Homes respond to everyone

The problem with homelessness is it doesn't make sense, financially it is a framework for ruin. The residue is a ambition of future politicians and the popularity of identity and ideology has undermined the reason behind it. I suggest homelessness is a  new paradigm, a sort of ridiculous decline of values for the sake of the pantomime. The difficulty is the homeless do not get there by themselves, just restore the threat to all of us from authority, whether religious of economic. I say homelessness is the future division in Europe, a crisis of monetary proportions.

The homeless live in shelters or do not survive and the public should understand why homelessness does not end. I argue the value of a person homeless is less than one pence. The future of the care of the homeless is non-viable, but bravery has no price tag. The country should not be consumed by the position, and one way out is for groups of writers to tackle every aspect of the nonsense. The eating habits of the homeless should be undermined through education about health and accidents living all day on streets animals cannot manage.

The country need not donate large sums, it doesn't get there, the city men and women gets more of it than a homeless man. The money is given to the chancellor and he feeds it into institutions. Less known is the price, he keeps over half. The religious institutions may claim great losses, but they fail to redistribute the money they get for the needy to actual homeless individuals.

A solution is to reinvent housing as not the state or private landlords, but as a charitable approach to encouraging self-independence. This would resist pressure from landlords through a single method of purchase and negate the state from participating in social reinvention. The state is financially rewarded and the money goes to its economic network. Individual housing saves the state money, but doesn't reward the private landlords mentioned earlier.