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

171–180 of 222 posts

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

#171

Post by jaywalk »

geokon wrote: post #72
olivermarks wrote: post #10

'Unsheltered' is a propaganda word and a fig leaf for the very sad reality that we have a chronic opioid and meth crisis which tips many people over into serious mental illness. Giving these individuals expensive housing is not going to solve anything. California is a magnet for substance abuse casualties and as then SF mayor Newsom found at the end of his grandiose plan to 'end homelessness' ever more people arrived…

I just visited SF for the first time in a long time and I noticed many many homeless crushing crystals in aluminum foil and then smoking with a torch and glass pipe. (Never saw this previously.. was always people shooting up) Out of morbid curiosity.. is this not crack cocaine?

Sounds more like meth.

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

#172

Post by TaylorAlexander »

twblalock wrote: post #31
olivermarks wrote: post #10

'Unsheltered' is a propaganda word and a fig leaf for the very sad reality that we have a chronic opioid and meth crisis which tips many people over into serious mental illness. Giving these individuals expensive housing is not going to solve anything. California is a magnet for substance abuse casualties and as then SF mayor Newsom found at the end of his grandiose plan to 'end homelessness' ever more people arrived…

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…

So what you’re saying is we should pay $60,000 per year for government housing for these people?

You know there have been studies where giving people homes, or building subsidized housing, absolutely does improve peoples lives, cut addiction and crime rates, and generally do the things most progressives say they will.

Your proposal also puts them in expensive government housing but it does so in a way which significantly harms the individual. Incarceration might “solve” the problem for you but it does so at an extreme cost to others. And the financial burden to the state is still high. Meanwhile social housing solutions like those in Vienna actually make positive changes to peoples lives while still getting them off the streets:

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr_edge_featd_articl...

Honestly it’s like you people think the police and prisons are free.

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

#173

Post by twblalock »

jwlstn wrote: post #153
twblalock wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's because places like SF, LA, and NYC tolerate it more than other cities. It's that simple.

So is your assertion that cities in WV "disappear" their homeless population? Show your work here. It's actually not simple at all because per capita drug abuse is far worse in WV so if that's the causal mechanism then you should see tons of homeless in WV.

They go to other places.

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

#174

Post by jelliclesfarm »

olivermarks wrote: post #149
notch656a wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been homeless without using drugs and without being mentally ill. Honestly I don't see the big deal if you sleep in a tent and use appropriate sanitation. I was always careful to pack in pack out, to respect the community, to not become intoxicated, and to dispose of waste appropriately. IMO the homeless issue is San Francisco is because they've practically incentivized being homeless by subsidizing the homeless…

I know a guy who is currently homeless again. He works at Whole Foods and doesn't use alcohol or drugs, doesn't have a car and has a years rent in the bank. He is one of the people I am very keen to help because he is literally sleeping in the park with screaming, violent drug addicts. He's told me he can't get section 8 housing or any other help as he has money. He has told me if he was an addict he knows he would b…

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.

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

#176

Post by caminante »

twblalock wrote: post #140
triceratops wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> attracts the most problematic homeless people from all over the country Here's a study someone else posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33010913 "The data shows that over 70% of all of SF's unhoused people became homeless while living in San Francisco"

So about 1/3 of them came from somewhere else! That's not normal. That's actually evidence of a strong attraction drawing people from other places.

And half of the 70% are "recent transplants."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33011351

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

#177

Post by twblalock »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #172
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…

So what you’re saying is we should pay $60,000 per year for government housing for these people? You know there have been studies where giving people homes, or building subsidized housing, absolutely does improve peoples lives, cut addiction and crime rates, and generally do the things most progressives say they will. Your proposal also puts them in expensive government housing but it does so in a way which significa…

> 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?

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

#178

Post by olivermarks »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #174
olivermarks wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a guy who is currently homeless again. He works at Whole Foods and doesn't use alcohol or drugs, doesn't have a car and has a years rent in the bank. He is one of the people I am very keen to help because he is literally sleeping in the park with screaming, violent drug addicts. He's told me he can't get section 8 housing or any other help as he has money. He has told me if he was an addict he knows he would b…

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.

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

#179

Post by TaylorAlexander »

twblalock wrote: post #177
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you’re saying is we should pay $60,000 per year for government housing for these people? You know there have been studies where giving people homes, or building subsidized housing, absolutely does improve peoples lives, cut addiction and crime rates, and generally do the things most progressives say they will. Your proposal also puts them in expensive government housing but it does so in a way which significa…

> 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.

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

#180

Post by closeparen »

triceratops wrote: post #107
closeparen wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good weather, good services, no law enforcement harassment.

You're saying mentally ill, drug addicted people are capable of making rational decisions such as this. But in another thread, you also claimed that regular people who "would be successful and housed" in cheaper places don't make the seemingly rational decision to move away. How?

Rationality is not required. Someone sleeping rough in a place like my hometown is going to be moved along if they're in a highly visible area, driven to a shelter if it's dangerously cold, or killed by the elements if they don't get to shelter. Someone in San Francisco can sleep in the same spot right in the middle of everything, undisturbed, for years. Of course you're going to see more homeless people here.
Post reply on HN