Crusties - as a subculture - have been around for a long, long time. They were all over the East Village in NYC through the 90s and 00s. They practically owned Tompkins Square Park. They're mostly junkies (heroin)

There's a whole national network of them, often hopping on freight trains to travel between different regions. Many of them are homeless, though some of them do share group homes in cheaper area of the PNW and NorCal. Many of them are part of the anarchist/syndicalist movement.

Anonymous wrote:We were there in April but didn't notice any. Had no trouble at all.

+1. Was there in May with my family and did some touristy stuff, e.g., Pier 39. We probably saw a few homeless, but not asked for money or bothered at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have not been to SF in 10 years. I saw nothing like OP described when I was there. I don't recall seeing a single homeless person.

I agree with PPs that it's not a good idea to give cash to anyone on the street. I've been told over and over again that you are enabling them to stay on the street if you give them cash. Food is OK, but I've had food thrown in my face, so I don't offer food either. I just don't make eye contact and walk quickly away. Most of the cash they collect is going to drugs and alcohol, not food, OP.

I guess no one should be helpful or try to be compassionate anymore. Just walk away.

PP, do you get off on your compassion? It's been explained like five times that your compassion is misplaced to say the least. You want to engage in street fighting? Be my guest. Just enough about your compassion alrready!

We were there a year ago at this time and did not notice this at all and we were all over the place. Lots of tourists, but didn't encounter any transients.

We were there in April but didn't notice any. Had no trouble at all.

Anonymous wrote:I have not been to SF in 10 years. I saw nothing like OP described when I was there. I don't recall seeing a single homeless person.

I agree with PPs that it's not a good idea to give cash to anyone on the street. I've been told over and over again that you are enabling them to stay on the street if you give them cash. Food is OK, but I've had food thrown in my face, so I don't offer food either. I just don't make eye contact and walk quickly away. Most of the cash they collect is going to drugs and alcohol, not food, OP.

I guess thats why "lately" was in the title. As others have confirmed, these travelers are a huge issue in the northwest and apparently austin too.

Anonymous wrote:I have not been to SF in 10 years. I saw nothing like OP described when I was there. I don't recall seeing a single homeless person.

I agree with PPs that it's not a good idea to give cash to anyone on the street. I've been told over and over again that you are enabling them to stay on the street if you give them cash. Food is OK, but I've had food thrown in my face, so I don't offer food either. I just don't make eye contact and walk quickly away. Most of the cash they collect is going to drugs and alcohol, not food, OP.

I guess no one should be helpful or try to be compassionate anymore. Just walk away.

I have not been to SF in 10 years. I saw nothing like OP described when I was there. I don't recall seeing a single homeless person.

I agree with PPs that it's not a good idea to give cash to anyone on the street. I've been told over and over again that you are enabling them to stay on the street if you give them cash. Food is OK, but I've had food thrown in my face, so I don't offer food either. I just don't make eye contact and walk quickly away. Most of the cash they collect is going to drugs and alcohol, not food, OP.

I was in Victoria BC about 10 years ago and it was like that. All of the panhandlers were young, white, super rude/aggressive, and had dogs. I had never seen anything like it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How stupid are you to actually give money to these people?? Grow a backbone and walk on by!

Why is giving money to someone who appears to be in need stupid? Especially someone with innocent dogs in tow. Why so rude to the OP? I think it is clear that they were not aware that this was a problem in the northwest.

These young adults aren't "in need" because of anything other than a choice. They choose to train hop and beg for money, rather than look for work and housing. They are choosing to be on the streets. Most of them aren't mentally ill and most are well past the age of being runaways or throwaways. They could come in from the streets, they just choose not to. I'll give money to homeless shelters and other organizations but not to them.

I grew up in the Bay Area and went to U. of Oregon.

The term of art was "transients," not "travelers," (which has its own meanings).

Some started out following the Grateful Dead but ran out of funds and fell off the tour.

Others were runaways or ex cons. Often they would sell a little pot or "loosies" (single cigarets) to help get get money in addition to pan handling. Others dealt meth or other drugs (meth is a huge problem in Oregon).

Often they had a small dog in tow.

They also were major contributors to the rapes on and around the university campus.

The whole phenomenon tends to be quite different from typical DC/mid Atlantic homelessness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How stupid are you to actually give money to these people?? Grow a backbone and walk on by!

Why is giving money to someone who appears to be in need stupid? Especially someone with innocent dogs in tow. Why so rude to the OP? I think it is clear that they were not aware that this was a problem in the northwest.

These young adults aren't "in need" because of anything other than a choice. They choose to train hop and beg for money, rather than look for work and housing. They are choosing to be on the streets. Most of them aren't mentally ill and most are well past the age of being runaways or throwaways. They could come in from the streets, they just choose not to. I'll give money to homeless shelters and other organizations but not to them.

Right but the OP didn't see/know that. They saw four dirty destitute young people with two dogs and tried to help.

This thread is hilarious, especially the "but . . . but . . . but the DOGS!" posters, and the tourists who apparently walk around handing out $20s to beggars, and than are just SHOCKED that the beggars want more. Go back to Iowa, please.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we always victim shame/blame or judge someone trying to help?

OMG you gave too much, YOU are the problem!

Nobody said OP was "the problem." IMO, she got what she asked for. So no, she's not entitled to feel outraged

Oh do tell, what did she ask for?

Reality check.

Being generous, compassionate or concerned = stupid. Gotcha.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How stupid are you to actually give money to these people?? Grow a backbone and walk on by!

Why is giving money to someone who appears to be in need stupid? Especially someone with innocent dogs in tow. Why so rude to the OP? I think it is clear that they were not aware that this was a problem in the northwest.

These young adults aren't "in need" because of anything other than a choice. They choose to train hop and beg for money, rather than look for work and housing. They are choosing to be on the streets. Most of them aren't mentally ill and most are well past the age of being runaways or throwaways. They could come in from the streets, they just choose not to. I'll give money to homeless shelters and other organizations but not to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we always victim shame/blame or judge someone trying to help?

OMG you gave too much, YOU are the problem!

Nobody said OP was "the problem." IMO, she got what she asked for. So no, she's not entitled to feel outraged

Oh do tell, what did she ask for?

Reality check.