Market Square

[tomh009]

This is difficult, and can’t be solved by arguing between between harsh and being lenient.....snip....
I’m aware that what I’m proposing would be very expensive. But it seems to me that what we’re doing right now is pretty expensive too.

There are no real solutions for this idea -- even if something just short of prison costs. The issue is that some simply can't be helped, no matter what you do. In the 'olden days', they'd be put into a sanitarium, but humans rights basically forbids that, even if it's the best solution for everyone involved (the public, the workers, the individual). Some people you just can't reach, so you get what we have here right now, which is the way the society wants it, well, it gets it, and I don't like it anymore than you guys.

Can't help those that either don't want to be helped, or at least follow some basic rules, including respect for others, which many have zero of.

I agree to the extent that it's true that not everyone wants help -- or at least not help on the terms that we are willing to provide it.

But I disagree with the implication (whether intentional or not) in your post that we cannot do better. For example, the Housing First approach has been highly successful in dramatically reducing homelessness in cities such as Edmonton and Helsinki. We might not be able to house 100% of the (current level of) homeless, but I don't see a 90% reduction (for example) as impossible.