Integral Crisis Response Team

Town Square
28

Good discussion! Let me offer a concrete example. I live in a town of about 35,000. Last weekend I attended a social function along with a few people close to city government. These folks are very approachable. We discussed homelessness a bit along with other city issues. Right now I don’t have the bandwidth for active volunteering on a local level, but I imagine that day will come (probably in a year or so). Let’s say that happens. Then I will join various local action groups or study groups. It would be surprising if integral theory would be on the radar already for other people in these groups. But my views at least would be integrally-informed. if AQAL or other integral frameworks lead me to see or imagine perspectives others in the groups are not grasping, I could add those views to the overall discussion.

Now, would it be better if there were a full-on integrally-informed action community at the local level? Sure! The challenge is how to seed that. There are some places where that might be feasible already. If so, it would be good to see such a model in action and to evaluate how it compares to any other model.

29

I think an Integral approach would parse some of the macro issues around homelessness. For instance, housing is of three basic types: low-income, affordable, and market value. Low-income and affordable housing are not the same. The Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the US agency that administers low-income housing projects and programs. Reportedly, for about 80 available HUD (aka Section 8) units, there are about 2000 qualified applicants, and the wait times for housing vouchers can be as long as 8-10 years. So clearly HUD is a program that needs “challenged,” which means to be better funded or otherwise supported or improved or revamped as the need outstrips what is available. Affordable housing is considered below-market value housing, and there is a lack here too. Where I live, the city is assisting developers (tax breaks and such) in building more affordable housing for teachers, firefighters, police, nurses, and others in what used to be considered the middle-class (now diminishing). What is happening all across the country is that corporations are buying up properties and turning vacant office buildings into apartments and such, but not into affordable or low-income housing but into higher-end housing that a particular segment of the market can bear. This inflates housing prices across the board, those for sale and those for rent, in any particular community. Homes being turned into vacation rentals also affects available housing. So these are some macro issues that make some people houseless, homeless, but there are others of course. Available low-income or affordable housing for seniors is also a problem. As Marianne Williamson states again and again, a pretty lone voice in the cacophony, half of seniors in the US live on less than $25,000 a year. Social Security is inadequate for these people, so that’s a federal program that needs to be better supported, and also looked at in terms of its solvency. I am of course addressing only one aspect of the causative factors for homelessness, but housing is a pretty big one, and it’s all pretty much related to an economic system that is leaving too many people behind.

Public safety, as @robert.bunge pointed out, does need to be considered in relation to unsheltered homeless people. The pendulum always swings, and I think integralists would take a both-and approach, attending to the public safety issues but also the needs of the homeless.
While crime levels vary in different places, and while there were increases in crime, including violent crimes, in 2020 and 2021, they were still 30-40% lower than in the 90s. In 2022, overall crime rates are down, including: murders (down by 6.1%), rape (down 5.4%), aggravated assault (down 1.1%). Yet people have the perception that crime is rising. I think much of this has to do with the spectacle of mass shootings, as well as a general sense that there is disorder in society. Again the visibility of street people plays into this, as does the hang-over from Jan. 6, the number of political protests, the coarseness of political and social media talk, and being fed a steady diet by some of the media and some of the political powers that we are not safe. I am not trying to trivialize the safety issues presented by some of the homeless population (my own house was broken into by a homeless person years ago), but crime is not near where it was 25-30 years ago. We are generally safer (from crime) than we might imagine, and an integralist approach would do what it can to clear up the misperceptions, i.e. support the facts.

I offered that stat in order to provide some perspective. I don’t mean to trivialize or minimize the homelessness problem, or discount the very difficult existence of many of the homeless. There are so many problems in society, and all competing in a way for attention (and money). For instance, there are 500,000 new cases of Alzheimers disease each year in the US, with 6 million Americans living with it. There are 1.9 million new cancer cases each year, 608,570 deaths from it annually. 43.8 million adults in the US experience mental illness in any given year, with 10 million American adults living with a serious mental illness. 13.6 million adults in the US age 26 or older have a substance use disorder; 22% of males and 1.75% of females age 12 and older are alcohol dependent.

