California needs to learn from Houston and Dallas about homelessness

Is Homelessness a “Crisis”? Scope and Trends

• One side argues homelessness isn’t a national “crisis” because it’s ~0.2% of the U.S. population and other harms (e.g., DUIs) are numerically larger.
• Others counter that ~770k people is comparable to a small U.S. state’s population, that visible street homelessness has surged in many cities, and that this is morally and practically crisis-level.
• Several note HUD’s “point-in-time” January counts likely undercount and that recent multi‑year increases (especially for families) are steep.
• Debate over whether the problem is truly “growing” nationally, or only severe in specific states and cities.

Risk, Safety, and Public Perception

• Some residents (especially of San Francisco) emphasize density of homeless people and associated public disorder as making daily life feel unsafe.
• Others argue data and experience suggest housed people commit most violent crime; homeless people are more often victims than perpetrators.
• Multiple comments criticize framing homelessness mainly as a problem for housed people’s comfort rather than one of suffering for the unhoused themselves.

Causes: Housing Costs, Mental Illness, and Drugs

• Strong agreement that housing costs and evictions are major drivers; Houston/Dallas’ cheaper, more abundant housing seen as structurally protective.
• Dispute over mental illness: one view says most homeless are mentally ill or addicted and need institutional‑level care; another notes “severe” mental illness is a minority and warns against overpathologizing poverty.
• Several describe the revolving door of jail–street–ER as a consequence of closing asylums without building humane alternatives.

Texas vs. California Models: Effectiveness and Blind Spots

• Supporters of the Texas/Houston approach highlight: housing‑first, centralized case tracking, coordinated agencies, and encampment closure only after placement.
• Critics say the article downplays encampment sweeps, ticketing for “civility” violations, and alleged busing of homeless or migrants to other jurisdictions; some locals from Texas cities say tent cities still exist and “success” is overstated.
• Weather and “null space” (more places to hide) are cited as factors making homelessness less visible in Texas than in dense California cities.

Zoning, Building, and the “Abundance” Debate

• Many see restrictive zoning, CEQA‑style review, NIMBY resistance, and multi‑year permitting as central to California’s crisis; Houston’s weak zoning is contrasted.
• Others warn “abundance” rhetoric can be a rebranded neoliberal push for deregulation that may not deliver affordability if housing remains primarily an investment asset.
• Some argue housing cannot be both a speculative vehicle and broadly affordable; resolving that tension is seen as fundamental.

Governance, Ideology, and Institutional Paralysis

• Recurrent theme: center‑left institutions are described as process‑obsessed, risk‑averse, and captured by powerful stakeholders, leading to endless consultation and weak execution.
• Several argue “perfect is the enemy of good”: incremental housing and policy changes are blocked by idealists, NIMBYs, or entrenched interests.
• Others claim this dysfunction is not accidental: donor classes prefer gridlock, and public failure justifies privatization or more punitive responses.

Relocation, Policing, and Moral Boundaries

• Multiple comments mention cities and states allegedly buying bus tickets for homeless people or migrants to other jurisdictions (especially California); some call this common, others label it a myth or oversimplification.
• There is also disagreement on aggressive enforcement: some see encampment sweeps and “don’t feed the homeless” policies as cynical displacement; others see strict policing and unattractive street conditions as part of why Texas has fewer visible encampments.

Role of Religion and Civil Society

• One perspective credits Texas’ religious infrastructure—churches providing sustained informal safety nets—as a meaningful difference versus more secular West Coast cities.
• Others respond that religious charities exist in California and Canada as well; without large-scale public housing and welfare, church-based aid is described as a band‑aid, not a structural fix.