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

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

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 515 posts

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

#281

Post by curun1r »

ktRolster wrote: post #147
marbletiles wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to be pedantic, but only because I think that's how the letter guy is going to try and get out of this too. The letter did not say that "there shouldn't be homeless people living in the streets". Both it and GP said he shouldn't have to see homeless people. The letter writer certainly wouldn't care if the homeless people were still homeless, so long as they were bussed somewhere he didn't have to gaze upon…

> so long as they were bussed somewhere he didn't have to gaze upon their poor faces. Lucky him, San Francisco offers one way bus tickets to anywhere for homeless people: http://www.ibtimes.com/homeless-bus-ticket-programs-across-n...

If you read your article, SF only offers tickets to people to return home. They're not trying to get rid of people who grew up here. This speaks to how much of SF's homeless problem stems from being a homeless destination. If you're homeless in a part of the country that is less accommodating, both politically and climatically, you come to SF. Based on your article, it seems that a lot of places will even buy you the bus ticket.

This issue reminds me of the refugee problems happening recently in Europe. The problem was refugees trying to get into Europe and should've been the responsibility of the entire EU to solve. But the problem was felt most acutely in the Greek islands where refugees were showing up. And when an national/continental issue is felt primarily by a single, smaller region, it's highly problematic.

As a thought experiment, what would happen if SF started sheltering the homeless and ensuring that all their needs were met. Well, suddenly those bus tickets bought by cities around the country become a lot more effective and more cities around the country start buying them. It's even the moral thing for social workers to do, since the political climate in their city means that it's better for the person being bussed out to go to SF. It becomes a tragedy of the commons situation where the disincentive for doing the right thing is that you get to deal with the problems from the places that do the wrong thing. A homeless person going elsewhere is a living externality.

This is a national problem (probably international, though deportation is considered entirely acceptable in that situation) and needs to be treated as such. If the Federal government doesn't want to deal with the problem, it could pass a law that allows the city that provides services to a homeless person to bill the cost to the homeless person's home city. Suddenly that bus ticket wouldn't seem like the cheapest option and SF could provide all the services necessary to solve its own homeless problem. Until then, the situation will remain fucked. SF is too liberal to be take a GTFO stance and too poor to comprehensively solve the problem for all the homeless that are there now and would show up if they started such a program.

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

#283

Post by pfarnsworth »

San Francisco spends $250M/year on homeless people, with zero metrics to figure out if the programs are working and zero accountability.

The mayor should be held accountable. And there is a problem with homeless people throughout downtown San Francisco. If such a massive amount of money weren't being spent, then I would understand but their budget is huge with no results.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-spends-record...

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

#284

Post by chris_wot »

monkmartinez wrote: post #178
a-saleh wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes I feel this "most of them prefer the way it is" is just a way to make excuses for us not solving a problem. For example in my city of ~ quarter mil. people, there are approximately 1000 people living on the streets and another 1000 without home (no adress, permanently living in hostels, people in prisons that no longer have home). Currently I know that there is project that focuses on the families without h…

Maybe, but funding new programs for homeless/mentally ill is problematic for a lot of reasons; A lot municipalities have budget problems with structural deficits. This puts pressure on basic infrastructure like roads, water, and sewer. Public transportation is under severe stress due to the budgets. Public safety agencies have been relying on grants (SAFER) from the fed to get basic needs met as the cities are tapped…

No wonder there is a homelessness problem then. With an attitude like this from both public officials and voters alike is it surprising that homelessness is getting worse and worse?

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

#285

Post by morganvachon »

Practicality wrote: post #97
toxican wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, what on earth are the limits for a millennial? My late-20s self, a 9th grader and a man in his 30s should not all be classified the same...

It does seems like anyone under 40 is now a millennial. The most recent clear definition I have heard is anyone born between 1980 and 2000. So anyone ~16 and under is a new generation, currently called Gen. Z, but they may get another name soon. It does seem like the media is absorbing Gen X into millennials now for some reason. I don't know why. Baby Boomers vs everyone else?

> So anyone ~16 and under is a new generation, currently called Gen. Z

Wait, I thought those were "digital natives", i.e. never having known life without ubiquitous computers/tablets/cellphones? I've mostly heard the progression as Gen X (born in the 70s), then Gen Y (born in the 80s). After Gen Y it's supposed to be Millennials (born in the 90s/coming of age in the 00s), then Digital Natives (aforementioned "raised by the Internet").

But really, I think they just make it all up to suit their current viewpoint. I'm 38 and I've been told I straddle the line between Gen X and Gen Y. I jammed to Pearl Jam and Alice in Chains in 9th grade while wearing flannel shirts and combat boots, so I'm Gen X...wait I also had an 80s electro revival phase wearing all black the following year, so I'm Gen Y...

You get the picture.

