Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

sfchronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 222 posts

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#181

Post by closeparen »

triceratops wrote: post #101
closeparen wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, people who would be successful and housed in cheaper markets do prefer being homeless in SF over moving.

> people who would be successful and housed in cheaper markets Do you have proof that they would, in fact, be successful? Have you tried running an RCT? Maybe they would't be able to find jobs, or have childcare available from family nearby.

Even though I'm inclined to believe people have deeper issues that would prevent them from thriving anywhere, I find Yglesias persuasive on this one [0]. Drug abuse and mental illness prevalence don't predict homelessness rates... rents do. Obviously you want to lower the rents in the places with housing crises, but those crises exist for deep and persistent reasons. Meanwhile, if in fact some currently homeless people are capable of thriving under conditions of lower rent, getting them into those conditions where they actually exist today could be cheap and cost-effective. A corporate relocation package is like $5,000, and a permanent BMR unit is like $500,000-$1m. It's orders of magnitude. I would love to see someone do the RCT. Even if the success rate is low, let's help the people we can help. Hell, I'll pay for a few out of pocket.

But I doubt it would get past an ethics committee, and if it did there would be a huge scandal. We're pretty deeply committed that the huddled masses of the world must be housed within SF. Even as we're equally deeply committed that they not exist at any particular site within SF, and won't contemplate anywhere near the unit counts (from a budget perspective or a permitting perspective) that would be required.

[0] https://www.slowboring.com/p/homelessness-housing

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#182

Post by jelliclesfarm »

olivermarks wrote: post #178
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is he in one of the most expensive cities living on the streets when he has enough money to rent for a year? I have lived in circumstances that I did not prefer but made decisions for safer/stable alternatives only because my survival instinct was stronger than my need to establish my need for freedom. I try to be empathetic but I can’t wrap my head around this kind of logic.

He's been here 10 years. I feel people who have a track record of living, working and paying taxes in place should have better access to resources than someone who just got off a bus from Tennessee with an advocate provided checklist of how to find resources to help support their drug habit.

OTOH: Thousands of immigrants on H1 visa have a track record of living, working and paying taxes in the United States, but will never get to vote or change a job or even leave the country. There is no guarantee that we will always get what we want.

We have a system where every individual has the freedom to live within the law of the land and using their own resources.

When living in San Francisco becomes untenable and yet the choice is made, the individual should accept responsibility for their decision.

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#183

Post by twblalock »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #179
twblalock wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly it’s like you people think the police and prisons are free. No, I think those things cost money and are worth paying for. What did I write that made you think I thought they were free?

Because you outright dismiss building social housing as expensive and ineffective but you want to put them in to an equally expensive situation that is clearly less effective. I cannot imagine why you would think prison is better than social housing unless you ignore the very real cost of prison.

Prison is social housing, but it’s mandatory rather than optional.

We could build all the social housing we want, but it will only house people who willingly move into it. Many homeless people are insane drug addicts, and they are the ones who disrupt society, and they will not willingly change. What would you do about that?

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#184

Post by closeparen »

twblalock wrote: post #183
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you outright dismiss building social housing as expensive and ineffective but you want to put them in to an equally expensive situation that is clearly less effective. I cannot imagine why you would think prison is better than social housing unless you ignore the very real cost of prison.

Prison is social housing, but it’s mandatory rather than optional. We could build all the social housing we want, but it will only house people who willingly move into it. Many homeless people are insane drug addicts, and they are the ones who disrupt society, and they will not willingly change. What would you do about that?

Some people are going to need more intensive (and possibly coercive) care and supervision than social housing provides, but it is not like they're struggling to fill social housing units. Backlogs are deep and competitive. We need a lot more of them.

