another thread where 'more housing', 'we must do more', 'politicians aren't doing enough' is the proposed solution. Lol. The simplest explanation is the love for drugs, and the lax laws against crime, and the removal of ability of people to defend themselves (ban on open carry). Whether HN likes it or not, it is progressive politics (voted in by the residents) which led to this. Which makes it really an SF problem and no one elses.
Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
101–110 of 184 posts
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#102I think it's important to note a couple of things. > The city of San Francisco released data last week showing that 55% of homeless individuals rejected shelter when offered it I think it's very important to understand why people turn down the beds. There are several reasons- * Shelters have very restricted hours, so if someone has a job that includes nights they likely can't use a shelter. A large number of homeless…
I think well meaning liberals want to believe that all of society’s problems can be solved without any form of coercion, and that is simply not the case. If someone is homeless and has a dog, and there is a shelter bed for them, you may just need to force them to give up their dog and move to the shelter (or else face arrest). There are overriding concerns greater than letting people keep their pets. I recognize the…
If you institute that rule, every tabloid in the US will immediately feed pictures of people being separated from their dogs. You will have a lynch mob on your hands in five minutes flat and anyone who supports you will have the same.
It's a complete non-starter politically.
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#103I think it's important to note a couple of things. > The city of San Francisco released data last week showing that 55% of homeless individuals rejected shelter when offered it I think it's very important to understand why people turn down the beds. There are several reasons- * Shelters have very restricted hours, so if someone has a job that includes nights they likely can't use a shelter. A large number of homeless…
I think well meaning liberals want to believe that all of society’s problems can be solved without any form of coercion, and that is simply not the case. If someone is homeless and has a dog, and there is a shelter bed for them, you may just need to force them to give up their dog and move to the shelter (or else face arrest). There are overriding concerns greater than letting people keep their pets. I recognize the…
Let's say this morning you force someone into a shelter bed, euthanizing their dog and throwing away their tent and other bulky property in the process. What are you going to do tomorrow morning? Is that bed now reserved for them going forward? Or can they lose access to it? If it's the latter then you've taken someone who has almost no stability in their life and removed whatever scraps of it they had left, then tossed them back into the street. You've accomplished absolutely nothing in this scenario, except make it even less likely that person will ever find their way back into a stable living situation.
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#104This is an opinion piece, not an article. Still, citing some sources would have helped.
> Many homeless prefer to live on the streets where they can freely use drugs
Says who? When I was there what I saw was (majorly) people with untreated mental health issues.
> San Francisco’s homeless epidemic is a result in large part of the familiar problems of drug addiction and mental illness.
Again, according to whom? If half of the issue is mental illness, why is this the only mention, while drugs are mentioned several times?
> Localities can’t use the threat of jail to induce addicts to receive treatment.
That's because putting someone in jail for stealing less than $950 worth of goods is bonkers. The problem is when the only response localities have for addicts is the threat of jail.
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
CA’s deregulatory moves have been great steps in the right direction, and progress is usually incremental. But realistically the whole Bay Area should be at “if you want to build a 10 or 20 story apartment building on your own land, go for it.” Allowing duplexes on smaller lots is great, but doesn’t go far enough. I actually think the momentum is in CA’s favor and they will be in a better position than, for instance,…
Agreed. Though the 20 story apartment building is something I don't see happening tbh. The momentum is definitely here but I don't see it reaching that ideal. As with the highspeed rail it will likely hit some sort of deadlock compromise.
Yes, I'll accept the incremental progress. I hope we can have similar solutions put in place where I live (TX).
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#106another thread where 'more housing', 'we must do more', 'politicians aren't doing enough' is the proposed solution. Lol. The simplest explanation is the love for drugs, and the lax laws against crime, and the removal of ability of people to defend themselves (ban on open carry). Whether HN likes it or not, it is progressive politics (voted in by the residents) which led to this. Which makes it really an SF problem an…
But Texas also has a large homeless population, despite being tough on crime and drug use, so your proposed solutions are clearly deficient. Conservatives love to pretend that every social problem can be resolved by throwing everyone in jail, but this has been shown over and over again to not only make the problem worse, but also cost more money in the long term. IDK what open carry would do, unless you're proposing armed vigilantes gunning down vagrants in the streets which IMO doesn't sound very "law and order" to me.
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think well meaning liberals want to believe that all of society’s problems can be solved without any form of coercion, and that is simply not the case. If someone is homeless and has a dog, and there is a shelter bed for them, you may just need to force them to give up their dog and move to the shelter (or else face arrest). There are overriding concerns greater than letting people keep their pets. I recognize the…
Let's say this morning you force someone into a shelter bed, euthanizing their dog and throwing away their tent and other bulky property in the process. What are you going to do tomorrow morning? Is that bed now reserved for them going forward? Or can they lose access to it? If it's the latter then you've taken someone who has almost no stability in their life and removed whatever scraps of it they had left, then tos…
These sound more like complaints with shelters than anything I said. If getting someone into a shelter bed is not overall a net positive for them and society, why are we even doing it in the first place? You're pointing out a lot of other issues that have nothing to do with what I talked about. I'm sure there are lots of ways shelters could be run better and improved. It's an imperfect, partial solution to a huge problem.
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what, exactly, is your plan for the animal after you forcible make the person give them up?
I'm surprised how a certain part of this site's audience have no problem in proposing the use of force in guiding people's lives, and then at the same time claim it is in the name of "liberty". In this particular case I'm sure they would see no problem in killing that dog (and call it euthanasia or some other fancy name) and please don't let me go on the obvious slippery slope from there. (EDIT: 5 minutes after and t…
I can only speak for myself, not "certain parts of this site", but I did not use the words liberty or freedom anywhere, or even invoke those principles in broad terms, I don't think.
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's say this morning you force someone into a shelter bed, euthanizing their dog and throwing away their tent and other bulky property in the process. What are you going to do tomorrow morning? Is that bed now reserved for them going forward? Or can they lose access to it? If it's the latter then you've taken someone who has almost no stability in their life and removed whatever scraps of it they had left, then tos…
These sound more like complaints with shelters than anything I said. If getting someone into a shelter bed is not overall a net positive for them and society, why are we even doing it in the first place? You're pointing out a lot of other issues that have nothing to do with what I talked about. I'm sure there are lots of ways shelters could be run better and improved. It's an imperfect, partial solution to a huge pro…
I absolutely agree it's a problem with shelter beds, but this is exactly what you're talking about. Coercive force is useless at best unless there's something effective that you're pushing people into. Pretending like the problem is that we're not "cracking down" hard enough, or that progressives are simply averse to sufficiently coercive measures bc they're soft-hearted or whatever, only obscures the solution space until we've resolved the other issues first. Coercion without effective direction is nothing more than torture.
Re: Why San Francisco Is a Homeless Mecca
#110600k per year per person? With that amount of funding you may as well buy every homeless person a house
It's not 600k per year per person. It's 606k additional spending since 2016, per additional sheltered individual since 2016.
From what I can tell, SF had about 18,548 shelter beds in 2022[0], which puts it at $36,230/bed/year. In 2016, there were 11,017 beds[1], which gets you $20,332/bed/year.
And of course not all help for homeless people is just paying for housing. Still seems expensive, but not nearly as bad as your math indicates.
[0] https://files.hudexchange.info/reports/published/CoC_HIC_CoC...
[1] https://files.hudexchange.info/reports/published/CoC_HIC_CoC...