The west coast also has the 9th circuit's Martin v. Boise decision (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_v._Boise). It prevents criminalizing public camping unless there's shelter space for everyone. This is impossible given the number of homeless people so we're stuck with encampments everywhere.
I think it's exceptionally possible to build enough shelter space, and adequate funds for most large cities. However what makes it possible is the people who object to construction of new shelter space, who oppose the creation of safe parking spaces, and the creation even of encampments with basic services.
IMHO the impulse to keep people out of their city and their neighborhood results in encampments and generally worse conditions both for those with and without houses.
> I think it's exceptionally possible to build enough shelter space, and adequate funds for most large cities. However what makes it possible is the people who object to construction of new shelter space, who oppose the creation of safe parking spaces, and the creation even of encampments with basic services.
If you mean that it's possible except for the voters then that may be true but it's kind of irrelevant.
> IMHO the impulse to keep people out of their city and their neighborhood results in encampments and generally worse conditions both for those with and without houses.
It's entirely sensible to oppose encampments in my neighborhood.
Fires, crimes, and assaults are regular occurrences at encampments and homeless people in Seattle are effectively immune from prosecution.
