Homelessness in Los Angeles

Los Angeles is the second most populated city in the United States, boasting a population of around four million people. Sixty-six thousand of which are homeless. Currently, there is a five-year-long program underway called the “25 by 25”, which sets Los Angeles on a path to build 25,000 housing units by the year 2025. However, others say that Los Angeles should take a “Roosevelt-like approach” and start a job creation program. This way, people can start working and earn money to be able to help themselves. I want to figure out which program will prove to be more effective in both the short and long term.

In essence, the “25 by 25” is all about building temporary shelters for the homeless. Chandler Street Tiny Home Village is a prime example of how temporary shelters can benefit the homeless. Not only do they provide basic living necessities, but they also boost morale. As one homeless person put it, “‘Just being able to fall asleep! That’s so hard to do when you’re on the streets.’” A temporary shelter relieves the homeless of the stresses and dangers that come with living on the streets. As a result, they can focus more time and energy on other things, like arranging documents to get a job. A job plays a crucial role in aiding the homeless in their transition from temporary to permanent housing. However, with the unemployment rate already high, how can we guarantee that they’ll be able to find a job, let alone keep one?

This is where a “Roosevelt-like approach” comes into play. Creating job opportunities that are specifically tailored towards the homeless is key to promoting and maintaining financial stability. Not to mention, the homeless face unique obstacles that make it extremely difficult to obtain a job. For example, most homeless have low educational attainment, children with no access to child care, little to no work experience, etc… Obstacles like these limit the type of employment available to the homeless. Thus, facilitating access to job training and placement programs is critical in ensuring that they have the tools they need for long-term success. Even then, obtaining a job doesn’t necessarily put an end to homelessness; that person still needs to find a place to live.

With that being said, I don’t believe that either approach, by itself, will put an end to homelessness. What’s the point of providing temporary shelters to the homeless if they can’t obtain a job? Likewise, what’s the point of providing jobs for the homeless if they can’t find housing? Focusing too much on either approach will inevitably put the homeless right back where they began, on the streets. By focusing our resources equally amongst both approaches, we can put an end to homelessness.

Works Cited

1. https://abc7.com/la-county-homelessness-socal-homeless-crisis-economic-roundtable-population/9601083/#:~:text=The%20county's%20overall%20homeless%20population,2023%2C%20a%2036%25%20increase.
2. https://ktla.com/news/local-news/l-a-opens-its-first-tiny-home-village-to-house-homeless-individuals/
3. http://nationalhomeless.org/issues/economic-justice/