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

Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

zamoshi.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 101 posts

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#31

Post by imiric »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #18
imiric wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, we don't know the entire backstory, but can we agree that no person should live in these conditions? Especially in one of the richest places in the world. Everyone deserves dignity, food, and shelter. Also, can we stop stigmatizing "drug" use? Most of humanity uses "drugs" regularly for various reasons. Just because a specific "drug" which someone enjoys using recreationally is on a government list doesn't mean…

He was given food and shelter, and then he left on his own volition. He wasn't willing to stay in a shelter unless he had a private room so he stole some stuff from some stores so he could sleep under a bridge.

He was given temporary shelter, and later a bed in a room with 20 people. Have you seen what these places look like? Would you sleep in such conditions?

Dignity and personal space is something the richest country in the world can afford for all of its citizens. Yet chooses not to.

People committing petty theft are largely forced to do so due to the circumstances they live in. Your judgment is better aimed at people committing white-collar crime with far worse consequences in the same city the author is located in.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#32

Post by IsTom »

NinjaTrance wrote: post #27

I'm not sure if this is real account or AI slop -- possibly a mix of both. But the US is a f*cking dystopia at this point. How come the richest country of the world - the model of capitalism - allows so many of their citizens go homeless? It's mindblowing.

> the model of capitalism

They've got capital, but I'd argue that they're long way from model capitalism since some time. There's both over- (regulatory capture) and under regulation (consumer and environment protection) that goes against this and companies have enough sway to influence the law and consequently the market. Free market in the original sense of "free from all forms of economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities" is not even a goal anymore.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#33

Post by pjerem »

ryanjshaw wrote: post #11
tossandthrow wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He explicitly writes that he did not do drugs or alcohol. It would seem like it is some kind of felony charges that are the cause. Whatever they were. But all in all - the downside risk is huge in the US.

The style of writing and strange segways suggest mental illness; the blog description seems to confirm it.

Doesn’t change anything. In civilized world, people who are mentally ill are took care of by the society, not thrown in the streets.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#34

Post by drhodes »

pierrekin wrote: post #15

I get an incredible “narcism ick” from this writing. I wonder if other people feel the same way. It’s so gross contrasted with the theme. The very first paragraphs start with a poor attempt to humble brag his”credentials” as not just a “normal” homeless person. The self mythologising, the framing of negative things more like the weather than consequences of his choices. The fact that despite privileged upbringing and…

It seems clear to me that the author was experiencing an unmedicated psychotic disorder and gallantly owning the preposterous outlook he had at the time. So, not bragging, just plainly stating the sort of bigger than life delusions that come with the territory.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#35

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

pjerem wrote: post #33
ryanjshaw wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The style of writing and strange segways suggest mental illness; the blog description seems to confirm it.

Doesn’t change anything. In civilized world, people who are mentally ill are took care of by the society, not thrown in the streets.

He wasn't "thrown into the streets". He was offered food and shelter, and he declined it.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#36

Post by pibaker »

Abimelex wrote: post #25

What I probably never get: When somebody is capable and reasonable but jobless, why stay homeless in a city with one of the highest rents? Why not move to a cheaper place, get any job, even a bad paid job will pay a nice flat in a small town. It's always those large very expensive cities that have a huge amount of homelessness. Don't get me wrong, I do not want to play clever here, it's just a honest question.

San Francisco also has a climate you won't freeze to death in February, a government that won't bulldoze your tent, charities that give you free stuff. For better or worse. In this man's case, it is probably also the only place where he has a slimmer of personal connections left that may still lend a helping hand.

Also, by the time he is already homeless homeless, he is likely no longer able to afford the fixed costs of a move. He is not getting an apartment even in small town USA if he can't put down a deposit. He is not even getting there without money to pay for the trip. He'll also likely need a car to hold any job which is another major cost.

And by the way, you said he should get a job, "any job." Now put yourself in the position of a small town mcdonalds franchise owner. Someone just moved to the town from California cough all in a sudden. He has no local connection, no experience in food service (or whatever other low skill job you are offering), probably not even an address. Why would you hire him instead of literally anyone else?

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#37

Post by Eisenstein »

Abimelex wrote: post #25

What I probably never get: When somebody is capable and reasonable but jobless, why stay homeless in a city with one of the highest rents? Why not move to a cheaper place, get any job, even a bad paid job will pay a nice flat in a small town. It's always those large very expensive cities that have a huge amount of homelessness. Don't get me wrong, I do not want to play clever here, it's just a honest question.

> When somebody is capable and reasonable but jobless

I'm not sure what your qualifications for 'reasonable' and 'capable' are, but without a support system those things are difficult to prove such that you can utilize them properly.

Let's do a thought experiment. Imagine have been evicted from your home and have no job. You have no car, no phone, no ID, no money, no credit or bank account. All of the people you know who would give you money or a place to stay or a reference have disappeared and cannot be reached. What do you do?

You could find a cash job as a dishwasher or something similar. If you work nights you can sleep in the library on in other public places. But where do you put your things? Spare clothes, toiletries, books, everything you might need to feel comfortable or to look decent has to be carried on your person, and even then is liable to become lost or stolen. How do you shower? Every restroom experience is using a public one. You can't cook meals, so you have to find free ones or buy them.

Hopefully what you got out of that is that access to things that you and I take for granted is a really big deal to someone without a home, and cities like San Francisco make many of those things difficult instead of impossible.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#38

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

imiric wrote: post #31
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He was given food and shelter, and then he left on his own volition. He wasn't willing to stay in a shelter unless he had a private room so he stole some stuff from some stores so he could sleep under a bridge.

He was given temporary shelter, and later a bed in a room with 20 people. Have you seen what these places look like? Would you sleep in such conditions? Dignity and personal space is something the richest country in the world can afford for all of its citizens. Yet chooses not to. People committing petty theft are largely forced to do so due to the circumstances they live in. Your judgment is better aimed at people c…

He makes it sound like he was originally offered more permanent shelter but he rejected it:

> The end of March happened and so did the temporary shelter. I needed to find a new place.

> I remembered a place in San Mateo I rejected back in February. It hadn’t crossed my mind when I first arrived back in San Francisco. When I had been offered it in February, I rejected the offer because I thought it was ludicrous to think I was homeless. I come from a relatively privileged upbringing, and the idea of homelessness was a distant concept to my naive brain.

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#39

Post by tossandthrow »

ryanjshaw wrote: post #11
tossandthrow wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He explicitly writes that he did not do drugs or alcohol. It would seem like it is some kind of felony charges that are the cause. Whatever they were. But all in all - the downside risk is huge in the US.

The style of writing and strange segways suggest mental illness; the blog description seems to confirm it.

It is incredible how much energy is being put into justifying why this is his own fault?

I guess this is the only way people with high salaries or wealth in the US can find peace with themselves - maybe that's the mental illness?

Re: Ex-Tech –> Homeless in SF

#40

Post by Razengan »

ArchieScrivener wrote: post #7

Are people reading this or just up voting the title? Sounds like someone who screwed up their life, likely by being stubborn, and doing a lot of drugs, which doesn't take knowing how to code to pull off. Reads like a love letter to misery by someone who knew they would never be truly affected by it.

I assumed this was a support group or service for tech workers who ended up homeless, and upvoted for that, and then took back my upvote after reading these comments :')
Post reply on HN