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#185

Post by jonwithoutanh »

twblalock wrote: post #143
cpuguy83 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absolutely appalling. Considering we've historically incarcerated these people and it didn't fix anything, I don't see how you can blame "progressive" attempts to solve the crisis. Do more people come to these cities that have such policies? Probably... but that's not an indictment of the policy. We have a national crisis. We have some cities/states who literally pay for 1-way bus tickets out (as an alternati…

> This solves nothing. Having more people in jail solves nothing. Yes it does. It gets them off the streets. It is the only thing that will do it. The problem in the past is that we only incarcerated homeless people overnight. Jail was a revolving door, and people went right back onto the streets after being released, over and over again. The problem is that we released them before they had recovered from the problem…

No post body was provided.

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#186

Post by olivermarks »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #182
olivermarks wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's been here 10 years. I feel people who have a track record of living, working and paying taxes in place should have better access to resources than someone who just got off a bus from Tennessee with an advocate provided checklist of how to find resources to help support their drug habit.

OTOH: Thousands of immigrants on H1 visa have a track record of living, working and paying taxes in the United States, but will never get to vote or change a job or even leave the country. There is no guarantee that we will always get what we want. We have a system where every individual has the freedom to live within the law of the land and using their own resources. When living in San Francisco becomes untenable an…

Citizenship is a totally separate topic.

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#187

Post by closeparen »

cpuguy83 wrote: post #83
twblalock wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically, the only way we can solve this is with incarceration. This has little to do with the availability of housing, or the cost of housing. Some people will simply refuse to live in the housing that is provided. Many are so mentally ill and addicted to drugs that no amount of money we give them, either directly or indirectly, will get them off the streets. Proposed solutions that don't involve incarceration…

This is absolutely appalling. Considering we've historically incarcerated these people and it didn't fix anything, I don't see how you can blame "progressive" attempts to solve the crisis. Do more people come to these cities that have such policies? Probably... but that's not an indictment of the policy. We have a national crisis. We have some cities/states who literally pay for 1-way bus tickets out (as an alternati…

When inmates at one of the most notoriously dysfunctional jails spend a few hours in soiled clothes with poop on the floor, it's news. That's every day in Civic Center.

There's a point at which freedom and independence aren't working for someone. Maybe with more resources it could work. But sometimes you need to be in the care of an institution from which you cannot just wander away. This seems obvious... I genuinely do not understand. Do you think there is no such threshold? Or do you think the people hanging out in Civic Center right now aren't over it?

[0] https://gothamist.com/news/rikers-images-shower-cages-poor-c...

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#188

Post by bombcar »

closeparen wrote: post #181
triceratops wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people who would be successful and housed in cheaper markets Do you have proof that they would, in fact, be successful? Have you tried running an RCT? Maybe they would't be able to find jobs, or have childcare available from family nearby.

Even though I'm inclined to believe people have deeper issues that would prevent them from thriving anywhere, I find Yglesias persuasive on this one [0]. Drug abuse and mental illness prevalence don't predict homelessness rates... rents do. Obviously you want to lower the rents in the places with housing crises, but those crises exist for deep and persistent reasons. Meanwhile, if in fact some currently homeless peop…

Couldn’t it also be that high rent areas are desirable areas and so everyone heads there, homeless or not?

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#189

Post by jelliclesfarm »

olivermarks wrote: post #186
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTOH: Thousands of immigrants on H1 visa have a track record of living, working and paying taxes in the United States, but will never get to vote or change a job or even leave the country. There is no guarantee that we will always get what we want. We have a system where every individual has the freedom to live within the law of the land and using their own resources. When living in San Francisco becomes untenable an…

Citizenship is a totally separate topic.

I agree. But you are claiming that the number of years having domicile in a location is an entitlement despite not being able to afford cost of living. How is that relevant/not irrelevant?

Re: S.F. sued over homeless camp sweeps: city charged with criminalizing unsheltered

#190

Post by bombcar »

colinmhayes wrote: post #167
horns4lyfe wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s going to be most of them, as most are drug addicts. And no I don’t have any stats for you, frankly just walk around SF or Portland, it’s obvious.

Most homeless are effectively hiding from you. The ones you see are the ones who don't care about being seen, the mental/addicted.

Truth be told those are the only ones people complain about. If SF was filled to the brim with disguised homeless nobody would care.
Post reply on HN