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

#286

Post by Coding_Cat »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #167
Shivetya wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clue me in, what is the human rights violation? Or better yet, in descending order what are they in regards to those needing help but refusing it and possibly endangering themselves or others?

Tell me everything about your life, and I could envision a situation where an aspect of yourself could be considered too "abnormal" or "dangerous" in action or thought to be left untreated. If people haven't harmed anybody, then they themselves shouldn't be harmed, even if professionals believe it is help. Removing that barrier opens the door to arbitrary treatment and involuntary commitment, the likes of which not s…

Well, again, involuntary commitment for mental afflictions is a thing. So it has surely been a thing in the 20th and 21st century. Of course, you don't get commited on basis of a diagnosis alone (AFAIK), but I would expect a similar criteria of "a danger to themselves or others" to be set for drug abuse as has been set in that case.

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

#287

Post by pfarnsworth »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #59
Afforess wrote: post #9

To play devil's advocate, he's right. He shouldn't have to see the pain, struggle, and despair of homeless - the city government should be providing affordable housing and shelters for the homeless. That it hasn't is a failure of the local government, and should be addressed. Much of the reason that affordable housing is out of reach of many in San Francisco is due to government regulation, not market capitalism. Ext…

Not sure what kind of solution the government should have. There's already a myriad of local, state and federal housing programs already in place. Whether its temporary emergency housing, eviction protection, child care services, or in some cases, low income housing and federal subsidies for permanent housing. There's plenty of safety nets in California, let alone the SF area. If people want to get off the streets, t…

You forgot the most important link:

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/S-F-spends-record...

SF spends $241 million per year on homeless, with no accountability and no ability to track results. They are NOT going above and beyond, they are wasting money with no improvement in results.

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

#288

Post by _b8r0 »

monkmartinez wrote: post #45
Afforess wrote: post #9

To play devil's advocate, he's right. He shouldn't have to see the pain, struggle, and despair of homeless - the city government should be providing affordable housing and shelters for the homeless. That it hasn't is a failure of the local government, and should be addressed. Much of the reason that affordable housing is out of reach of many in San Francisco is due to government regulation, not market capitalism. Ext…

This is a complex issue... but in my experience, most of the homeless are not looking for help to find jobs and/or contribute to society in manner that will lead them out of "homelessness." A lot of them prefer this "lifestyle"... we try very hard to help the people that want help. Most don't. Go talk to your local EMS/Fire department personnel and most of them will have similar stories. I know the homeless people in…

> A lot of them prefer this "lifestyle"... we try very hard to help the people that want help. Most don't.

As someone who's been homeless twice, I appreciate that you don't intend to offend, but this is a very loaded and offensive statement. You appear to work with homeless people and have very little sympathy for their situation, which I can understand but it still makes me a little sad.

Becoming homeless is something that can happen to anyone for any number of reasons, and there are different kinds of being homeless. Once you become homeless it becomes harder as time goes on to move back to something permanent. Booze and drugs can sometimes be a simple manner of being able to sleep, or to get away from the situation you're in or how you got there. Choices that seem nonsensical for those who have a warm bed every night make perfect sense when you're worn down by the elements and incredibly poor sleep. After a while the prospect of having to deal with the build up of shit in your life and get shit together becomes a bigger mountain to climb than carrying on when you are, even though your everyday struggle is a mountain of shit in itself.

It's not that people choose a lifestyle as such, it's that sometimes it feels less painful to have a permanent known level of shit in your life than to fight all the way back up to get a permanent place to live and risk being knocked back when you're already pretty fragile. Being homeless is the suckiest thing you can probably reasonably imagine.

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

#289

Post by scelerat »

Most of San Francisco's homeless, around 70%, were living in San Francisco at the time they became homeless. Nearly half lived in San Francisco longer than ten years [1].

The homeless don't have a whole lot of say in the policies that affect them, such as affordable housing, policing that concentrates them in particular areas (most noticeable recently with the super bowl) and so on.

One reason among many that tech folk are noticing more homeless people is that the techies are moving into poorer neighborhoods (eg Market street and the TL) and causing rents to go up. Police officially or unofficially try to create homeless zones, and these become concentrations of addiction, disease, and filth.

[1] https://www.stanthonysf.org/san-franciscos-2015-homeless-cou...

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

#290

Post by sp332 »

sixQuarks wrote: post #77
sp332 wrote: post #2

How can he live in SF for years and think it's a free market? I live across the country and even I know that the housing market there is artificially constrained. He really seems to think that homeless people grow on trees or something instead of realizing that they lived in the city before he did.

The homeless problem in SF has very little to do with the high cost of housing. SF's policies on homeless has attracted homeless people from far and wide. Other cities were caught busing their homeless people and dropping them off in SF.

Not saying the policies are great, but how can you say that limited availability of housing and astronomical prices don't cause most of the homelessness? Anyway SF only claims that the bused-in people cost them half a million dollars. http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/11/2602391/san-franc...
Post reply on HN