Total Pageviews

Friday, October 12, 2007

Homeless Numbers Drop in Los Angeles but Climb on Skid Row

Yesterday, journalist Susannah Rosenblatt reports in the Los Angeles Times that the number of homeless people living in Los Angeles County on a given night has dropped in the last two years, but more people are concentrated in downtown Los Angeles' skid row, according to a survey by a city-county agency. Countywide, the number of homeless dropped from 88,000 in 2005 to 74,000 this year according to a federally required report of the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. However, the 5,100 people sleeping on skid row (the streets and park around 5th and San Pedro) represent a 40% jump from 2005. "It still indicates a tremendous amount needs to be done," said Orlando Ward, spokesman for the Midnight Mission on skid row. (For more see http://www.latimes.com/)

4 comments:

Raby Savage said...

Why do we have any homeless people at all? Didn't San Francisco provide housing ultimately for everyone--homelessness finished.
This is American, surely we can do better than this.

I remember visiting Moscow,Russia in the 80s--no one lived on the street. Aren't we supposed to have a better system than Communism?Then, let's prove it!

ls said...

And you find in poor countries like Mexico, outside of the cities that whole neighborhoods pitch in and support the homeless. Because they've made the connection that the homeless are part of them and their daily lives, like the widows and young families who can't support themselves.

Anonymous said...

The homeless in Russia were most likely thrown into jails or institutions for the mentally ill where they most likely were treated like animals. Just because a city doesn't have any visible homeless people doesn't mean that there are no homeless. Some countries do a better job providing shelter for the less unfortunate; some don't do much at all; some lock them away hidden and even more forgotten.

Raby Savage said...

Anonymous, you've got me thinkin'. You might be right about locking away people in former Communist Russia. I'm not sure which is worse, letting people out who are not able mentally to fend for themselves (like we did with the Camarillo Mental Institution) or locking people away.

How about permanent housing for people who have severe mental disorders? We need more, I think. Just this past week I saw two posters regarding people wandering away that are mentally ill. Sometimes even families aren't equipped to properly support their loved one and the loved one is sometimes resistant to being constantly monitored.