to pay to remain in the double-ups--when they want to stay and when there is enough space.
In Detroit, the existence in homes of adequate square footage--in addition to a sense of generosity and commitment to one's kin and friends--has enabled people to double-up and to take in others who are close to homelessness. Yet ownership or tenancy in a three-bedroom, freestanding house has become a thing of the past for thousands of Detroiters. Problems of homelessness more often associated with large coastal cities are becoming commonplace in Detroit.
Reciprocity continues to be part of everyday life in communities like Jefferson- Chalmers, particularly among those who have experienced job loss. Doubling-up is the most common way of avoiding immediate homelessness. Resoluteness and resilience go a long way toward helping families compensate for the havoc visited on their lives by budget-cutting at all levels of government. Nevertheless, the disappearance of housing resources that staved off homelessness for decades is now bringing thousands of Detroiters close to an absolute minimum of family security.
Compensatory education, manpower training (as illustrated in the Kendall Tyler case history), and community action programs are all important. However, any presumption that these alone will redress the poverty that now virtually guarantees homelessness for many, rests on the premise that poverty is a product of the poor themselves. On the contrary, the inevitable conclusion to be drawn from this chapter is that the cure for homelessness lies more in increasing the availability of low- income housing and narrowing the progressively widening chasm between the poor, those who work, and those who control society's resources, than in changing the values and behaviors of the poor.