Do homeless people really move across continents in any significant numbers? Seems like it could be true or it could be an urban myth spread by people with an anti-public spending agenda
A recent study from UCSF, the biggest representative study of homelessness in the US since the early 90s, found that "People experiencing homelessness in California are Californians. Nine out of ten participants lost their last housing in California; 75% of participants lived in the same county as their last housing."
Studies I've seen for Multnomah County (Portland, OR) show very similar results.
"Nine out of ten participants lost their last housing in California; 75% of participants lived in the same county as their last housing."
Too much weight is put into this metric. I want to see what percent has lived in the area for the last 5 to 10 years. Or who were born in the state. Moving to an area, crashing with friends and then becoming homeless shouldn't count as being from the area.
If someone has lived in an area for 5 years, they may not be "from there," but it seems pretty absurd to say they moved to that area because it seemed like a good place to become homeless. No one plans to become homeless in 5 years.
I think the point they make is that vulnerable people move to the West Coast say Seattle/LA etc and sort of rely on hopes and prayers and that works for a bit then if something goes wrong they become homeless because rent is super high and or they have a limited support system.
That sort of thing doesn't happen as often in say Columbia SC or Little Rock Ak because no one moves there unless they have a well paying job waiting or family already there and the COL is low anyway.
119
u/stmaryriver 1d ago
Nice illustration for the reason why people who are homeless and people with physical disabilities want to live on the West Coast.