Why is San Francisco's homeless problem so atrocious?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw a PBS segment and one woman went from the east coast to SF in the 60s and has been homeless since. She said she chooses to live that way because she has no rules or boundaries to limit her and just wants to be a free spirit. She believes she was meant to live this way and can't see any other way.

I read an article recently about LAs hiking trails are turning onto homeless camps right on the path itself. for miles and miles all you could see was tent after tent and dogs everywhere.

But there are many cities in California with good weather, public parks etc.

What is it which has enabled that woman to live year-round for 50 years as a homeless person in San Francisco? Are they giving out public buffets of food for breakfast, lunch, and dinner? Why are you giving them crazy levels of medical care? What about money for small expenditures and large ones like drugs - is theft rampant?

+1. They have to be giving out free stuff. Whether it’s food or healthcare. Something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New job creation vs new housing in the Bay Area is something like 8:1. There are so many homeless people, because there isn't enough housing. Sometimes it really is that simple.

Opiod addicts and people who haven't bathed in a week aren't exactly the ones who would be going work day-to-day in a cubicle though.

Even the janitors and cafeteria workers just move further out and commute in for their jobs in San Francisco and Mountain View.

They're not giving up and living on the streets -

Fernandez said that some workers are living in garages with their families while others are commuting long hours because it’s become too expensive to live in the Bay Area.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/24/hundreds-of-facebook-cafeteria-workers-join-union/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New job creation vs new housing in the Bay Area is something like 8:1. There are so many homeless people, because there isn't enough housing. Sometimes it really is that simple.

...those people aren’t in the jobs.

Actually, SF has a pretty sizable population of homeless people who also have steady jobs. But you are also missing the point. At some point, even housing becomes a simple supply and demand commodity. What used to be low cost housing is now being snapped up by tech workers earning six figures. You would be shocked at the conditions people would pay 4-figures/month to live in out here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw a PBS segment and one woman went from the east coast to SF in the 60s and has been homeless since. She said she chooses to live that way because she has no rules or boundaries to limit her and just wants to be a free spirit. She believes she was meant to live this way and can't see any other way.

I read an article recently about LAs hiking trails are turning onto homeless camps right on the path itself. for miles and miles all you could see was tent after tent and dogs everywhere.

But there are many cities in California with good weather, public parks etc.

What is it which has enabled that woman to live year-round for 50 years as a homeless person in San Francisco? Are they giving out public buffets of food for breakfast, lunch, and dinner? Why are you giving them crazy levels of medical care? What about money for small expenditures and large ones like drugs - is theft rampant?

Grace Cathedral serves meals to homeless, as do a few other churches in the city. There are a few needle exchange places, and there are outreach orgs that walk around handing out free clean needles to those who want them. I believe about 60% of the needles handed out come back.

Also, there are a lot of tourists here. I, as a local, have problem saying "No, sorry" several times a day to homeless people asking for food or money. But many tourists can't do that, or get flustered because they've never been out of their suburban community and don't know WHAT to say so they give money.

As for why we're giving homeless people medical care - why shouldn't we? Should we let them painfully die on a street corner from something treatable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New job creation vs new housing in the Bay Area is something like 8:1. There are so many homeless people, because there isn't enough housing. Sometimes it really is that simple.

...those people aren’t in the jobs.

Actually, SF has a pretty sizable population of homeless people who also have steady jobs. But you are also missing the point. At some point, even housing becomes a simple supply and demand commodity. What used to be low cost housing is now being snapped up by tech workers earning six figures. You would be shocked at the conditions people would pay 4-figures/month to live in out here.

Oh please stop. No, homeless does not have to do with supply and demand. If that were it then every expensive city in the world would have the same problem. The problem in SF is unique and it really stands out coming from another city without a homeless problem.

Besides, if housing becomes expensive enough, people who don’t want to pay the rent will just move to another city and/or state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw a PBS segment and one woman went from the east coast to SF in the 60s and has been homeless since. She said she chooses to live that way because she has no rules or boundaries to limit her and just wants to be a free spirit. She believes she was meant to live this way and can't see any other way.

I read an article recently about LAs hiking trails are turning onto homeless camps right on the path itself. for miles and miles all you could see was tent after tent and dogs everywhere.

But there are many cities in California with good weather, public parks etc.

What is it which has enabled that woman to live year-round for 50 years as a homeless person in San Francisco? Are they giving out public buffets of food for breakfast, lunch, and dinner? Why are you giving them crazy levels of medical care? What about money for small expenditures and large ones like drugs - is theft rampant?

Grace Cathedral serves meals to homeless, as do a few other churches in the city. There are a few needle exchange places, and there are outreach orgs that walk around handing out free clean needles to those who want them. I believe about 60% of the needles handed out come back.

Also, there are a lot of tourists here. I, as a local, have problem saying "No, sorry" several times a day to homeless people asking for food or money. But many tourists can't do that, or get flustered because they've never been out of their suburban community and don't know WHAT to say so they give money.

As for why we're giving homeless people medical care - why shouldn't we? Should we let them painfully die on a street corner from something treatable?

No. They should be functioning members of society like the rest of us. Have jobs, put a roof over our heads and pay taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw a PBS segment and one woman went from the east coast to SF in the 60s and has been homeless since. She said she chooses to live that way because she has no rules or boundaries to limit her and just wants to be a free spirit. She believes she was meant to live this way and can't see any other way.

I read an article recently about LAs hiking trails are turning onto homeless camps right on the path itself. for miles and miles all you could see was tent after tent and dogs everywhere.

But there are many cities in California with good weather, public parks etc.

