the communities.

Yes, but not at the expense of addressing the root causes of homelessness or helping the homeless escape the streets.

The government should increase funding for homeless shelters and services, further increasing money collected by the government due to the aid given to homeless people

I feel that the government should increase funding for homeless shelters and services with terms that state the homeless should show a commitment to the program. If they break commitment, they are taken off the program and aren't allowed back for a certain amount of time.

No because many homeless refuse to stay in shelters because of its cost to them. I believe that they need to play some role in society and earn a wage

Yes, but only in cities. In towns, the principle responsibility should be on local charities and churches.

No, the government should require churches to fund such services in their area to maintain tax exemot status

No, but give every homeless person a home. Finland already did this. There are tens of millions of empty homes but under one million homeless people in this country. They will have to pay monthly for these homes once they have a paycheck, at an amount proportional to said paycheck, until the cost to build the house plus inflation is paid off.

I feel like it could be a good idea, but most of the homeless people dont even go to shelter or even try to get a job

No, funding should be used to support shelters and services but more should work to find the root of the problem.

Homeless people just need a place to sleep and get back on there feet. Homeless camps shouldn't be nicer than apartments.

Make community’s for the homeless assign them jobs to help get them back on feet over them jobs not money or handouts

Depends on if the homeless people in the said area want help and are actively seeking it. Some unfortunately don't accept help.

Yes, as long as the national debt is not negatively affected (as long as the government can afford it)

No but public and private donations should be made to give to these charities and that would increase awareness on homelessness

I think there need to Be a study that estimates how many people accept free housing and how many people deny free housing and use those statistics to determine whether more people want housing and less people deny free housing and vise versa

Yes, but the services need to be targeted more on rehabilitation programs along with food and clothing.

So much money is already spent on homelessness and everything else. We need new leadership at state and local levels to oversee this is done correctly.

No, it's like rewarding someone for bad behavior. I'm not saying it's a crime to be homeless, but the more help you give to people who don't wish to be help, the more entitled they feel, take welfare for example and how people abuse the system that was supposed to be a temporary solution to their lack of finances.

Yes, but it must get homeless people off the streets and into housing and a job. You can't allow them to be freeloaders

Although housing is important making homeless shelters more funded isn't really going to address the issue.

yes but also they should try attacking sources of that instead of just helping them stay where they are

Yes, but only if the shelter is monitored and regulated as it needs to be ensured the funding is being used to improve the life of its citizens and not the bureaucracy of the facility!

Yeah if you want to help people but not with peoples tax dollars to pay for it do that with your own money

I feel that the government should increase fundraising/awareness for the homeless shelters and services

This depends on the locality and current rate of homelessness, and funds should be allocated flexibly based on projections for both factors.

Yes but not to perfect we don’t want to create laziness and not get a job and less taxes from people for these welfare programs get a job at least give them blankets and food and water and health care if they are in a really bad situation

Yes, but only to shelters and services who have proven rates of homeless people rejoining society and thriving.

Yes for major cities that have an overflow of homeless, but homeless people should go out and try to get a job.

yes and no becuse some of them could be on stuff and be messed up and just want a easy fixed. and then there are some whos trying too get there life toghter.

No, abolish all property taxes and implement a land-value tax on all secondary properties to increase individual home ownership and decrease rentals while also reforming zoning laws to increase housing supply instead

Yes, but they must be used to help homeless people get to work and house themselves, we can't just allow homeless people to freeload

They should increase their funding on mental health care as well as increase funding for homeless shelters and services.

Yes, and provide ways to get homeless people mental health and sobriety assistance through existing non-profit organizations

Yes, but only for non violent individuals and as long as it is not too much money and their is a time limit

No, instead they should increase funding towards a project that attacks the problem that is creating the homelessness problem.

Yes, increase funding — shelters and services are under-resourced and overwhelmed, and while funding alone is not a silver bullet, it is a critical part of addressing homelessness with compassion and effectiveness.

Yes, but the services should move them towards to bettering their lives, and moving forward with jobs, and not just giving them stuff for free.

for homeless veterans yes and ensure that these homeless individuals can get back up on their feet mentally and financially

Yes, but I would prefer rehabilitation, treatment, and reintegration assistance rather than the current services and shelters.

Yes, but we should also find ways to help them so they're no longer homeless and can rely on themselves.

Yes but also Provide programs and bring down the cost of living and inflation. ALL rentals should be determined by size of family and should not exceed space required per person and rent cost should be determined by household income and should not exceed 27% of household income.

No, allow private charity organizations and/or churches to do it instead for the sake of low taxes, low national debt, capitalism, federalism, weak government, and checks and balances.

Government should not focus on funding for homeless shelters and focus on the reason why people are homeless.

No, we should instead use that funding to create more affordable housing to lower the amount of homelessness.

No. Rather than increasing funding for these programs, the proposed additional funds should be allocated toward auditing how current and past resources have been used.

Yes, but it should invest more in addressing the root causes of homelessness: mental and physical health care access, and worker protections

Yes, but the state and local governments should watch over these programs. Of course, the root causes of homelessness should be addressed, even though I don't have enough information on this subject to form a good opinion.

