Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA homeless situation is pretty bad too.
I’m in Boston and the homeless take over Harvard Square in the evenings.

The income gap is growing.

Homeless is not a function of income gap. Whether people make 300K max or $1B max there will still be the same drivers of homelessness.

So what's your solution? Yes, lots of these people CHOOSE to live on the street despite the dangers. You literally cannot convince these mentally ill people to make the right choice, let alone hold down a job and save for a security deposit.

Look, the real reason Reagan shut down the mental hospitals is that he wanted to go on a tax cutting binge. Literally one of the first things he does when he gets into office is shut down a massive source of tax spending - community mental health institutions.

Who is volunteering for their taxes to go up? None of the Republicans I know who incessantly complain about the homeless in DC, LA, NYC, etc.

It was not just a cost cutting decision by Reagan
.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinstitutionalisation

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA homeless situation is pretty bad too.
I’m in Boston and the homeless take over Harvard Square in the evenings.

The income gap is growing.

Homeless is not a function of income gap. Whether people make 300K max or $1B max there will still be the same drivers of homelessness.

So what's your solution? Yes, lots of these people CHOOSE to live on the street despite the dangers. You literally cannot convince these mentally ill people to make the right choice, let alone hold down a job and save for a security deposit.

Look, the real reason Reagan shut down the mental hospitals is that he wanted to go on a tax cutting binge. Literally one of the first things he does when he gets into office is shut down a massive source of tax spending - community mental health institutions.

Who is volunteering for their taxes to go up? None of the Republicans I know who incessantly complain about the homeless in DC, LA, NYC, etc.

It was not just a cost cutting measure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This problem started back when Reagan decided to get people out of mental institutions. They all went to the streets. I remember it well as I was starting a career in Chicago. Most Americans had never heard the word "homeless" before that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980

Back when all the esteemed psychiatrists advised us that these people would be fine because of medications and should live freely. Very sadly, their lives would be much better if they were taken care of through required long-term hospitalization or group homes, rather than living on the streets.

Yup, it's always 'Reagan's fault!' when there were so many progressives back then foaming at the mouth that it was cruel and inhumane to lockup people with mental problems in govt institutions. Liberals all told us they would be fine living in the world on their own.

+1 quite true. Good ole friendly Reagan did not make and carry out this decision on his own with only Republicans nodding in agreement. And since that time, many liberals have maintained that it's not humane to keep them institutionalized, but too many of the mentally ill refuse treatment and don't remember or refuse to take their medications.

“ So the crime statistics are really off in SF because police won’t take crime reports.“

This is the key! Published reports show crime is up in blue cities a paltry 10% or 15%, & everyone thinks the GOP is overreacting to the effects of no-cash bail, social justice prosecutors, & other leftist policies. But they are only reporting a FRACTION of the actual crimes. They are trying to downplay how horrible it is so they can claim their policies are a success & should be adopted elsewhere. And that their governor (Newsom) should be your president.

Even in far-left Oakland CA the residents are begging for a return to old-fashioned law enforcement.

Homelessness will NEVER end in San Francisco because even if they house 10,000 homeless individuals so there were not more homeless anywhere in the city (and keys just say fir the sake of argument all of them will accept shelter and give up lining in the streets), within a couple of years 10,000 more people will arrive who are homeless.

SF gives out $687 in welfare to homeless adults as long as they say they have been in SF for Fifteen DAYS plus they then get $281 in food stamps. And free medical services through medi-cal. So of course when homeless people who are recent arrivals are asked if they are from SF they say yes because you have to say you intend to stay in SF and be one a resident in order to get the free money.

So why would you want to be homeless and/or a drug addict in Alabama or Montana or Texas where you get nothing, drugs aren’t legal and the police might harass you? Add to that there are homeless organizations getting millions to provide you with services.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA homeless situation is pretty bad too.
I’m in Boston and the homeless take over Harvard Square in the evenings.

The income gap is growing.

Homeless is not a function of income gap. Whether people make 300K max or $1B max there will still be the same drivers of homelessness.

So what's your solution? Yes, lots of these people CHOOSE to live on the street despite the dangers. You literally cannot convince these mentally ill people to make the right choice, let alone hold down a job and save for a security deposit.

Look, the real reason Reagan shut down the mental hospitals is that he wanted to go on a tax cutting binge. Literally one of the first things he does when he gets into office is shut down a massive source of tax spending - community mental health institutions.

Who is volunteering for their taxes to go up? None of the Republicans I know who incessantly complain about the homeless in DC, LA, NYC, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SF is ripe for investing in now

It’ll fall somewhat from here but it’s not gonna become Detroit

is sf a dump? Yes

Would I personally live in sf? No

If you aren’t too over levered and can stomach some volatility, people getting into sf now are gonna make a killing in 15-20 years

I think you seriously underestimate SF’s risk for complete meltdown due to commercial RE implosion. If companies flee, which they’re already doing in SF, RE values tank. What’s SF going to tax then? They’ll try to dramatically hike taxes on residents, who will just leave. Is a death spiral due to their overly progressives politics. They’re following the same self destructive behavior as Baltimore. I bet if you asked people in the 1920s if Baltimore could ever become a rundown murderpit they would never be able to comprehend it because Baltimore was so wealthy back then. Yet here we are in the now with Baltimore more murders some years than NYC.

