But then you have to hire contractors to do all that. And managers to manage them. And managers to manage the managers. And pensions for all the inspectors and managers. Or the government could try to do it directly. Either way... the real cost gets significant additions. Along with a higher probability of failure.
You need security. Some of these people aren't safe for others to be with. Liability. So you need insurance. And lawyers. Lots of lawyers so you don't get sued as much when someone cuts themselves on a shipping container.
So you can probably 5-10x the real cost and still run into budget problems. So people keep suffering. That's why I don't know what the answer is but I wish I did.
I assumed, although I didn't state it, that we could deny people who were a danger to others access. This also doesn't include medical care because these people almost certainly already have it through other the government programs.
And yeah I didn't include managers or other employees salaries. We could save much of that by requiring that the people there worked a few hours a week or by running some traning program in the kitchen and get cheap labour that way.
I also assumed non-stupidty by the government as we were trying to find out what it cost to house them, not what they could drive the price up to.
But then you have to hire contractors to do all that. And managers to manage them. And managers to manage the managers. And pensions for all the inspectors and managers. Or the government could try to do it directly. Either way... the real cost gets significant additions. Along with a higher probability of failure.
You need security. Some of these people aren't safe for others to be with. Liability. So you need insurance. And lawyers. Lots of lawyers so you don't get sued as much when someone cuts themselves on a shipping container.
So you can probably 5-10x the real cost and still run into budget problems. So people keep suffering. That's why I don't know what the answer is but I wish I did.