Basic Needs

Actually, both are true. There's not just one type of homeless person, which is a large part of why it's such a complex issue to address.

There are a lot of homeless who are severely mentally ill, addicted to drugs, or both (self medication). These people are a significant portion of the homeless (~1/3 mentally ill, ~1/3 alcohol, ~1/4 drugs).

There are also a lot of homeless people who had some bad luck and need help getting back on their feet.

There's no one size fits all fix here, but the idea of giving someone a stack of cash and expecting it to be used responsibly is absurd. There need to be guardrails in place.

I'm not disparaging the people who can't spend a stack of cash responsibly either. They need help in the form of social services, not money.

Relationships are a basic necessity for most people, and you have to start by meeting people.

Ok but it also highlights one of the sources for that preconception. A single influx of cash won't get an unhoused person back on their feet. They can't take $100 to the bank and get a car loan or a mortgage. They could rent a room for a day or two at most, OR they could get some drugs and/or alcohol and enjoy life for a few hours. Might even get laid, or make a friend.

Do you expect them to maximize the value of that opportunity? To go buy some bulk rice and beans and start meal prepping, or invest in a bus pass and a collared shirt? When you're down, a day of fun can be the memory that sustains you through some hard times. There's logic in choosing the short-term when things are that bleak.

The real problem is that we confuse handouts for safety nets and investments in our society. Every study on the subject of aid shows us that poor people need money. Not food stamps, not shelters, not some tightly-controlled stipend with strings and requirements and monitoring. Straight cash is the best remedy, and it's not even close. Some people will buy drugs or alcohol or lobsters or whatever else people are afraid of.

The lesson here is that it's OK if a welfare recipient spends some of that money enjoying themselves. Addiction treatment should be available to all, but there isn't a vice in the history of human civilization that has been eliminated or even reduced by making people poorer. If we had UBI, then people would have a reason to stay sober and rejoin society as a functioning adult. If we simply gave out the money we already spend fighting homelessness and addiction, it would provide more help to more people, even if some of them spiral down further.

Did you know a good portion, like 50%, of homeless people are foster kids who aged out?

https://www.chicagohopesforkids.org/blog/the-connection-between-foster-care-and-homelessness-and-what-can-be-done-to-weaken-it

it plays off the idea that homeless people are homeless because they’re deviants somehow,

The only problem here is your interpretation of the comic.

Instead of looking at how it humanizes homeless people and shows that they are
just like everyone else you decided to interpret the guy going clubbing and being
interested in the opposite sex as the artist depicting "deviants". WTF?

Fact is that giving homeless people a sizeable cash injection and a place to live often has very good outcomes in them being able to turn their lives around.

Not always - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruitt–Igoe

Maybe it's a joke about this definition of basic?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_(slang)#:~:text="Basic" is a slang term,even though they are not.

Glad I'm not the only.

Sure it's just a joke, but it does feed into this distorted rhetoric that giving money to homeless people will just lead to the money being misused rather than survival, which is absurd.