You underestimate Sf’s geography — it’s pretty rare on the planet

Money will always find its way to coastal areas with picturesque views and temperate weather

It’s not going to devolve into South Africa levels of dysfunction

CRE will get repurposed on a multi decade time horizon — if you have a family office between 5-10 billion, allocating 10-15% in Sf is smart and will pay off over a generation

You vastly overrate SF’s self worth.

Pp here - Bloomberg from yesterday:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-01/california-s-home-to-more-millionaires-than-ever-and-they-re-getting-richer

“It was the inaugural reception for Core, a members-only club opening next year for Californians ready to shell out $15,000 to $100,000 in initiation fees, along with thousands more in annual dues. For the New York-based company, the expansion marks a big bet that wealthy clientele will flock to the city’s ailing downtown.”

She has reason for optimism: Even as California contends with population loss, exorbitant housing costs and corporate departures, it remains one of the most popular places for global wealth. In fact, it has become home to even more ultra-rich residents in recent years, helping to bolster the world’s fifth-biggest economy while inequality has deepened.

“We’ve never seen an absolute growth in the number of millionaires like this data,” said Cristobal Young, a Cornell University professor who has studied wealth migration. “Ultimately, California is a great place to make money

…:.

Anonymous wrote:LA homeless situation is pretty bad too.
I’m in Boston and the homeless take over Harvard Square in the evenings.

The income gap is growing.

Homeless is not a function of income gap. Whether people make 300K max or $1B max there will still be the same drivers of homelessness.

LA homeless situation is pretty bad too.
I’m in Boston and the homeless take over Harvard Square in the evenings.

The income gap is growing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel for this guy. What a nightmare SF has become.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-lost-my-temper-san-francisco-has-lost-its-mind-collier-gwin-police-crime-50d9bacf

It’s behind a paywall. Basically an owner of a store and neighboring stores in SF calls social services hotline 50 times over 25 days to report a mentally ill woman. But when social workers or police showed up they said they couldn’t move her or do anything.

A tpolice report of the incident, local merchants described her as “severely mentally ill” and noted that she often “steals food from restaurants, defecates openly in front of their businesses, performs sex acts upon herself publicly, screams at merchants and passersby and spits on people when they get close to her.’’

So the business owner who was trying to clean in front of his store with a hose reached his breaking point and sprayed her with water to get her to move.

He was the one arrested, booked and ordered to do community service.

This is just pathetic. Absolutely ridiculous.
He cannot get any help from the city, and when he tries to deal with the issue since the city won't, he gets arrested.

This is not a city of sf thing. This is is a how we deal with mentally ill thing and exists everywhere. You can't just lock up mentally ill people forever. They still have rights. And somwhere the decision as made to not warehouse these people against their will as it used to be done. And while you can argue that the current state is untenable, there is no immediate solution to the problem.

And again, this is not a SF issue alone.

If she was defecating on the sidewalk, and masturbating in a public area, those are cause for arrests for indecency.

The key is "if" and unless they have proof of it, it's a he said/she said. Cops aren't just going to arrest people w/o proof. And unfortunately, this is just hwo it is.

We were side swiped, egregiously, by a commercial vehicle. Had eye witnesses. The driver denied it. No one was charged b/c it was he said/she said. Same thing.

You don’t understand that in SF even when police witness defecating on the streets, masturbating, someone being physically hit, spat upon, etc. they don’t do anything because what is the point of arresting the mentally I’ll person if they just get released right away? My brother has video proof of being assaulted by a mentally off homeless person and the police would NOT even take a report. So the crime statistics are really off in SF because police won’t take crime reports.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel for this guy. What a nightmare SF has become.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-lost-my-temper-san-francisco-has-lost-its-mind-collier-gwin-police-crime-50d9bacf

It’s behind a paywall. Basically an owner of a store and neighboring stores in SF calls social services hotline 50 times over 25 days to report a mentally ill woman. But when social workers or police showed up they said they couldn’t move her or do anything.

A tpolice report of the incident, local merchants described her as “severely mentally ill” and noted that she often “steals food from restaurants, defecates openly in front of their businesses, performs sex acts upon herself publicly, screams at merchants and passersby and spits on people when they get close to her.’’

So the business owner who was trying to clean in front of his store with a hose reached his breaking point and sprayed her with water to get her to move.

He was the one arrested, booked and ordered to do community service.

