Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

The Los Angeles homelessness crisis is an example of an "inverse correlation" problem. When pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into a system only makes the problem worse, it's a clear indicator of systemic fraud and a "homelessness industrial complex," not a need for even more funding.

Related Insights

Medicaid claims for autism in Minnesota skyrocketed from $3M to $400M in five years. This suggests that large-scale entitlement fraud doesn't just steal money; it can also create the illusion of a worsening social crisis by manufacturing data, leading to misallocated resources and a distorted public perception of the problem's scale.

Systemic government fraud often operates as an intentional cycle. Public funds are allocated to allied NGOs, which then funnel a portion of that money back into the campaigns of the politicians who approved the funding. This creates a self-sustaining loop of corruption disguised as public service.

Despite a massive budget increase from $36.5B to $127B since 2000, key metrics like safety and education have declined while population growth was minimal. This shows that simply increasing spending doesn't solve civic problems and often indicates deep inefficiency.

Unlike for-profit businesses that must deliver value to survive, NGOs rely on donor fundraising. This creates a perverse incentive where solving a problem eliminates their reason for existing. Thus, they often "move the goalposts" or even foment crises to ensure continued donations.

San Francisco's non-profits are often paid based on the number of homeless individuals they serve. This creates a perverse financial incentive to maintain and manage the homeless population like a "flock" rather than pursuing solutions that would permanently reduce their numbers and, consequently, the NGO's funding.

Various organizations, including housing developers and NGOs, receive significant government funding to address homelessness. This can create a financial incentive system where fortunes are made from a problem that is not necessarily being solved effectively.

Pouring more money into homelessness without fixing the underlying incentive structures does not solve the issue. Instead, it funds the bureaucracy around the problem, making it larger and more entrenched, as evidenced by NYC's budget nearly quadrupling while the homeless population grew.

NYC spends more per homeless person than the median household income, yet its homeless population is growing. This suggests that without proper outcome tracking and incentive alignment, massive funding can simply make a social problem more comfortable and entrenched, rather than solving it.

Despite a $150 billion state budget increase over six years, California has seen no corresponding improvement in critical areas like housing, education, or safety. This points to a systemic lack of accountability and misaligned incentives, not a lack of money.

For many in government, the state is their "startup." They are incentivized to increase their budget and influence. This can lead to perverse outcomes where a homelessness agency's success is measured not by reducing homelessness, but by growing its budget, which paradoxically requires more homeless people.

When funding a problem makes it worse, assume fraud, not insufficient funds. | RiffOn