<story><title>How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness</title><url>http://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how?20</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mabbo</author><text>The &amp;#x27;Housing First&amp;#x27; model was really pushed hard by Stephen Harper as Prime Minister of Canada. It was weird because he is such a staunch right-wing kind of guy, yet here he was putting money towards what seems like a very left-wing socialist idea.&lt;p&gt;But he, like Lloyd Pendleton in this article, apparently figured out that it saves a lot of money, ideology be damned.&lt;p&gt;Maybe that&amp;#x27;s a good example of how to get right-wing politicians to agree to some left-wing ideals: prove that it will save money and let them lower taxes.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>ergothus</author><text>&amp;gt; Maybe that&amp;#x27;s a good example of how to get right-wing politicians to agree to some left-wing ideals: prove that it will save money and let them lower taxes.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve certainly heard this argument from the (few) libertarian sources that are considering basic income.  They are opposed to &amp;quot;entitlement&amp;quot; programs, but see a (theoretically) cheaper entitlement program as better than an expensive one. (Perhaps they also think that a flat-sum basic income is easier to lower or hold flat than a complex web of social programs.  Or I may be being cynical)&lt;p&gt;OTOH, it can still be a hard sell to constituents.  The US has known for at least a decade that spending more on IRS agents would earn more money than it would cost.  No new rules, no new regulations, just enforcement of the rules we have.  Seems like an easy decision to me, but few politicians, left or right, want to be caught saying we should have more tax enforcers.&lt;p&gt;Pity.</text></comment>
<story><title>How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness</title><url>http://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how?20</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>mabbo</author><text>The &amp;#x27;Housing First&amp;#x27; model was really pushed hard by Stephen Harper as Prime Minister of Canada. It was weird because he is such a staunch right-wing kind of guy, yet here he was putting money towards what seems like a very left-wing socialist idea.&lt;p&gt;But he, like Lloyd Pendleton in this article, apparently figured out that it saves a lot of money, ideology be damned.&lt;p&gt;Maybe that&amp;#x27;s a good example of how to get right-wing politicians to agree to some left-wing ideals: prove that it will save money and let them lower taxes.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>saosebastiao</author><text>Policy is very regularly unrelated to ideology. I consider myself conservative in ideology, but very rarely agree with the policies of US conservatives, and relatively often agree with policies of US liberals, but I almost never agree on the principal arguments liberals might put forth to justify the policy. For example, I advocate for freedom of immigration and emigration as a matter of freedom of trade. I advocate for a solid (but not lavish) welfare state as a matter of fiscal policy (It&amp;#x27;s a lot cheaper than prisons). I advocate for a single payer health care system because it reduces regulatory capture and rent seeking.&lt;p&gt;Politics, however, has far more to do with identity than ideology &lt;i&gt;or&lt;/i&gt; policy. Finding common ground on contentious issues does not raise money or secure votes. Demonizing and opposing those that don&amp;#x27;t look, live, or act like you does.</text></comment>