Yes because we should help poor people with their needs because as Jesus Christ the king of all kings and the lord of all lords says to take care of the poor. But the government should shrink their spending on a lot of things so it doesn’t lead to problems.

The government should only provide the funds to the homeless with an ability to work only if they are in desire to find a job. And if the person doesn't have an ability to work, the government should either build an affordable public rents for them or put them in a nursing/care giving homes regard/regardless of their consent depending on their condition.

We shouldn't need homeless shelters, there are plenty of empty homes for the homeless, take them away from the banks and property holding conpanies.

No, the funding needs to be used appropriately and not given to bad non-profits like in New York City

Yes, but there should be requirements and other programs attached to it to make sure that it is a safe environment.

Not necessarily, instead, focus on individuals with disabilities or mental health issues, not just low life drug addicts

yes, there are enough unused buildings to build shelters and assist those that want a stable place to live, but can't afford housing. use funding refurbish these buildings and allow those who want help to move in and pay into a rental assistance program, where a portion of their money goes towards bills, and the rest into a savings program to help buy their own home and stability within a specific time frame based on their need.

The government should do more to liberalize housing construction through streamlining regulation and permitting.

it should be up to the states to form a budget, if an area has a high rate of homelessness then yes they should increase, but there is no point in increasing numbers in an area where its not needed.

No. Make it more private instead of raising our taxes and raising the national debt. Also, please do not take away capitalism, checks and balances, weak government, and federalism.

No, instead help them gain job experience and skills to keep their jobs permanently and get up the ranks of society. Hand up, not a hand out.

No, Given the area has good quality shelters in place there would be a need to work to fight the root cause of homelessness

Yes we need to give everyone opertunities but also this should only be available if the homeless person is "clean" aka off drugs.

I believe this should only be relevant for poor families and single parents taking care of children and trying their best.

Instead of homeless shelters, everyone should be able to afford a house without worries from landlords or the rich.

Yes, governments should increase funding for homeless shelters and services, as it can lead to improved outcomes for individuals experiencing homelessness and potentially reduce long-term costs associated with homelessness.
Here's a more detailed look at the arguments for increased funding:
Benefits of Increased Funding:
Improved Outcomes for Individuals:
Increased funding can lead to better access to safe and stable housing, which can improve the health, safety, and well-being of individuals experiencing homelessness.
Reduced Costs:
Studies show that providing housing and supportive…  Read more services to people experiencing homelessness can be more cost-effective than managing the costs associated with emergency services, healthcare, and incarceration.
Addressing the Crisis:
The rise in unsheltered homelessness begs increased attention with short- and long-term solutions.
Economic Benefits:
A stable and housed population can contribute to the economy through employment and tax revenue.
Community Safety:
Addressing homelessness can help create safer and more livable communities for everyone.
Examples of Effective Programs:
Permanent Supportive Housing:
This model provides long-term, affordable housing with access to supportive services, such as case management and mental health care.
Rapid Re-Housing:
This program helps people quickly find and secure permanent housing by providing rental assistance and other support services.
Homelessness Prevention:
Investing in programs that prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place can be a cost-effective way to address the issue.
Challenges and Considerations:
Funding Allocation:
It's important to ensure that funding is used effectively and efficiently, with a focus on outcomes and accountability.
Coordination:
Effective solutions require coordination among different levels of government, service providers, and community stakeholders.
Public Opposition:
There can be public opposition to new housing and shelters, which can create obstacl

There’s only so much you can do for a homeless. If they don’t want the help, why are we funding but if there’s individuals that do seek the help then it should go to those individuals .

There should be some increase, but for the most part it seems fine right now with how many private groups provide aid.

Yes as long as the money goes towards programs to aid in getting people into job training, assist with helping people work towards getting off the streets.

State governments should be who decide this. Homeless shelters should keep them all day, notnkick them out between certain hours and try to correct the issue in which they are homeless.

I think they should put more money towards war vets that are homeless and recovery/addiction. Not just shealters and leting anyody in.

i think it depends because if its homeless vets or homeless but not of the people riding off the system

yes but only for shelters to help care for the homeless not give them money just give them housing and food and places to clean up

I think that the government should provide some sort of help to the homeless but it should get to a point eventually. I think that this funding should only come out of fundraisers and donations because some of them could definitely clean up and get a job and some of them might be lazy and try to benefit from tax payers who work for their money which isn't always fair

Yes, but it needs to be towards services that help recipients to get a job and become a functioning member of society.

Homeless services, yes. Homeless shelters, no. Homeless Shelters are dangerous and the reason people might refuse them is because of safety.

Yes, instead of just shelters, a tiny home neighborhood with campground to help unhomed get on their feet and maybe a trade school with job placement to help them stay on their feet.

No, building more houses will make being homeless less likely and hiving institutions to take in people who cannot function on their own would be a far better solution.

Yes, but state governments should be the ones in charge of funding their homeless shelters in their respective states.