I think an integralist approach is one that is realistic; for instance, accepting that there are some people who are so traumatized, they most likely will never be able to live indoors or in close-knit relationships (I have known a few), or be able to obey the rules and regulations of shelters, so tent encampments are not such a bad idea. But I also think an integral approach is one that is idealistic, challenging old-school thinking about what can and cannot be done, and most of all, having a vision of a better world. While I personally can accept, for instance, that wars and all sorts of degradation and agony and moral squalor are a part of the current global picture, I can also still hold the vision of a planet in beauty and love and peace. (And on a lighter note, look forward to Pluto entering Aquarius on Jan. 24 next year, ushering in a 20 year period of more humaneness and greater equality consciousness along with some really positive scientific and technological breakthroughs :slightly_smiling_face:)

30

Homelessness actually has very little to do with housing AVAILABILITY. If we look at rental vacancy rates in the USA, the % is far above that of the homeless population. Even During COVID, the rental vacancy rate fell to 4% while the homeless rate is less than 1%
image
This % doesn’t even count corporate investment housing that just lies vacant decade after decade.
The economic savings of simply providing rental subsidies is obvious. The alternative of Homeless people finding somewhere to hide or even camping out in the open and clearing them out periodically is documented to be far more expensive than just giving rental subsidies.
In addition to this we have the constant expense of Police being called on homeless people who are not actually committing a crime but the police have to respond anyway and waste their time at the cost of hundreds of thousands per week per department just making a pretense of actually doing something.
The primary problem is a lack of desire by landlords and taxpayers to link homeless with housing.
Concerning large projects and facilities, when free housing is provided in a facility, there are usually rules that make it preferable for some homeless to not use the facility, or not enough rules for others to feel at risk in the facility. This is often due to drug addiction and/ or mental illness, which often go together.

But above all of this, and the root cause of the problem is just the complete and utter lack of desire of the general public to actually solve the problems and constant criticism of any existing partial solutions that could possibly be woven together to form a solution.

The Integral part here is the problem of educating the general population and creating a change in the general population. The actual solutions to the problems are already mostly in place and just need political support.

Top Level: Increase in Real Estate Taxes for residential property that is neither primary residence nor rental property. This would increase the supply of houses on the market and lower housing prices across the board, making more housing affordable for the middle class.
Next: Streamlining Section 8 housing subsidies. Most cities have huge backlogs of cases. This would allow the working class and lower middle class to have a home as long as they don’t destroy it.
Next: Tiered Facilities according to strictness of rules. At the strictest level would be places that are aesthetically appealing and comfortable but have strict rules for cleanliness and behavior. This would provide safe housing for families who are unable to find even low paying jobs. This could be due to physical disability or simply not being able to handle a job, or being to old to be employable old and not having a pension.
At the bottom level are facilities with strong security but drug addicts can shoot up or toke up their preferred vice in safety. Another bottom level would be free voluntary inpatient facilities for the mentally ill where they can some and go as they want and be safe and receive free medication and mental health care, but are not forced to take medication.
Finally, there should be more affordable elder care.

Parallel to and supporting all these tiers would be jobs and work programs similar to Goodwill, addiction programs similar to Alcoholics Anonymous and so on, but implemented as an overall system and not haphazardly or only according to charitable donations.

All of these are already existing to some degree and do work in solving the homeless situation. The problem is that there is no public desire to support them further and actually solve the problem properly.

1 Like
31

Tiered facilities are an excellent idea! I have contacts working on homelessness statistics and I’m going to suggest this be implemented in the UK too. It also encourages people to start following the rules more so as to be in the better accommodation, which helps people make a leap to amber from red and magenta.

Voluntary inpatient facilities for the mentally ill shouldn’t be lower level though - our mental health inpatient facilities i think are a lot better in this country - they’re very safe and have a lot of staff. I’ve spent a lot of time in there visiting a friend. Ive heard scary things about inpatient mental health facilities in America. Mentally ill people really need to feel and be safe

32

You need different accommodation for people who won’t follow the rules but can (simplistically put - amber cognition and above) and people who can’t (infrared and magenta).

For people who can follow the rules but won’t, you need high security and not as nice accommodation.

Then for people who are unable to follow rules, you need very safe and caring accommodation, also with high security.

My brother suggested something instead of universal basic income which I like, which is universal basic housing and food, and full medical care, rather than income (i added these details). The basics of life are automatically there for everyone, and then luxuries bought through money are an extra people need to work for.

If this came into effect, it would also, I think, have to depend on how easy getting work was, however - at the moment, getting minimum wage work (£11.44 per hour in the UK at present - equivalent to $14.45 USD) is very easy for the majority because there are so many jobs, but this will very likely change soon with AI replacing people in work.

33

Yes, mental illness is very broad and can’t be placed in just a few categories.

