As we drive through our large cities particularly in the old parts we see the streets inundated with homeless people. We don’t want to look them in the face, we seek to drive on by as quickly as possible. How did this happen? Is there a solution? Are these all-old people or young people or lazy people or simply our people? This is America, we solve problems. This is a problem we created and we must solve it. Solving it requires us acknowledging how it came to be such a huge problem.

Our researcher will tell us so many people are living on the streets today because housing has become unaffordable while the support systems that help people stay housed often cannot meet the need. Homelessness is rarely caused by just one thing. Usually, several problems come together. Here are some root causes: Housing costs too much, the financial crisis, Job loss, divorce, domestic violence, medical bills, or the death of a family member can leave someone unable to afford housing, mental illness and addiction, not enough affordable housing, family breakdown and personal trauma, people leave unsafe homes, experience abuse, age out of foster care, or lose family support. Without another safe place to go, they may end up on the street and the difficulty of getting back into housing. Without a permanent address, identification, transportation, or reliable access to services, finding work and securing an apartment can become much harder. Homelessness can turn into a cycle that is difficult to escape. This is the rationale provided by researchers and scholars which is accurate.

 

According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, about 746,000 people were experiencing homelessness on a single night in January 2025. That included people in shelters as well as people sleeping outdoors or in other places not meant for living. Obtaining an accurate count of the number of homeless people is extremely difficult to determine. I think it is safe to assume approximately one million people are homeless in America.

 

Several approaches are possible. Build and preserve more affordable housing. Help people at risk of eviction before they lose their homes. Expand mental-health care and effective addiction treatment. Provide permanent supportive housing for people who need continuing assistance. Maintain safe public spaces while connecting people living outdoors with realistic pathways into housing. Homelessness is both a housing problem and, for many people, a health and social-support problem. Addressing only one side is unlikely to solve it.

 

The 1980’s witnessed a major shift in government intervention and assistance. A shift which we, the electorate supported. The Reagan administration’s largest direct contribution was cutting federal support for low-income housing, reducing the supply of affordable places to live while rents and economic hardship pushed more people toward homelessness. It also cut parts of the social safety net and reduced federal support for community mental-health services.

The broader story has a few qualifications: deinstitutionalization of psychiatric hospitals began before Reagan, and the recession, stagnant incomes, and other housing-market changes also contributed. But federal housing cuts during his administration are widely identified as a major factor in the sharp rise in visible homelessness in the 1980s. In 1987, Reagan signed the McKinney Act, which funded homeless assistance, but it did not restore the broader affordable-housing support that had been cut.[3][5][8]

 

In the U.S., a University of Chicago study estimated that about 40% of unsheltered adults had formal earnings from work at some point during the year they were observed homeless (2011–2018). That does not mean 40% held steady full-time jobs: the figure includes part-time or intermittent work, and it is not a count of how many were working on any specific night. There isn’t a reliable current nationwide count specifically of street homeless people working at a given moment. In the U.S., HUD counted 38,170 unaccompanied young people under 25 experiencing homelessness on a single night in 2024, up 10% from 2023. That figure includes people in shelters as well as those sleeping outside, so it is not a count of youth living on the street alone. A precise national count of street-homeless youth is difficult: young people are often hidden from street counts, staying temporarily with friends or in motels, or avoiding services because of safety concerns, stigma, or fear of authorities. Common pathways into youth homelessness include family conflict or rejection, abuse or neglect, poverty and housing costs, and leaving foster care or other systems without stable support. LGBTQ+ youth and young parents face elevated risks, as do young people who have experienced school disruption or discrimination. If these are the people living on our streets how do we get them housed, employed and contributing to society.

 

The most effective approach is to get people into housing can help immediately, but lasting reductions require enough affordable homes and tailored support.

• Expand affordable housing through rental assistance, deeply affordable units, and permanent supportive housing for people who need ongoing help.
• Move people quickly into housing. Use rapid rehousing for people who can stabilize with short-term rent and case-management support, and permanent supportive housing for people with long-term disabilities or complex needs.
• Offer low-barrier shelter and practical services—including safe places for couples and people with pets, accessible facilities, health care, and voluntary mental-health and substance-use treatment.
• Prevent homelessness early with emergency rent assistance, eviction prevention, and help for people leaving foster care, hospitals, jails, or other institutions.
• Use consistent, housing-focused outreach to connect people with actual placements and services; clearing an encampment without providing somewhere safe and stable to go generally displaces people rather than resolving their homelessness.

 

The 1980’s witnessed the last of the boomers entering the labor market at a time when jobs that provided economic promise still existed. That would begin fading fast as corporations began shifting overseas and using automation to reduce costs and maximize profits. This brought efforts in corporate takeovers. This preceded the corporate raiders who would buy a company then off sell the parts, reduce the number of employees, offer early buyouts to employees ending pensions and leaving  401k’s for retirement. Not an equitable trade but it happened. Our government leaders let us down with no effort to maintain jobs or even job training for those let go or replaced by automation. We heard their justifications if corporations are given tax breaks then their trickle down economics would somehow equalize our loses. Our taxes would also be reduced by reducing the public assistance to the underserving poor. Trickle down has never worked but trickle up does work. Employed people with decent paying jobs spend money, buy products and pay taxes.  The shift from helping those with less then giving to those with much more was the greatest grift of all time. We accepted that redistributing our tax dollars, essentially taking from the poor to give to the rich, was a good idea. Soon we would realize the folly of this scheme. Our problem can be addressed by transferring from what we were told was over spending to spending vs priories. Basic economics needs to return to our public sector budgets. In the mid 70’s under the Carter Administration zero based budgeting was introduced. It was viewed by many as complicated because its basic premise was there was no automatic given. It was necessary to justify all your budget line items each year. This certainly was threatening to many bureaucrats.

These approaches work best when housing, shelter, health services, and local agencies coordinate around people’s needs and when shelter or short-term programs do not replace investment in permanent housing. These efforts require us, our government, providing help. Relying on various social services, not for profits, religious groups and the like isn’t adequate. Recognizing not only a role but an absolute need for public involvement is essential. In recent years we have heard our elected leaders use terms like welfare queens, nonworking poor and claims of lazy, druggies and such. In actuality these have little basis in fact. Regardless their acceptance allowed us to not see these people living on our streets. Giving us someone to blame, the poor, while the rich gained enormous wealth was easy. We relieved our guilt. Now it is time to reclaim our country and our obligation to our fellow citizens. This means electing people at all levels of government, federal, state and local levels who understand how the public sector can intervene and recognize the limits of that intervention. Our elected leaders can not simply call for lower taxes. Taxes alone are not the problem but the priorities on government spending are. It is well past time to again recognize our responsibility for our fellow citizens, rich or poor, housed or homeless. If we want to rebuild America as the “City on the Hill,” we start at the bottom up not the top down.