Quote:
Originally Posted by bcp
co-housing with interviews, lifestyle preferences, age restrictions, and designed for millennials mostly - let's not kid ourselves: those places will not be accepting a street-hardened down on his luck fellow that may have substance abuse problems and no money or bank account
the move is nice - but the same people pushing for those low cost options are usually the same trying to shut down SROs (a very important part of keeping people off the street, getting them a chance for nearby clinic care (if zoning and neighbors allow), and keeping the cost of any eventual health / legal troubles lower for the public)
|
Not to belabor this, but the relevant point is a general trend that could be learned from. From the Atlantic article:
Quote:
|
DePaulo argues that it would be particularly helpful to integrate cohousing into public-housing policy. “People who work on housing for the poor have to deal with people’s whole lives,” she argues in her book. “They can’t just give them a place to live and forget about them.” Keeping rent affordable is the foremost concern for people in charge of managing public housing, but cohousing can fill in other difficulties of living without much money: Splitting cooking, childcare, and household expenses can save lots of time and money. For these reasons and others, Danish and Swedish governments have long supported cohousing.
|
Maybe something comes of it, maybe not.