I work in homeless services. I do not like the term "unhoused." It centers 'house' rather than 'home' while not being meaningfully more inclusive than "homeless."

The better fight to pick is getting people to say "people experiencing homelessness" rather than "homeless people."

inb4 'but words don't help anybody': it's not about which term makes a material difference in the lives of people experiencing homelessness; it's about how people who are NOT experiencing homelessness shaping our language- and thought-patterns to reaffirm others' personhood.

Also, "unhoused" smells to me like rebranding. It doesn't help that the first hit for it on Google is a non-profit selling 65 quid hoodies whose tag line is "is a social impact startup focused on using technology to help the unhoused."

Significantly and permanently reducing homelessness is not complicated; it's merely expensive, and requires time, political will, and general local support.

Reaching functional zero is more complicated, but the roadmap exists, and it doesn't need new tech or polymer clothes.

Build more affordable housing, then raise the minimum wage and the SSI/SSDI payout (a lot). That's it. That's your huge drop.

Want functional zero? GMI, improve substance abuse and mental health access and treatment, and make background and credit checks illegal for rentals.

Oh, and fund some fucking case managers. They do incredibly hard and necessary work with high rates of burnout, and their median wage is around 30k/year, also called "barely enough to survive on."

Oh right and Medicaid for All. Overshot it because it's right there.