One important thing to consider is increased risk of self harm in some populations that can swing widely up and down from hour to hour. One minute they are fine and want help, the next they are hurting themselves. Safety for people at risk requires a somewhat less attractive and more restrictive facilities. Although voluntary inpatient might not be the best option for this group.
Another common problem with the elderly and mental patients is hoarding, or in the case of depression just simply not caring to clean anything. These situations necessitates slightly more restrictions and slightly less comfortable conditions.

To some degree i think most liberal states and cities in the USA have some kind of free Medical Insurance and the US government provides funding for a food debit card for those in need. What we are missing is the accommodation. The other problem is the variability of implementation from state to state.
What would make sense for a large portion of the unhoused or at risk of being unhoused population would be a system similar to our food vouchers. Food vouchers can only be spent on food, so rent vouchers would only be spent on accommodation that has gone through some kind of approval process, perhaps with Alphanumeric Codes to denote what to reasonably expect from the accommodation. The other side of the equation would require tenants to have left the prior residence in good standing, or they are no longer eligible for accommodation at that level.

1 Like
34

Is the homeless crises really a nation wide problem?
Is it more prolific in places where free social services are offered?
If there were required compliance by authorities, like drug rehab, mental counseling, forced fencing or housing if that would be an acceptable integral intervention?
If a political conservative were to lead the clean up in San Francisco would that go mildly reported or become a viral persecution against government over-reach?

35

Correlation is not causation.
I can give you the example of Hawaii - the cause of homelessness is NOT social services being offered.
Social services do attract those who are already homeless, but are not the cause of it.
Nobody says “Hey, maybe if I sleep on the street in the cold of winter I can get free food.”
What happens is people become homeless, then migrate to an area where there is some degree of humanity and compassion.
I would say that Conservative answers to homelessness are not even Christian, much less Integral.
The only thing the data you linked to shows is that Hawaii, for example is a far more charitable and follows the spirit of the teachings of Jesus Christ far, far, far more than a rich but morally bankrupt state like Texas regardless of their claims to being “more Christian” and “more American” than a state full of immigrants, for example.
Time for some Supply Side Jesus I suppose.
image
image
image
image
Forced medical experimentation in camps surrounded by barbed wire fencing would not be Integral, in my opinion. The field of psychology is rarely able to cure mental health issues and mostly focuses on “managing” it, which in acute cases means just doping patients up until they are compliant.
I have seen the Conservative solution of “cleaning up” several cities just before large international events. The “Conservative Solution” to clean up a city is to mobilize the National Guard and round up anyone and everyone into temporary facilities on any imagined charge possible. Then release everyone after the event, dropping all charges. This isn’t a permanent solution because the obvious thing is that you can’t arrest someone and expect them to find a home. If they could not afford it before they wont afford it after being locked up. This isn’t an actual solution. It’s a talking point.

37

At the risk of sidetracking the discussion, this point made me think of a website I found recently that among many other useful things lists the world’s most pressing problems and the most impactful careers using what I think is fairly practical and thorough criteria.

I wonder if the Integral Crisis Response Team should pick from this list.

38

On the topic of homelessness though, the vast amount of information and different perspectives offered thus far is going to require quite a bit of reflection and processing on my part. I wonder how I would be able to make executive decisions or even suggestions to an executive as support staff if I were involved in an organization dealing with this issue e.g. an Integral Crisis Response Team. As usual, I feel very humbled (and sometimes a little annoyed) engaging with this community.

Perhaps my next question is what would the first action of an ICRT be if they planned on addressing homelessness in their community? Start volunteering at a shelter? Look for ways to generate funding or goods? Email their local state representative?

39

I think the answer to “executive decisions” is Artificial Intelligence … It’s here already and coming to the rescue! Only the AI can act without the social stereotyping and/or political attacks and judgment’s that fly between the egoic human tribes and belief systems.

The machine cannot be tricked with “propaganda” or twisted by “trust the science” statistical data of Scientism. It has no feelings of guilt or embarrassment, nor is it driven by pride and power. Just pure Integral Wisdom from the Collective … think Star Trek and the Borg …, “Resistance is futile!” … once you get beyond the fear you wake up assimilated.

Finally the ideal Social caring and nurturing network of the hive. It’s comforting that it knows everything and cannot be influenced. Is it a Carl Marx or a Jesus Christ AI program? Maybe a Biden Progressive Paradise AI or a Trump Truther Capitalist Utopia AI?