What is it which has enabled that woman to live year-round for 50 years as a homeless person in San Francisco? Are they giving out public buffets of food for breakfast, lunch, and dinner? Why are you giving them crazy levels of medical care? What about money for small expenditures and large ones like drugs - is theft rampant?

Grace Cathedral serves meals to homeless, as do a few other churches in the city. There are a few needle exchange places, and there are outreach orgs that walk around handing out free clean needles to those who want them. I believe about 60% of the needles handed out come back.

Also, there are a lot of tourists here. I, as a local, have problem saying "No, sorry" several times a day to homeless people asking for food or money. But many tourists can't do that, or get flustered because they've never been out of their suburban community and don't know WHAT to say so they give money.

As for why we're giving homeless people medical care - why shouldn't we? Should we let them painfully die on a street corner from something treatable?

Because by giving out this free stuff you’ve turned your city into a dump.

[Anonymous]

I'm the SF Local poster, and there ARE teachers who are living in their car and showering at a gym before teaching kids, then coaching, then tutoring. It's heartbreaking. I have rent-control, and even with that the percentage of my income that goes towards rent is already creeping up to one I'm not super comfortable with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw a PBS segment and one woman went from the east coast to SF in the 60s and has been homeless since. She said she chooses to live that way because she has no rules or boundaries to limit her and just wants to be a free spirit. She believes she was meant to live this way and can't see any other way.

I read an article recently about LAs hiking trails are turning onto homeless camps right on the path itself. for miles and miles all you could see was tent after tent and dogs everywhere.

But there are many cities in California with good weather, public parks etc.

What is it which has enabled that woman to live year-round for 50 years as a homeless person in San Francisco? Are they giving out public buffets of food for breakfast, lunch, and dinner? Why are you giving them crazy levels of medical care? What about money for small expenditures and large ones like drugs - is theft rampant?

Grace Cathedral serves meals to homeless, as do a few other churches in the city. There are a few needle exchange places, and there are outreach orgs that walk around handing out free clean needles to those who want them. I believe about 60% of the needles handed out come back.

Also, there are a lot of tourists here. I, as a local, have problem saying "No, sorry" several times a day to homeless people asking for food or money. But many tourists can't do that, or get flustered because they've never been out of their suburban community and don't know WHAT to say so they give money.

As for why we're giving homeless people medical care - why shouldn't we? Should we let them painfully die on a street corner from something treatable?

Tourists and churches? You really think that's the problem?

The weird thing is that Boston, Atlanta, New York City and Washington, D.C., all have more homeless people per-capita than San Francisco, according to Housing and Urban Development estimates. San Francisco, however, has the highest proportion of unsheltered homeless, counting 511 people on the streets for every 100,000 residents.

So maybe that's a huge difference. Having to visually look at them day-in and day-out. Because having been in all four of those cities, SF by far feels the worst.

Someone up-thread mentioned dogs, something about not being allowed to arrest anyone with a dog as a pet? Which means you can't get them off the streets? And the open defecation is human-and-animal waste compounded by this situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the SF Local poster, and there ARE teachers who are living in their car and showering at a gym before teaching kids, then coaching, then tutoring. It's heartbreaking. I have rent-control, and even with that the percentage of my income that goes towards rent is already creeping up to one I'm not super comfortable with.

Well they are fools. A teacher can easily get a job in another school district in a nearby town/city or in another state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the SF Local poster, and there ARE teachers who are living in their car and showering at a gym before teaching kids, then coaching, then tutoring. It's heartbreaking. I have rent-control, and even with that the percentage of my income that goes towards rent is already creeping up to one I'm not super comfortable with.

You are arguing about probably less than 5% of the homeless population in San Francisco. And they would be the ones most likely to be able to get a space in a shelter. The homeless described in the article citied in the OP, and what posters are responding to, do not fit your definition and are the vast majority of the homeless in San Francisco.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New job creation vs new housing in the Bay Area is something like 8:1. There are so many homeless people, because there isn't enough housing. Sometimes it really is that simple.

The peninsula is full of 1% liberal elites who are of the typical liberal not in my back yard people who fight tooth and golden nail to prevent adding density to their precious neighborhood.

Typical west coast liberals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New job creation vs new housing in the Bay Area is something like 8:1. There are so many homeless people, because there isn't enough housing. Sometimes it really is that simple.

The peninsula is full of 1% liberal elites who are of the typical liberal not in my back yard people who fight tooth and golden nail to prevent adding density to their precious neighborhood.

Typical west coast liberals.

Fighting to prevent added density - you mean more housing options - apartment buildings and more multi-family building. But that doesn't solve the problem of 95% of the homeless in San Francisco.

You honestly think these people have jobs?

That they could pass a random drug test or background check?

That they have good credit?

Or that they can scrape together first month's rest, last month's rent, and the security deposit? Which in a place with a high COL would be $5,000+?

[Anonymous]

There was a great bog written by a Google new hire who was living in a former Uhaul truck that he had purchased. Kept it parked in the Google parking lot until the blog was featured in an SF Chronicle article and Google asked him to find another location to park over night. The guy was saving a fortune between his Google salary and his low cost of living. Upper class homeless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There was a great bog written by a Google new hire who was living in a former Uhaul truck that he had purchased. Kept it parked in the Google parking lot until the blog was featured in an SF Chronicle article and Google asked him to find another location to park over night. The guy was saving a fortune between his Google salary and his low cost of living. Upper class homeless.

That is not the person sitting on the sidewalk begging for change. He probably showered in the personal employee-only gym as well.

The homeless problem driving away people from conventions are the ones who haven't bathed, are doing drugs, are wearing three layers of clothes, and look like they'll shiv you for chips.

Get real.