We're skeptical over here at Seattlest that tent cities are really the best option for providing zero cost housing. Well, "providing" is not actually the right word. An empty lot is all that is "provided," but even empty lots are not so easy to come by when the prospective tenant is a tent city. They have to move from place to place, often for unclear reasons. They provide minimal shelter from the elements. There are no nearby community services. There are rarely employment opportunities nearby and access to mass transit is sometimes available, but by no means a given. Even if land could be found for something more permanent there would have to be money and a will to build structures that wouldn't be catastrophic in the event of a mild earthquake. Is it better than the street? Of course. It's not a long-term solution, though. more ›