Free shelters for the homeless, possible?

Is it possible to provide free shelters to the homeless?  

A team of young and creative people, Michael Polacek, Michal Nedorolik and Martin Lee Keniz with a vision of a better future, would like to make that happen though their company DesignDevelop by working on Gregory project .

It does not make sense though, when they have estimated that it will cost £41,000 to produce a prototype of 18 sq m (194 sq ft) of floor space that will include a bathroom, a kitchen, an office space, a bed with additional storage area.  To top that, a further £60,000 will be required to create an additional off-grid version with independent systems to connect the shelter with electricity, water and sewer systems.


Who will be willing be bear the cost to build and maintain it so that the homeless can stay there free of charge?  They have the answer.  Advertisers! The idea is to have the shelters incorporated into the advertisers' billboards so that the income from advertising could subsidize the shelters' running costs.

What would a billboard shelter look like?  Check this video out.




If you like to see this a success, you can contribute to Project Gregory at their Kickstarter page.

Who are you feeding?

If you do not want stray dogs in your neighbourhood, what must you do? My answer is, “DON’T FEED THEM!” I read with concern (StarMetro: "Home on the Streets" dated 19 July 2012)that food provided under free food programme are dropped at designated area to be picked up by “someone” for the homeless. How are such NGOs to know if the food do reached those who deserve to eat them? It is in the news too that low-cost units are not owner-occupied. These units are often rented out to foreign workers who are on the move, based on the projects they are working on. Would they care about the environment they live in? Take a look at the low cost buildings in your area and you will get a clear picture that they are generally not well maintained. So how do NGOs know that they are not feeding illegal immigrants who may also be occupying homes meant for fellow Malaysians who need them? But can we blame low-cost unit owners from renting out their units for extra source of income? No! Blame the Ministry of Housing and Local Government who do not build low-cost units with the future in mind. While we have read that some low cost units have been taken up by those who are already owners of other houses, there are those who deserved them and have started out with low income. Over time they have progressed in life, their children have grown and they could now afford better homes. Look at the lifestyle of the majority race. If the culture is for all family members to live under one roof and to enjoy family gatherings in a large kitchen, how is it possible for them to continue living in the low cost units they could then afford? Maybe we should learn from the neighbouring countries. In Singapore, when size is a factor that caused units in unpopular district to be unsold, the Housing Development Board broke up the walls dividing two units and to create jumbo units which were quickly taken up. Why must low cost buildings be branded as such forever? If there is an option for owners of low cost units to acquire their next door units to extend the size of their homes, we could resolve the issues of unoccupied units or rental of such units to foreign workers. As neighbours of low cost buildings, I am sure you would like to see them well maintained and occupied by fellow Malaysians who have progressed in life, right?