The article doesn't state how this program came to be. I'm surprised that a state like Utah of all places would embrace such a program, and now officials in Wyoming want to do the same thing.
Just imagine how much the homelessness problem would go down if states like California, New York, Pennsylvania and Michigan were to start something like this.
Except in CA and NY, it's less likely that the cost of housing the homeless would be cheaper than periodically putting out the fires of their periodic criminal and medical crises.
I don't have any numbers to verify what you said, but do you think that the status quo in CA and NY are preferable to Utah's program? Homelessness is part of the reason those criminal and medical crises occur so frequently.
I never said anything about the status quo in CA and NY. I'm just pointing out that if your goal as a policymaker is to minimize the cost of maintaining the homeless population, Utah's solution probably isn't going to be the cheapest one if your housing costs are stratospheric.
Utah isn't doing this because they're a bunch of feel-good progressives who think everyone is entitled to a house and mental healthcare and candy and marshmallows. They're doing it because it saves them money versus what they'd spend at the back end when these people end up in the ER or in jail or damage property. The cheaper solution is also the solution that is no doubt better for the homeless, so it's a win-win.
