San José’s “Solution” to Homelessness: Rearranging the Deck Chairs While the Ship Sinks San Jose và Bài Toán Vô Nghiệm Về Người Vô Gia Cư

__ENGLISH

By Thu Pham

The recent article “San Jose homeless residents shuffled around after being swept” should trouble every resident of Silicon Valley—not merely for the human cost, but for what it reveals about how we are failing ourselves. (sanjosespotlight.com)

The gist: San José officials recently cleared homeless encampments in various locations, displacing people and forcing them to relocate—often to adjacent sites or less visible corners of the city. The city claims it is doing so “methodically,” coordinating with outreach and interim housing, but the outcome is clear: the same people end up somewhere else, the tent count shifts, and the visible mess migrates. Meanwhile, taxpayers continue to pay ever-rising costs of maintenance, policing, sanitation, outreach, temporary housing, and so on.

This is not a failure of will—it is a failure of logic. Homelessness, like energy, doesn’t vanish. It transforms; it relocates. You can sweep a camp under freeway overpasses, push it out of parks, or hide it behind tent-cities of “interim housing,” but unless you resolve the fundamental drivers, it reappears somewhere else, in another form. The city is not “solving” homelessness — it is displacing it.

The City’s Approach: Shuffling, Not Solving

San José Mayor Matt Mahan has defended these sweeps as necessary for public safety and clean streets. He argues that people who repeatedly refuse shelter deserve to be arrested or compelled into behavioral treatment. The city has also ramped up the number of temporary beds, converted motels, built tiny-home villages, and declared certain areas “no encampment zones.”

These are not inherently bad ideas. But what’s missing is follow-through: scalable, cost-effective shelter that can be deployed quickly — not in five to seven years, but in months. Permanent housing may sound ideal, but it is painfully slow, prohibitively expensive, and out of reach for those currently living on the street, many of whom battle untreated mental illness or drug addiction.

Why This Fails — And Hurts Taxpayers

From a conservative perspective, here are the fundamental failures:

1. The illusion of progress hides real failure.
By chasing tents and camps, the city pretends to make progress. But sweeping is not housing. Revenue spent on repeated cleanup, enforcement, and temporary relocation is money not invested in scalable shelter solutions.

2. You cannot wish away supply constraints.
San José faces one of the highest housing cost burdens in the U.S. With traditional affordable housing projects taking years to complete, the homeless population simply grows. Quick-build housing offers a way to rapidly expand supply and ease pressure without waiting for endless permitting and lawsuits.

3. Criminalizing homelessness shifts costs to courts, jails, and enforcement.
Arresting someone who declines shelter is easy if one believes the individual is purely at fault. But untreated mental illness, addiction, and trauma don’t vanish in handcuffs. Jails and emergency rooms are the most expensive “housing program” of all — and taxpayers pay the bill.

4. Taxpayers bear the burden forever.
Every cleanup, every outreach team, every “interim” shelter — somebody pays. Voters already feel squeezed by property taxes, utility rates, and inflation. Without quick, effective, low-cost housing options, San José will keep draining resources into the same cycle.

A Conservative-Minded Roadmap for Real Change

If San José is serious about solving (not just shuffling) homelessness, it needs a paradigm shift. Here’s a conservative-minded blueprint:

• Prioritize pre-engineered, quick-build housing. These units can be assembled in months at a fraction of the cost of traditional construction, giving people immediate shelter and stability.
• Streamline red tape. Fast-track zoning and permitting for quick-build projects and conversions of motels or underused buildings.
• Create accountability and metrics. Every dollar spent must come with results: how many people moved off the street, how many stabilized, what cost per placement.
• Differentiate by need. Quick-build shelters can provide structured environments for those battling addiction or mental illness — a realistic step before permanent housing.
• Leverage private and faith-based partnerships. Government cannot do it alone; churches, nonprofits, and private developers can deliver cost-effective solutions faster than bureaucracy ever will.

Conclusion: We Can’t Afford Tomorrow’s Illusions

San José is not “fighting homelessness” — it is shifting it around. And in doing so, the city is digging a deeper and more expensive hole for taxpayers to fill. Until we admit that homelessness is not a disorder you sweep away but a structural crisis you solve — by deploying fast, flexible, pre-engineered housing with accountability — our dollars will fund nothing but motion.

Homelessness is like energy: it doesn’t vanish, it only transfers. Without real solutions, taxpayers will keep paying for the same problem in a new location. It’s time to stop applauding the illusion of progress and start demanding solutions that work.

__VIETNAMESE

Tác giả: Thu Phạm

Bài viết gần đây “San Jose homeless residents shuffled around after being swept” cho thấy một sự thật đáng buồn: Thành phố không giải quyết được nạn vô gia cư, mà chỉ “đẩy” nó từ chỗ này sang chỗ khác.

Thành phố ra tay dẹp lều trại, tuyên bố “làm sạch” công viên hay bờ sông, nhưng người vô gia cư chỉ chuyển đi nơi khác. Giống như năng lượng — nó không biến mất, mà chỉ đổi hình thức và vị trí. Và trong khi đó, người dân vẫn phải đóng thuế cao, chi phí sinh hoạt ngày càng đè nặng, mà kết quả chỉ là… tạm thời.

Vì Sao Chính Sách Thất Bại?

• Ảo tưởng thay vì thực chất: Dẹp lều không có nghĩa là có nhà ở.
• Nhà ở vĩnh viễn quá xa vời: Mất 5–7 năm để xây, trong khi khủng hoảng xảy ra ngay bây giờ.
• Tốn kém vô tận: Cứ quét dọn, cưỡng chế, rồi lại lập lại. Tiền thuế chảy hoài mà không thấy lối ra.
• Tốn kém hơn nếu hình sự hóa: Đẩy họ vào tù hoặc nhà thương chỉ làm phí thêm ngân sách.

Giải Pháp Thực Tế: Nhà Tiền Chế

Tôi ủng hộ nhà tiền chế, dựng nhanh (quick-build housing). Những căn nhà này chỉ cần vài tháng để hoàn thành với chi phí thấp hơn nhiều so với xây chung cư truyền thống. Đây là bước đệm thực tế cho những người đang nghiện ngập hay bệnh tâm thần — họ cần nơi ổn định trước khi có thể nghĩ đến nhà ở lâu dài.

Thành phố cần:

• Ưu tiên nhà tiền chế thay vì chờ nhà vĩnh viễn.
• Giảm thủ tục, cắt giấy phép rườm rà.
• Có báo cáo minh bạch: chi bao nhiêu, kết quả ra sao.
• Hợp tác với nhà thờ, hội đoàn, tư nhân để triển khai nhanh và rẻ.

Kết Luận

San Jose không hề “giải quyết” vô gia cư — mà chỉ đang di chuyển vấn đề đi chỗ khác. Năng lượng không biến mất, nó chỉ chuyển đổi. Vô gia cư cũng vậy. Nếu tiếp tục chạy theo ảo tưởng “quét sạch” mà không có giải pháp thực tế, thì người đóng thuế sẽ mãi trả tiền cho một vấn đề không bao giờ chấm dứt.