This is just pathetic. Absolutely ridiculous.
He cannot get any help from the city, and when he tries to deal with the issue since the city won't, he gets arrested.

This is not a city of sf thing. This is is a how we deal with mentally ill thing and exists everywhere. You can't just lock up mentally ill people forever. They still have rights. And somwhere the decision as made to not warehouse these people against their will as it used to be done. And while you can argue that the current state is untenable, there is no immediate solution to the problem.

And again, this is not a SF issue alone.

If she was defecating on the sidewalk, and masturbating in a public area, those are cause for arrests for indecency.

The key is "if" and unless they have proof of it, it's a he said/she said. Cops aren't just going to arrest people w/o proof. And unfortunately, this is just hwo it is.

We were side swiped, egregiously, by a commercial vehicle. Had eye witnesses. The driver denied it. No one was charged b/c it was he said/she said. Same thing.

This is why I put a dashcam in my car. This is why, when something happens, I turn my phone's camera on. The world is full of shitty liars, and the fact that there are so many shitty liars and not enough evidence to keep people honest is part of why police and prosecutors are cynical and unhelpful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I used to live in SF…it was like Heaven:great food, safe, moderate weather, amazing scenery. Then Leftism takes over, & insanity prevails.

Low crime because every infraction is now de facto legal.

The guy who claimed all homeless need is a roof over their head & they will automatically become Ward Cleaver has the mind of a 6th grade girl.

Don’t like having to absorb other people’s problems? Now you know what Texas border goes through.

Homelessness is a housing issue. All of the tech companies drove prices so high people have no where to go. Also, people forget about the 9th Circuit Court decision. The Court ordered that cities and towns cannot force homeless people off the street.

It's not a housing issue.

Newsflash: people are not entitled to live wherever they want. If they can't afford an area, they need to.find a place they can afford. Choosing to remain in a location you can't afford at the cost of being homeless is a really terrible life decision. There are places in Pennsylvania, for example, where you can own homes for under $120,000. Why would you demand to be in a stupidly expensive area like SF and be homeless, when you have other options in this country where you can afford to have a roof over your head?

Progressives will never admit that there is a large fraction of homeless who chooses it out of their own free will because they want to live a bohemian, drug fueled lifestyle devoid of any personal responsibility and as an alternative lifestyle to 'the system'. It's not my responsibility to subsidize their stupid lifestyle. They should have the right to ruin the quality of life of everyone else so they they can live in tents in the park where they shoot up heroin and have sex in public. They are human trash.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This problem started back when Reagan decided to get people out of mental institutions. They all went to the streets. I remember it well as I was starting a career in Chicago. Most Americans had never heard the word "homeless" before that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980

Back when all the esteemed psychiatrists advised us that these people would be fine because of medications and should live freely. Very sadly, their lives would be much better if they were taken care of through required long-term hospitalization or group homes, rather than living on the streets.

Yup, it's always 'Reagan's fault!' when there were so many progressives back then foaming at the mouth that it was cruel and inhumane to lockup people with mental problems in govt institutions. Liberals all told us they would be fine living in the world on their own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel for this guy. What a nightmare SF has become.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-lost-my-temper-san-francisco-has-lost-its-mind-collier-gwin-police-crime-50d9bacf

It’s behind a paywall. Basically an owner of a store and neighboring stores in SF calls social services hotline 50 times over 25 days to report a mentally ill woman. But when social workers or police showed up they said they couldn’t move her or do anything.

A tpolice report of the incident, local merchants described her as “severely mentally ill” and noted that she often “steals food from restaurants, defecates openly in front of their businesses, performs sex acts upon herself publicly, screams at merchants and passersby and spits on people when they get close to her.’’

So the business owner who was trying to clean in front of his store with a hose reached his breaking point and sprayed her with water to get her to move.

He was the one arrested, booked and ordered to do community service.

This is just pathetic. Absolutely ridiculous.
He cannot get any help from the city, and when he tries to deal with the issue since the city won't, he gets arrested.

This is not a city of sf thing. This is is a how we deal with mentally ill thing and exists everywhere. You can't just lock up mentally ill people forever. They still have rights. And somwhere the decision as made to not warehouse these people against their will as it used to be done. And while you can argue that the current state is untenable, there is no immediate solution to the problem.

And again, this is not a SF issue alone.

If she was defecating on the sidewalk, and masturbating in a public area, those are cause for arrests for indecency.

The key is "if" and unless they have proof of it, it's a he said/she said. Cops aren't just going to arrest people w/o proof. And unfortunately, this is just hwo it is.

We were side swiped, egregiously, by a commercial vehicle. Had eye witnesses. The driver denied it. No one was charged b/c it was he said/she said. Same thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This problem started back when Reagan decided to get people out of mental institutions. They all went to the streets. I remember it well as I was starting a career in Chicago. Most Americans had never heard the word "homeless" before that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980

He didn't do that all by himself.

He was a big part of it, as you are well aware.