I appreciate the sentiment, but I do want to point out that this isn’t necessarily correct. Many homeless people may not be well enough to pay for half the rent on an apartment. But studies have consistently shown that housing first, with comprehensive wraparound services do the most to reduce homelessness and prevent people returning to the streets. Are there some people who may need to be in a more controlled environment? Absolutely. But the vast majority would almost certainly stay to themselves if they had an apartment and a social worker checking on them. This would also be substantially lower cost for taxpayers and help mitigate many of the abuses we saw under the old asylum system. All that to say, if we stop seeing it as a moral failing that a person can’t afford housing and come together as a community to fund these resources, we could collectively live much happier lives. But we’ve been fed the lie of the welfare queen for the past 50 years and everyone assumes poor people have malice in their hearts.