SF tech bro: ‘I shouldn’t have to see the pain, struggle, despair of homeless’

Some comments here use a lot of words to essentially say they don't feel any collective duty to help homeless people. Fine, if that's what you believe. But I'd ask you say that loud and clear, stand up and be judged.

Because I believe we collectively have a responsibility to each other, and government is one institution that reflects that responsibility (among its other roles). As a friend once said, simply: "I believe you can judge a society by how it treats its least-fortunate."

Now, the situation in SF is special; yes, it's got mild weather and a decent social safety net (by US standards, not European), which makes it a destination of sorts. But this is also why Justin K addressed his post to the wrong people: this isn't an SF issue, it's a state and national issue. And it's an issue that's heavily entangled with substance abuse and mental illness.[1]

And it's only made worse by bad behavior and bad politics. For example, Nevada bused mentally ill homeless people to SF (often without medication or any contact person):

http://www.sacbee.com/news/investigations/nevada-patient-bus...

The reason California in particular has such a large population of mentally ill homeless people is thanks to a few extra years of Reagan, who famously shuttered all the mental hospitals in California while governor (before defunding initiatives for mental health care and research at the federal level as president):

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/29/ronald_reagans_shameful_lega...

So, do you think this is all of our problems, or somehow this is an example of individual responsibility? I venture how you feel about that question is probably heavily correlated with whether you think success in business is a product of pure hard work, or if there's a contribution from luck and civil institutions. And this isn't some low-stakes game of political philosophizing; the policies that have exacerbated homelessness in SF and California in general are rooted in the same political philosophy that motivated this short-sighted, self-centered, fundamentally heartless post. Politics matter.

In other words: if you think like Justin that SF is 'ruined' for you by problems of homelessness, and the city should do more to fix it... then you're simply not thinking hard enough, and not taking responsibility for your role as a citizen of San Francisco, California, the US, and the world.

And as a Bay Area native and SF resident for 10 years, I'd kindly ask you to leave, or at least stop writing stupid things publicly, and leave the debate over difficult civil and social issues to people who are more thoughtful and compassionate -- a couple of core San Franciscan values that I particularly treasure.

[1] "Almost two out of three respondents (63%) reported one or multiple disabling conditions." from here: http://www.sfgov3.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=4...

Indeed, something as simple as smoking weed (regardless of the reason) will exclude you from most government assistance. Living indoors is not always a suitable trade-off for giving up medications that work.

He clearly doesn't care that people who are being priced out of the city they've lived in longer than he has are helped, just that they're gone. What a disgusting attitude.

It's really disheartening to see the plight of people who could have been helped. Especially, given that we (US) spend more per capita on healthcare...

Another interesting observation is the difference between LA and SF. In LA (beach areas and west LA/Westwood) a side from minor inconvenience of a line outside public beach restrooms/showers and some encampments, there really isn't a disruption. In SF, people walk in yelling into stores, act out aggressively in broad daylight and generally don't seem to feel any restraint. I never felt particularly unsafe in LA, but definitely had to watch my surroundings last weekend in SF, much more than ever before in the last decade.