The new study, funded by the government and carried out by King’s College London (KCL) and the homelessness charity Greater Change, will recruit 360 people in England and Wales. Half will continue to get help from frontline charities. The other half will get additional help from Greater Change, whose support workers will discuss their financial problems then pay for items such as rent deposits, outstanding debts, work equipment, white goods, furniture or new clothes. They do not make direct transfers to avoid benefits being stopped due to a cash influx.

Professor Michael Sanders, who runs KCL’s experimental government unit, said: “What we’re trying to understand is the boundary conditions for cash transfers. When does it work? For whom does it work? What are the amounts you need to give people in order to make it work?”

One of the first cash transfer schemes was in Mexico in 1997 and since then they have been used around the world. But most evidence is from low and middle-income countries, and there has been opposition from politicians and the public, who often believe people will spend the money unwisely. Last year researchers in Canada found that giving CA$7,500 (£4,285) to 50 homeless people in Vancouver was more effective than spending money housing them in shelters, and saved around CA$777 (£443) per person.

  • Flying SquidM
    link
    English
    231 month ago

    who often believe people will spend the money unwisely

    But if they spend that money “unwisely,” it’s fine. Sure, you can buy a $50 bottle of wine to get drunk with friends at dinner, but they get drunk on some cheap malt liquor because they’re fucking homeless and it sucks- or, heaven forbid, get addicted to opiates because they’re in pain and live in a country with a for-profit health care system- and they’re the problem.

    Giving them cash is nice. Giving them homes would be nicer. If you house the homeless and also offer them addiction counseling and mental health care, most of them don’t end up back on the streets. Sure, some people will always be homeless, but most homeless people just need help to get out of that situation.

    But money helps too. You can’t afford a phone or new clothes that don’t stink and look presentable? Or just basic toiletries? Good luck getting a job.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      101 month ago

      Also shelters don’t count and you cannot interpret refusal to stay at a shelter as “wanting to be homeless.”

      I help out with a street outreach mutual aid group. I’ve not met a single person that wanted to be homeless but I’ve met tons of people that don’t want to fuck with shelters cause:

      • they have to get rid of their dog
      • they can’t bunk with their partner or children
      • they are trans and most of the shelters are religiously affiliated
      • there are tight curfews and early kick out times
      • no guarantee of consecutive night stays or even a bed, no consistency
      • you can’t have friends over
      • you can’t have more than one bag
      • you must walk outside to a separate communal bathroom–even in a blizzard–if a pee cup is discovered you’ll be kicked out
      • you must attend religious services prior to receiving aid
      • some shelters are day only

      The streets are harsh, but in most cases the shelters are worse. Their only consistent benefit is that they are warm when it’s -20F out and if you keep your head down the police will probably not fuck with you.

      • Flying SquidM
        link
        English
        51 month ago

        Agreed 100% and the dog part is even more serious than people think because a lot of homeless women need their dog for protection. So their choice is then either temporary shelter and no protection once they’re back out on the streets or protection but no shelter.