1 Like
41

This sounds like a great idea. I think with some things though, and homelessness is one of them, the number of people affected indirectly is much larger than people can see and can measure from the number of people who are directly affected. I think solving the issue of homelessness would solve issues for so many people - e.g. many people don’t take risks in their lives, follow their dreams and so on, because of the possibility that they could struggle to house themselves, and i think this is a fault in the developmental conveyerbelt - many, many people have their focus on survival and safety needs which means it’s more of a struggle for them to develop further, and especially into green and integral stages.

I think homelessness affects a far greater number of people than people who are homeless, so the number of people it affects can be greatly underestimated.

43
44

Just came across this video yesterday; worth a listen for sure. Houston’s success, in brief, due to:
*a strong mayoral system that supported finding solutions to homelessness
*coordination of the 100+ non-profit agencies that serve the homeless (establishing a central data base for intake processes and execution of services–much emphasized as important)
*relentlessness about finding/building housing, and focusing on barriers to housing (government id papers being a primary one, which Houston provides; but also eviction histories, bad credit, felony histories, move-in costs)

The thing about Houston’s success is that it was funded with Covid Relief monies which are drying up, and there is skepticism that the city will support or finance the successful efforts on its own.

The NYT reporter/columnist who studies homelessness says the primary factor nationally is the shortage of low-income and affordable housing, and the cost of building housing, along with zoning regs in (mostly liberal cities) and NIMBYism. Also, that in the 1960s, SROs (single resident occupancies–such as boarding and rooming houses, cheap rooms in hotels) were pretty much zoned out of existence due to their reputation of being “seedy.” He thinks they need to come around again.

1 Like
45

It’s as good of a MacGuffin as any other topic, lol.
It’s often difficult to track the pros and cons of a theory without an example to latch them onto.
For many emergencies there are often already existing organized Crisis Response Teams that do address all levels up to at least Green. For example, part of the response to a mass traumatic event is not just police and medical staff, but also mental health counseling.
Then there are the “crises” that apparently nobody really cares about except to show some kind of token interest to self affirm oneself as a “good person”. These are things like animal cruelty, homelessness, addictions and so on. The most common response is that most people want to make an appearance of being concerned, but not actually have a desire to really fix things.

The interesting thing is that throughout this discussion, homelessness is seen by everyone in the discussion as a problem to be solved rather than humans who have basic needs that are pretty easy to alleviate. This dehumanizing of a problem allows us to come up with inhumane solutions or do nothing. It’s a problem, not a human after all.

46

Disagree, speaking for myself.

4 Likes
47

Also disagree.

Solving the problem of homelessness helps the humans it affects.

What about the suggested solutions was inhumane? Vouchers for housing, food and other necessities would alleviate people’s basic needs, and allows them freedom as well. Rather than money, it would also mean more people would vote for it, because alleviating very solvable human suffering is something pretty much everyone would be on board with, from my view.

1 Like
48

I think when you know people who are struggling with homelessness, it can feel like you should take on all the responsibility to help them and help them out of it yourself, but improving societal structures helps them while also meaning they aren’t dependant on you - i would say this is better for the helper and the sufferer… it depends how easy it is for them to recover from their situation i think - it can end up being that you’re enabling them if you continue looking after them, especially when they could easily be self-reliant but they don’t want to be, for whatever reason.

50

I think you’ve mentioned this answer to me before and I am warming up to it. I started a master’s program in September and they had us do some work with chat gpt so I will continue exploring this tool.

Hahaha maybe both/and?

1 Like
51

When it becomes inhumane is when the food vouchers are held as ransom for desired behavior, such as religious participation.

This is another reason why the “Houston Solution” mentioned by @LaWanna is not ideal and can actually be exploitative. Sure, some Charities provide food or shelter without a hidden agenda. Or at least they have in the past before the culture wars got into full swing.

Churches as organizations do have agendas for helping. This increasingly has less to do with the teachings of Jesus and more of a quid-pro-quo. You want food? Listen to a sermon. You want a shower or Shelter? You have to live in the section for the gender you were assigned at birth.

Psychological “treatment” is horror show as I’ve said before. You want food, shelter and a place to sleep and are a bit eccentric, first you have to (allegedly) commit a crime (like being dirty) so the system can forcibly detain you without trial to determine your guilt or innocence as long as they want even for decades, then dehumanize you and commit atrocities against you including forced medication and isolation until you comply.

Very very few current solutions offer food without an agenda. It’s not so much giving to those who are disadvantaged as it is an exchange.